VLDB 2026 Research / reviewers in the wild / expert
David Durfee
dblp:155/9794
· DBLP profile ↗
17ranked-venue papers
10as first author
4since 2021 · last 2025
0000-0002-8551-0426ORCID · corroborated
Domains — the database's venue-derived domains; a paper can count in several
Theory of computation · 10 · 6 first-authorArtificial intelligence and machine learning · 5 · 4 first-author · 2 since 2021Applied, interdisciplinary, general and emerging computing · 2 · 2 since 2021
Expertise — from the expertise taxonomy: the topics of the expert's papers under the CCF categories. A weight counts papers with recency: 1 for a paper about the topic, 0.3 when the topic is its context, halved every five years.
| Theoretical computer science
9 papers |
Graph algorithms and graph theory · 40% Algorithms and data structures · 26% Computational complexity · 15% | |
| Network and information security
5 papers |
Privacy and data protection · 100% | |
| Computer architecture, parallel and distributed computing, and storage systems
1 paper |
Parallel and multicore computing · 100% | |
| Artificial intelligence
1 paper |
Optimization for machine learning · 100% |
Topics — the 30 heaviest of 39, each with the papers that count most for it
| Topic | Weight | Papers | Last | Evidence papers |
|---|---|---|---|---|
Privacy and data protection
differential privacy |
2.7 | 5 | 2024 | Instance-Specific Asymmetric Sensitivity in Differential Privacy · NeurIPS 2024 Unbounded Differentially Private Quantile and Maximum Estimation · NeurIPS 2023 Individual Sensitivity Preprocessing for Data Privacy · SODA 2020 |
Privacy and data protection › differential privacy › privacy mechanism design
sparse vector technique |
1.4 | 2 | 2024 | Instance-Specific Asymmetric Sensitivity in Differential Privacy · NeurIPS 2024 Unbounded Differentially Private Quantile and Maximum Estimation · NeurIPS 2023 |
Graph algorithms and graph theory › graph sparsification
spectral sparsification |
1.4 | 4 | 2020 | Determinant-Preserving Sparsification of SDDM Matrices · SIAM J. Comput. 2020 Fully dynamic spectral vertex sparsifiers and applications · STOC 2019 Determinant-Preserving Sparsification of SDDM Matrices with Applications to Counting and Sampling Spanning Trees · FOCS 2017 |
Privacy and data protection › differential privacy › privacy accounting
composition theorems |
0.8 | 2 | 2020 | Optimal Differential Privacy Composition for Exponential Mechanisms · ICML 2020 Practical Differentially Private Top-k Selection with Pay-what-you-get Composition · NeurIPS 2019 |
Algorithms and data structures › dynamic algorithms
dynamic graph algorithms |
0.8 | 2 | 2020 | Parallel Batch-Dynamic Graphs: Algorithms and Lower Bounds · SODA 2020 Fully dynamic spectral vertex sparsifiers and applications · STOC 2019 |
Privacy and data protection › differential privacy › private statistical estimation
private quantile estimation |
0.7 | 1 | 2023 | Unbounded Differentially Private Quantile and Maximum Estimation · NeurIPS 2023 |
Graph algorithms and graph theory
graph algorithms |
0.6 | 2 | 2017 | Sampling random spanning trees faster than matrix multiplication · STOC 2017 Determinant-Preserving Sparsification of SDDM Matrices with Applications to Counting and Sampling Spanning Trees · FOCS 2017 |
Graph algorithms and graph theory
graph sparsification |
0.5 | 2 | 2017 | Determinant-Preserving Sparsification of SDDM Matrices with Applications to Counting and Sampling Spanning Trees · FOCS 2017 On Fully Dynamic Graph Sparsifiers · FOCS 2016 |
Privacy and data protection › differential privacy › privacy mechanism design
exponential mechanism |
0.4 | 1 | 2020 | Optimal Differential Privacy Composition for Exponential Mechanisms · ICML 2020 |
Privacy and data protection › differential privacy › relaxed differential privacy
personalized differential privacy |
0.4 | 1 | 2020 | Individual Sensitivity Preprocessing for Data Privacy · SODA 2020 |
Privacy and data protection › differential privacy
private statistical estimation |
0.4 | 1 | 2020 | Individual Sensitivity Preprocessing for Data Privacy · SODA 2020 |
Parallel and multicore computing › parallel computation models
