On the Complexity of Minimizing Energy Consumption of Partitioning DAG Tasks
Wei Liu
Jian-Jia Chen
Yongjie Yang
Abstract
We study a graph partition problem where we are given a directed acyclic graph (DAG) whose vertices and arcs can be respectively regarded as tasks and dependencies among tasks. The objective of the problem is to minimize the total energy consumed for completing these tasks by assigning the tasks to heterogeneous machines.
We first show that the problem is NP-hard. Then, we present polynomial-time algorithms for two special cases where there are only two machines and where the input DAG is a directed path. Finally, we study a natural variant where there are only two machines with one of them being capable of executing a limited number of tasks. We show that this special case remains computationally hard.
[lc]organization=Department of Computer Science, TU Dortmund University,city=Dortmund,
postcode=44227,
country=Germany
\affiliation[yyj]organization=Chair of Economic Theory, Saarland University,
city=Saarbrücken,
postcode=66123,
country=Germany
1 Introduction
Tasks that are represented by directed acyclic graphs (DAG tasks) are ubiquitous in many applications, including for instance cloud computing, deep neural network, workflow scheduling, etc. [1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6]. In this paper, we investigate the complexity of a new graph partition problem which models the scenario where DAG tasks are deemed to be assigned to heterogeneous machines (e.g., execution units in distributed systems, clusters of cores in heterogeneous multicore systems, etc.), with the objective to minimize the energy consumption for the computation of these tasks under natural restrictions. More precisely, in this problem, we are given a DAG whose vertices represent tasks, in which the energy consumption of a task depends on which machine is allocated for its execution. An arc from a task to a task means that the computation of requires the output of task . So, if and are assigned to different machines, the output of needs to be transferred to the machine executing the task , which also incurs energy consumption. We note that when there are multiple outneighbors of a task assigned to a machine different from that of , we need only to transfer once the output of to the machine .
We assume that the energy consumption associated with the transfer primarily depends on the volume of transferred data and the impact of other factors is neglectable.
Under this assumption, we may simply use a univariate function map** tasks to numbers to define energy consumption for data transformation. A more general case is when, in addition to the volume of the data, energy consumption also takes into account the types of data, the identities of machines between which the data is transferred, etc. We prove that even in our special case, the problem is already NP-hard.
Now we formulate the problems. We assume the reader is familiar with the basics in graph theory [7] and parameterized complexity theory [8, 9, 10].
A directed graph (digraph) is a tuple where is a set of vertices and is a set of arcs. Each arc is defined as an ordered pair of vertices. An arc from a vertex to a vertex is denoted by . We say that the arc leaves and enters . We also use to denote the set of arcs of , and use to denote the set of vertices of . The set of outneighbors (respectively, inneighbors) of a vertex is defined as (respectively, ). The outdegree (respectively, indegree) of is the number of outneighbors (respectively, inneighbors) of in . The set of closed outneighbors (respectively, closed inneighbors) of is defined as (respectively, ). Vertices of outdegree zero are called sinks, and those of indegree zero are called sources of . A DAG is a digraph without directed cycles.
For and , let . In addition, we define
For an integer , we use to denote the set of all positive integers no greater than .
For a function , we use to denote the set consisting of all such that . For two functions and , we define
(1)
In Equality (1), is a function assigning vertices of to machines, defines the energy consumption for transferring the outputs of vertices in , and is exactly the total amount of energy consumption for transferring all necessary data under the assignment .
Energy-Saving Partition of DAG (ESP-DAG)
Input:
A DAG , two functions and , a rational number .
Question:
Is there an assignment function so that
In the formulation, for each and each is the amount of energy consumed for the computation of task in the machine .
We also study a natural variant of the special case where under the restriction that one of the two machines is capable of executing a limited number of tasks. For simplicity of presentation, we reformulate the special case as follows. For a graph , two disjoint subsets , and a function , let
(2)
Size Bounded Energy-Saving Bipartition of DAG (SB-ESBP-DAG)
Input:
A DAG , two functions and , a rational number , and an integer .
Question:
Are there disjoint such that , , and
Our Main Contributions
We first establish a complexity dichotomy for ESP-DAG with respect to the number of machines: the problem is NP-hard if there are at least three machines (Theorem 1), but becomes polynomial-time solvable when there are two machines (Theorem 2).
