Document Open Access Logo

Ideal Membership Problem and a Majority Polymorphism over the Ternary Domain

Authors Arpitha P. Bharathi, Monaldo Mastrolilli

Thumbnail PDF


  • Filesize: 0.67 MB
  • 13 pages

Document Identifiers

Author Details

Arpitha P. Bharathi
  • IDSIA, Lugano, Switzerland
Monaldo Mastrolilli
  • IDSIA, Lugano, Switzerland

Cite AsGet BibTex

Arpitha P. Bharathi and Monaldo Mastrolilli. Ideal Membership Problem and a Majority Polymorphism over the Ternary Domain. In 45th International Symposium on Mathematical Foundations of Computer Science (MFCS 2020). Leibniz International Proceedings in Informatics (LIPIcs), Volume 170, pp. 13:1-13:13, Schloss Dagstuhl - Leibniz-Zentrum für Informatik (2020)


The Ideal Membership Problem (IMP) asks if an input polynomial f ∈ 𝔽[x₁,… ,x_n] with coefficients from a field 𝔽 belongs to an input ideal I ⊆ 𝔽[x₁,… ,x_n]. It is a well-known fundamental problem with many important applications, though notoriously intractable in the general case. In this paper we consider the IMP for polynomial ideals encoding combinatorial problems and where the input polynomial f has degree at most d = O(1) (we call this problem IMP_d). Our main interest is in understanding when the inherent combinatorial structure of the ideals makes the IMP_d "hard" (NP-hard) or "easy" (polynomial time) to solve. Such a dichotomy result between "hard" and "easy" IMPs was recently achieved for Constraint Satisfaction Problems over finite domains [Andrei A. Bulatov, 2017; Dmitriy Zhuk, 2017] (this is equivalent to IMP₀) and IMP_d for the Boolean domain [Mastrolilli, 2019], both based on the classification of the IMP through functions called polymorphisms. For the latter result, each polymorphism determined the complexity of the computation of a suitable Gröbner basis. In this paper we consider a 3-element domain and a majority polymorphism (constraints under this polymorphism are a generalisation of the 2-SAT problem). By using properties of the majority polymorphism and assuming graded lexicographic ordering of monomials, we show that the reduced Gröbner basis of ideals whose varieties are closed under the majority polymorphism can be computed in polynomial time. This proves polynomial time solvability of the IMP_d for these constrained problems. We conjecture that this result can be extended to a general finite domain of size k = O(1). This is a first step towards the long term and challenging goal of generalizing the dichotomy results of solvability of the IMP_d for a finite domain.

Subject Classification

ACM Subject Classification
  • Mathematics of computing → Gröbner bases and other special bases
  • Mathematics of computing → Combinatoric problems
  • Polynomial ideal membership
  • Polymorphisms
  • Gröbner basis theory
  • Constraint satisfaction problems