massively parallel computation |
0.4 | 1 | 2020 | Parallel Batch-Dynamic Graphs: Algorithms and Lower Bounds · SODA 2020 |
Parallel and multicore computing › parallel computation models
MPC model |
0.4 | 1 | 2020 | Parallel Batch-Dynamic Graphs: Algorithms and Lower Bounds · SODA 2020 |
Computational complexity
lower bounds |
0.4 | 1 | 2020 | Parallel Batch-Dynamic Graphs: Algorithms and Lower Bounds · SODA 2020 |
Computational complexity › parallel complexity
p-completeness |
0.4 | 1 | 2020 | Parallel Batch-Dynamic Graphs: Algorithms and Lower Bounds · SODA 2020 |
Algorithms and data structures › randomized algorithms
sampling |
0.4 | 1 | 2020 | Determinant-Preserving Sparsification of SDDM Matrices · SIAM J. Comput. 2020 |
Computational complexity › counting problems
spanning tree counting |
0.4 | 1 | 2020 | Determinant-Preserving Sparsification of SDDM Matrices · SIAM J. Comput. 2020 |
Algorithms and data structures
numerical linear algebra |
0.4 | 2 | 2020 | Determinant-Preserving Sparsification of SDDM Matrices with Applications to Counting and Sampling Spanning Trees · FOCS 2017 Determinant-Preserving Sparsification of SDDM Matrices · SIAM J. Comput. 2020 |
Graph algorithms and graph theory › graph sparsification
vertex sparsification |
0.4 | 1 | 2019 | Fully dynamic spectral vertex sparsifiers and applications · STOC 2019 |
Machine learning › Optimization for machine learning › stochastic gradient descent
preconditioned SGD |
0.3 | 1 | 2018 | $\ell_1$ Regression using Lewis Weights Preconditioning and Stochastic Gradient Descent · COLT 2018 |
Machine learning › Optimization for machine learning
stochastic gradient descent |
0.3 | 1 | 2018 | $\ell_1$ Regression using Lewis Weights Preconditioning and Stochastic Gradient Descent · COLT 2018 |
Mathematical optimization › statistical estimation › regression › regularized regression
l1 regression |
0.3 | 1 | 2018 | $\ell_1$ Regression using Lewis Weights Preconditioning and Stochastic Gradient Descent · COLT 2018 |
Mathematical optimization › statistical estimation › regression › robust regression
least absolute deviations |
0.3 | 1 | 2018 | $\ell_1$ Regression using Lewis Weights Preconditioning and Stochastic Gradient Descent · COLT 2018 |
Graph algorithms and graph theory
random walk |
0.3 | 1 | 2018 | Nearly Tight Bounds for Sandpile Transience on the Grid · SODA 2018 |
Mathematical optimization › statistical estimation
regression |
0.3 | 1 | 2018 | $\ell_1$ Regression using Lewis Weights Preconditioning and Stochastic Gradient Descent · COLT 2018 |
Algorithms and data structures › numerical linear algebra
determinant computation |
0.3 | 1 | 2017 | Determinant-Preserving Sparsification of SDDM Matrices with Applications to Counting and Sampling Spanning Trees · FOCS 2017 |
Graph algorithms and graph theory › spanning tree
random spanning tree |
0.3 | 1 | 2017 | Sampling random spanning trees faster than matrix multiplication · STOC 2017 |
Algorithms and data structures
dynamic algorithms |
0.2 | 1 | 2016 | On Fully Dynamic Graph Sparsifiers · FOCS 2016 |
Graph algorithms and graph theory › graph algorithms › network flow › maximum flow
dynamic maximum flow |
0.2 | 1 | 2016 | On Fully Dynamic Graph Sparsifiers · FOCS 2016 |
Algorithms and data structures › dynamic algorithms › dynamic graph algorithms
fully dynamic graph algorithms |
0.2 | 1 | 2016 | On Fully Dynamic Graph Sparsifiers · FOCS 2016 |
Methods — techniques the papers use, named apart from their topics
sparse vector technique · 1.4exponential mechanism · 1.1random sample extractor · 0.9graph contraction · 0.9distributed data structures · 0.9schur complement · 0.7leverage scores · 0.7approximate cholesky factorization · 0.7preconditioning · 0.7lewis weights · 0.7abovethreshold · 0.7smooth sensitivity · 0.4sample-and-aggregate · 0.4recursive formula · 0.4propose-test-release · 0.4lipschitz extension · 0.4adaptive composition analysis · 0.4spectral graph theory · 0.4
| Year | Publication | Venue | Position |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2025 | Sub-Centimeter Probes for Low-Frequency Alternating Electric Field (AEF) Measurements in Rodent Models of Brain Cancer
