In the Serial Parallel Decision Problem (SPDP), introduced by Kuszmaul and Westover [SPAA'24], an algorithm receives a series of tasks online, and must choose for each between a serial implementation and a parallelizable (but less efficient) implementation. Kuszmaul and Westover describe three decision models: (1) Instantly-committing schedulers must decide on arrival, irrevocably, which implementation of the task to run. (2) Eventually-committing schedulers can delay their decision beyond a task’s arrival time, but cannot revoke their decision once made. (3) Never-committing schedulers are always free to abandon their progress on the task and start over using a different implementation. Kuszmaul and Westover gave a simple instantly-committing scheduler whose total completion time is 3-competitive with the offline optimal schedule, and proved two lower bounds: no eventually-committing scheduler can have competitive ratio better than ϕ ≈ 1.618 in general, and no instantly-committing scheduler can have competitive ratio better than 2 in general. They conjectured that the three decision models should admit different competitive ratios, but left upper bounds below 3 in any model as an open problem. In this paper, we show that the powers of instantly, eventually, and never committing schedulers are distinct, at least in the "massively parallel regime". The massively parallel regime of the SPDP is the special case where the number of available processors is asymptotically larger than the number of tasks to process, meaning that the work associated with running a task in serial is negligible compared to its runtime. In this regime, we show (1) The optimal competitive ratio for instantly-committing schedulers is 2, (2) The optimal competitive ratio for eventually-committing schedulers lies in [1.618, 1.678], (3) The optimal competitive ratio for never-committing schedulers lies in [1.366, 1.500]. We additionally show that our instantly-committing scheduler is also 2-competitive outside of the massively parallel regime, giving proof-of-concept that results in the massively parallel regime can be translated to hold with fewer processors.

This work considers the problem of output-sensitive listing of occurrences of $2k$-cycles for fixed constant $k\geq 2$ in an undirected host graph with $m$ edges and $t$ $2k$-cycles. Recent work of Jin and Xu (and independently Abboud, Khoury, Leibowitz, and Safier) [STOC 2023] gives an $O(m^{4/3}+t)$ time algorithm for listing $4$-cycles, and recent work by Jin, Vassilevska Williams and Zhou [SOSA 2024] gives an $\widetilde{O}(n^2+t)$ time algorithm for listing $6$-cycles in $n$ node graphs. We focus on resolving the next natural question: obtaining listing algorithms for $6$-cycles in the sparse setting, i.e., in terms of $m$ rather than $n$. Previously, the best known result here is the better of Jin, Vassilevska Williams and Zhou's $\widetilde{O}(n^2+t)$ algorithm and Alon, Yuster and Zwick's $O(m^{5/3}+t)$ algorithm. We give an algorithm for listing $6$-cycles with running time $\widetilde{O}(m^{1.6}+t)$. Our algorithm is a natural extension of Dahlgaard, Knudsen and Stöckel's [STOC 2017] algorithm for detecting a $2k$-cycle. Our main technical contribution is the analysis of the algorithm which involves a type of ``supersaturation'' lemma relating the number of $2k$-cycles in a bipartite graph to the sizes of the parts in the bipartition and the number of edges. We also give a simplified analysis of Dahlgaard, Knudsen and Stöckel's $2k$-cycle detection algorithm (with a small polylogarithmic increase in the running time), which is helpful in analyzing our listing algorithm.

This paper introduces the serial-parallel decision problem. Consider an online scheduler that receives a series of tasks, where each task has both a parallel and a serial implementation. The parallel implementation has the advantage that it can make progress concurrently on multiple processors, but the disadvantage that it is (potentially) work-inefficient. As tasks arrive, the scheduler must decide for each task which implementation to use.

We present an in-place algorithm for the parallel-partition problem with linear work and polylogarithmic span. The algorithm uses only exclusive read/write shared variables and can be implemented using parallel-for-loops without any additional concurrency considerations (i.e., the algorithm is EREW). A key feature of the algorithm is that it exhibits provably optimal cache behavior up to small-order factors.