Kernel Bounds for Path and Cycle Problems

Connectivity problems like k-Path and k-Disjoint Paths relate to many important milestones in parameterized complexity, namely the Graph Minors Project, color coding, and the recent development of techniques for obtaining kernelization lower bounds. This work explores the existence of polynomial kernels for various path and cycle problems, by considering nonstandard parameterizations. We show polynomial kernels when the parameters are a given vertex cover, a modulator to a cluster graph, or a (promised) max leaf number. We obtain lower bounds via cross-composition, e.g., for Hamiltonian Cycle and related problems when parameterized by a modulator to an outerplanar graph

Lossy Kernelization

In this paper we propose a new framework for analyzing the performance of preprocessing algorithms. Our framework builds on the notion of kernelization from parameterized complexity. However, as opposed to the original notion of kernelization, our definitions combine well with approximation algorithms and heuristics. The key new definition is that of a polynomial size $\alpha$-approximate kernel. Loosely speaking, a polynomial size $\alpha$-approximate kernel is a polynomial time pre-processing algorithm that takes as input an instance $(I,k)$ to a parameterized problem, and outputs another instance $(I',k')$ to the same problem, such that $|I'|+k' \leq k^{O(1)}$. Additionally, for every $c \geq 1$, a $c$-approximate solution $s'$ to the pre-processed instance $(I',k')$ can be turned in polynomial time into a $(c \cdot \alpha)$-approximate solution $s$ to the original instance $(I,k)$. Our main technical contribution are $\alpha$-approximate kernels of polynomial size for three problems, namely Connected Vertex Cover, Disjoint Cycle Packing and Disjoint Factors. These problems are known not to admit any polynomial size kernels unless $NP \subseteq coNP/poly$. Our approximate kernels simultaneously beat both the lower bounds on the (normal) kernel size, and the hardness of approximation lower bounds for all three problems. On the negative side we prove that Longest Path parameterized by the length of the path and Set Cover parameterized by the universe size do not admit even an $\alpha$-approximate kernel of polynomial size, for any $\alpha \geq 1$, unless $NP \subseteq coNP/poly$. In order to prove this lower bound we need to combine in a non-trivial way the techniques used for showing kernelization lower bounds with the methods for showing hardness of approximationComment: 58 pages. Version 2 contain new results: PSAKS for Cycle Packing and approximate kernel lower bounds for Set Cover and Hitting Set parameterized by universe siz

Compression via Matroids: A Randomized Polynomial Kernel for Odd Cycle Transversal

The Odd Cycle Transversal problem (OCT) asks whether a given graph can be made bipartite by deleting at most $k$ of its vertices. In a breakthrough result Reed, Smith, and Vetta (Operations Research Letters, 2004) gave a \BigOh(4^kkmn) time algorithm for it, the first algorithm with polynomial runtime of uniform degree for every fixed $k$. It is known that this implies a polynomial-time compression algorithm that turns OCT instances into equivalent instances of size at most \BigOh(4^k), a so-called kernelization. Since then the existence of a polynomial kernel for OCT, i.e., a kernelization with size bounded polynomially in $k$, has turned into one of the main open questions in the study of kernelization. This work provides the first (randomized) polynomial kernelization for OCT. We introduce a novel kernelization approach based on matroid theory, where we encode all relevant information about a problem instance into a matroid with a representation of size polynomial in $k$. For OCT, the matroid is built to allow us to simulate the computation of the iterative compression step of the algorithm of Reed, Smith, and Vetta, applied (for only one round) to an approximate odd cycle transversal which it is aiming to shrink to size $k$. The process is randomized with one-sided error exponentially small in $k$, where the result can contain false positives but no false negatives, and the size guarantee is cubic in the size of the approximate solution. Combined with an \BigOh(\sqrt{\log n})-approximation (Agarwal et al., STOC 2005), we get a reduction of the instance to size \BigOh(k^{4.5}), implying a randomized polynomial kernelization.Comment: Minor changes to agree with SODA 2012 version of the pape

Data Reduction for Graph Coloring Problems

This paper studies the kernelization complexity of graph coloring problems with respect to certain structural parameterizations of the input instances. We are interested in how well polynomial-time data reduction can provably shrink instances of coloring problems, in terms of the chosen parameter. It is well known that deciding 3-colorability is already NP-complete, hence parameterizing by the requested number of colors is not fruitful. Instead, we pick up on a research thread initiated by Cai (DAM, 2003) who studied coloring problems parameterized by the modification distance of the input graph to a graph class on which coloring is polynomial-time solvable; for example parameterizing by the number k of vertex-deletions needed to make the graph chordal. We obtain various upper and lower bounds for kernels of such parameterizations of q-Coloring, complementing Cai's study of the time complexity with respect to these parameters. Our results show that the existence of polynomial kernels for q-Coloring parameterized by the vertex-deletion distance to a graph class F is strongly related to the existence of a function f(q) which bounds the number of vertices which are needed to preserve the NO-answer to an instance of q-List-Coloring on F.Comment: Author-accepted manuscript of the article that will appear in the FCT 2011 special issue of Information & Computatio