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


  1. Libor Barto. The constraint satisfaction problem and universal algebra. The Bulletin of Symbolic Logic, 21(3):319-337, 2015. URL:
  2. Libor Barto, Andrei Krokhin, and Ross Willard. Polymorphisms, and How to Use Them. In Andrei Krokhin and Stanislav Zivny, editors, The Constraint Satisfaction Problem: Complexity and Approximability, volume 7 of Dagstuhl Follow-Ups, pages 1-44. Schloss Dagstuhl-Leibniz-Zentrum fuer Informatik, Dagstuhl, Germany, 2017. URL:
  3. Bruno Buchberger. Bruno buchberger’s phd thesis 1965: An algorithm for finding the basis elements of the residue class ring of a zero dimensional polynomial ideal. Journal of Symbolic Computation, 41(3):475-511, 2006. Logic, Mathematics and Computer Science: Interactions in honor of Bruno Buchberger (60th birthday). URL:
  4. Andrei A. Bulatov. A dichotomy theorem for constraint satisfaction problems on a 3-element set. J. ACM, 53(1):66-120, January 2006. URL:
  5. Andrei A. Bulatov. A dichotomy theorem for nonuniform CSPs (best paper award). In 58th IEEE Annual Symposium on Foundations of Computer Science, FOCS 2017, Berkeley, CA, USA, October 15-17, 2017, pages 319-330, 2017. Google Scholar
  6. Andrei A. Bulatov. Constraint satisfaction problems: Complexity and algorithms. ACM SIGLOG News, 5(4):4-24, November 2018. URL:
  7. Hubie Chen. A rendezvous of logic, complexity, and algebra. ACM Comput. Surv., 42(1):2:1-2:32, December 2009. URL:
  8. David A. Cox, John Little, and Donal O'Shea. Ideals, Varieties, and Algorithms: An Introduction to Computational Algebraic Geometry and Commutative Algebra. Springer Publishing Company, Incorporated, 4th edition, 2015. Google Scholar
  9. João Gouveia, Pablo A. Parrilo, and Rekha R. Thomas. Theta bodies for polynomial ideals. SIAM Journal on Optimization, 20(4):2097-2118, 2010. Google Scholar
  10. David Hilbert. Ueber die theorie der algebraischen formen. Mathematische Annalen, 36:473-534, 1890. URL:
  11. David Hilbert. Ueber die vollen invariantensysteme. Mathematische Annalen, 42:313-373, 1893. URL:
  12. Peter Jeavons. On the algebraic structure of combinatorial problems. Theoretical Computer Science, 200(1):185-204, 1998. URL:
  13. Peter Jeavons, David Cohen, and Marc Gyssens. Closure properties of constraints. J. ACM, 44(4):527-548, July 1997. URL:
  14. Monique Laurent. Sums of squares, moment matrices and optimization over polynomials. In Mihai Putinar and Seth Sullivant, editors, Emerging Applications of Algebraic Geometry, pages 157-270. Springer New York, New York, NY, 2009. URL:
  15. László Lovász. On the shannon capacity of a graph. IEEE Transactions on Information Theory, 25:1-7, 1979. Google Scholar
  16. Monaldo Mastrolilli. The complexity of the ideal membership problem for constrained problems over the boolean domain. In Proceedings of the Thirtieth Annual ACM-SIAM Symposium on Discrete Algorithms, SODA '19, pages 456-475, Philadelphia, PA, USA, 2019. Society for Industrial and Applied Mathematics. URL:
  17. Ernst W. Mayr. Membership in polynomial ideals over q is exponential space complete. In B. Monien and R. Cori, editors, STACS 89, pages 400-406, Berlin, Heidelberg, 1989. Springer Berlin Heidelberg. Google Scholar
  18. Ernst W. Mayr and Albert R. Meyer. The complexity of the word problems for commutative semigroups and polynomial ideals. Advances in Mathematics, 46(3):305-329, 1982. URL:
  19. Ernst W. Mayr and Stefan Toman. Complexity of membership problems of different types of polynomial ideals. In Gebhard Böckle, Wolfram Decker, and Gunter Malle, editors, Algorithmic and Experimental Methods in Algebra, Geometry, and Number Theory, pages 481-493. Springer International Publishing, Cham, 2017. URL:
  20. Ryan O'Donnell. SOS Is Not Obviously Automatizable, Even Approximately. In Christos H. Papadimitriou, editor, 8th Innovations in Theoretical Computer Science Conference (ITCS 2017), volume 67 of Leibniz International Proceedings in Informatics (LIPIcs), pages 59:1-59:10, Dagstuhl, Germany, 2017. Schloss Dagstuhl-Leibniz-Zentrum fuer Informatik. URL:
  21. Prasad Raghavendra and Benjamin Weitz. On the Bit Complexity of Sum-of-Squares Proofs. In Ioannis Chatzigiannakis, Piotr Indyk, Fabian Kuhn, and Anca Muscholl, editors, 44th International Colloquium on Automata, Languages, and Programming (ICALP 2017), volume 80 of Leibniz International Proceedings in Informatics (LIPIcs), pages 80:1-80:13, Dagstuhl, Germany, 2017. Schloss Dagstuhl-Leibniz-Zentrum fuer Informatik. URL:
  22. Thomas J. Schaefer. The complexity of satisfiability problems. In Proceedings of the Tenth Annual ACM Symposium on Theory of Computing, STOC '78, pages 216-226, New York, NY, USA, 1978. ACM. URL:
  23. Amir Shpilka. Recent results on polynomial identity testing. In Alexander Kulikov and Nikolay Vereshchagin, editors, Computer Science - Theory and Applications, pages 397-400, Berlin, Heidelberg, 2011. Springer Berlin Heidelberg. Google Scholar
  24. Dmitriy Zhuk. A proof of CSP dichotomy conjecture (best paper award). In 58th IEEE Annual Symposium on Foundations of Computer Science, FOCS 2017, Berkeley, CA, USA, October 15-17, 2017, pages 331-342, 2017. URL:
Questions / Remarks / Feedback

Feedback for Dagstuhl Publishing

Thanks for your feedback!

Feedback submitted

Could not send message

Please try again later or send an E-mail