14,212 research outputs found

    Hierarchies of Inefficient Kernelizability

    Full text link
    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

    Kernelizations for the hybridization number problem on multiple nonbinary trees

    Get PDF
    Given a finite set XX, a collection T\mathcal{T} of rooted phylogenetic trees on XX and an integer kk, the Hybridization Number problem asks if there exists a phylogenetic network on XX that displays all trees from T\mathcal{T} and has reticulation number at most kk. We show two kernelization algorithms for Hybridization Number, with kernel sizes 4k(5k)t4k(5k)^t and 20k2(Δ+−1)20k^2(\Delta^+-1) respectively, with tt the number of input trees and Δ+\Delta^+ their maximum outdegree. Experiments on simulated data demonstrate the practical relevance of these kernelization algorithms. In addition, we present an nf(k)tn^{f(k)}t-time algorithm, with n=∣X∣n=|X| and ff some computable function of kk

    Signature-Based Gr\"obner Basis Algorithms --- Extended MMM Algorithm for computing Gr\"obner bases

    Full text link
    Signature-based algorithms is a popular kind of algorithms for computing Gr\"obner bases, and many related papers have been published recently. In this paper, no new signature-based algorithms and no new proofs are presented. Instead, a view of signature-based algorithms is given, that is, signature-based algorithms can be regarded as an extended version of the famous MMM algorithm. By this view, this paper aims to give an easier way to understand signature-based Gr\"obner basis algorithms

    Computing cardinalities of Q-curve reductions over finite fields

    Get PDF
    We present a specialized point-counting algorithm for a class of elliptic curves over F\_{p^2} that includes reductions of quadratic Q-curves modulo inert primes and, more generally, any elliptic curve over F\_{p^2} with a low-degree isogeny to its Galois conjugate curve. These curves have interesting cryptographic applications. Our algorithm is a variant of the Schoof--Elkies--Atkin (SEA) algorithm, but with a new, lower-degree endomorphism in place of Frobenius. While it has the same asymptotic asymptotic complexity as SEA, our algorithm is much faster in practice.Comment: To appear in the proceedings of ANTS-XII. Added acknowledgement of Drew Sutherlan

    Space Efficiency of Propositional Knowledge Representation Formalisms

    Full text link
    We investigate the space efficiency of a Propositional Knowledge Representation (PKR) formalism. Intuitively, the space efficiency of a formalism F in representing a certain piece of knowledge A, is the size of the shortest formula of F that represents A. In this paper we assume that knowledge is either a set of propositional interpretations (models) or a set of propositional formulae (theorems). We provide a formal way of talking about the relative ability of PKR formalisms to compactly represent a set of models or a set of theorems. We introduce two new compactness measures, the corresponding classes, and show that the relative space efficiency of a PKR formalism in representing models/theorems is directly related to such classes. In particular, we consider formalisms for nonmonotonic reasoning, such as circumscription and default logic, as well as belief revision operators and the stable model semantics for logic programs with negation. One interesting result is that formalisms with the same time complexity do not necessarily belong to the same space efficiency class

    The Complexity of Reasoning for Fragments of Autoepistemic Logic

    Get PDF
    Autoepistemic logic extends propositional logic by the modal operator L. A formula that is preceded by an L is said to be "believed". The logic was introduced by Moore 1985 for modeling an ideally rational agent's behavior and reasoning about his own beliefs. In this paper we analyze all Boolean fragments of autoepistemic logic with respect to the computational complexity of the three most common decision problems expansion existence, brave reasoning and cautious reasoning. As a second contribution we classify the computational complexity of counting the number of stable expansions of a given knowledge base. To the best of our knowledge this is the first paper analyzing the counting problem for autoepistemic logic
    • …
    corecore