Dichotomy for Symmetric Boolean PCSPs

Authors Miron Ficak , Marcin Kozik , Miroslav Olšák, Szymon Stankiewicz



PDF
Thumbnail PDF

File

LIPIcs.ICALP.2019.57.pdf
  • Filesize: 442 kB
  • 12 pages

Document Identifiers

Author Details

Miron Ficak
  • Theoretical Computer Science Department, Faculty of Mathematics and Computer Science, Jagiellonian University, Kraków, Poland
Marcin Kozik
  • Theoretical Computer Science Department, Faculty of Mathematics and Computer Science, Jagiellonian University, Kraków, Poland
Miroslav Olšák
  • Department of Algebra, Charles University, Prague, Czech Republic
Szymon Stankiewicz
  • Theoretical Computer Science Department, Faculty of Mathematics and Computer Science, Jagiellonian University, Kraków, Poland

Cite As Get BibTex

Miron Ficak, Marcin Kozik, Miroslav Olšák, and Szymon Stankiewicz. Dichotomy for Symmetric Boolean PCSPs. In 46th International Colloquium on Automata, Languages, and Programming (ICALP 2019). Leibniz International Proceedings in Informatics (LIPIcs), Volume 132, pp. 57:1-57:12, Schloss Dagstuhl – Leibniz-Zentrum für Informatik (2019) https://doi.org/10.4230/LIPIcs.ICALP.2019.57

Abstract

In one of the most actively studied version of Constraint Satisfaction Problem, a CSP is defined by a relational structure called a template. In the decision version of the problem the goal is to determine whether a structure given on input admits a homomorphism into this template. Two recent independent results of Bulatov [FOCS'17] and Zhuk [FOCS'17] state that each finite template defines CSP which is tractable or NP-complete.
In a recent paper Brakensiek and Guruswami [SODA'18] proposed an extension of the CSP framework. This extension, called Promise Constraint Satisfaction Problem, includes many naturally occurring computational questions, e.g. approximate coloring, that cannot be cast as CSPs. A PCSP is a combination of two CSPs defined by two similar templates; the computational question is to distinguish a YES instance of the first one from a NO instance of the second.
The computational complexity of many PCSPs remains unknown. Even the case of Boolean templates (solved for CSP by Schaefer [STOC'78]) remains wide open. The main result of Brakensiek and Guruswami [SODA'18] shows that Boolean PCSPs exhibit a dichotomy (PTIME vs. NPC) when "all the clauses are symmetric and allow for negation of variables". In this paper we remove the "allow for negation of variables" assumption from the theorem. The "symmetric" assumption means that changing the order of variables in a constraint does not change its satisfiability. The "negation of variables" means that both of the templates share a relation which can be used to effectively negate Boolean variables.
The main result of this paper establishes dichotomy for all the symmetric boolean templates. The tractability case of our theorem and the theorem of Brakensiek and Guruswami are almost identical. The main difference, and the main contribution of this work, is the new reason for hardness and the reasoning proving the split.

Subject Classification

ACM Subject Classification
  • Theory of computation → Complexity theory and logic
  • Theory of computation → Constraint and logic programming
Keywords
  • promise constraint satisfaction problem
  • PCSP
  • algebraic approach

Metrics

  • Access Statistics
  • Total Accesses (updated on a weekly basis)
    0
    PDF Downloads