Marinus H. Daling, David Durfee, Turner Shelton, Samuel Simonian, Keith Schubert, Sabbir Khan, Chirag B. Patel, Vincent W. Leung |
BSN | 2 |
| 2024 | Analysis of Wireless Power Transfer Efficiency and Specific Absorption Rate for a Distributed Brain Implant SystemabstractWireless sub-mm sized distributed brain implants have been proposed as the next frontier of Brain-Machine Interface (BMI) design to achieve untethered, high-density neural recording and stimulation. Simultaneously improving the wireless power transfer (WPT) efficiency and reducing the specific absorption rate (SAR) will be crucial for its clinical success. Towards these goals, we present an EM simulation method, a lumped equivalent circuit model, and a theoretical analysis to accurately predict the power delivered to the recording/ stimulating nodes, as well as the power dissipated in biological tissues and all other lossy elements within the system. This comprehensive framework also explains how increasing the distance between the transmit coil and the scalp can beneficially reduce the SAR without undermining the WPT efficiency. This work presents a rigorous prediction technique for transmission loss and tissue heating towards performance optimization. Julian Alonzo, Marinus H. Daling, Ah-Hyoung Lee, David Durfee, Peter M. Asbeck, Lawrence E. Larson, Arto V. Nurmikko, Vincent W. Leung |
BSN | 5 |
| 2024 | Instance-Specific Asymmetric Sensitivity in Differential PrivacyabstractWe provide a new algorithmic framework for differentially private estimation of general functions that adapts to the hardness of the underlying dataset. We build upon previous work that gives a paradigm for selecting an output through the exponential mechanism based upon closeness of the inverse to the underlying dataset, termed the inverse sensitivity mechanism. Our framework will slightly modify the closeness metric and instead give a simple and efficient application of the sparse vector technique. While the inverse sensitivity mechanism was shown to be instance optimal, it was only with respect to a class of unbiased mechanisms such that the most likely outcome matches the underlying data. We break this assumption in order to more naturally navigate the bias-variance tradeoff, which will also critically allow for extending our method to unbounded data. In consideration of this tradeoff, we provide theoretical guarantees and empirical validation that our technique will be particularly effective when the distances to the underlying dataset are asymmetric. This asymmetry is inherent to a range of important problems including fundamental statistics such as variance, as well as commonly used machine learning performance metrics for both classification and regression tasks. We efficiently instantiate our method in $O(n)$ time for these problems and empirically show that our techniques will give substantially improved differentially private estimations. David Durfee |
NeurIPS | 1 |
| 2023 | Unbounded Differentially Private Quantile and Maximum EstimationabstractIn this work we consider the problem of differentially private computation of
quantiles for the data, especially the highest quantiles such as maximum, but
with an unbounded range for the dataset. We show that this can be done
efficiently through a simple invocation of $\texttt{AboveThreshold}$, a
subroutine that is iteratively called in the fundamental Sparse Vector
Technique, even when there is no upper bound on the data. In particular, we
show that this procedure can give more accurate and robust estimates on the
highest quantiles with applications towards clipping that is essential for
differentially private sum and mean estimation. In addition, we show how two
invocations can handle the fully unbounded data setting. Within our study, we
show that an improved analysis of $\texttt{AboveThreshold}$ can improve the
privacy guarantees for the widely used Sparse Vector Technique that is of
independent interest. We give a more general characterization of privacy loss
for $\texttt{AboveThreshold}$ which we immediately apply to our method for
improved privacy guarantees. Our algorithm only requires one $O(n)$ pass
