Multiway Tables and Integer Programming are Fixed-Parameter Tractable

Similar documents
Robust Integer Programming

Advances in Integer Programming

Nonlinear Discrete Optimization

Algebraic and Geometric ideas in the theory of Discrete Optimization

A polynomial oracle-time algorithm for convex integer minimization

Nonlinear optimization for matroid intersection and extensions

Final results on P vs NP via Integer Factorization and Optimization

P=NP via Integer factorization and Optimization

Complex Programming. Yuly Shipilevsky. Toronto, Ontario, Canada address:

Carathéodory Bounds for Integer Cones

Integer factorization is in P

P=NP via Integer Factorization and Optimization

Lift-and-Project Inequalities

Structural Grobner Basis. Bernd Sturmfels and Markus Wiegelmann TR May Department of Mathematics, UC Berkeley.

Complex Programming. Yuly Shipilevsky. Toronto, Ontario, Canada address:

The Complexity of Maximum. Matroid-Greedoid Intersection and. Weighted Greedoid Maximization

Integer Quadratic Programming is in NP

1 The linear algebra of linear programs (March 15 and 22, 2015)

Representations of All Solutions of Boolean Programming Problems

Commuting birth-and-death processes

Deciding Emptiness of the Gomory-Chvátal Closure is NP-Complete, Even for a Rational Polyhedron Containing No Integer Point

Minimizing Cubic and Homogeneous Polynomials Over Integer Points in the Plane

BCOL RESEARCH REPORT 07.04

Minimizing Cubic and Homogeneous Polynomials over Integers in the Plane

IBM Research Report. Nonlinear Integer Programming. Otto-von-Guericke-Universität Magdeburg FMA/IMO Universitätsplatz Magdeburg Germany

Integer programming, Barvinok s counting algorithm and Gomory relaxations

Lecture 5. 1 Goermans-Williamson Algorithm for the maxcut problem

LEVEL MATRICES G. SEELINGER, P. SISSOKHO, L. SPENCE, AND C. VANDEN EYNDEN

A strongly polynomial algorithm for linear systems having a binary solution

1 Solution of a Large-Scale Traveling-Salesman Problem... 7 George B. Dantzig, Delbert R. Fulkerson, and Selmer M. Johnson

Section Notes 9. IP: Cutting Planes. Applied Math 121. Week of April 12, 2010

Optimization WS 13/14:, by Y. Goldstein/K. Reinert, 9. Dezember 2013, 16: Linear programming. Optimization Problems

Introduction. 1 Partially supported by a grant from The John Templeton Foundation

Notes on Dantzig-Wolfe decomposition and column generation

Inverse Integer Linear Programs: Complexity and Computation

Copositive Programming and Combinatorial Optimization

6-1 The Positivstellensatz P. Parrilo and S. Lall, ECC

The complexity of Boolean formula minimization

Formalizing Randomized Matching Algorithms

Research Reports on Mathematical and Computing Sciences

Polynomiality of Linear Programming

CS154, Lecture 17: conp, Oracles again, Space Complexity

1 Strict local optimality in unconstrained optimization

An Alternative Proof of Primitivity of Indecomposable Nonnegative Matrices with a Positive Trace

Integer Linear Programs

CS675: Convex and Combinatorial Optimization Fall 2014 Combinatorial Problems as Linear Programs. Instructor: Shaddin Dughmi

Optimization of Submodular Functions Tutorial - lecture I

Topics in Theoretical Computer Science April 08, Lecture 8

Lecture: Algorithms for LP, SOCP and SDP

Introduction to optimization

Approximate Farkas Lemmas in Convex Optimization

Subgradient methods for huge-scale optimization problems

Cutting Planes for First Level RLT Relaxations of Mixed 0-1 Programs

A primal-simplex based Tardos algorithm

MATH36061 Convex Optimization

Resource Constrained Project Scheduling Linear and Integer Programming (1)

MSRI Summer Graduate Workshop: Algebraic, Geometric, and Combinatorial Methods for Optimization. Part IV

Lecture 5: Computational Complexity

Real Symmetric Matrices and Semidefinite Programming

Copositive Programming and Combinatorial Optimization

Umans Complexity Theory Lectures

Multicommodity Flows and Column Generation

Recent Developments in Compressed Sensing

Integer Programming Duality

Semidefinite and Second Order Cone Programming Seminar Fall 2001 Lecture 5

Introduction to Advanced Results

A General Framework for Convex Relaxation of Polynomial Optimization Problems over Cones

A new family of facet defining inequalities for the maximum edge-weighted clique problem

arxiv: v1 [cs.dm] 27 Jan 2014

Definability in fields Lecture 2: Defining valuations

Convex optimization. Javier Peña Carnegie Mellon University. Universidad de los Andes Bogotá, Colombia September 2014

