You are provided with the abstract of a scientific paper and the abstracts of the papers it references. Your task is to write a Related Work section for the main paper. This section should concisely summarize and integrate the key points from the cited abstracts, reflecting how they relate to the main paper's contributions and context. In your summary, use numerical citation markers like [1], [2], etc., to refer to the corresponding papers.

Main Abstract:
We study the truthful facility assignment problem, where a set of agents with private most-preferred points on a metric space are assigned to facilities that lie on the metric space, under capacity constraints on the facilities. The goal is to produce such an assignment that minimizes the social cost, i.e., the total distance between the most-preferred points of the agents and their corresponding facilities in the assignment, under the constraint of truthfulness, which ensures that agents do not misreport their most-preferred points. We propose a resource augmentation framework, where a truthful mechanism is evaluated by its worst-case performance on an instance with enhanced facility capacities against the optimal mechanism on the same instance with the original capacities. We study a very well-known mechanism, Serial Dictatorship, and provide an exact analysis of its performance. Although Serial Dictatorship is a purely combinatorial mechanism, our analysis uses linear programming; a linear program expresses its greedy nature as well as the structure of the input, and finds the input instance that enforces the mechanism have its worst-case performance. Bounding the objective of the linear program using duality arguments allows us to compute tight bounds on the approximation ratio. Among other results, we prove that Serial Dictatorship has approximation ratio @math when the capacities are multiplied by any integer @math . Our results suggest that even a limited augmentation of the resources can have wondrous effects on the performance of the mechanism and in particular, the approximation ratio goes to 1 as the augmentation factor becomes large. We complement our results with bounds on the approximation ratio of Random Serial Dictatorship, the randomized version of Serial Dictatorship, when there is no resource augmentation.

Cited Abstract(s):
[1]: We study computationally hard combinatorial problems arising from the important engineering question of how to maximize the number of connections that can be simultaneously served in a wavelength division ultiplexing (WDM) optical network. In such networks, WDM technology can satisfy a set of connections by computing a route and assigning a wavelength to each connection so that no two connections routed through the same fiber are assigned the same wavelength. Each fiber supports a limited number of @math wavelengths and in order to fully exploit the parallelism provided by the technology, one should select a set of connections of maximum cardinality which can be satisfied using the available wavelengths. This is known as the maximum routing and path coloring (maxRPC) problem. Our main contribution is a general analysis method for a class of iterative algorithms for a more general coloring problem. A lower bound on the benefit of the solution computed by such an algorithm in terms of the optimal benefit and the number of available wavelengths is given by a benefit-revealing linear program. We apply this method to maxRPC in both undirected and bidirected rings to obtain upper bounds on the approximation ratio of several algorithms. The best bounds obtained are @math and @math for undirected and bidirected rings; these results improve known bounds of @math and @math , respectively. Our results extend to multifiber ring networks and also apply to the maximum path coloring (maxPC) problem, where paths instead of connection requests are given as part of the input. We also study the profit version of maxPC in rings where each path has a profit and the objective is to satisfy a set of paths of maximum total profit. We present an algorithm based on linear programming and randomized rounding with approximation ratio 1.49015, improving on the @math bound obtained by a simple iterative algorithm.

[2]: In a seminal paper, Karp, Vazirani, and Vazirani show that a simple ranking algorithm achieves a competitive ratio of 1-1 e for the online bipartite matching problem in the standard adversarial model, where the ratio of 1-1 e is also shown to be optimal. Their result also implies that in the random arrivals model defined by Goel and Mehta, where the online nodes arrive in a random order, a simple greedy algorithm achieves a competitive ratio of 1-1 e. In this paper, we study the ranking algorithm in the random arrivals model, and show that it has a competitive ratio of at least 0.696, beating the 1-1 e ≈ 0.632 barrier in the adversarial model. Our result also extends to the i.i.d. distribution model of , removing the assumption that the distribution is known. Our analysis has two main steps. First, we exploit certain dominance and monotonicity properties of the ranking algorithm to derive a family of factor-revealing linear programs (LPs). In particular, by symmetry of the ranking algorithm in the random arrivals model, we have the monotonicity property on both sides of the bipartite graph, giving good "strength" to the LPs. Second, to obtain a good lower bound on the optimal values of all these LPs and hence on the competitive ratio of the algorithm, we introduce the technique of strongly factor-revealing LPs. In particular, we derive a family of modified LPs with similar strength such that the optimal value of any single one of these new LPs is a lower bound on the competitive ratio of the algorithm. This enables us to leverage the power of computer LP solvers to solve for large instances of the new LPs to establish bounds that would otherwise be difficult to attain by human analysis.

