Multiprocessor scheduling with rejection

SIAM Journal on Discrete Mathematics

Volumn 13, Issue 1, 2000, Pages 64-78

  Bartal, Yair ^a   Leonardi, Stefano ^b   Marchetti Spaccamela, Alberto ^a   Sgall, Jiří ^c,d   Stougie, Leen ^e  

^a TEL AVIV UNIVERSITY   (Israel)

^b SAPIENZA UNIVERSITY OF ROME   (Italy)

^c MATHEMATICAL INSTITUTE   (Czech Republic)

^d CHARLES UNIVERSITY   (Czech Republic)

^e EINDHOVEN UNIVERSITY OF TECHNOLOGY   (Netherlands)

Author keywords

Approximation algorithms; Competitive analysis; Multiprocessor scheduling; On line algorithms

Indexed keywords

EID: 0002514784     PISSN: 08954801     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1137/S0895480196300522     Document Type: Article

References (14)

1. S. ALBERS, Better bounds for online scheduling, in Proceedings of the 29th Annual ACM Symposium on Theory of Computing, ACM, New York, 1997, pp. 130-139.
2. Y. BARTAL, A FIAT, H. KARLOFF, AND R. VOHRA, New algorithms for an ancient scheduling problem, J Comput Systems Sci., 51 (1995), pp. 359-366.
3. D. W. ENGELS, D. R KARGER, S. G. KOLLIOPOULOS, S. SENGUPTA, R N. UMA, AND J. WEIN, Techniques for scheduling with rejection, in Proceedings of the 6th Annual European Symposium on Algorithms, Lecture Notes in Comput. Sci. 1461, Springer-Verlag, New York, 1998, pp. 490-501
4. L. EPSTEIN AND J. SGALL, Approximation Schemes for Scheduling on Uniformly Related and Identical Parallel Machines, Technical Report KAM-DIMATIA Series 98-414, Charles University, Prague, Czech Republic, 1998
5. G. GALAMBOS AND G. J. WOEGINGER, An on-line scheduling heuristic with better worst case ratio than Graham's list scheduling, SIAM J. Comput., 22 (1993), pp. 349-355.
6. M. R. GAREY AND D. S. JOHNSON, Computers and Intractability: A Guide to the Theory of NP-completeness, W. H. Freeman, San Francisco, CA, 1979.
7. R. L. GRAHAM, Bounds for certain multiprocessor anomalies, Bell System Tech., 45 (1966), pp. 1563-1581.
8. D. S. HOCHBAUM AND D. B. SHMOYS, Using dual approximation, algorithms for scheduling problems: Theoretical and practical results. J. Assoc. Comput. Mach., 34 (1987), pp. 144-162.
9. E. HOROWITZ AND S. SAHNI, Exact and approximate algorithms for scheduling non-identical processors, J. Assoc. Comput. Mach., 23 (1976), pp. 317-327.
10. D. R. KARGER, S. J. PHILLIPS, AND E. TORNG, A better algorithm for an ancient scheduling problem, J. Algorithms, 20 (1996), pp. 400-430.
11. R. M. KARP, On-line algorithms versus off-line algorithms: How much is it worth to know the future?, in Proceedings of the IFIP 12th World Computer Congress. Vol. 1: Algorithms, Software, Architecture, J. van Leeuwen, ed., Elsevier Science Publishers, Amsterdam, 1992, pp. 416-429.
12. E. L. LAWLER, J. K. LENSTRA, A. H. G. RINNOOY KAN, AND D. B. SHMOYS, Sequencing and scheduling: Algorithms and complexity, in Handbooks in Operations Research and Management Science, Vol. 4: Logistics of Production and Inventory, S. C. Graves, A. H. G. Rinnooy Kan, and P. Zipkin, eds., North-Holland, Amsterdam, 1993, pp. 445-552.
13. S. S. SEIDEN, More Multiprocessor Scheduling with Rejection, Technical Report Woe-16, Department of Mathematics, TU Graz, Graz, Austria, 1997.
14. D. D. SLEATOR AND R. E. TARJAN, Amortized efficiency of list update and paging rules, Comm. Assoc. Comput. Mach., 28 (1985), pp. 202-208.