aiqbench analysis
This paper establishes a theoretical bridge between ratio of submodular (RS) and difference of submodular (DS) optimization problems, showing how approximation guarantees in one domain can inform the other. By analyzing a specific greedy algorithm, the authors provide novel insights into DS optimization while re-evaluating standard approaches for RS problems within a unified quasiconvex framework. These findings advance the mathematical foundations of combinatorial optimization, which underpins many machine learning tasks involving set functions and feature selection.
On the Approximation Relationship between Optimizing Ratio of Submodular (RS) and Difference of Submodular (DS) Functions
arXiv:2101.01631v2 Announce Type: cross Abstract: We demonstrate that from an algorithm guaranteeing an approximation factor for the ratio of submodular (RS) optimization problem, we can build another algorithm having a different kind of approximation guarantee -- weaker than the classical one -- for the difference of submodular (DS) optimization problem, and vice versa. We also illustrate the link between these two problems by analyzing a \textsc{Greedy} algorithm which approximately maximizes objective functions of the form $\Psi(f,g)$, where $f,g$ are two non-negative, monotone, submodular functions and $\Psi$ is a {quasiconvex} 2-variables function, which is non decreasing with respect to the first variable. For the choice $\Psi(f,g)\triangleq f/g$, we recover RS, and for the choice $\Psi(f,g)\triangleq f-g$, we recover DS. To the best of our knowledge, this greedy approach is new for DS optimization. For RS optimization, it reduces to the standard \textsc{GreedRatio} algorithm that has already been analyzed previously. However, our analysis is novel for this case.
Abstract:We demonstrate that from an algorithm guaranteeing an approximation factor for the ratio of submodular (RS) optimization problem, we can build another algorithm having a different kind of approximation guarantee -- weaker than the classical one -- for the difference of submodular (DS) optimization problem, and vice versa. We also illustrate the link between these two problems by analyzing a \textsc{Greedy} algorithm which approximately maximizes objective functions of the form $\Psi(f,g)$, where $f,g$ are two non-negative, monotone, submodular functions and $\Psi$ is a {quasiconvex} 2-variables function, which is non decreasing with respect to the first variable. For the choice $\Psi(f,g)\triangleq f/g$, we recover RS, and for the choice $\Psi(f,g)\triangleq f-g$, we recover DS. To the best of our knowledge, this greedy approach is new for DS optimization. For RS optimization, it reduces to the standard \textsc{GreedRatio} algorithm that has already been analyzed previously. However, our analysis is novel for this case.
Data Structures and Algorithms (cs.DS); Machine Learning (cs.LG); Machine Learning (stat.ML)
arXiv:2101.01631 [cs.DS]
(or arXiv:2101.01631v2 [cs.DS] for this version)
https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2101.01631 Focus to learn more arXiv-issued DOI via DataCite
arXivLabs is a framework that allows collaborators to develop and share new arXiv features directly on our website.
Both individuals and organizations that work with arXivLabs have embraced and accepted our values of openness, community, excellence, and user data privacy. arXiv is committed to these values and only works with partners that adhere to them.
Have an idea for a project that will add value for arXiv's community? Learn more about arXivLabs.
Full text under the publisher's open licence · 251 words
Related coverage

Expenditure Horizon: Measuring Optimization Ability, with an Application to NanoGPT
METR · Jul 21, 2026

The Cost of Utopias (a Dialog)
LessWrong · Sep 18, 2026
Links #5: 2026/07
LessWrong · Jul 31, 2026

Surface ‘dirt’ shields quantum sensors from noise
Quantum Zeitgeist · Oct 13, 2026