On the Maximum Crossing Number

Research about crossings is typically about minimization. In this paper, we consider \emph{maximizing} the number of crossings over all possible ways to draw a given graph in the plane. Alpert et al. [Electron. J. Combin., 2009] conjectured that any graph has a \emph{convex} straight-line drawing, e.g., a drawing with vertices in convex position, that maximizes the number of edge crossings. We disprove this conjecture by constructing a planar graph on twelve vertices that allows a non-convex drawing with more crossings than any convex one. Bald et al. [Proc. COCOON, 2016] showed that it is NP-hard to compute the maximum number of crossings of a geometric graph and that the weighted geometric case is NP-hard to approximate. We strengthen these results by showing hardness of approximation even for the unweighted geometric case and prove that the unweighted topological case is NP-hard.Comment: 16 pages, 5 figure

Complexity of Discrete Energy Minimization Problems

Discrete energy minimization is widely-used in computer vision and machine learning for problems such as MAP inference in graphical models. The problem, in general, is notoriously intractable, and finding the global optimal solution is known to be NP-hard. However, is it possible to approximate this problem with a reasonable ratio bound on the solution quality in polynomial time? We show in this paper that the answer is no. Specifically, we show that general energy minimization, even in the 2-label pairwise case, and planar energy minimization with three or more labels are exp-APX-complete. This finding rules out the existence of any approximation algorithm with a sub-exponential approximation ratio in the input size for these two problems, including constant factor approximations. Moreover, we collect and review the computational complexity of several subclass problems and arrange them on a complexity scale consisting of three major complexity classes -- PO, APX, and exp-APX, corresponding to problems that are solvable, approximable, and inapproximable in polynomial time. Problems in the first two complexity classes can serve as alternative tractable formulations to the inapproximable ones. This paper can help vision researchers to select an appropriate model for an application or guide them in designing new algorithms.Comment: ECCV'16 accepte

Sum-of-squares proofs and the quest toward optimal algorithms

In order to obtain the best-known guarantees, algorithms are traditionally tailored to the particular problem we want to solve. Two recent developments, the Unique Games Conjecture (UGC) and the Sum-of-Squares (SOS) method, surprisingly suggest that this tailoring is not necessary and that a single efficient algorithm could achieve best possible guarantees for a wide range of different problems. The Unique Games Conjecture (UGC) is a tantalizing conjecture in computational complexity, which, if true, will shed light on the complexity of a great many problems. In particular this conjecture predicts that a single concrete algorithm provides optimal guarantees among all efficient algorithms for a large class of computational problems. The Sum-of-Squares (SOS) method is a general approach for solving systems of polynomial constraints. This approach is studied in several scientific disciplines, including real algebraic geometry, proof complexity, control theory, and mathematical programming, and has found applications in fields as diverse as quantum information theory, formal verification, game theory and many others. We survey some connections that were recently uncovered between the Unique Games Conjecture and the Sum-of-Squares method. In particular, we discuss new tools to rigorously bound the running time of the SOS method for obtaining approximate solutions to hard optimization problems, and how these tools give the potential for the sum-of-squares method to provide new guarantees for many problems of interest, and possibly to even refute the UGC.Comment: Survey. To appear in proceedings of ICM 201