Scribd
Upload
22 views

Greedy Algorithm For Matroids

This document outlines a greedy algorithm for matroids and proves its validity. It begins by defining matroids and introducing weighted functions on matroids. It then describes Kruskal's minimum spanning tree algorithm before detailing the greedy algorithm for matroids. The algorithm selects elements of maximum weight from the matroid at each step. Finally, the document proves that a collection satisfies the greedy algorithm property if and only if it is a matroid, establishing the algorithm's validity.

Uploaded by

Yasin
Copyright
© © All Rights Reserved
Available Formats
Download as PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
22 views

Greedy Algorithm For Matroids

This document outlines a greedy algorithm for matroids and proves its validity. It begins by defining matroids and introducing weighted functions on matroids. It then describes Kruskal's minimum spanning tree algorithm before detailing the greedy algorithm for matroids. The algorithm selects elements of maximum weight from the matroid at each step. Finally, the document proves that a collection satisfies the greedy algorithm property if and only if it is a matroid, establishing the algorithm's validity.

Uploaded by

Yasin
Copyright
© © All Rights Reserved
Available Formats
Download as PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
You are on page 1/ 15

Greedy Algorithm for Matroids

Yassin Tesfaw
Advisor: Professor Nan y Ann Neudauer

Afri an Institutes for Mathemati al S ien es

January 23, 2019


Outlines

◮ Denition of Matroids
◮ Weighted Fun tion

◮ Greedy Algorithm for Matroids


◮ Minimum weighted spanning Tree

◮ Kruskal's Algorithm

◮ Theorem for Greedy Algorithm

2 / 11
Denition of Matroids

Denition
A matroid M is an order pair (E , I) onsisting a nite set E and a
olle tion I of subsets of E satisfying the following three onditions:
(M1) ∅ ∈ I .
(M2) If I ∈ I and I ′ ⊆ I , then I ′ ∈ I .
(M3) If I1 and I2 are in I and |I1 | < |I2 |, then there is an element e of
I2 − I1 su h that I1 ∪ e ∈ I .

Example
Given a set E = {a, b, c} and
I = {∅, {a}, {b}, {c}, {a, b}, {a, c}, {b, c}}, then (E , I) is a matroid.

3 / 11
Denition
A matroid (E , I) if it equipped with a weight fun tion w : E → R+ , i.e.,
all weights are positive real numbers. If X ⊆ E then
X
w (X ) = w (x).
x∈X

Example
Consider the graph with the E = {a, b, c, d, e} and their weight under
the subs ript.
a1

◮ I = {∅, a, b, c, ab, ac, bc} is a


matroid on E .
b2 c3 e4
◮ X = {a, c, d} have the weight
9.
d5

4 / 11
Greedy Algorithm for Matroids

Before going to greedy algorithm for matroids,


◮ Minimum weighted spanning tree

◮ Kruskal's Algorithm(1956)

5 / 11
Greedy Algorithm for Matroids

Before going to greedy algorithm for matroids,


◮ Minimum weighted spanning tree

◮ Kruskal's Algorithm(1956)

Let I be a olle tion of subsets of a set E and suppose I satises (M 1)


and (M 2). Let w be a weighted fun tion and w (∅) = 0. The pair (I, w )
be omes optimization problem as:

5 / 11
Find a maximal member B of I of maximum weight?
The greedy algorithm for the pair (I, w ) pro eeds as follows:
// Maximizing version
1. Set X0 = ∅ and j = 0.
2. If E − Xj ontains an element e su h that Xj ∪ e ∈ I , hoose su h
an element ej+1 of maximum weight, Let Xj+1 = Xj ∪ ej+1 , and go
to (3); otherwise, let Xj = BG and go to (4).
3. Add 1 to j and go to (2).
4. stop.
Example
a1
◮ E = {a, b, c, d, e} and
X0 = ∅.
b2 c3 e4 ◮ Iteration for sele ting
d5 ◮ Xj = BG = {d, e, c}

6 / 11
Theorem for Greedy Algorithm

Theorem
Let I be a olle tion of subsets of set E . Then (E , I) is a matroid if and
only if I satises the following onditions:
(M1) ∅ ∈ I .
(M2) If I ∈ I and I ′ ⊆ I , then I ′ ∈ I .
(G) For all weighted fun tion w : E −→ R, the greedy algorithm
produ es a maximal member of I of maximum weight.

Proof.
◮ If (E , I) is a matroid M 1 and M 2 holds and so too does (G ).

◮ Now suppose that I satises (M 1), (M 2) and (G ). We want to


show I satises (M 3).

7 / 11
Assume the ontrary, that is suppose that I1 , I2 are members of I with
|I1 | < |I2 | su h that I1 ∪ e ∈
/ I for all e ∈ I2 − I1 .

8 / 11
Assume the ontrary, that is suppose that I1 , I2 are members of I with
|I1 | < |I2 | su h that I1 ∪ e ∈
/ I for all e ∈ I2 − I1 .

We have |I1 − I2 | < |I2 − I1 | and I1 − I2 6= ∅, so we hose a positive


number ǫ su h that

0 < (1 + ǫ)|I1 − I2 | < |I2 − I1 | (1)

8 / 11
Assume the ontrary, that is suppose that I1 , I2 are members of I with
|I1 | < |I2 | su h that I1 ∪ e ∈
/ I for all e ∈ I2 − I1 .

We have |I1 − I2 | < |I2 − I1 | and I1 − I2 6= ∅, so we hose a positive


number ǫ su h that

0 < (1 + ǫ)|I1 − I2 | < |I2 − I1 | (1)

Dene w : E → R+ by


2 if e ∈ I1 ∩ I2 ,
1
if e ∈ I1 − I2 ,



|I1 −I2 |
w (e) = 1+ǫ


 |I2 −I1 | if e ∈ I2 − I1 ,
0

otherwise

8 / 11
Then
w (BG ) = 2|I1 ∩ I2 | + 1 (2)

9 / 11
Then
w (BG ) = 2|I1 ∩ I2 | + 1 (2)

But by (M2), I2 is ontained in maximal memeber I2′ of I and

w (I2 ) = 2|I1 ∩ I2 | + 1 + ǫ (3)

Hen e from (2) and (3), we dedu e that w (I2′ ) > w (BG ), that the greedy
algorithm fails.

9 / 11
Referen es

◮ (Oxford Graduate Texts in Mathemati s) James G. Oxley - Matroid


Theory-Oxford University Press (1993)

10 / 11
Time for Questions

Thank You

11 / 11

You might also like