• Nem Talált Eredményt

# Minicourse on parameterized algorithms and complexity Part 8: The Strong Exponential-Time Hypothesis

N/A
N/A
Protected

Ossza meg "Minicourse on parameterized algorithms and complexity Part 8: The Strong Exponential-Time Hypothesis"

Copied!
24
0
0

Teljes szövegt

(1)

Minicourse on parameterized algorithms and complexity Part 8: The Strong Exponential-Time Hypothesis

Dániel Marx

(slides by Daniel Lokshtanov) Jagiellonian University in Kraków

April 21-23, 2015

(2)

### Tight lower bounds

Have seen that ETH can give tight lower bounds How tight? ETH «ignores» constants in exponent How to distinguish 1.85n from 1.0001n?

(3)

### SAT

Input: Formula with m clauses over n boolean variables.

Question: Does there exist an assignment to the variables that satisfies all clauses?

Note: Input can have size superpolynomial in n!

Fastest algorithm for SAT: 2npoly(m)

(4)

### d-SAT

Here all clauses have size d Input size nd

Fastest algorithm for 2-SAT: n+m Fastest algorithm for 3-SAT: 1.31n Fastest algorithm for 4-SAT: 1.47n

Fastest algorithm for d-SAT:

Fastest algorithm for SAT:

(5)

### Strong ETH

Let d-SAT has a algorithm

Know: 0 d 1

3

Let

(6)

### Showing Lower Bounds under SETH

Too fast algorithm?

d-SAT

1.99999

The number of 9’s MUST be independent of d

(7)

### Dominating Set

Input: n vertices, integer k

Question: Is there a set S of at most k vertices such that N[S] = V(G)?

Naive: nk+1

Smarter: nk+o(1)

Assuming ETH: no f(k)no(k)

k/10

k-1

## ?

(8)

### SAT  k-Dominating Set

Variables

SAT-formula

k groups, each on n/k variables.

One vertex for each of the 2n/k assignments to the variables in the group.

(9)

x y x y x y x y x y

Variables SAT-formula

k groups, each on n/k variables.

Selecting one vertex from each cloud corrsponds to selecting an assignment to the variables.

Cliques Cliques

(10)

x y x y x y x y x y

Variables SAT-formula

k groups, each on n/k variables.

One vertex per clause in the formula

Edge if the partial assignment satisfies the clause

(11)

### SAT  k-Dominating Set

analysis

Too fast algorithm for k-Dominating Set: nk-0.01

For any fixed k (like k=3)

The output graph has k2n/k + m 2k 2n/k vertices If m 2n/k then 2n is at most mk,

which is polynomial!

So m

(2 )2� �

0.01

(12)

### Dominating Set, wrapping up

A O(n2.99) algorithm for 3-Dominating Set, or a O(n3.99) algorithm for 4-Dominating Set, or a a O(n4.99) algorithm for 5-Dominating Set, or a …

… would violate SETH.

(13)

### Independent Set / Treewidth

Input: Graph G, integer k, tree-decomposition of G of width t.

Question: Does G have an independent set of size at least k?

t

### n) time algorithm

Can we do it in 1.99t poly(n) time?

Next: If yes, then SETH fails!

(14)

### Independent Set / Treewidth

Will reduce n-variable d-SAT to Independent Set in graphs of treewidth t, where t n+d.

So a 1.99tpoly(N) algorithm for Independent Set gives a 1.99n+dpoly(n) O(1.999n) time algorithm for d-SAT.

(15)

### Independent Sets on an Even Path

t f t f t f t f t f

True False

In independent set:

Not in solution:

In independent set:

Not in solution:

first

True

then

False

(16)

### d-SAT Independent Set

proof by example

= (a b c) (a c d) (b c d)

t f t f t f

t f t f t f

t f t f t f

t f t f t f

a b c d

a c

b

a d

c

b d

c

(17)

### Independent Sets Assignments

= (a b c) (a c d) (b c d)

t f t f t f

t f t f t f

t f t f t f

t f t f t f

a b c d

a c

b

a d

c

b d

c

True

True False

False

first true then false independent sets?

first true then false independent sets?

(18)

### Dealing with true  false

a b c d

Clause

1 2 3 1 2 3 1 2 3 1 2 3 1 2 3

Every variable flips truefalse at most once!

(19)

by picture

t f t f t f

t f t f t f

t f t f t f

t f t f t f

a b c d

a c

b

a d

c

b d

c

### n d

Formal proof - exercise

(20)

### Independent Set / Treewidth

wrap up

Reduced n-variable d-SAT to Independent Set in graphs of treewidth t, where t n+d.

A 1.99tpoly(N) algorithm for Independent Set

gives a 1.99n+dpoly(n) O(1.999n) time algorithm for d-SAT.

Thus, no 1.99t algorithm for

Independent Set assuming

(21)

### Assuming SETH, the following algorithms are optimal:

2t poly(n) for Independent Set 3t poly(n) for Dominating Set ct poly(n) for c-Coloring

3t poly(n) for Odd Cycle Transversal 2t poly(n) for Partition Into Triangles 2t poly(n) for Max Cut

(22)

t

### lower bound for Dominating Set?

Need to reduce k-SAT formulas on n-variables to Dominating Set in graphs of treewidth t, where

(23)

### Conclusions

SETH can be used to give very tight running time bounds.

SETH recently has been used to give lower

bounds for polynomial time solvable problems, and for running time of approximation

algorithms.

(24)

### Important Open Problems

Can we show a 2n lower bound for Set Cover assuming SETH?

Can we show a 1.00001 lower bound for 3-SAT assuming SETH?

Hivatkozások

KAPCSOLÓDÓ DOKUMENTUMOK

In this article we survey algorithmic lower bound results that have been obtained in the field of exact exponential time algorithms and pa- rameterized complexity under

We show that our lower bounds, with the exception of Theorem 1.2 and Theorem 1.3(iii), can be obtained using the weaker complexity assumption stating that counting the number

We prove essentially tight lower bounds, conditionally to the Exponential Time Hypothesis, for two fun- damental but seemingly very different cutting problems on

To settle the classical complexity of the examined problems, first we observe (Thms. 1 and 2) that classical results imply polynomial-time al- gorithms for the edge-deletion

⇒ Transforming an Independent Set instance (G , k) into a Vertex Cover instance (G , n − k) is a correct polynomial-time reduction.. However, Vertex Cover is FPT, but Independent Set

If exists optimal LP solution that sets x v to 1, then exists optimal vertex cover that selects v..  Remove v from G and decrease k

Theorem: [Grohe, Grüber 2007] There is a polynomial-time algorithm that finds a solution of D ISJOINT DIRECTED CYCLES with OPT/̺(OPT) cycles for some nontrivial function ̺....

By default iterative compression adds n factor to the running time.. Ex: show that for VC and FVST this factor can be reduced to O(k) (hint: