A Tutorial on Clique Problems in Communications and Signal Processing

Since its first use by Euler on the problem of the seven bridges of K\"onigsberg, graph theory has shown excellent abilities in solving and unveiling the properties of multiple discrete optimization problems. The study of the structure of some integer programs reveals equivalence with graph theory problems making a large body of the literature readily available for solving and characterizing the complexity of these problems. This tutorial presents a framework for utilizing a particular graph theory problem, known as the clique problem, for solving communications and signal processing problems. In particular, the paper aims to illustrate the structural properties of integer programs that can be formulated as clique problems through multiple examples in communications and signal processing. To that end, the first part of the tutorial provides various optimal and heuristic solutions for the maximum clique, maximum weight clique, and $k$-clique problems. The tutorial, further, illustrates the use of the clique formulation through numerous contemporary examples in communications and signal processing, mainly in maximum access for non-orthogonal multiple access networks, throughput maximization using index and instantly decodable network coding, collision-free radio frequency identification networks, and resource allocation in cloud-radio access networks. Finally, the tutorial sheds light on the recent advances of such applications, and provides technical insights on ways of dealing with mixed discrete-continuous optimization problems

Combinatorial optimization and metaheuristics

Today, combinatorial optimization is one of the youngest and most active areas of discrete mathematics. It is a branch of optimization in applied mathematics and computer science, related to operational research, algorithm theory and computational complexity theory. It sits at the intersection of several fields, including artificial intelligence, mathematics and software engineering. Its increasing interest arises for the fact that a large number of scientific and industrial problems can be formulated as abstract combinatorial optimization problems, through graphs and/or (integer) linear programs. Some of these problems have polynomial-time (“efficient”) algorithms, while most of them are NP-hard, i.e. it is not proved that they can be solved in polynomial-time. Mainly, it means that it is not possible to guarantee that an exact solution to the problem can be found and one has to settle for an approximate solution with known performance guarantees. Indeed, the goal of approximate methods is to find “quickly” (reasonable run-times), with “high” probability, provable “good” solutions (low error from the real optimal solution). In the last 20 years, a new kind of algorithm commonly called metaheuristics have emerged in this class, which basically try to combine heuristics in high level frameworks aimed at efficiently and effectively exploring the search space. This report briefly outlines the components, concepts, advantages and disadvantages of different metaheuristic approaches from a conceptual point of view, in order to analyze their similarities and differences. The two very significant forces of intensification and diversification, that mainly determine the behavior of a metaheuristic, will be pointed out. The report concludes by exploring the importance of hybridization and integration methods

Physical portrayal of computational complexity

Computational complexity is examined using the principle of increasing entropy. To consider computation as a physical process from an initial instance to the final acceptance is motivated because many natural processes have been recognized to complete in non-polynomial time (NP). The irreversible process with three or more degrees of freedom is found intractable because, in terms of physics, flows of energy are inseparable from their driving forces. In computational terms, when solving problems in the class NP, decisions will affect subsequently available sets of decisions. The state space of a non-deterministic finite automaton is evolving due to the computation itself hence it cannot be efficiently contracted using a deterministic finite automaton that will arrive at a solution in super-polynomial time. The solution of the NP problem itself is verifiable in polynomial time (P) because the corresponding state is stationary. Likewise the class P set of states does not depend on computational history hence it can be efficiently contracted to the accepting state by a deterministic sequence of dissipative transformations. Thus it is concluded that the class P set of states is inherently smaller than the set of class NP. Since the computational time to contract a given set is proportional to dissipation, the computational complexity class P is a subset of NP.Comment: 16, pages, 7 figure

Measurements, Models, Systems and Design

531 s.