References

  1. P. Austrin, J. Håstad, and V. Guruswami. (2 + epsilon)-Sat Is NP-Hard. In 2014 IEEE 55th Annual Symposium on Foundations of Computer Science, pages 1-10, October 2014. URL: http://dx.doi.org/10.1109/FOCS.2014.9.
  2. Libor Barto and Marcin Kozik. Robust Satisfiability of Constraint Satisfaction Problems. In Proceedings of the Forty-fourth Annual ACM Symposium on Theory of Computing, STOC '12, pages 931-940, New York, NY, USA, 2012. ACM. URL: http://dx.doi.org/10.1145/2213977.2214061.
  3. Joshua Brakensiek and Venkatesan Guruswami. New Hardness Results for Graph and Hypergraph Colorings. In Proceedings of the 31st Conference on Computational Complexity, CCC '16, pages 14:1-14:27, Germany, 2016. Schloss Dagstuhl-Leibniz-Zentrum fuer Informatik. URL: http://dx.doi.org/10.4230/LIPIcs.CCC.2016.14.
  4. Joshua Brakensiek and Venkatesan Guruswami. An Algorithmic Blend of LPs and Ring Equations for Promise CSPs. CoRR, abs/1807.05194, 2018. URL: http://arxiv.org/abs/1807.05194.
  5. Joshua Brakensiek and Venkatesan Guruswami. Promise Constraint Satisfaction: Structure Theory and a Symmetric Boolean Dichotomy, pages 1782-1801. SIAM, 2018. URL: http://dx.doi.org/10.1137/1.9781611975031.117.
  6. A. A. Bulatov. A Dichotomy Theorem for Nonuniform CSPs. In 2017 IEEE 58th Annual Symposium on Foundations of Computer Science (FOCS), volume 00, pages 319-330, October 2017. URL: http://dx.doi.org/10.1109/FOCS.2017.37.
  7. Andrei A. Bulatov, Andrei A. Krokhin, and Peter Jeavons. Constraint satisfaction problems and finite algebras. In Automata, languages and programming (Geneva, 2000), volume 1853 of Lecture Notes in Comput. Sci., pages 272-282. Springer, Berlin, 2000. Google Scholar
  8. Jakub Bulín, Andrei A. Krokhin, and Jakub Oprsal. Algebraic approach to promise constraint satisfaction. CoRR, abs/1811.00970, 2018. URL: http://arxiv.org/abs/1811.00970.
  9. Irit Dinur, Elchanan Mossel, and Oded Regev. Conditional Hardness for Approximate Coloring. In Proceedings of the Thirty-eighth Annual ACM Symposium on Theory of Computing, STOC '06, pages 344-353, New York, NY, USA, 2006. ACM. URL: http://dx.doi.org/10.1145/1132516.1132567.
  10. Tomás Feder and Moshe Y. Vardi. The Computational Structure of Monotone Monadic SNP and Constraint Satisfaction: A Study through Datalog and Group Theory. SIAM Journal on Computing, 28(1):57-104, 1998. URL: http://dx.doi.org/10.1137/S0097539794266766.
  11. Miron Ficak, Marcin Kozik, Miroslav Olsak, and Szymon Stankiewicz. Dichotomy for symmetric Boolean PCSPs, 2019. URL: http://arxiv.org/abs/1904.12424.
  12. Sangxia Huang. Improved Hardness of Approximating Chromatic Number. In Prasad Raghavendra, Sofya Raskhodnikova, Klaus Jansen, and José D. P. Rolim, editors, Approximation, Randomization, and Combinatorial Optimization. Algorithms and Techniques, pages 233-243, Berlin, Heidelberg, 2013. Springer Berlin Heidelberg. Google Scholar
  13. Peter Jeavons, David Cohen, and Marc Gyssens. Closure properties of constraints. J. ACM, 44(4):527-548, 1997. Google Scholar
  14. Vladimir Kolmogorov, Andrei Krokhin, and Michal Rolinek. The Complexity of General-Valued CSPs. In Proceedings of the 2015 IEEE 56th Annual Symposium on Foundations of Computer Science (FOCS), FOCS '15, pages 1246-1258, Washington, DC, USA, 2015. IEEE Computer Society. URL: http://dx.doi.org/10.1109/FOCS.2015.80.
  15. Thomas J. Schaefer. The complexity of satisfiability problems. In Conference Record of the Tenth Annual ACM Symposium on Theory of Computing (San Diego, Calif., 1978), pages 216-226. ACM, New York, 1978. Google Scholar
  16. D. Zhuk. A Proof of CSP Dichotomy Conjecture. In 2017 IEEE 58th Annual Symposium on Foundations of Computer Science (FOCS), volume 00, pages 331-342, October 2017. URL: http://dx.doi.org/10.1109/FOCS.2017.38.
Questions / Remarks / Feedback
X

Feedback for Dagstuhl Publishing


Thanks for your feedback!

Feedback submitted

Could not send message

Please try again later or send an E-mail