through the data, which can be unsorted, and each subsequent query takes $O(1)$
time. We empirically compare our unbounded algorithm with the state-of-the-art
algorithms in the bounded setting. For inner quantiles, we find that our method
often performs better on non-synthetic datasets. For the maximal quantiles,
which we apply to differentially private sum computation, we find that our
method performs significantly better. David Durfee |
NeurIPS | 1 |
| 2020 | Optimal Differential Privacy Composition for Exponential MechanismsabstractComposition is one of the most important properties of differential privacy (DP), as it allows algorithm designers to build complex private algorithms from DP primitives. We consider precise composition bounds of the overall privacy loss for exponential mechanisms, one of the fundamental classes of mechanisms in DP. Exponential mechanism has also become a fundamental building block in private machine learning, e.g. private PCA and hyper-parameter selection. We give explicit formulations of the optimal privacy loss for both the adaptive and non-adaptive composition of exponential mechanism. For the non-adaptive setting in which each mechanism has the same privacy parameter, we give an efficiently computable formulation of the optimal privacy loss. In the adaptive case, we derive a recursive formula and an efficiently computable upper bound. These precise understandings about the problem lead to a 40% saving of the privacy budget in a practical application. Furthermore, the algorithm-specific analysis shows a difference in privacy parameters of adaptive and non-adaptive composition, which was widely believed to not exist based on the evidence from general analysis. Jinshuo Dong, David Durfee, Ryan Rogers 0002 |
ICML | 2 |
| 2020 | Individual Sensitivity Preprocessing for Data PrivacyabstractThe sensitivity metric in differential privacy, which is informally defined as the largest marginal change in output between neighboring databases, is of substantial significance in determining the accuracy of private data analyses. Techniques for improving accuracy when the average sensitivity is much smaller than the worst-case sensitivity have been developed within the differential privacy literature, including tools such as smooth sensitivity, Sample-and-Aggregate, Propose-Test-Release, and Lipschitz extensions. In this work, we provide a new and general Sensitivity-Preprocessing framework for reducing sensitivity, where efficient application gives state-of-the-art accuracy for privately outputting the important statistical metrics median and mean when no underlying assumptions are made about the database. In particular, our framework compares favorably to smooth sensitivity for privately outputting median, in terms of both running time and accuracy. Furthermore, because our framework is a preprocessing step, it can also be complementary to smooth sensitivity and any other private mechanism, where applying both can achieve further gains in accuracy. We additionally introduce a new notion of individual sensitivity and show that it is an important metric in the variant definition of personalized differential privacy. We show that our algorithm can extend to this context and serve as a useful tool for this variant definition and its applications in markets for privacy. Given the effectiveness of our framework in these important statistical metrics, we further investigate its properties and show that: (1) Our construction is conducive to efficient implementation with strong accuracy guarantees, evidenced by an O(n) implementation for median (with presorted data), and O(n2) implementation for more complicated functions such as mean, α-trimmed mean, and variance. (2) Our construction is both NP-hard and also optimal in the general setting (3) Our construction can be extended to higher dimensions, although it incurs accuracy loss that is linear in the dimension. Rachel Cummings, David Durfee |
SODA | 2 |
