The density and complexity of polynomial cores for intractable sets

Let A be a recursive problem not in P. Lynch has shown that A then has an infinite recursive polynomial complexity core. This is a collection C of instances of A such that every algorithm deciding A needs more than polynomial time almost everywhere on C. We investigate the complexity of recognizing the instances in such a core, and show that every recursive problem A not in P has an infinite core recognizable in subexponential time. We further study how dense the core sets for A can be, under various assumptions about the structure of A. Our main results in this direction are that if P ≠ NP, then NP-complete problems have polynomially nonsparse cores recognizable in subexponential time, and that EXPTIME-complete problems have cores of exponential density recognizable in exponential time

Fast Biclustering by Dual Parameterization

We study two clustering problems, Starforest Editing, the problem of adding and deleting edges to obtain a disjoint union of stars, and the generalization Bicluster Editing. We show that, in addition to being NP-hard, none of the problems can be solved in subexponential time unless the exponential time hypothesis fails. Misra, Panolan, and Saurabh (MFCS 2013) argue that introducing a bound on the number of connected components in the solution should not make the problem easier: In particular, they argue that the subexponential time algorithm for editing to a fixed number of clusters (p-Cluster Editing) by Fomin et al. (J. Comput. Syst. Sci., 80(7) 2014) is an exception rather than the rule. Here, p is a secondary parameter, bounding the number of components in the solution. However, upon bounding the number of stars or bicliques in the solution, we obtain algorithms which run in time $2^{5 \sqrt{pk}} + O(n+m)$ for p-Starforest Editing and $2^{O(p \sqrt{k} \log(pk))} + O(n+m)$ for p-Bicluster Editing. We obtain a similar result for the more general case of t-Partite p-Cluster Editing. This is subexponential in k for fixed number of clusters, since p is then considered a constant. Our results even out the number of multivariate subexponential time algorithms and give reasons to believe that this area warrants further study.Comment: Accepted for presentation at IPEC 201

Independent Set, Induced Matching, and Pricing: Connections and Tight (Subexponential Time) Approximation Hardnesses

We present a series of almost settled inapproximability results for three fundamental problems. The first in our series is the subexponential-time inapproximability of the maximum independent set problem, a question studied in the area of parameterized complexity. The second is the hardness of approximating the maximum induced matching problem on bounded-degree bipartite graphs. The last in our series is the tight hardness of approximating the k-hypergraph pricing problem, a fundamental problem arising from the area of algorithmic game theory. In particular, assuming the Exponential Time Hypothesis, our two main results are: - For any r larger than some constant, any r-approximation algorithm for the maximum independent set problem must run in at least 2^{n^{1-\epsilon}/r^{1+\epsilon}} time. This nearly matches the upper bound of 2^{n/r} (Cygan et al., 2008). It also improves some hardness results in the domain of parameterized complexity (e.g., Escoffier et al., 2012 and Chitnis et al., 2013) - For any k larger than some constant, there is no polynomial time min (k^{1-\epsilon}, n^{1/2-\epsilon})-approximation algorithm for the k-hypergraph pricing problem, where n is the number of vertices in an input graph. This almost matches the upper bound of min (O(k), \tilde O(\sqrt{n})) (by Balcan and Blum, 2007 and an algorithm in this paper). We note an interesting fact that, in contrast to n^{1/2-\epsilon} hardness for polynomial-time algorithms, the k-hypergraph pricing problem admits n^{\delta} approximation for any \delta >0 in quasi-polynomial time. This puts this problem in a rare approximability class in which approximability thresholds can be improved significantly by allowing algorithms to run in quasi-polynomial time.Comment: The full version of FOCS 201