Numerical Methods. Equations and Partial Fractions. Jaesung Lee

conp, Oracles, Space Complexity

CS599: Convex and Combinatorial Optimization Fall 2013 Lecture 24: Introduction to Submodular Functions. Instructor: Shaddin Dughmi

Lecture 3: Huge-scale optimization problems

On the matrix-cut rank of polyhedra

Discrete Optimization 2010 Lecture 1 Introduction / Algorithms & Spanning Trees

A notion of Total Dual Integrality for Convex, Semidefinite and Extended Formulations

A Lower Bound for the Size of Syntactically Multilinear Arithmetic Circuits

MATH2070 Optimisation

MINI-TUTORIAL ON SEMI-ALGEBRAIC PROOF SYSTEMS. Albert Atserias Universitat Politècnica de Catalunya Barcelona

A Constructive Characterization of the Split Closure of a Mixed Integer Linear Program. Juan Pablo Vielma

Mathematical Optimisation, Chpt 2: Linear Equations and inequalities

Toric Varieties in Statistics

Relations between Semidefinite, Copositive, Semi-infinite and Integer Programming

Semidefinite Programming

Travelling Salesman Problem

A note on parallel and alternating time

Lecture 1: Introduction

Computability and Complexity Theory

Lecture 9: Dantzig-Wolfe Decomposition

Approximation algorithms for nonnegative polynomial optimization problems over unit spheres

Lecture Note 5: Semidefinite Programming for Stability Analysis

Stanford University CS254: Computational Complexity Handout 8 Luca Trevisan 4/21/2010

A NOTE ON STRATEGY ELIMINATION IN BIMATRIX GAMES

AM 121: Intro to Optimization! Models and Methods! Fall 2018!

CS599: Convex and Combinatorial Optimization Fall 2013 Lecture 17: Combinatorial Problems as Linear Programs III. Instructor: Shaddin Dughmi

On the Relative Complexity of 15 Problems Related to 0/1-Integer Programming

Definition: conp = { L L NP } What does a conp computation look like?

Boolean constraint satisfaction: complexity results for optimization problems with arbitrary weights

Transcription:

Multiway Tables and Integer Programming are Fixed-Parameter Tractable Technion Israel Institute of Technology

Outline 1. Overview our theory of Graver bases for integer programming (with Berstein, De Loera, Hemmecke, Lee, Romanchuk, Rothblum, Weismantel)

Outline 1. Overview our theory of Graver bases for integer programming (with Berstein, De Loera, Hemmecke, Lee, Romanchuk, Rothblum, Weismantel) 2. Multiway tables are polynomial time solvable

Outline 1. Overview our theory of Graver bases for integer programming (with Berstein, De Loera, Hemmecke, Lee, Romanchuk, Rothblum, Weismantel) 2. Multiway tables are polynomial time solvable 3. Multiway tables and IP are fixed-parameter tractable (with Hemmecke and my student Romanchuk, Mathematical Programming, 213)

Outline 1. Overview our theory of Graver bases for integer programming (with Berstein, De Loera, Hemmecke, Lee, Romanchuk, Rothblum, Weismantel) 2. Multiway tables are polynomial time solvable 3. Multiway tables and IP are fixed-parameter tractable (with Hemmecke and my student Romanchuk, Mathematical Programming, 213) 4. Huge multiway tables - P versus NP and conp (posted last week on the Arxiv)

Outline 1. Overview our theory of Graver bases for integer programming (with Berstein, De Loera, Hemmecke, Lee, Romanchuk, Rothblum, Weismantel) 2. Multiway tables are polynomial time solvable 3. Multiway tables and IP are fixed-parameter tractable (with Hemmecke and my student Romanchuk, Mathematical Programming, 213) 4. Huge multiway tables - P versus NP and conp (posted last week on the Arxiv) 5. Approximation hierarchy for integer programming

(Non)-Linear Integer Programming The problem is: min { f(x) : Ax = b, l x u, x in Z n } with data: A: integer m x n matrix b: right-hand side in Z m l,u: lower/upper bounds in Z n f: function from Z n to R

(Non)-Linear Integer Programming The problem is: min { f(x) : Ax = b, l x u, x in Z n } with data: A: integer m x n matrix b: right-hand side in Z m l,u: lower/upper bounds in Z n f: function from Z n to R Our theory enables polynomial time solution of broad natural universal (non)-linear integer programs in variable dimension

Graver Bases and Nonlinear Integer Programming

Graver Bases The Graver basis of an integer matrix A is the finite set G(A) of conformal-minimal nonzero integer vectors x satisfying Ax =. x is conformal-minimal if no other y in same orthant has all y i x i

