In this paper we study noisy sorting without re-sampling. In this problem there is an unknown order {display equation} where π is a permutation on <i>n</i> elements. The input is the status of (<sup><i>n</i></sup><sub>2</sub>) queries of the form <i>q</i>(<i>a<sub>i</sub>, a<sub>j</sub></i>), for <i>i</i> < <i>j</i>, where <i>q(a<sub>i</sub>, a<sub>j</sub>)</i> = + (-) with probability 1/2 + γ if π(<i>i</i>) > π(<i>j</i>)(π(<i>i</i>) < π(<i>j</i>)) for all pairs <i>i</i> ≠ <i>j</i>, where γ > 0 is a constant. It is assumed that the errors are independent. Given the status of the queries the goal is to find the maximum likelihood order. In other words, the goal is find a permutation σ that minimizes the number of pairs σ(<i>i</i>) > σ(<i>j</i>) where <i>q</i>(σ(<i>i</i>), σ(<i>j</i>)) = -. The problem so defined is the feedback arc set problem on distributions of inputs, each of which is a tournament obtained as a noisy perturbation of a linear order. Note that when γ < 1/2 and <i>n</i> is large, it is impossible to recover the original order π.
It is known that the weighted feedback arc set problem on tournaments is NP-hard in general. Here we present an algorithm of running time <i>n<sup>O(γ-4))</sup></i> and sampling complexity <i>O</i>γ (<i>n</i> log <i>n</i>) that with high probability solves the noisy sorting without re-sampling problem. We also show that if <i>a</i><sub>σ(1)</sub>, <i>a</i><sub>σ(2)</sub>, …, <i>a<sub>σ(n)</sub></i> is an optimal solution of the problem then it is "close" to the original order. More formally, with high probability it holds that {display equation}.
Our results are of interest in applications to ranking, such as ranking in sports, or ranking of search items based on comparisons by experts.
[1]
R. Graham,et al.
Spearman's Footrule as a Measure of Disarray
,
1977
.
[2]
Eli Upfal,et al.
Computing with unreliable information
,
1990,
STOC '90.
[3]
Steven Roman.
Introduction to coding and information theory
,
1997,
Undergraduate texts in mathematics.
[4]
M. Charikar,et al.
Aggregating inconsistent information: ranking and clustering
,
2005,
STOC '05.
[5]
Noga Alon,et al.
Ranking Tournaments
,
2006,
SIAM J. Discret. Math..
[6]
Atri Rudra,et al.
Ordering by weighted number of wins gives a good ranking for weighted tournaments
,
2006,
SODA '06.
[7]
Claire Mathieu,et al.
Electronic Colloquium on Computational Complexity, Report No. 144 (2006) How to rank with few errors A PTAS for Weighted Feedback Arc Set on Tournaments
,
2006
.
[8]
Terence Tao,et al.
Additive combinatorics
,
2007,
Cambridge studies in advanced mathematics.
[9]
Nir Ailon,et al.
Aggregating inconsistent information: Ranking and clustering
,
2008
.