Spanning trees of 3-uniform hypergraphs

Masbaum and Vaintrob's "Pfaffian matrix tree theorem" implies that counting spanning trees of a 3-uniform hypergraph (abbreviated to 3-graph) can be done in polynomial time for a class of "3-Pfaffian" 3-graphs, comparable to and related to the class of Pfaffian graphs. We prove a complexity result for recognizing a 3-Pfaffian 3-graph and describe two large classes of 3-Pfaffian 3-graphs -- one of these is given by a forbidden subgraph characterization analogous to Little's for bipartite Pfaffian graphs, and the other consists of a class of partial Steiner triple systems for which the property of being 3-Pfaffian can be reduced to the property of an associated graph being Pfaffian. We exhibit an infinite set of partial Steiner triple systems that are not 3-Pfaffian, none of which can be reduced to any other by deletion or contraction of triples. We also find some necessary or sufficient conditions for the existence of a spanning tree of a 3-graph (much more succinct than can be obtained by the currently fastest polynomial-time algorithm of Gabow and Stallmann for finding a spanning tree) and a superexponential lower bound on the number of spanning trees of a Steiner triple system.Comment: 34 pages, 9 figure

Even Delta-Matroids and the Complexity of Planar Boolean CSPs

The main result of this paper is a generalization of the classical blossom algorithm for finding perfect matchings. Our algorithm can efficiently solve Boolean CSPs where each variable appears in exactly two constraints (we call it edge CSP) and all constraints are even $\Delta$-matroid relations (represented by lists of tuples). As a consequence of this, we settle the complexity classification of planar Boolean CSPs started by Dvorak and Kupec. Using a reduction to even $\Delta$-matroids, we then extend the tractability result to larger classes of $\Delta$-matroids that we call efficiently coverable. It properly includes classes that were known to be tractable before, namely co-independent, compact, local, linear and binary, with the following caveat: we represent $\Delta$-matroids by lists of tuples, while the last two use a representation by matrices. Since an $n\times n$ matrix can represent exponentially many tuples, our tractability result is not strictly stronger than the known algorithm for linear and binary $\Delta$-matroids.Comment: 33 pages, 9 figure