Document Open Access Logo

Equi-Rank Homomorphism Preservation Theorem on Finite Structures

Author Benjamin Rossman

PDF

File

Thumbnail PDF
PDF
LIPIcs.CSL.2025.6.pdf
  • Filesize: 0.83 MB
  • 17 pages

Document Identifiers

Subject Classification

ACM Subject Classification
  • Theory of computation → Finite Model Theory
Keywords
  • finite model theory
  • preservation theorems
  • quantifier rank

Metrics

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

Abstract

The Homomorphism Preservation Theorem (HPT) of classical model theory states that a first-order sentence is preserved under homomorphisms if, and only if, it is equivalent to an existential-positive sentence. This theorem remains valid when restricted to finite structures, as demonstrated by the author in [Rossman, 2008; Rossman, 2017] via distinct model-theoretic and circuit-complexity based proofs. In this paper, we present a third (and significantly simpler) proof of the finitary HPT based on a generalized Cai-Fürer-Immerman construction. This method establishes a tight correspondence between syntactic parameters of a homomorphism-preserved sentence (quantifier rank, variable width, alternation height) and structural parameters of its minimal models (tree-width, tree-depth, decomposition height). Consequently, we prove a conjectured "equi-rank" version of the finitary HPT. In contrast, previous versions of the finitary HPT possess additional properties, but incur blow-ups in the quantifier rank of the equivalent existential-positive sentence.

Cite As Get BibTex

Benjamin Rossman. Equi-Rank Homomorphism Preservation Theorem on Finite Structures. In 33rd EACSL Annual Conference on Computer Science Logic (CSL 2025). Leibniz International Proceedings in Informatics (LIPIcs), Volume 326, pp. 6:1-6:17, Schloss Dagstuhl – Leibniz-Zentrum für Informatik (2025) https://doi.org/10.4230/LIPIcs.CSL.2025.6

Author Details

Benjamin Rossman
  • Duke University, Durham, NC, USA

Acknowledgements

I thank Deepanshu Kush, William He and Ken-ichi Kawarabayashi for stimulating conversions that prompted me to revisit the topic of this paper. Anuj Dawar provided helpful comments on a preliminary draft of this paper. I am grateful to the anonymous referees for numerous suggestions that improved the clarity of this paper. This paper was partially written during a visit to the National Institute of Informations in Tokyo, Japan.