Hierarchies of Inefficient Kernelizability

The framework of Bodlaender et al. (ICALP 2008) and Fortnow and Santhanam (STOC 2008) allows us to exclude the existence of polynomial kernels for a range of problems under reasonable complexity-theoretical assumptions. However, there are also some issues that are not addressed by this framework, including the existence of Turing kernels such as the "kernelization" of Leaf Out Branching(k) into a disjunction over n instances of size poly(k). Observing that Turing kernels are preserved by polynomial parametric transformations, we define a kernelization hardness hierarchy, akin to the M- and W-hierarchy of ordinary parameterized complexity, by the PPT-closure of problems that seem likely to be fundamentally hard for efficient Turing kernelization. We find that several previously considered problems are complete for our fundamental hardness class, including Min Ones d-SAT(k), Binary NDTM Halting(k), Connected Vertex Cover(k), and Clique(k log n), the clique problem parameterized by k log n

Kernelization Lower Bounds By Cross-Composition

We introduce the cross-composition framework for proving kernelization lower bounds. A classical problem L AND/OR-cross-composes into a parameterized problem Q if it is possible to efficiently construct an instance of Q with polynomially bounded parameter value that expresses the logical AND or OR of a sequence of instances of L. Building on work by Bodlaender et al. (ICALP 2008) and using a result by Fortnow and Santhanam (STOC 2008) with a refinement by Dell and van Melkebeek (STOC 2010), we show that if an NP-hard problem OR-cross-composes into a parameterized problem Q then Q does not admit a polynomial kernel unless NP \subseteq coNP/poly and the polynomial hierarchy collapses. Similarly, an AND-cross-composition for Q rules out polynomial kernels for Q under Bodlaender et al.'s AND-distillation conjecture. Our technique generalizes and strengthens the recent techniques of using composition algorithms and of transferring the lower bounds via polynomial parameter transformations. We show its applicability by proving kernelization lower bounds for a number of important graphs problems with structural (non-standard) parameterizations, e.g., Clique, Chromatic Number, Weighted Feedback Vertex Set, and Weighted Odd Cycle Transversal do not admit polynomial kernels with respect to the vertex cover number of the input graphs unless the polynomial hierarchy collapses, contrasting the fact that these problems are trivially fixed-parameter tractable for this parameter. After learning of our results, several teams of authors have successfully applied the cross-composition framework to different parameterized problems. For completeness, our presentation of the framework includes several extensions based on this follow-up work. For example, we show how a relaxed version of OR-cross-compositions may be used to give lower bounds on the degree of the polynomial in the kernel size.Comment: A preliminary version appeared in the proceedings of the 28th International Symposium on Theoretical Aspects of Computer Science (STACS 2011) under the title "Cross-Composition: A New Technique for Kernelization Lower Bounds". Several results have been strengthened compared to the preliminary version (http://arxiv.org/abs/1011.4224). 29 pages, 2 figure

Cross-Composition: A New Technique for Kernelization Lower Bounds

We introduce a new technique for proving kernelization lower bounds, called cross-composition. A classical problem L cross-composes into a parameterized problem Q if an instance of Q with polynomially bounded parameter value can express the logical OR of a sequence of instances of L. Building on work by Bodlaender et al. (ICALP 2008) and using a result by Fortnow and Santhanam (STOC 2008) we show that if an NP-complete problem cross-composes into a parameterized problem Q then Q does not admit a polynomial kernel unless the polynomial hierarchy collapses. Our technique generalizes and strengthens the recent techniques of using OR-composition algorithms and of transferring the lower bounds via polynomial parameter transformations. We show its applicability by proving kernelization lower bounds for a number of important graphs problems with structural (non-standard) parameterizations, e.g., Chromatic Number, Clique, and Weighted Feedback Vertex Set do not admit polynomial kernels with respect to the vertex cover number of the input graphs unless the polynomial hierarchy collapses, contrasting the fact that these problems are trivially fixed-parameter tractable for this parameter. We have similar lower bounds for Feedback Vertex Set.Comment: Updated information based on final version submitted to STACS 201