Afterwards, we show that when the input DAG degenerates to a directed path111Such a DAG is also called a chain in the literature.
, the problem admits a pseudo polynomial-time algorithm, regardless of the number of machines (Theorem 3). In contrast to ESP-DAG, we show that the size-bounded variant SB-ESBP-DAG, where there are only two machines, is computationally hard: it is W[1]-hard with respect to the parameter (Corollary 3). As a byproduct of this result, we show that a variant of the minimum cut problem is W[1]-hard with respect to a natural parameter (Theorem 4), strengthening its NP-hardness studied in [11].
2 Related Works
To the best of our knowledge, ESP-DAG has not been studied from a theoretical point of view in the literature. However, the problem and its variant defined above belong to the gigantic family of graph partition problems which have been extensively and intensively studied in the literature. These problems aim at dividing either the vertices or the arcs of a given graph (undirected or directed) into several sets so that certain structural properties are met or certain optimization objections are achieved (see, e.g., [12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19]).
More specifically, our problem falls into the category of task allocation problems [20, 21, 22, 23].
In the realm of task allocation problems, partitioning a DAG can achieve various objectives. These objectives include minimizing makespan, reducing energy consumption, decreasing communication costs, achieving load balancing, ensuring fault tolerance, etc. Our model aims to minimize energy consumption.
In most of the previous works tackling DAG tasks, the cost of data transformation are arc-wisely defined: if a task assigned to a machine has multiple outneighbors assigned to a different machine , the output of needs to be transferred multiple times from machine to machine , one for each of ’s outneighbors assigned to the machine . We build upon previous approaches by considering a more comprehensive energy consumption model for data transformation. We simplify multiple transfers of output data from one machine to another when a task has multiple outneighbors assigned to different machines. This refined modeling approach enables us to evaluate and minimize energy consumption more accurately in DAG-based task allocation.
One noticeable related problem where a similar energy model as ours is adopted is a one studied by Hu et al. [24] in 2019. Particularly, this problem takes as the same input as SB-ESBP-DAG with being dropped, and the problem consists in dividing into two sets and to minimize , under the restriction that there are no arcs from to . For the problem, Hu et al. [24] proposed a polynomial-time algorithm which is, however, pointed out to be flawed by Li et al. [25].
Our studied problem is also related to several specific resource allocation problems. Particularly, when the given DAG does not contain any arc (or for all ), ESP-DAG is equivalent to the problem of maximizing social welfare in multi-agent resource allocation when agents hold -additive utility functions, which is known to be polynomial-time solvable [26, 27].222To see the equivalence, consider each task as a resource, consider each machine as an agent, and consider as the utility of the resource for the agent . This special case is also related to a winners allocation problem proposed by Yang [28], which generalizes the multi-agent resource allocation with two agents, with each holding a -additive utility function.
3 Problems to Establish Our Results
Our results are obtained based on the following problems.
An undirected graph is a tuple where is a set of vertices and is a set of edges. The set of vertices and the set of edges of are also denoted by and , respectively. An edge between two vertices and is denoted by .
For a function and a subset , we define .
For a graph and a subset , we use to denote the graph obtained from by removing all edges in .
Multiway Cut
Input:
An undirected graph , a weight function , a set of distinct vertices from called terminals, and a number .
Question:
Is there a subset such that and vertices from are pairwise disconnected in ?
Equivalently, Multiway Cut determines if we can partition into sets, each containing exactly one terminal, so that the total weight of edges crossing the partition does not exceed .
It is known that Multiway Cut is NP-hard for every , but becomes polynomial-time solvable if [29]. (Multiway Cut with two terminals is exactly the decision version of the classic problem Minimum --Cut.)
The problem Size Bounded Minimum --Cut (SBM---Cut) takes as the same input as Multiway Cut where together with an integer , and determines if there is a bipartition of so that , , , and the total weight of edges between and in is at most . SBM---Cut is NP-hard [11].
A clique in an undirected graph is a subset of pairwise adjacent vertices.
Clique
Input:
An undirected graph and an integer .
Question:
Does contain a clique of vertices?
