Mobility Matters
Home›Mobile agents on graphs›Exploration›Graph exploration by a single agent›Online exploration of weighted graphs

Online exploration of weighted graphs

One agent must visit every node of an unknown weighted graph and return to its start node, learning the edges at each node only when it gets there; how close to a shortest tour can its cost be?

Problem statement and measuresexpand

A single agent starts at a node \(s\) of an unknown connected undirected graph \(G=(V,E)\) with \(n\) nodes; every edge \(e\) has a non-negative weight \(\mathrm{wt}(e)\). Nodes and edges carry distinct identifiers. When the agent visits a node for the first time it learns the identifiers of its neighbours and the identifiers and weights of the edges to them. Crossing an edge has a cost equal to its weight. The agent must visit every node and return to the start node \(s\); its walk is then a tour. An algorithm is measured by its competitive ratio: the supremum, over all graphs and start nodes, of the cost of its tour divided by \(\mathrm{OPT}\), the cost of a shortest closed walk that visits every node (an optimal travelling-salesperson tour of \(G\)); for a randomized algorithm the expected cost is used. Unless a setting says otherwise the algorithm is deterministic, the graph is arbitrary and nothing about it is known in advance. Memory and computation are unbounded: the question is what the lack of information costs. Since \(\mathrm{OPT}\) lies between the weight of a minimum spanning tree and twice that weight, a depth-first search that ignores the weights already explores trees optimally, and the difficulty lies in the cycles.

Measures: Competitive ratio, worst-case cost of the agent's tour divided by OPT, the cost of a shortest tour.

tight near-optimal polynomial gap unknown impossible· rows follow the assumption tree; each cell: best upper bound vs lower bound, and what forces the lower bound
Setting
Competitive ratio
Arbitrary weighted graphs + static graph, + undirected, + labelled nodes
3 open · 1 results
polynomial gap \(O(\log n)\) vs \(4\) online graph revelation
Known graph, weight estimates deterministic, + weight estimates
1 open · 1 results
polynomial gap \(\vartheta\) vs \(\min(\vartheta, 2)\) online graph revelation
Complete graphs, uniform weight estimates + complete graph
0 open · 1 results
tight \(\tfrac{1+\vartheta}{2}\) vs \(\tfrac{1+\vartheta}{2}\) online graph revelation
Graphs excluding a fixed minor deterministic, nothing known, + \(H\)-minor-free
1 open · 1 results
tight \(O(1)\) vs \(4\) online graph revelation
Planar graphs deterministic, nothing known, + planar
1 open · 1 results
tight \(16\) vs \(4\) online graph revelation
Weighted cycles deterministic, nothing known, any graph, + ring
0 open · 2 results
tight \(\tfrac{1+\sqrt3}{2}\) vs \(\tfrac{1+\sqrt3}{2}\) online graph revelation
Weighted cycles, randomized agent + private coins, + ring
2 open · 1 results
tight \(1+\tfrac{(3-\sqrt2)^2}{8}\) vs \(1+\tfrac{\sqrt2}{8+3\sqrt2}\) online graph revelation

Know a better result, or found a mistake? Suggest a result · Report an error. Accepted contributions are acknowledged.