A Dichotomy Theorem for Polynomial Evaluation

A dichotomy theorem for counting problems due to Creignou and Hermann states that or any nite set S of logical relations, the counting problem #SAT(S) is either in FP, or #P-complete. In the present paper we show a dichotomy theorem for polynomial evaluation. That is, we show that for a given set S, either there exists a VNP-complete family of polynomials associated to S, or the associated families of polynomials are all in VP. We give a concise characterization of the sets S that give rise to "easy" and "hard" polynomials. We also prove that several problems which were known to be #P-complete under Turing reductions only are in fact #P-complete under many-one reductions

Fine-grained dichotomies for the Tutte plane and Boolean #CSP

Jaeger, Vertigan, and Welsh [15] proved a dichotomy for the complexity of evaluating the Tutte polynomial at fixed points: The evaluation is #P-hard almost everywhere, and the remaining points admit polynomial-time algorithms. Dell, Husfeldt, and Wahl\'en [9] and Husfeldt and Taslaman [12], in combination with Curticapean [7], extended the #P-hardness results to tight lower bounds under the counting exponential time hypothesis #ETH, with the exception of the line $y=1$, which was left open. We complete the dichotomy theorem for the Tutte polynomial under #ETH by proving that the number of all acyclic subgraphs of a given $n$-vertex graph cannot be determined in time $exp(o(n))$ unless #ETH fails. Another dichotomy theorem we strengthen is the one of Creignou and Hermann [6] for counting the number of satisfying assignments to a constraint satisfaction problem instance over the Boolean domain. We prove that all #P-hard cases are also hard under #ETH. The main ingredient is to prove that the number of independent sets in bipartite graphs with $n$ vertices cannot be computed in time $exp(o(n))$ unless #ETH fails. In order to prove our results, we use the block interpolation idea by Curticapean [7] and transfer it to systems of linear equations that might not directly correspond to interpolation.Comment: 16 pages, 1 figur

A Dichotomy Theorem for Homomorphism Polynomials

In the present paper we show a dichotomy theorem for the complexity of polynomial evaluation. We associate to each graph H a polynomial that encodes all graphs of a fixed size homomorphic to H. We show that this family is computable by arithmetic circuits in constant depth if H has a loop or no edge and that it is hard otherwise (i.e., complete for VNP, the arithmetic class related to #P). We also demonstrate the hardness over the rational field of cut eliminator, a polynomial defined by B\"urgisser which is known to be neither VP nor VNP-complete in the field of two elements, if VP is not equal to VNP (VP is the class of polynomials computable by arithmetic circuit of polynomial size)

Polynomial-time Solvable #CSP Problems via Algebraic Models and Pfaffian Circuits

A Pfaffian circuit is a tensor contraction network where the edges are labeled with changes of bases in such a way that a very specific set of combinatorial properties are satisfied. By modeling the permissible changes of bases as systems of polynomial equations, and then solving via computation, we are able to identify classes of 0/1 planar #CSP problems solvable in polynomial-time via the Pfaffian circuit evaluation theorem (a variant of L. Valiant's Holant Theorem). We present two different models of 0/1 variables, one that is possible under a homogeneous change of basis, and one that is possible under a heterogeneous change of basis only. We enumerate a series of 1,2,3, and 4-arity gates/cogates that represent constraints, and define a class of constraints that is possible under the assumption of a ``bridge" between two particular changes of bases. We discuss the issue of planarity of Pfaffian circuits, and demonstrate possible directions in algebraic computation for designing a Pfaffian tensor contraction network fragment that can simulate a swap gate/cogate. We conclude by developing the notion of a decomposable gate/cogate, and discuss the computational benefits of this definition

On the Computational Complexity of Non-dictatorial Aggregation

We investigate when non-dictatorial aggregation is possible from an algorithmic perspective, where non-dictatorial aggregation means that the votes cast by the members of a society can be aggregated in such a way that the collective outcome is not simply the choices made by a single member of the society. We consider the setting in which the members of a society take a position on a fixed collection of issues, where for each issue several different alternatives are possible, but the combination of choices must belong to a given set $X$ of allowable voting patterns. Such a set $X$ is called a possibility domain if there is an aggregator that is non-dictatorial, operates separately on each issue, and returns values among those cast by the society on each issue. We design a polynomial-time algorithm that decides, given a set $X$ of voting patterns, whether or not $X$ is a possibility domain. Furthermore, if $X$ is a possibility domain, then the algorithm constructs in polynomial time such a non-dictatorial aggregator for $X$. We then show that the question of whether a Boolean domain $X$ is a possibility domain is in NLOGSPACE. We also design a polynomial-time algorithm that decides whether $X$ is a uniform possibility domain, that is, whether $X$ admits an aggregator that is non-dictatorial even when restricted to any two positions for each issue. As in the case of possibility domains, the algorithm also constructs in polynomial time a uniform non-dictatorial aggregator, if one exists. Then, we turn our attention to the case where $X$ is given implicitly, either as the set of assignments satisfying a propositional formula, or as a set of consistent evaluations of an sequence of propositional formulas. In both cases, we provide bounds to the complexity of deciding if $X$ is a (uniform) possibility domain.Comment: 21 page

Model Counting of Query Expressions: Limitations of Propositional Methods

Query evaluation in tuple-independent probabilistic databases is the problem of computing the probability of an answer to a query given independent probabilities of the individual tuples in a database instance. There are two main approaches to this problem: (1) in `grounded inference' one first obtains the lineage for the query and database instance as a Boolean formula, then performs weighted model counting on the lineage (i.e., computes the probability of the lineage given probabilities of its independent Boolean variables); (2) in methods known as `lifted inference' or `extensional query evaluation', one exploits the high-level structure of the query as a first-order formula. Although it is widely believed that lifted inference is strictly more powerful than grounded inference on the lineage alone, no formal separation has previously been shown for query evaluation. In this paper we show such a formal separation for the first time. We exhibit a class of queries for which model counting can be done in polynomial time using extensional query evaluation, whereas the algorithms used in state-of-the-art exact model counters on their lineages provably require exponential time. Our lower bounds on the running times of these exact model counters follow from new exponential size lower bounds on the kinds of d-DNNF representations of the lineages that these model counters (either explicitly or implicitly) produce. Though some of these queries have been studied before, no non-trivial lower bounds on the sizes of these representations for these queries were previously known.Comment: To appear in International Conference on Database Theory (ICDT) 201