Clique is a well-known NP-hard problem [30]. Moreover, it is W[1]-hard with respect to even when restricted to regular graphs [31, 32, 33].
For a digraph and a subset of arcs, denotes the digraph obtained from by removing all arcs in .
For two disjoint subsets , let be the set of all arcs from to , i.e.,
. The decision version of Directed Minimum - Cut (DM---Cut) is defined as follows.
DM---Cut
Input:
A digraph , a weight function , two distinct vertices and in , an integer .
Question:
Is there a bipartition of such that , , and ?
Equivalently, DM---Cut determines if there is a subset so that and there is no directed path from to in . It is known that DM---Cut is polynomial-time solvable [16]).
4 Energy-Saving Partition of DAG
This section presents our results for ESP-DAG. We first pinpoint the complexity boundary of the problem concerning the number of machines.
Theorem 1.
ESP-DAG is NP-hard when .
Proof.
We prove Theorem 1 by a reduction from Multiway Cut to ESP-DAG. Let be an instance of Multiway Cut, where . Without loss of generality, assume that . To construct an instance of ESP-DAG, we first arbitrarily orient into a DAG (e.g., we arbitrarily fix a linear order on and orient edges forwardly). Let denote this DAG. It holds that . Then, we construct a graph obtained from by subdividing all arcs: for each arc , we introduce one new vertex , add the arcs and , and remove the arc .
Clearly, each newly introduced vertex has exactly one outneighbor and has exactly one inneighbor . Moreover, remains as a DAG.
Now we construct two functions and as follows.
For each , we define
(3)
For each , we define , and for each newly introduced vertex where , we define .
The instance of ESP-DAG is . The reduction clearly runs in polynomial time.
In the following, we show its correctness.
For each , let
For , let , and let .
Assume that the instance of Multiway Cut is a Yes-instance, i.e., there is a partition of into sets , , , such that for all , and the total weight of edges crossing the partition is at most . Note that for every two disjoint , and are disjoint. It follows that is a partition of . Let be the assignment function corresponding to this partition, i.e., for every and every , it holds that . We claim that is a Yes-witness to the instance of ESP-DAG constructed above. First, by the definition of and Equality (3), holds. Moreover, by the definition of , we have that
(4)
To see that Equality (4) holds, observe that for every , where , it holds that and . Consequently, only outputs of newly introduced vertices necessitate transfer.
Moreover, the outdegree of each newly introduced vertex is exactly one. This ensures the correctness of the transition from the first line to the third line in Equality (4). The transition from the penultimate line to the last line in Equality (4) follows from the construction of from , and the definition of the function . Now, we can conclude that the instance of ESP-DAG is a Yes-instance.
Assume that the instance of ESP-DAG is a Yes-instance, i.e., there is an assignment function such that
(5)
By Equality (3), for every terminal , where , it holds that . As for all and , we have that . For each , let . We show below that the total weight of edges in crossing the partition is exactly , which is at most . To this end, recall that for every . Then, by Inequality (5), we know that for all and . That is, for every , and all its outneighbors in are assigned the same value by . To be more precise, for every , it holds that . As and are disjoint as long as and are, this indeed means that for all . Then, by the same reasoning in the proof for the direction, we infer that Equality (4) holds too in this direction. Therefore, the instance of Multiway Cut is a Yes-instance.
∎
We remark that as the optimization version of Multiway Cut is APX-hard for every [29], our reduction in the proof of Theorem 1 indicates that the optimization version of ESP-DAG is APX-hard for every .333The objective of the optimization version of ESP-DAG is to find an assignment that minimizes the energy consumption.
Moreover, as Multiway Cut remains NP-hard for every even when all edges have the same weight [29], our reduction also implies that ESP-DAG remains NP-hard for every , even when the two functions and each has two different values, with one value being identical. Furthermore, astute readers may observe that our reduction can be readily adapted to demonstrate an even more compelling result:
Corollary 1.
ESP-DAG is NP-hard for every even when the two functions and have overall two different values.
The proof of the result can be done by replacing the value in Equality (3) with , resetting for all newly introduced vertices , and resetting in the instance of ESP-DAG constructed in our reduction.
