arXiv++ Combinatorics

Browse math.CO papers from arXiv

Papers by Pasin Manurangsi

5 paper(s) by this author · All BibTeX
2026-04-01
On Expansion of Random Regular Graphs: Improved Lower Bounds for Small Even Degrees
We show that a simple scoring-based tie-breaking can help improve lower bounds for the expansion (aka isoperimetric number) of random regular graphs with small even degrees. Specifically, for degrees 4, 6 and 8, we show that, with high probability, the expansions are at least 0.489, 1.120 and 1.813 respectively.
Discrepancy Beyond Additive Functions with Applications to Fair Division
We consider a setting where we have a ground set $M$ together with real-valued set functions $f_1, \dots, f_n$, and the goal is to partition $M$ into two sets $S_1,S_2$ such that $|f_i(S_1) - f_i(S_2)|$ is small for every $i$. Many results in discrepancy theory can be stated in this form with the functions $f_i$ being additive. In this work, we initiate the study of the unstructured case where $f_i$ is not assumed to be additive. We show that even without the additivity assumption, the upper bound remains at most $O(\sqrt{n \log n})$. Our result has implications on the fair allocation of indivisible goods. In particular, we show that a consensus halving up to $O(\sqrt{n \log n})$ goods always exists for $n$ agents with monotone utilities. Previously, only an $O(n)$ bound was known for this setting.
2021-05-04 v2
Almost Envy-Freeness for Groups: Improved Bounds via Discrepancy Theory
Published in Theoretical Computer Science, 930:179-195 (2022) • View PublicationBIB
We study the allocation of indivisible goods among groups of agents using well-known fairness notions such as envy-freeness and proportionality. While these notions cannot always be satisfied, we provide several bounds on the optimal relaxations that can be guaranteed. For instance, our bounds imply that when the number of groups is constant and the $n$ agents are divided into groups arbitrarily, there exists an allocation that is envy-free up to $Θ(\sqrt{n})$ goods, and this bound is tight. Moreover, we show that while such an allocation can be found efficiently, it is NP-hard to compute an allocation that is envy-free up to $o(\sqrt{n})$ goods even when a fully envy-free allocation exists. Our proofs make extensive use of tools from discrepancy theory.
2021-05-01 v2
Generalized Kings and Single-Elimination Winners in Random Tournaments
Published in Autonomous Agents and Multi-Agent Systems, 36(2):28 (2022) • View PublicationBIB
Tournaments can be used to model a variety of practical scenarios including sports competitions and elections. A natural notion of strength of alternatives in a tournament is a generalized king: an alternative is said to be a $k$-king if it can reach every other alternative in the tournament via a directed path of length at most $k$. In this paper, we provide an almost complete characterization of the probability threshold such that all, a large number, or a small number of alternatives are $k$-kings with high probability in two random models. We show that, perhaps surprisingly, all changes in the threshold occur in the range of constant $k$, with the biggest change being between $k=2$ and $k=3$. In addition, we establish an asymptotically tight bound on the probability threshold for which all alternatives are likely able to win a single-elimination tournament under some bracket.
Near-tight closure bounds for Littlestone and threshold dimensions
We study closure properties for the Littlestone and threshold dimensions of binary hypothesis classes. Given classes $\mathcal{H}_1, \ldots, \mathcal{H}_k$ of Boolean functions with bounded Littlestone (respectively, threshold) dimension, we establish an upper bound on the Littlestone (respectively, threshold) dimension of the class defined by applying an arbitrary binary aggregation rule to $\mathcal{H}_1, \ldots, \mathcal{H}_k$. We also show that our upper bounds are nearly tight. Our upper bounds give an exponential (in $k$) improvement upon analogous bounds shown by Alon et al. (COLT 2020), thus answering a question posed by their work.