[3]: We study the asymmetric binary matrix partition problem that was recently introduced by (Proceedings of the 9th Conference on Web and Internet Economics (WINE), pp 1–14, 2013). Instances of the problem consist of an (n m ) binary matrix A and a probability distribution over its columns. A partition scheme (B=(B_1, ,B_n) ) consists of a partition (B_i ) for each row i of A. The partition (B_i ) acts as a smoothing operator on row i that distributes the expected value of each partition subset proportionally to all its entries. Given a scheme B that induces a smooth matrix (A^B ), the partition value is the expected maximum column entry of (A^B ). The objective is to find a partition scheme such that the resulting partition value is maximized. We present a 9 10-approximation algorithm for the case where the probability distribution is uniform and a ((1-1 e) )-approximation algorithm for non-uniform distributions, significantly improving results of Although our first algorithm is combinatorial (and very simple), the analysis is based on linear programming and duality arguments. In our second result we exploit a nice relation of the problem to submodular welfare maximization.

[4]: This paper introduces a special family of randomized algorithms for Max DICUT that we call oblivious algorithms. Let the bias of a vertex be the ratio between the total weight of its outgoing edges and the total weight of all its edges. An oblivious algorithm selects at random in which side of the cut to place a vertex v, with probability that only depends on the bias of v, independently of other vertices. The reader may observe that the algorithm that ignores the bias and chooses each side with probability 1 2 has an approximation ratio of 1 4, whereas no oblivious algorithm can have an approximation ratio better than 1 2 (with an even directed cycle serving as a negative example). We attempt to characterize the best approximation ratio achievable by oblivious algorithms, and present results that are nearly tight. The paper also discusses natural extensions of the notion of oblivious algorithms, and extensions to the more general problem of Max 2-AND.

[5]: We present new combinatorial approximation algorithms for the k-set cover problem. Previous approaches are based on extending the greedy algorithm by efficiently handling small sets. The new algorithms further extend these approaches by utilizing the natural idea of computing large packings of elements into sets of large size. Our results improve the previously best approximation bounds for the k-set cover problem for all values of k≥6. The analysis technique used could be of independent interest; the upper bound on the approximation factor is obtained by bounding the objective value of a factor-revealing linear program.

[6]: We study the online transportation problem under the assumption that the adversary has only half as many servers at each site as the online algorithm. We show that the GREEDY algorithm is @math -competitive under this assumption, where m is the number of server sites and C is the total number of servers. We then present an algorithm BALANCE, which is a simple modification of the GREEDY algorithm, that is, O(1)-competitive under this assumption.

[7]: In this article, we will formalize the method of dual fitting and the idea of factor-revealing LP. This combination is used to design and analyze two greedy algorithms for the metric uncapacitated facility location problem. Their approximation factors are 1.861 and 1.61, with running times of O(m log m) and O(n3), respectively, where n is the total number of vertices and m is the number of edges in the underlying complete bipartite graph between cities and facilities. The algorithms are used to improve recent results for several variants of the problem.
Compared to the related result in [6] , we remark that our analysis is substantially different due to the use of linear programming. This technique for the analysis of purely combinatorial algorithms has found applications in many different contexts such as facility location [7] , set cover [5] , online matching [2] , maximum directed cut [4] , wavelength routing [1] , and revenue optimization [3] . Like in our case, these techniques usually lead to tight analysis. Also note that while the connection between SD and RSD and the greedy algorithm for the online transportation problem is straightforward, the two problems are fundamentally different and hence non-greedy online competitive algorithms do not imply any bounds for our setting and non-serial truthful mechanisms do not imply any bounds for the online setting.