When is a constant function, ESP-DAG can be solved trivially. Therefore, we have a complexity dichotomy for ESP-DAG with respect to the number of different values of the function . Towards a complexity dichotomy for ESP-DAG concerning the number of machines, we have the following result.
Theorem 2.
ESP-DAG with is linear-time reducible to DM---Cut.
Proof.
Let be an instance of ESP-DAG where is a DAG, and and are two functions. Our reduction is as follows. We first construct a digraph obtained from by performing the following operations:
1.
For each nonsink , we perform the following operations:
(a)
create two vertices and ;
(b)
for every outneighbor of in , add the arcs and , and let the weights of both arcs be ;
(c)
add the arcs and , and let the weights of both arcs be ;
(d)
remove all arcs from to all its outneighbors except .
2.
Create two vertices and , add arcs from to all vertices in , and add arcs from all vertices in to . For each , let the weight of the arc be , and let that of be . (Note that there are no arcs between the newly created vertices and .)
We refer to Figure 1 for an illustration of the construction of .
Figure 1: An illustration of the construction of the graph from a DAG in the proof of Theorem 2. Red arcs have positive infinite weights. For clarity, the weights of other arcs are not shown.
Let be the function such that for each arc it holds that equals the weight of defined above. The instance of DM---Cut is .
The reduction clearly can be carried out in time , where and are respectively the number of vertices and the number of edges of .
It remains to prove its correctness.
Assume that there are two disjoint such that
(6)
Below we construct a partition of such that , , and the total weight of edges crossing is at most . To achieve this, we define the following sets:
1.
For each , let be the set of vertices such that and all its outneighbors in are in the same set . (Notice that each isolated vertex of is either in or in .)
2.
For each , let be the set of vertices constructed for vertices from by Operation (1a).
3.
For each such that , let be the set of vertices from having at least one outneighbor from in .
4.
For each such that , let .
5.
For each such that , let .
The above defined ten sets are pairwise disjoint, and their union is exactly .
Let
and let
It is not difficult to verify that and . To conclude this part of the proof, we need to demonstrate that the total weight of edges crossing the bipartition in is at most . To achieve this, we identify the edges crossing this bipartition, relying on Claims 1 through 5 presented below.
Claim 1.
None of has any outneighbors from in .
Proof.
By the construction of and the definitions of and , all outneighbors of vertices of in are contained in . As , none of has any outneighbors from in .
For a vertex where , the only outneighbor of in is which is clearly not in .
For a vertex where , the outneighbors of in are exactly the outneighbors of in the graph which are all contained in . As , none of the outneighbors of is from .
By the definition of , every has exactly one outneighbor in which is from . Clearly, and are disjoint.
∎
Claim 2.
All arcs from to in are contained in .
Proof.
By the construction of , every has exactly two outneighbors and in . By the definition of , for every , is contained in .
∎
Claim 3.
None of has any inneighbors from in .
Proof.
Let be any arbitrary vertex in , if there are any. We consider first the case where is neither a sink nor a source of . By the construction of , it holds that (Operations (1c) and (1d)). Clearly, . Let be a vertex in . If , then as and , we know that . It follows that . If , then either (when ) or (when ). In both cases, we have that . Therefore, none of the inneighbors of in are from . In the case where is a sink but not a source of , we have that , in the case where is a source but not a sink of , we have that , and in the case where is an isolated vertex in , we have that . The proof for that none of the inneighbors of in is from in these cases are the same as above.
Consider now a vertex where . By the construction of , we know that is the only inneighbor of in . For a vertex where , by the construction of , we know that . As , we know that . Clearly, is the union of and which are both contained in . We can conclude now that none of the inneighbors of any vertex in is from .
Now we prove the claim for . Let be a vertex from . Obviously, . By the construction of , is the only inneighbor of . As , the claim holds.
∎
Claim 4.
All arcs from to in are contained in .
Proof.
By the construction of , there are no arcs from to in . By Claim 3, there are no arcs from to in . This leaves only the possibility that all arcs from to in are contained in . ∎
The following claim is a consequence of Claims 1–4.
Claim 5.
is the union of the following pairwise disjoint sets:
1.
, i.e., the set of all arcs from to all vertices of in the graph .
2.
