On the Adaptivity Gap of Stochastic Orienteering

  • Nikhil Bansal
  • Viswanath Nagarajan
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 8494)


The input to the stochastic orienteering problem [14] consists of a budget B and metric (V,d) where each vertex v ∈ V has a job with a deterministic reward and a random processing time (drawn from a known distribution). The processing times are independent across vertices. The goal is to obtain a non-anticipatory policy (originating from a given root vertex) to run jobs at different vertices, that maximizes expected reward, subject to the total distance traveled plus processing times being at most B. An adaptive policy is one that can choose the next vertex to visit based on observed random instantiations. Whereas, a non-adaptive policy is just given by a fixed ordering of vertices. The adaptivity gap is the worst-case ratio of the expected rewards of the optimal adaptive and non-adaptive policies.

We prove an \(\Omega\left((\log\log B)^{1/2}\right)\) lower bound on the adaptivity gap of stochastic orienteering. This provides a negative answer to the O(1)-adaptivity gap conjectured in [14] and comes close to the O(loglogB) upper bound proved there. This result holds even on a line metric.

We also show an O(loglogB) upper bound on the adaptivity gap for the correlated stochastic orienteering problem, where the reward of each job is random and possibly correlated to its processing time. Using this, we obtain an improved quasi-polynomial time \( \min\{\log n,\log B\}\cdot \tilde{O}(\log^2\log B)\)-approximation algorithm for correlated stochastic orienteering.


Vehicle Rout Problem Left Child Orienteering Problem Adaptive Policy Good Approximation Ratio 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. 1.
    Bansal, N., Blum, A., Chawla, S., Meyerson, A.: Approximation algorithms for deadline-TSP and vehicle routing with time-windows. In: STOC, pp. 166–174 (2004)Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Bansal, N., Gupta, A., Li, J., Mestre, J., Nagarajan, V., Rudra, A.: When LP is the cure for your matching woes: Improved bounds for stochastic matchings. Algorithmica 63(4), 733–762 (2012)CrossRefzbMATHMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Bansal, N., Nagarajan, V.: On the adaptivity gap of stochastic orienteering. CoRR, abs/1311.3623 (2013)Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Bhalgat, A.: A (2 + ε)-approximation algorithm for the stochastic knapsack problem (2011) (unpublished manuscript)Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Bhalgat, A., Goel, A., Khanna, S.: Improved approximation results for stochastic knapsack problems. In: SODA, pp. 1647–1665 (2011)Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Blum, A., Chawla, S., Karger, D.R., Lane, T., Meyerson, A., Minkoff, M.: Approximation algorithms for orienteering and discounted-reward TSP. SIAM J. Comput. 37(2), 653–670 (2007)CrossRefzbMATHMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Chekuri, C., Korula, N., Pál, M.: Improved algorithms for orienteering and related problems. ACM TALG 8(3) (2012)Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Chen, N., Immorlica, N., Karlin, A.R., Mahdian, M., Rudra, A.: Approximating matches made in heaven. In: Albers, S., Marchetti-Spaccamela, A., Matias, Y., Nikoletseas, S., Thomas, W. (eds.) ICALP 2009, Part I. LNCS, vol. 5555, pp. 266–278. Springer, Heidelberg (2009)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Dean, B.C., Goemans, M.X., Vondrák, J.: Approximating the stochastic knapsack problem: The benefit of adaptivity. Math. Oper. Res. 33(4), 945–964 (2008)CrossRefzbMATHMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Garg, N., Könemann, J.: Faster and simpler algorithms for multicommodity flow and other fractional packing problems. SIAM J. Comput. 37(2), 630–652 (2007)CrossRefzbMATHMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Golden, B.L., Levy, L., Vohra, R.: The orienteering problem. Naval Research Logistics 34(3), 307–318 (1987)CrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Guha, S., Munagala, K.: Multi-armed bandits with metric switching costs. In: Albers, S., Marchetti-Spaccamela, A., Matias, Y., Nikoletseas, S., Thomas, W. (eds.) ICALP 2009, Part II. LNCS, vol. 5556, pp. 496–507. Springer, Heidelberg (2009)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Gupta, A., Krishnaswamy, R., Molinaro, M., Ravi, R.: Approximation algorithms for correlated knapsacks and non-martingale bandits. In: FOCS, pp. 827–836 (2011)Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Gupta, A., Krishnaswamy, R., Nagarajan, V., Ravi, R.: Approximation algorithms for stochastic orienteering. In: SODA, pp. 1522–1538 (2012)Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Ma, W.: Improvements and generalizations of stochastic knapsack and multi-armed bandit approximation algorithms: Extended abstract. In: SODA, pp. 1154–1163 (2014)Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Plotkin, S.A., Shmoys, D.B., Tardos, E.: Fast approximation algorithms for fractional packing and covering problems. In: FOCS, pp. 495–504 (1991)Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Vansteenwegena, P., Souffriaua, W., Oudheusdena, D.V.: The orienteering problem: A survey. Eur. J. Oper. Res. 209(1), 1–10 (2011)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Weyland, D.: Stochastic Vehicle Routing - From Theory to Practice. PhD thesis, University of Lugano, Switzerland (2013)Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    Zhang, T.: Data dependent concentration bounds for sequential prediction algorithms. In: COLT, pp. 173–187 (2005)Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing Switzerland 2014

Authors and Affiliations

  • Nikhil Bansal
    • 1
  • Viswanath Nagarajan
    • 2
  1. 1.Eindhoven University of TechnologyThe Netherlands
  2. 2.IBM T.J. Watson Research CenterUSA

Personalised recommendations