Graver Bases The Graver basis of an integer matrix A is the finite set G(A) of conformal-minimal nonzero integer vectors x satisfying Ax =. Example: Consider A=(1 2 1). Then G(A) consists of circuits: ±(2-1 ), ±(1-1), ±( 1-2) non-circuits: ±(1-1 1)

Some Theorems on (Non)-Linear Integer Programming Theorem 1: linear optimization in polytime with G(A): min { wx : Ax = b, l x u, x in Z n } Reference: N-fold integer programming (De Loera, Hemmecke, Onn, Weismantel) Discrete Optimization (Volume in memory of George Dantzig), 28

Some Theorems on (Non)-Linear Integer Programming Theorem 2: separable convex minimization in polytime with G(A): min {Σ f i (x i ) : Ax = b, l x u, x in Z n } Reference: A polynomial oracle-time algorithm for convex integer minimization (Hemmecke, Onn, Weismantel) Mathematical Programming, 211

Some Theorems on (Non)-Linear Integer Programming Theorem 3: polynomial minimization in polytime with G(A): min {p(x) : Ax = b, l x u, x in Z n } for a certain class of possibly non-convex multivariate polynomials. Reference: The quadratic Graver cone, quadratic integer minimization & extensions (Lee, Onn, Romanchuk, Weismantel), Mathematical Programming, 212

The Iterative Algorithm

Proof of Theorem 2 To solve min {f(x) : Ax = b, l x u, x in Z n } R n Do: with the Graver basis G(A) f R

Proof of Theorem 2 To solve min {f(x) : Ax = b, l x u, x in Z n } R n f Do: with the Graver basis G(A) 1. Find initial point by auxiliary program R

Proof of Theorem 2 To solve min {f(x) : Ax = b, l x u, x in Z n } R n R f with the Graver basis G(A) Do: 1. Find initial point by auxiliary program 2. Iteratively improve by Graver-best steps, that is, by best cz with c in Z and z in G(A).

Proof of Theorem 2 To solve min {f(x) : Ax = b, l x u, x in Z n } R n R f with the Graver basis G(A) Do: 1. Find initial point by auxiliary program 2. Iteratively improve by Graver-best steps, that is, by best cz with c in Z and z in G(A). Using supermodality of f and integer Caratheodory theorem (Cook-Fonlupt-Schrijver, Sebo) we can show polytime convergence to some optimal solution

Multiway Tables

Multiway Tables The multiway table problem of Motzkin (1952) concerns minimization over m 1 X... X m k X m k+1 tables with given margins. 6 3 3 5 1 9 1 4 2 1 8

Multiway Tables The multiway table problem of Motzkin (1952) concerns minimization over m 1 X... X m k X m k+1 tables with given margins. If all m i fixed then solvable by fixed dimension theory. 6 3 3 5 1 9 1 4 2 1 8

Multiway Tables The multiway table problem of Motzkin (1952) concerns minimization over m 1 X... X m k X n tables with given margins. n 6 3 3 5 1 4 2 1 8 1 9

Multiway Tables The multiway table problem of Motzkin (1952) concerns minimization over m 1 X... X m k X n tables with given margins. n g 6 3 3 5 1 1 4 2 1 8 If one side n is variable then we have the following: 9 Lemma: For fixed m 1,..., m k there is Graver complexity g:=g(m 1,..., m k ) such that the relevant Graver basis consists of all O(n g ) lifts of the relevant Graver basis of m 1 X... X m k X g tables.

Multiway Tables The multiway table problem of Motzkin (1952) concerns minimization over m 1 X... X m k X n tables with given margins. n g 6 3 3 5 1 1 4 2 1 8 If one side n is variable then we have the following: 9 Lemma: For fixed m 1,..., m k there is Graver complexity g:=g(m 1,..., m k ) such that the relevant Graver basis consists of all O(n g ) lifts of the relevant Graver basis of m 1 X... X m k X g tables. g(3,3)=9, g(3,4) = 27, g(3,5) =? Ω(2 m ) = g(3,m) = Ο(6 m )

Multiway Tables The multiway table problem of Motzkin (1952) concerns minimization over m 1 X... X m k X n tables with given margins. n g 6 3 3 5 1 1 4 2 1 8 9 Corollary: (Non)-linear optimization over m 1 X... X m k X n tables with given margins is doable in polynomial time O(n g(m 1,,m k ) L).