, i.e., the set of all arcs from all vertices in to in the graph .
3.
, i.e., the set of arcs from to in the graph .
4.
, i.e., the set of arcs from to in the graph .
Armed with Claim 5, we examine the size of the cut from to in .
By Operation (2) in the construction of , we know that there is an arc from to every vertex in , and there is no arc from to any other vertices in .
Then, by Operation (1c) in the construction of , we know that
Analogously, we know that .
From and , we obtain
(7)
Now we analyze . As for every vertex where , is the only inneighbor of in , we have that
It follows that
Analogously, we can obtain that .
By Claim 1, and the facts that , , and every vertex from has at least one outneighbor from in the graph , we have that . Similarly, it holds that .
We arrive at
(8)
From Claim 5, and Equalities (7) and (8), we have that
which is at most by Inequality (6). It follows that the instance of DM---Cut is a Yes-instance.
Assume that there is a bipartition of such that , , and . Without loss of generality, we assume that is minimized among all bipartitions of . We show that possesses several structural properties which help us construct a desired assignment of .
The first property, as formally articulated in the ensuing claim, affirms that when a vertex in is included in the same part of alongside all its outneighbors in , retaining both newly introduced vertices for within the same part as emerges as an optimal strategy.
Claim 6.
Let such that and all outneighbors of in are in the same . Let . Let and let . Then, it holds that if , and if .
Proof.
Let be as stipulated in Claim 6. We consider first the case where . Thus, and in this case. We need to prove that . To this end, observe that none of is in , due to the infinite weight of arcs in this set ((1b)). It follows that . If , it holds that , and thus ; we are done. Assume now that . Then, as , we have that .
We consider now the case where . In this case, , , and . Observe that none of is in , due to the infinite weight of arcs in this set. It follows that . If , it holds that , and thus ; we are done. Assume now that . Then, as , we have that .
∎
By Claim 6, we may assume that, for every such that , if are contained in the same , then are also contained in .
The subsequent property essentially posits that for any vertex of placed in part , if at least one of ’s outneighbors in is placed in the opposite part , then the arc , whose weight equals the amount of energy consumption of transferring , must necessarily be in .
Claim 7.
Let such that . Then, and none of the arcs entering or leaving is contained in .
Proof.
Let be as stipulated in the claim. Let be any arbitrary vertex from . It must hold that , since otherwise the arc which has infinite weight is contained in , contradicting with . As is the only outneighbor of in and , the only arc leaving is excluded from . Finally, recall that , and by the definition of the function , every arc where has an infinite weight. As , we know that none of the arcs entering can be in .
∎
By Claim 7, for every which has at least one outneighbor in that is put in from , we may assume that .
Moreover, as is the only outneighbor of in , we may assume that .
Applying analogous reasoning, we derive the following assertion.
Claim 8.
Let such that . Then, , and none of the arcs entering or leaving is contained in .
Let and let . We show below that the assignment corresponding to is a Yes-witness of the instance of ESP-DAG.
By the definition of the function , we have that
For every and every , are contained in the same part of as .
2.
For every , and .
The following equalities follow:
(10)
(11)
The sum of the left sides of Equalities (9)–(11) is , and the sum of the right sides of them is . From , we know that the instance of ESP-DAG is a Yes-instance.
∎
As DM---Cut can be solved in time [34], by Theorem 2, we reach the following result.
Corollary 2.
ESP-DAG with can be solved in time , where and are respectively the number of vertices and the number of edges of the input graph.
Next, we derive a pseudo polynomial-time algorithm for a special case of ESP-DAG where the input DAG is a directed path. Tasks having such precedence dependencies are relevant to many applications (see, e.g., [35, 36]).
Theorem 3.
ESP-DAG can be solved in time when the given DAG is a directed path of vertices, where is the number of bits to encode any number in the ranges of the functions and .
Proof.
Let be an instance of ESP-DAG, where is a directed path, and are two functions, and is a number. Let be the maximum value of the functions and . We derive a dynamic programming algorithm to solve the problem as follows.
Let be the directed path representing . We maintain a table where and . Specifically, is defined as the value of an optimal solution to the instance restricted to the first vertices under the restriction that is assigned to the machine :
By the definition, for each , we have that .