| 2020 | Parallel Batch-Dynamic Graphs: Algorithms and Lower BoundsabstractIn this paper we study the problem of dynamically maintaining graph properties under batches of edge insertions and deletions in the massively parallel model of computation. In this setting, the graph is stored on a number of machines, each having space strongly sublinear with respect to the number of vertices, that is, nϵ for some constant 0 < ϵ < 1. Our goal is to handle batches of updates and queries where the data for each batch fits onto one machine in constant rounds of parallel computation, as well as to reduce the total communication between the machines. This objective corresponds to the gradual buildup of databases over time, while the goal of obtaining constant rounds of communication for problems in the static setting has been elusive for problems as simple as undirected graph connectivity. We give an algorithm for dynamic graph connectivity in this setting with constant communication rounds and communication cost almost linear in terms of the batch size. Our techniques combine a new graph contraction technique, an independent random sample extractor from correlated samples, as well as distributed data structures supporting parallel updates and queries in batches. We also illustrate the power of dynamic algorithms in the MPC model by showing that the batched version of the adaptive connectivity problem is P-complete in the centralized setting, but sub-linear sized batches can be handled in a constant number of rounds. Due to the wide applicability of our approaches, we believe it represents a practically-motivated workaround to the current difficulties in designing more efficient massively parallel static graph algorithms. Laxman Dhulipala, David Durfee, Janardhan Kulkarni, Richard Peng, Saurabh Sawlani, Xiaorui Sun |
SODA | 2 |
| 2020 | Determinant-Preserving Sparsification of SDDM MatricesabstractWe show that variants of spectral sparsification routines can preserve the total spanning tree counts of graphs. By Kirchhoff's matrix-tree theorem, this is equivalent to preserving the determinant of a graph Laplacian minor or, equivalently, of any symmetric diagonally dominant matrix (SDDM). Our analyses utilize this combinatorial connection to bridge the gap between statistical leverage scores/effective resistances and the analysis of random graphs by Janson [ Combin. Probab. Comput., 3 (1994), pp. 97--126]. This leads to a routine that, in quadratic time, sparsifies a graph down to about $n^{1.5}$ edges in a way that preserves both the determinant and the distribution of spanning trees (provided the sparsified graph is viewed as a random object). Extending this algorithm to work with Schur complements and approximate Choleksy factorizations leads to algorithms for counting and sampling spanning trees which are nearly optimal for dense graphs. We give an algorithm that computes a $(1 \pm \delta)$ approximation to the determinant of any SDDM matrix with constant probability in about $n^2 \delta^{-2}$ time. This is the first routine for graphs that outperforms general-purpose routines for computing determinants of arbitrary matrices. We also give an algorithm that generates, in about $n^2 \delta^{-2}$ time, a spanning tree of a weighted undirected graph from a distribution with a total variation distance of $\delta$ from the $\boldsymbol{\mathit{w}}$-uniform distribution. David Durfee, John Peebles, Richard Peng, Anup B. Rao |
SIAM J. Comput. | 1 |
| 2019 | Practical Differentially Private Top-k Selection with Pay-what-you-get CompositionabstractWe study the problem of top-k selection over a large domain universe subject to user-level differential privacy. Typically, the exponential mechanism or report noisy max are the algorithms used to solve this problem. However, these algorithms require querying the database for the count of each domain element. We focus on the setting where the data domain is unknown, which is different than the setting of frequent itemsets where an apriori type algorithm can help prune the space of domain elements to query. We design algorithms that ensures (approximate) differential privacy and only needs access to the true top-k' elements from the data for any chosen k' ≥ k. This is a highly desirable feature for making differential privacy practical, since the algorithms require no knowledge of the domain. We consider both the setting where a user's data can modify an arbitrary number of counts by at most 1, i.e. unrestricted sensitivity, and the setting where a user's data can modify at most some small, fixed number of counts by at most 1, i.e. restricted sensitivity. Additionally, we provide a pay-what-you-get privacy composition bound for our algorithms. That is, our algorithms might return fewer than k elements when the top-k elements are queried, but the overall privacy budget only decreases by the size of the outcome set. David Durfee, Ryan Rogers 0002 |
