22,952 research outputs found

    Global Cardinality Constraints Make Approximating Some Max-2-CSPs Harder

    Get PDF
    Assuming the Unique Games Conjecture, we show that existing approximation algorithms for some Boolean Max-2-CSPs with cardinality constraints are optimal. In particular, we prove that Max-Cut with cardinality constraints is UG-hard to approximate within ~~0.858, and that Max-2-Sat with cardinality constraints is UG-hard to approximate within ~~0.929. In both cases, the previous best hardness results were the same as the hardness of the corresponding unconstrained Max-2-CSP (~~0.878 for Max-Cut, and ~~0.940 for Max-2-Sat). The hardness for Max-2-Sat applies to monotone Max-2-Sat instances, meaning that we also obtain tight inapproximability for the Max-k-Vertex-Cover problem

    Distributed PCP Theorems for Hardness of Approximation in P

    Get PDF
    We present a new distributed model of probabilistically checkable proofs (PCP). A satisfying assignment x{0,1}nx \in \{0,1\}^n to a CNF formula φ\varphi is shared between two parties, where Alice knows x1,,xn/2x_1, \dots, x_{n/2}, Bob knows xn/2+1,,xnx_{n/2+1},\dots,x_n, and both parties know φ\varphi. The goal is to have Alice and Bob jointly write a PCP that xx satisfies φ\varphi, while exchanging little or no information. Unfortunately, this model as-is does not allow for nontrivial query complexity. Instead, we focus on a non-deterministic variant, where the players are helped by Merlin, a third party who knows all of xx. Using our framework, we obtain, for the first time, PCP-like reductions from the Strong Exponential Time Hypothesis (SETH) to approximation problems in P. In particular, under SETH we show that there are no truly-subquadratic approximation algorithms for Bichromatic Maximum Inner Product over {0,1}-vectors, Bichromatic LCS Closest Pair over permutations, Approximate Regular Expression Matching, and Diameter in Product Metric. All our inapproximability factors are nearly-tight. In particular, for the first two problems we obtain nearly-polynomial factors of 2(logn)1o(1)2^{(\log n)^{1-o(1)}}; only (1+o(1))(1+o(1))-factor lower bounds (under SETH) were known before

    Inapproximability of Combinatorial Optimization Problems

    Full text link
    We survey results on the hardness of approximating combinatorial optimization problems

    Sticky Brownian Rounding and its Applications to Constraint Satisfaction Problems

    Get PDF
    Semidefinite programming is a powerful tool in the design and analysis of approximation algorithms for combinatorial optimization problems. In particular, the random hyperplane rounding method of Goemans and Williamson has been extensively studied for more than two decades, resulting in various extensions to the original technique and beautiful algorithms for a wide range of applications. Despite the fact that this approach yields tight approximation guarantees for some problems, e.g., Max-Cut, for many others, e.g., Max-SAT and Max-DiCut, the tight approximation ratio is still unknown. One of the main reasons for this is the fact that very few techniques for rounding semidefinite relaxations are known. In this work, we present a new general and simple method for rounding semi-definite programs, based on Brownian motion. Our approach is inspired by recent results in algorithmic discrepancy theory. We develop and present tools for analyzing our new rounding algorithms, utilizing mathematical machinery from the theory of Brownian motion, complex analysis, and partial differential equations. Focusing on constraint satisfaction problems, we apply our method to several classical problems, including Max-Cut, Max-2SAT, and MaxDiCut, and derive new algorithms that are competitive with the best known results. To illustrate the versatility and general applicability of our approach, we give new approximation algorithms for the Max-Cut problem with side constraints that crucially utilizes measure concentration results for the Sticky Brownian Motion, a feature missing from hyperplane rounding and its generalization

    On the Quantitative Hardness of CVP

    Full text link
    \newcommand{\eps}{\varepsilon} \newcommand{\problem}[1]{\ensuremath{\mathrm{#1}} } \newcommand{\CVP}{\problem{CVP}} \newcommand{\SVP}{\problem{SVP}} \newcommand{\CVPP}{\problem{CVPP}} \newcommand{\ensuremath}[1]{#1} For odd integers p1p \geq 1 (and p=p = \infty), we show that the Closest Vector Problem in the p\ell_p norm (\CVP_p) over rank nn lattices cannot be solved in 2^{(1-\eps) n} time for any constant \eps > 0 unless the Strong Exponential Time Hypothesis (SETH) fails. We then extend this result to "almost all" values of p1p \geq 1, not including the even integers. This comes tantalizingly close to settling the quantitative time complexity of the important special case of \CVP_2 (i.e., \CVP in the Euclidean norm), for which a 2n+o(n)2^{n +o(n)}-time algorithm is known. In particular, our result applies for any p=p(n)2p = p(n) \neq 2 that approaches 22 as nn \to \infty. We also show a similar SETH-hardness result for \SVP_\infty; hardness of approximating \CVP_p to within some constant factor under the so-called Gap-ETH assumption; and other quantitative hardness results for \CVP_p and \CVPP_p for any 1p<1 \leq p < \infty under different assumptions

    From Gap-ETH to FPT-Inapproximability: Clique, Dominating Set, and More

    Full text link
    We consider questions that arise from the intersection between the areas of polynomial-time approximation algorithms, subexponential-time algorithms, and fixed-parameter tractable algorithms. The questions, which have been asked several times (e.g., [Marx08, FGMS12, DF13]), are whether there is a non-trivial FPT-approximation algorithm for the Maximum Clique (Clique) and Minimum Dominating Set (DomSet) problems parameterized by the size of the optimal solution. In particular, letting OPT\text{OPT} be the optimum and NN be the size of the input, is there an algorithm that runs in t(OPT)poly(N)t(\text{OPT})\text{poly}(N) time and outputs a solution of size f(OPT)f(\text{OPT}), for any functions tt and ff that are independent of NN (for Clique, we want f(OPT)=ω(1)f(\text{OPT})=\omega(1))? In this paper, we show that both Clique and DomSet admit no non-trivial FPT-approximation algorithm, i.e., there is no o(OPT)o(\text{OPT})-FPT-approximation algorithm for Clique and no f(OPT)f(\text{OPT})-FPT-approximation algorithm for DomSet, for any function ff (e.g., this holds even if ff is the Ackermann function). In fact, our results imply something even stronger: The best way to solve Clique and DomSet, even approximately, is to essentially enumerate all possibilities. Our results hold under the Gap Exponential Time Hypothesis (Gap-ETH) [Dinur16, MR16], which states that no 2o(n)2^{o(n)}-time algorithm can distinguish between a satisfiable 3SAT formula and one which is not even (1ϵ)(1 - \epsilon)-satisfiable for some constant ϵ>0\epsilon > 0. Besides Clique and DomSet, we also rule out non-trivial FPT-approximation for Maximum Balanced Biclique, Maximum Subgraphs with Hereditary Properties, and Maximum Induced Matching in bipartite graphs. Additionally, we rule out ko(1)k^{o(1)}-FPT-approximation algorithm for Densest kk-Subgraph although this ratio does not yet match the trivial O(k)O(k)-approximation algorithm.Comment: 43 pages. To appear in FOCS'1
    corecore