We study the online proportional knapsack problem with two paid forms of recourse. Items arrive one by one and must be handled immediately, without knowledge of the future: an algorithm may pack an item $x$, reject it, or reserve it for possible later use at proportional cost $αx$; additionally, it may at any time remove previously packed items, at proportional cost $βy$ for each removed item $y$. Reservation and removal have each been analyzed in isolation, but their combination raises a natural question: is the better of the two mechanisms always optimal on its own, or is there a region in the parameter space spanned by $α$ and $β$ in which they genuinely enter into a symbiosis? So far, this question has only been answered for the special case of free removal ($β= 0$), leaving the vast majority of the parameter space unexplored. We close this gap, determining matching upper and lower bounds on the competitive ratio for every pair of cost parameters $(α, β)$ and revealing three qualitatively different regimes. In some regions, reservation alone already achieves the optimal ratio; in others, removal alone does. However, most interestingly, in the heart of the parameter space lies a symbiosis region in which combining both mechanisms is strictly better than either one on its own. The optimal algorithm in the symbiosis region is a natural blend of the two known single-mechanism strategies: postponing commitment by reserving until a threshold is reached, then packing greedily and revising via removal.

翻译：暂无翻译