We use the following recursion to update the table:
After the table is computed, we conclude that is a Yes-instance if and only if
As there are at most entries in the table, and computing each entry needs to check at most other entries and perform addition/comparison operations times on numbers of maximum values , the table can be computed in time .
∎
5 Sized-Bounded Energy-Saving Partition of DAG with Two Machines
Now we switch our focus to the natural variant SB-ESBP-DAG where there are only two machines and one of them is capable of executing only a limited number of tasks.
Recall that SBM---Cut is exactly Multiway Cut where with an additional restriction that one of the parts in the desired bipartition contains at most vertices. Then, based on the reduction in the proof of Theorem 1 and the fact that SBM---Cut is NP-hard, we know that SB-ESBP-DAG is NP-hard as well. his observation prompts an exploration into whether the natural parameter might offer a potential tractability insight within the realm of parameterized complexity theory.
A concise introduction to parameterized complexity theory can be beneficial for readers unfamiliar with the concept.
A parameterized problem is a subset of , where is a finite alphabet. A parameterized problem can be either fixed-parameter tractable (FPT) or fixed-parameter intractable.
In particular, a parameterized problem is FPT if there is an algorithm which correctly determines for each instance of the problem whether
is a Yes-instance in time , where is a computable function and is the size of .
W[1]-hard problems are considered intractable, in the sense that unless FPTW[1] (which is widely believed to be unlikely), they do not admit any FPT-algorithms. For greater details on parameterized complexity theory, we refer to [8, 9, 10].
Answering the above question, we show that SB-ESBP-DAG is W[1]-hard with respect to . To this end, through a trivial reduction from Clique on regular graphs, we show that SBM---Cut is W[1]-hard with respect to even in a special case. Despite the widespread attention this problem has received, it is remarkable that such a W[1]-hardness result has not been previously documented. Therefore, our reduction bolsters the NP-hardness of SBM---Cut as examined in [11].
Theorem 4.
SBM---Cut is W[1]-hard with respect to . Moreover, this holds even if the edges in the given graph have at most two different weights.
Proof.
Let be an instance of Clique where is a regular graph of vertices. Let denote the degree of vertices in .
We assume that since otherwise the problem is trivial to solve.
Let be the graph obtained from by adding two vertices and both of which are adjacent to all vertices of . Let be a function such that for every edge it holds that
It is easy to verify that contains a clique of vertices if and only if there is a bipartition of such that and are in different parts with the one containing having vertices and, moreover, the total weight of edges crossing the bipartition is at most .
∎
By employing the reduction outlined in the proof of Theorem 1, Theorem 4 yields the following corollary.
Corollary 3.
SB-ESBP-DAG is W[1]-hard with respect to . This holds even if the function has two different values and the function has three different values.
6 Conclusion
We have studied the complexity of ESP-DAG and its sized-bounded variant SB-ESBP-DAG. Our study offers several dichotomy results on the complexity of ESP-DAG, concerning the number of machines and the values of the function . However, an intriguing open question persists: can SB-ESBP-DAG be solved in polynomial time when the function remains constant? Furthermore, the unresolved inquiry into whether SB-ESBP-DAG retains its status as NP-hard when exhibits only two distinct values adds another layer of complexity to this fascinating problem.
References
Rajak et al. [2023]
R. Rajak, S. Kumar,
S. Prakash, N. Rajak,
P. Dixit,
A novel technique to optimize quality of service for
directed acyclic graph (DAG) scheduling in cloud computing environment
using heuristic approach,
J. Supercomput. 79
(2023) 1956–1979.
doi:10.1007/s11227-022-04729-4.
Kwok and Ahmad [1999]
Y.-K. Kwok, I. Ahmad,
Static scheduling algorithms for allocating directed
task graphs to multiprocessors,
ACM Comput. Surv. 31
(1999) 406–471.
doi:10.1145/344588.344618.
Lin et al. [2023]
C. Lin, J. Shi, N. Ueter,
M. Günzel, J. Reineke,
J. Chen,
Type-aware federated scheduling for typed DAG tasks
on heterogeneous multicore platforms,
IEEE Trans. Computers 72
(2023) 1286–1300.
doi:10.1109/TC.2022.3202748.