NeurIPS | 1 |
| 2019 | Fully dynamic spectral vertex sparsifiers and applicationsabstractWe study dynamic algorithms for maintaining spectral vertex sparsifiers of graphs with respect to a set of terminals T of our choice. Such objects preserve pairwise resistances, solutions to systems of linear equations, and energy of electrical flows between the terminals in T. We give a data structure that supports insertions and deletions of edges, and terminal additions, all in sublinear time. We then show the applicability of our result to the following problems. David Durfee, Yu Gao 0001, Gramoz Goranci, Richard Peng |
STOC | 1 |
| 2019 | Efficient Second-Order Shape-Constrained Function Fitting
David Durfee, Yu Gao 0001, Anup B. Rao, Sebastian Wild |
WADS | 1 |
| 2018 | $\ell_1$ Regression using Lewis Weights Preconditioning and Stochastic Gradient DescentabstractWe present preconditioned stochastic gradient descent (SGD) algorithms for the $\ell_1$ minimization problem $\min_{\boldsymbol{\mathit{x}}}\|\boldsymbol{\mathit{A}} \boldsymbol{\mathit{x}} - \boldsymbol{\mathit{b}}\|_1$ in the overdetermined case, where there are far more constraints than variables. Specifically, we have $\boldsymbol{\mathit{A}} \in \mathbb{R}^{n \times d}$ for $n \gg d$. Commonly known as the Least Absolute Deviations problem, $\ell_1$ regression can be used to solve many important combinatorial problems, such as minimum cut and shortest path. SGD-based algorithms are appealing for their simplicity and practical efficiency. Our primary insight is that careful preprocessing can yield preconditioned matrices $\tilde{\boldsymbol{\mathit{A}}}$ with strong properties (besides good condition number and low-dimension) that allow for faster convergence of gradient descent. In particular, we precondition using Lewis weights to obtain an isotropic matrix with fewer rows and strong upper bounds on all row norms. We leverage these conditions to find a good initialization, which we use along with recent smoothing reductions and accelerated stochastic gradient descent algorithms to achieve $\epsilon$ relative error in $\widetilde{O}(nnz(\boldsymbol{\mathit{A}}) + d^{2.5} \epsilon^{-2})$ time with high probability, where $nnz(\boldsymbol{\mathit{A}})$ is the number of non-zeros in $\boldsymbol{\mathit{A}}$. This improves over the previous best result using gradient descent for $\ell_1$ regression. We also match the best known running times for interior point methods in several settings. Finally, we also show that if our original matrix $\boldsymbol{\mathit{A}}$ is approximately isotropic and the row norms are approximately equal, we can give an algorithm that avoids using fast matrix multiplication and obtains a running time of $\widetilde{O}(nnz(\boldsymbol{\mathit{A}}) + s d^{1.5}\epsilon^{-2} + d^2\epsilon^{-2})$, where $s$ is the maximum number of non-zeros in a row of $\boldsymbol{\mathit{A}}$. In this setting, we beat the best interior point methods for certain parameter regimes. David Durfee, Kevin A. Lai, Saurabh Sawlani |
COLT | 1 |
| 2018 | Nearly Tight Bounds for Sandpile Transience on the GridabstractWe use techniques from the theory of electrical networks to give nearly tight bounds for the transience class of the Abelian sandpile model on the two-dimensional grid up to polylogarithmic factors. The Abelian sandpile model is a discrete process on graphs that is intimately related to the phenomenon of self-organized criticality. In this process, vertices receive grains of sand, and once the number of grains exceeds their degree, they topple by sending grains to their neighbors. The transience class of a model is the maximum number of grains that can be added to the system before it necessarily reaches its steady-state behavior or, equivalently, a recurrent state. Through a more refined and global analysis of electrical potentials and random walks, we give an O(n4 log4 n) upper bound and an Ω(n4) lower bound for the transience class of the n × n grid. Our methods naturally extend to nd-sized d-dimensional grids to give O(n3d–2 logd+2 n) upper bounds and Ω(n3d–2) lower bounds. David Durfee, Matthew Fahrbach, Yu Gao 0001 |