References

  1. Samson Abramsky, Anuj Dawar, and Pengming Wang. The pebbling comonad in finite model theory. In 2017 32nd Annual ACM/IEEE Symposium on Logic in Computer Science (LICS), pages 1-12. IEEE, 2017. URL: https://doi.org/10.1109/LICS.2017.8005129.
  2. Samson Abramsky and Luca Reggio. Arboreal categories and equi-resource homomorphism preservation theorems. Annals of Pure and Applied Logic, 175(6):103423, 2024. URL: https://doi.org/10.1016/J.APAL.2024.103423.
  3. Isolde Adler and Eva Fluck. Monotonicity of the Cops and Robber Game for Bounded Depth Treewidth. In 49th International Symposium on Mathematical Foundations of Computer Science (MFCS 2024), volume 306, pages 6:1-6:18, 2024. URL: https://doi.org/10.4230/LIPICS.MFCS.2024.6.
  4. Albert Atserias. On digraph coloring problems and treewidth duality. European Journal of Combinatorics, 29(4):796-820, 2008. URL: https://doi.org/10.1016/J.EJC.2007.11.004.
  5. Albert Atserias, Anuj Dawar, and Phokion G. Kolaitis. On preservation under homomorphisms and unions of conjunctive queries. J. ACM, 53(2):208-237, 2006. URL: https://doi.org/10.1145/1131342.1131344.
  6. Jin-Yi Cai, Martin Fürer, and Neil Immerman. An optimal lower bound on the number of variables for graph identification. Combinatorica, 12(4):389-410, 1992. URL: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF01305232.
  7. James Carr. Homomorphism preservation theorems for many-valued structures. arXiv preprint arXiv:2403.00217, 2024. Google Scholar
  8. Hubie Chen. On the complexity of existential positive queries. ACM Transactions on Computational Logic (TOCL), 15(1):1-20, 2014. URL: https://doi.org/10.1145/2559946.
  9. Wojciech Czerwinski, Wojciech Nadara, and Marcin Pilipczuk. Improved bounds for the excluded-minor approximation of treedepth. In 27th Annual European Symposium on Algorithms (ESA 2019). Schloss Dagstuhl - Leibniz-Zentrum für Informatik, 2019. Google Scholar
  10. Anuj Dawar. Homomorphism preservation on quasi-wide classes. Journal of Computer and System Sciences, 76(5):324-332, 2010. URL: https://doi.org/10.1016/J.JCSS.2009.10.005.
  11. Anuj Dawar and Ioannis Eleftheriadis. Preservation theorems on sparse classes revisited. In Proceedings of the 49th International Symposium on Mathematical Foundations of Computer Science, 2024. Google Scholar
  12. Anuj Dawar, Tomáš Jakl, and Luca Reggio. Lovász-type theorems and game comonads. In 2021 36th Annual ACM/IEEE Symposium on Logic in Computer Science (LICS), pages 1-13. IEEE, 2021. Google Scholar
  13. Larry Denenberg, Yuri Gurevich, and Saharon Shelah. Definability by constant-depth polynomial-size circuits. Information and control, 70(2-3):216-240, 1986. URL: https://doi.org/10.1016/S0019-9958(86)80006-7.
  14. Tomás Feder and Moshe Y. Vardi. Homomorphism closed vs. existential positive. In Proceedings of the 18th IEEE Symposium on Logic in Computer Science, pages 310-320, 2003. URL: https://doi.org/10.1109/LICS.2003.1210071.
  15. Eva Fluck, Tim Seppelt, and Gian Luca Spitzer. Going deep and going wide: Counting logic and homomorphism indistinguishability over graphs of bounded treedepth and treewidth. In 32nd EACSL Annual Conference on Computer Science Logic (CSL 2024). Schloss-Dagstuhl-Leibniz Zentrum für Informatik, 2024. Google Scholar
  16. Martin Fürer. On the combinatorial power of the Weisfeiler-Lehman algorithm. In International Conference on Algorithms and Complexity, pages 260-271. Springer, 2017. URL: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-57586-5_22.
  17. Nicola Galesi, Dmitry Itsykson, Artur Riazanov, and Anastasia Sofronova. Bounded-depth Frege complexity of Tseitin formulas for all graphs. Annals of Pure and Applied Logic, 174(1):103166, 2023. URL: https://doi.org/10.1016/J.APAL.2022.103166.
  18. Archontia C Giannopoulou, Paul Hunter, and Dimitrios M Thilikos. LIFO-search: A min-max theorem and a searching game for cycle-rank and tree-depth. Discrete Applied Mathematics, 160(15):2089-2097, 2012. URL: https://doi.org/10.1016/J.DAM.2012.03.015.