Li et al. [2021]
J. Li, W. Liang, Y. Li,
Z. Xu, X. Jia,
Delay-aware DNN inference throughput maximization
in edge computing via jointly exploring partitioning and parallelism,
in: IEEE LCN, 2021, pp.
193–200. doi:10.1109/LCN52139.2021.9524928.
Duan and Wu [2021]
Y. Duan, J. Wu,
Joint optimization of DNN partition and scheduling
for mobile cloud computing,
in: ICPP, 2021, pp.
21:1–21:10. doi:10.1145/3472456.3472468.
Bang-Jensen and Gutin [2018]
J. Bang-Jensen, G. Z. Gutin (Eds.),
Classes of Directed Graphs, Springer Monographs in
Mathematics, Springer, 2018.
doi:10.1007/978-3-319-71840-8.
Cygan et al. [2015]
M. Cygan, F. V. Fomin,
L. Kowalik, D. Lokshtanov,
D. Marx, M. Pilipczuk,
M. Pilipczuk, S. Saurabh,
Parameterized Algorithms, Springer,
2015. doi:10.1007/978-3-319-21275-3.
Downey and Fellows [2013]
R. G. Downey, M. R. Fellows,
Fundamentals of Parameterized Complexity, Texts in Computer
Science, Springer, 2013.
doi:10.1007/978-1-4471-5559-1.
Downey and Fellows [1992]
R. G. Downey, M. R. Fellows,
Fixed parameter tractability and completeness,
in: Complexity Theory: Current Research,
1992, pp. 191–225.
Chen et al. [2016]
W. Chen, N. F. Samatova,
M. F. Stallmann, W. Hendrix,
W. Ying,
On size-constrained minimum - cut problems and
size-constrained dense subgraph problems,
Theor. Comput. Sci. 609
(2016) 434–442.
doi:10.1016/j.tcs.2015.10.031.
Bodlaender and Jansen [1995]
H. L. Bodlaender, K. Jansen,
Restrictions of graph partition problems. Part
I,
Theor. Comput. Sci. 148
(1995) 93–109.
doi:10.1016/0304-3975(95)00057-4.
Alon and Marx [2011]
N. Alon, D. Marx,
Sparse balanced partitions and the complexity of
subgraph problems,
SIAM J. Discret. Math. 25
(2011) 631–644.
doi:10.1137/100812653.
Andersen et al. [2020]
J. B. Andersen, J. Bang-Jensen,
A. Yeo,
On the parameterized complexity of 2-partitions,
Theor. Comput. Sci. 844
(2020) 97–105.
doi:10.1016/j.tcs.2020.08.008.
Bang-Jensen et al. [2018]
J. Bang-Jensen, S. Bessy,
F. Havet, A. Yeo,
Out-degree reducing partitions of digraphs,
Theor. Comput. Sci. 719
(2018) 64–72.
doi:10.1016/j.tcs.2017.11.007.
Deligkas et al. [2023]
A. Deligkas, E. Eiben,
G. Gutin, P. R. Neary,
A. Yeo,
Complexity dichotomies for the maximum weighted
digraph partition problem,
CoRR (2023).
Oum et al. [2014]
S. Oum, S. H. Sæther,
M. Vatshelle,
Faster algorithms for vertex partitioning problems
parameterized by clique-width,
Theor. Comput. Sci. 535
(2014) 16–24.
doi:10.1016/j.tcs.2014.03.024.
Shachnai and Zehavi [2017]
H. Shachnai, M. Zehavi,
Parameterized algorithms for graph partitioning
problems,
Theory Comput. Syst. 61
(2017) 721–738.
doi:10.1007/s00224-016-9706-0.
Bansal et al. [2014]
N. Bansal, U. Feige,
R. Krauthgamer, K. Makarychev,
V. Nagarajan, J. Naor,
R. Schwartz,
Min-max graph partitioning and small set expansion,
SIAM J. Comput. 43
(2014) 872–904.
doi:10.1137/120873996.
Ernst et al. [2006]
A. T. Ernst, H. Jiang,
M. Krishnamoorthy,
Exact solutions to task allocation problems,
Manag. Sci. 52
(2006) 1634–1646.
doi:10.1287/mnsc.1060.0578.
