Percolation games, probabilistic cellular automata, and the hard-core model

Let each site of the square lattice $\mathbb{Z}^2$ be independently assigned one of three states: a \textit{trap} with probability $p$, a \textit{target} with probability $q$, and \textit{open} with probability $1-p-q$, where $0<p+q<1$. Consider the following game: a token starts at the origin, and two players take turns to move, where a move consists of moving the token from its current site $x$ to either $x+(0,1)$ or $x+(1,0)$. A player who moves the token to a trap loses the game immediately, while a player who moves the token to a target wins the game immediately. Is there positive probability that the game is \emph{drawn} with best play -- i.e.\ that neither player can force a win? This is equivalent to the question of ergodicity of a certain family of elementary one-dimensional probabilistic cellular automata (PCA). These automata have been studied in the contexts of enumeration of directed lattice animals, the golden-mean subshift, and the hard-core model, and their ergodicity has been noted as an open problem by several authors. We prove that these PCA are ergodic, and correspondingly that the game on $\mathbb{Z}^2$ has no draws. On the other hand, we prove that certain analogous games \emph{do} exhibit draws for suitable parameter values on various directed graphs in higher dimensions, including an oriented version of the even sublattice of $\mathbb{Z}^d$ in all $d\geq3$. This is proved via a dimension reduction to a hard-core lattice gas in dimension $d-1$. We show that draws occur whenever the corresponding hard-core model has multiple Gibbs distributions. We conjecture that draws occur also on the standard oriented lattice $\mathbb{Z}^d$ for $d\geq 3$, but here our method encounters a fundamental obstacle.Comment: 35 page

Sparse approaches for the exact distribution of patterns in long state sequences generated by a Markov source

We present two novel approaches for the computation of the exact distribution of a pattern in a long sequence. Both approaches take into account the sparse structure of the problem and are two-part algorithms. The first approach relies on a partial recursion after a fast computation of the second largest eigenvalue of the transition matrix of a Markov chain embedding. The second approach uses fast Taylor expansions of an exact bivariate rational reconstruction of the distribution. We illustrate the interest of both approaches on a simple toy-example and two biological applications: the transcription factors of the Human Chromosome 5 and the PROSITE signatures of functional motifs in proteins. On these example our methods demonstrate their complementarity and their hability to extend the domain of feasibility for exact computations in pattern problems to a new level

Deterministic parallel algorithms for bilinear objective functions

Many randomized algorithms can be derandomized efficiently using either the method of conditional expectations or probability spaces with low independence. A series of papers, beginning with work by Luby (1988), showed that in many cases these techniques can be combined to give deterministic parallel (NC) algorithms for a variety of combinatorial optimization problems, with low time- and processor-complexity. We extend and generalize a technique of Luby for efficiently handling bilinear objective functions. One noteworthy application is an NC algorithm for maximal independent set. On a graph $G$ with $m$ edges and $n$ vertices, this takes $\tilde O(\log^2 n)$ time and $(m + n) n^{o(1)}$ processors, nearly matching the best randomized parallel algorithms. Other applications include reduced processor counts for algorithms of Berger (1997) for maximum acyclic subgraph and Gale-Berlekamp switching games. This bilinear factorization also gives better algorithms for problems involving discrepancy. An important application of this is to automata-fooling probability spaces, which are the basis of a notable derandomization technique of Sivakumar (2002). Our method leads to large reduction in processor complexity for a number of derandomization algorithms based on automata-fooling, including set discrepancy and the Johnson-Lindenstrauss Lemma