Our system is currently under heavy load due to increased usage. We're actively working on upgrades to improve performance. Thank you for your patience.
2007
DOI: 10.1007/s00453-007-9114-6
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Approximation Schemes for Node-Weighted Geometric Steiner Tree Problems

Abstract: In this paper we introduce a new technique for approximation schemes for geometrical optimization problems. As an example problem, we consider the following variant of the geometric Steiner tree problem. Every point u which is not included in the tree costs a penalty of π(u) units. Furthermore, every Steiner point that we use costs c S units. The goal is to minimize the total length of the tree plus the penalties. Our technique yields a polynomial time approximation scheme for the problem, if the points lie in… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1

Citation Types

0
3
0

Year Published

2007
2007
2022
2022

Publication Types

Select...
6
2

Relationship

0
8

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 8 publications
(3 citation statements)
references
References 23 publications
0
3
0
Order By: Relevance
“…Proof: The construction uses some ideas similar to the ones in [26]. We partition the area of R \ S into rectangular moats M 1 , M 2 , .…”
Section: S2 For Each Portalmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Proof: The construction uses some ideas similar to the ones in [26]. We partition the area of R \ S into rectangular moats M 1 , M 2 , .…”
Section: S2 For Each Portalmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Our interest, in this paper, is in exact solutions to the PCEST problem. Such solutions are absent from the literature, however approximation schemes have been discussed in Remy and Steger (2009). The range of problems covered by their methods includes the PCEST problem.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Thus we partially settle the approximability for this problem: GAPLESS-MEC is not APX-hard unless NP ⊆ QP (cf. [20]). Thus our result reveals a separation of the hardness of the gapless case and the case where we allow a single gap.…”
mentioning
confidence: 99%