Kopras et al. [2022]
B. Kopras, B. Bossy,
F. Idzikowski, P. Kryszkiewicz,
H. Bogucka,
Task allocation for energy optimization in fog
computing networks with latency constraints,
IEEE Trans. Commun. 70
(2022) 8229–8243.
doi:10.1109/TCOMM.2022.3216645.
Liu et al. [2014]
J. Liu, Q. Zhuge, S. Gu,
J. Hu, G. Zhu, E. H.
Sha,
Minimizing system cost with efficient task assignment
on heterogeneous multicore processors considering time constraint,
IEEE Trans. Parallel Distributed Syst.
25 (2014) 2101–2113.
doi:10.1109/TPDS.2013.312.
Pagani et al. [2017]
S. Pagani, A. Pathania,
M. Shafique, J. Chen,
J. Henkel,
Energy efficiency for clustered heterogeneous
multicores,
IEEE Trans. Parallel Distributed Syst.
28 (2017) 1315–1330.
doi:10.1109/TPDS.2016.2623616.
Hu et al. [2019]
C. Hu, W. Bao, D. Wang,
F. Liu,
Dynamic adaptive DNN surgery for inference
acceleration on the edge,
in: INFOCOM, 2019, pp.
1423–1431. doi:10.1109/INFOCOM.2019.8737614.
Li et al. [2023]
J. Li, W. Liang, Y. Li,
Z. Xu, X. Jia, S. Guo,
Throughput maximization of delay-aware DNN
inference in edge computing by exploring DNN model partitioning and
inference parallelism,
IEEE Trans. Mob. Comput. 22
(2023) 3017–3030.
doi:10.1109/TMC.2021.3125949.
Nguyen et al. [2014]
N. Nguyen, T. T. Nguyen,
M. Roos, J. Rothe,
Computational complexity and approximability of
social welfare optimization in multiagent resource allocation,
Auton. Agent Multi-AG. 28
(2014) 256–289.
doi:10.1007/s10458-013-9224-2.
Chevaleyre et al. [2008]
Y. Chevaleyre, U. Endriss,
S. Estivie, N. Maudet,
Multiagent resource allocation in -additive
domains: Preference representation and complexity,
Ann. Oper. Res. 163
(2008) 49–62.
doi:10.1007/s10479-008-0335-0.
Yang [2021]
Y. Yang,
A model of winners allocation,
in: AAAI, 2021, pp.
5760–5767.
Dahlhaus et al. [1994]
E. Dahlhaus, D. S. Johnson,
C. H. Papadimitriou, P. D. Seymour,
M. Yannakakis,
The complexity of multiterminal cuts,
SIAM J. Comput. 23
(1994) 864–894.
doi:10.1137/S0097539792225297.
Karp [1972]
R. M. Karp,
Reducibility among combinatorial problems,
in: Complexity of Computer Computations,
1972, pp. 85–103.
doi:10.1007/978-1-4684-2001-2_9.
Cai [2008]
L. Cai,
Parameterized complexity of cardinality constrained
optimization problems,
Comput. J. 51
(2008) 102–121.
doi:10.1093/comjnl/bxm086.
Mathieson and Szeider [2008]
L. Mathieson, S. Szeider,
The parameterized complexity of regular subgraph
problems and generalizations,
in: CATS, 2008, pp.
79–86.
Hao and Orlin [1994]
J. Hao, J. Orlin,
A faster algorithm for finding the minimum cut in a
directed graph,
Journal of Algorithms 17
(1994) 424–446.
doi:https://doi.org/10.1006/jagm.1994.1043.
Aba et al. [2017]
M. A. Aba, L. Zaourar,
A. Munier,
Approximation algorithm for scheduling a chain of
tasks on heterogeneous systems,
in: Euro-Par, 2017, pp.
353–365. doi:10.1007/978-3-319-75178-8_29.
Jansen and Solis-Oba [2010]
K. Jansen, R. Solis-Oba,
Approximation schemes for scheduling jobs with chain
precedence constraints,
Int. J. Found. Comput. Sci. 21
(2010) 27–49.
doi:10.1142/S0129054110007118.