Competitive Fair Scheduling with Predictions
Keywords: Learning-augmented Algorithms, Scheduling, Competitive analysis, Fairness, Predictions
TL;DR: We consider online non-clairvoyant scheduling to minimize the max-stretch under the learning-augmented framework and design competitive algorithms under various settings.
Abstract: Beyond the worst-case analysis of algorithms, the learning-augmented framework considers that an algorithm can leverage possibly imperfect predictions about the unknown variables to have guarantees tied to the prediction quality. We consider online non-clairvoyant scheduling to minimize the max-stretch under this framework, where the scheduler can access job size predictions. We present a family of algorithms: Relaxed-Greedy (RG) with an $O(\eta^3 \cdot \sqrt{P})$ competitive ratio, where $\eta$ denotes the prediction error for job sizes and $P$ the maximum job size ratio; Adaptive Relaxed-Greedy with an $O(\lambda^{0.5} \cdot \eta^{2.5} \cdot \sqrt{P})$ competitive ratio, where $\lambda$ denotes the error for the minimum job size; Predictive Relaxed-Greedy with an $O(\lambda^{0.5} \cdot \varphi^{0.5} \cdot \eta \cdot \max \\\{ \eta, \varphi \\\} \cdot \sqrt{P})$ competitive ratio, where $\varphi$ denotes the error for the maximum job size. We also present *${RG}^x$*, an algorithm that represents a trade-off between consistency and smoothness, with an $O(\eta^{2+2x} \cdot P^{1-x})$ competitive ratio. We introduce a general method using resource augmentation to bound robustness, resulting in *RR*-augmented *RG*, with a $(1 + \epsilon)$-speed $O(\min \\\{ \eta^3 \sqrt{P}, \frac{n}{\epsilon} \\\})$ competitive ratio. Finally, we conduct simulations on synthetic and real-world datasets to evaluate the practical performance of these algorithms.
Primary Area: optimization
Code Of Ethics: I acknowledge that I and all co-authors of this work have read and commit to adhering to the ICLR Code of Ethics.
Submission Guidelines: I certify that this submission complies with the submission instructions as described on https://iclr.cc/Conferences/2025/AuthorGuide.
Anonymous Url: I certify that there is no URL (e.g., github page) that could be used to find authors’ identity.
No Acknowledgement Section: I certify that there is no acknowledgement section in this submission for double blind review.
Submission Number: 6052
Loading