Improved Approximation Algorithms for the TSP and S-t-path TSP
summary
Survey of concrete advances: metric TSP stays at 3/2 for tours while the S–T path gap drops from Hoogeveen’s 5/3 using a concrete algorithmic recipe: solve the Held‑Karp LP, decompose into spanning trees, sample a tree (best-of-many Christofides), and bound expected T‑join cost via laminar Gao trees and narrow‑cut structure. Iterated recursive dynamic programming then yields algorithms with ratio 3/2+ε (provable) and several intermediate analyses give 1.6 and 1.566 guarantees.
AI-written summary · about
chapters (18)
- 0:00Intro
- 1:19The Metric Case
- 3:09The Thin Tree Approach
- 8:25How Does Randomization Help
- 9:38Christa PDS
- 13:45Notation
- 14:25Polyhedral Combinatorics
- 16:53Standard LP Relaxation
- 18:30Fractional Tjoint
- 20:59Integrality Gap
- 21:49LP
- 23:46Best of many Christinas
- 24:50Randomized version
- 27:34Thirds bound
- 30:03Lemma
- 48:45Fractional TSP
- 49:48General Metrics
- 53:01Progress