SODA | 1 |
| 2017 | Determinant-Preserving Sparsification of SDDM Matrices with Applications to Counting and Sampling Spanning TreesabstractWe show variants of spectral sparsification routines can preserve the total spanning tree counts of graphs, which by Kirchhoff's matrix-tree theorem, is equivalent to determinant of a graph Laplacian minor, or equivalently, of any SDDM matrix. Our analyses utilizes this combinatorial connection to bridge between statistical leverage scores/effective resistances and the analysis of random graphs by [Janson, Combinatorics, Probability and Computing `94]. This leads to a routine that in quadratic time, sparsifies a graph down to about n1.5 edges in ways that preserve both the determinant and the distribution of spanning trees (provided the sparsified graph is viewed as a random object). Extending this algorithm to work with Schur complements and approximate Cholesky factorizations leads to algorithms for counting and sampling spanning trees which are nearly optimal for dense graphs. We give an algorithm that computes a (1±δ) approximation to the determinant of any SDDM matrix with constant probability in about n2δ-2time. This is the first routine for graphs that outperforms general-purpose routines for computing determinants of arbitrary matrices. We also give an algorithm that generates in about n2δ-2time a spanning tree of a weighted undirected graph from a distribution with total variation distance of δ from the w-uniform distribution. David Durfee, John Peebles, Richard Peng, Anup B. Rao |
FOCS | 1 |
| 2017 | Sampling random spanning trees faster than matrix multiplicationabstractWe present an algorithm that, with high probability, generates a random spanning tree from an edge-weighted undirected graph in (n5/3 m1/3) time. The tree is sampled from a distribution where the probability of each tree is proportional to the product of its edge weights. This improves upon the previous best algorithm due to Colbourn et al. that runs in matrix multiplication time, O(nω). For the special case of unweighted graphs, this improves upon the best previously known running time of Õ(min{nω,m√n,m4/3}) for m ⪢ n7/4 (Colbourn et al. '96, Kelner-Madry '09, Madry et al. '15). David Durfee, Rasmus Kyng, John Peebles, Anup B. Rao, Sushant Sachdeva |
STOC | 1 |
| 2016 | On Fully Dynamic Graph SparsifiersabstractWe initiate the study of fast dynamic algorithms for graph sparsification problems and obtain fully dynamic algorithms, allowing both edge insertions and edge deletions, that take polylogarithmic time after each update in the graph. Our three main results are as follows. First, we give a fully dynamic algorithm for maintaining a (1 ± ϵ)-spectral sparsifier with amortized update time poly(log n, ϵ-1). Second, we give a fully dynamic algorithm for maintaining a (1 ± ϵ)-cut sparsifier with worst-case update time poly(log n, ϵ-1). Both sparsifiers have size n · poly(log n, ϵ-1). Third, we apply our dynamic sparsifier algorithm to obtain a fully dynamic algorithm for maintaining a (1 - ϵ)-approximation to the value of the maximum flow in an unweighted, undirected, bipartite graph with amortized update time poly(log n, ϵ-1). Ittai Abraham, David Durfee, Ioannis Koutis, Sebastian Forster, Richard Peng |
FOCS | 2 |
| 2015 | On the Complexity of Nash Equilibria in Anonymous GamesabstractWe show that the problem of finding an ε-approximate Nash equilibrium in an {anonymous} game with seven pure strategies is complete in PPAD, when the approximation parameter ε is exponentially small in the number of players. Xi Chen 0001, David Durfee, Anthi Orfanou |
STOC | 2 |