  19. Martin Grohe. The complexity of homomorphism and constraint satisfaction problems seen from the other side. Journal of the ACM, 54(1):1-24, 2007. URL: https://doi.org/10.1145/1206035.1206036.
  20. Yuri Gurevich. Toward logic tailored for computational complexity. In M. M. Richter et al., editor, Computation and Proof Theory, pages 175-216. Springer Lecture Notes in Mathematics, 1984. Google Scholar
  21. Lucy Ham. Relativised homomorphism preservation at the finite level. Studia Logica, 105(4): 761-786, 2017. URL: https://doi.org/10.1007/S11225-017-9710-7.
  22. Johan Håstad. On small-depth Frege proofs for Tseitin for grids. Journal of the ACM (JACM), 68(1):1-31, 2020. URL: https://doi.org/10.1145/3425606.
  23. Pavol Hell and Jaroslav Nešetřil. The core of a graph. Discrete Math., 109:117-126, 1992. URL: https://doi.org/10.1016/0012-365X(92)90282-K.
  24. Neil Immerman. Descriptive Complexity Theory. Graduate Texts in Computer Science. Springer, New York, 1999. Google Scholar
  25. Ken-ichi Kawarabayashi and Benjamin Rossman. A polynomial excluded-minor characterization of treedepth. In 29th ACM-SIAM Symposium on Discrete Algorithms, pages 234-246, 2018. Google Scholar
  26. Balagopal Komarath, Anurag Pandey, and Chengot Sankaramenon Rahul. Monotone arithmetic complexity of graph homomorphism polynomials. Algorithmica, 85(9):2554-2579, 2023. URL: https://doi.org/10.1007/S00453-023-01108-0.
  27. Deepanshu Kush and Benjamin Rossman. Tree-depth and the formula complexity of subgraph isomorphism. SIAM Journal on Computing, 52(1):273-325, 2023. URL: https://doi.org/10.1137/20M1372925.
  28. Yuan Li, Alexander Razborov, and Benjamin Rossman. On the AC⁰ complexity of subgraph isomorphism. SIAM Journal on Computing, 46(3):936-971, 2017. Google Scholar
  29. Leonid Libkin. Elements of Finite Model Theory. Springer-Verlag, 2004. Google Scholar
  30. Jerzy Łoś. On the extending of models (I). Fundamenta Mathematicae, 42:38-54, 1955. Google Scholar
  31. Roger C. Lyndon. Properties preserved under homomorphism. Pacific J. Math., 9:129-142, 1959. Google Scholar
  32. Daniel Neuen. Homomorphism-distinguishing closedness for graphs of bounded tree-width. In 41st International Symposium on Theoretical Aspects of Computer Science (STACS 2024). Schloss Dagstuhl - Leibniz-Zentrum für Informatik, 2024. Google Scholar
  33. Benjamin Rossman. Homomorphism preservation theorems. Journal of the ACM, 55(3):15, 2008. Google Scholar
  34. Benjamin Rossman. An improved homomorphism preservation theorem from lower bounds in circuit complexity. In 8th Innovations in Theoretical Computer Science, volume 67 of LIPIcs, pages 27:1-17, 2017. URL: https://doi.org/10.4230/LIPICS.ITCS.2017.27.
  35. Benjamin Rossman. Formulas versus circuits for small distance connectivity. SIAM Journal on Computing, 47(5):1986-2028, 2018. URL: https://doi.org/10.1137/15M1027310.
  36. Benjamin Rossman. Formula size-depth tradeoffs for iterated sub-permutation matrix multiplication. In Proceedings of the 56th Annual ACM Symposium on Theory of Computing, pages 1386-1395, 2024. URL: https://doi.org/10.1145/3618260.3649628.
  37. Paul D Seymour and Robin Thomas. Graph searching and a min-max theorem for tree-width. Journal of Combinatorial Theory, Series B, 58(1):22-33, 1993. URL: https://doi.org/10.1006/JCTB.1993.1027.
  38. William W. Tait. A counterexample to a conjecture of Scott and Suppes. J. Symbolic Logic, 24:15-16, 1959. URL: https://doi.org/10.2307/2964569.
  39. Alfred Tarski. Contributions to the theory of models. I. In Indagationes Mathematicae (Proceedings), volume 57, pages 572-581. Elsevier BV, 1954. Google Scholar
  40. Grigori S Tseitin. On the complexity of derivation in propositional calculus. Automation of reasoning: 2: Classical papers on computational logic 1967-1970, pages 466-483, 1983. Google Scholar
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
© 2023-2025 Schloss Dagstuhl – LZI GmbH About DROPS Imprint Privacy Contact