Multiway Tables The multiway table problem of Motzkin (1952) concerns minimization over m 1 X... X m k X n tables with given margins. n 6 3 3 5 1 4 2 1 8 1 9 Corollary: (Non)-linear optimization over m 1 X... X m k X n tables with given margins is doable in polynomial time O(n g(m 1,,m k ) L). However, if two sides are variable then have the Universality Theorem: Every integer program is one over 3 X m X n tables with given line-sums.

Fixed-Parameter Tractability

Multiway Tables are Fixed-Parameter Tractable Reference: N-fold integer programming in cubic time (Hemmecke, Onn, Romanchuk) Mathematical Programming, 213

Multiway Tables are Fixed-Parameter Tractable Theorem: (Non)-linear optimization over m 1 X... X m k X n tables with given margins is doable in fixed-parameter cubic time O(n 3 L).

Multiway Tables are Fixed-Parameter Tractable Theorem: (Non)-linear optimization over m 1 X... X m k X n tables with given margins is doable in fixed-parameter cubic time O(n 3 L). Instead of O(n g(m 1,,m k ) L)

Multiway Tables are Fixed-Parameter Tractable Theorem: (Non)-linear optimization over m 1 X... X m k X n tables with given margins is doable in fixed-parameter cubic time O(n 3 L). Instead of O(n g(m 1,,m k ) L) Now, have parameterization of all integer programming by universality: Every integer program is one over 3 X m X n tables with given line-sums.

Multiway Tables are Fixed-Parameter Tractable Theorem: (Non)-linear optimization over m 1 X... X m k X n tables with given margins is doable in fixed-parameter cubic time O(n 3 L). Instead of O(n g(m 1,,m k ) L) Now, have parameterization of all integer programming by universality: Every integer program is one over 3 X m X n tables with given line-sums. Corollary: (nonlinear) integer programming is fixed-parameter tractable: for each fixed m it is solvable in time O(n 3 L)instead of O(n g(3,m) L).

Proof: Better Way of Finding Graver-Best Steps Let x be a feasible l X m X n table at some iteration of minimizing w over such tables with given line-sums and let G be the Graver basis.

Proof: Better Way of Finding Graver-Best Steps Let x be a feasible l X m X n table at some iteration of minimizing w over such tables with given line-sums and let G be the Graver basis. A Graver-best step for x is a table h such that x+h is feasible and at least as good as any feasible x+cz with cinz and zin G.

Proof: Better Way of Finding Graver-Best Steps Let x be a feasible l X m X n table at some iteration of minimizing w over such tables with given line-sums and let G be the Graver basis. A Graver-best step for x is a table h such that x+h is feasible and at least as good as any feasible x+cz with cinz and zin G. Previous way: for each of O(n g(l,m) )tables z in G find best c in Z

Proof: Better Way of Finding Graver-Best Steps Let x be a feasible l X m X n table at some iteration of minimizing w over such tables with given line-sums and let G be the Graver basis. A Graver-best step for x is a table h such that x+h is feasible and at least as good as any feasible x+cz with cinz and zin G. Previous way: for each of O(n g(l,m) )tables z in G find best c in Z New way: for each c find ch at least as good as any cz with z ing

Proof: Better Way of Finding Graver-Best Steps Let x be a feasible l X m X n table at some iteration of minimizing w over such tables with given line-sums and let G be the Graver basis. Let V(l,m) := {v : v is sum of at most g(l,m) many l X m circuit matrices} 1-1 1-1 -1 1

Proof: Better Way of Finding Graver-Best Steps Let x be a feasible l X m X n table at some iteration of minimizing w over such tables with given line-sums and let G be the Graver basis. Let V(l,m) := {v : v is sum of at most g(l,m) many l X m circuit matrices} 1-1 1-1 -1 1 Example: for 3 X 3 X n tables, V(3,3) consists of 42931 matrices such as 9-2 -7-4 5-1 -5-3 8

Proof: Better Way of Finding Graver-Best Steps Let x be a feasible l X m X n table at some iteration of minimizing w over such tables with given line-sums and let G be the Graver basis. Let V(l,m) := {v : v is sum of at most g(l,m) many l X m circuit matrices} Note that V(l,m) c(l,m) g(l,m) is (huge) constant. 1-1 1-1 -1 1 Example: for 3 X 3 X n tables, V(3,3) consists of 42931 matrices such as 9-2 -7-4 5-1 -5-3 8

Proof: Better Way of Finding Graver-Best Steps Let x be a feasible l X m X n table at some iteration of minimizing w over such tables with given line-sums and let G be the Graver basis. Let V(l,m) := {v : v is sum of at most g(l,m) many l X m circuit matrices} Lemma: For every n and every l X m X n table h in the Graver basis G, the sum of every subset of layers of h is a matrix in V(l,m). n g 6 3 3 5 1 1 4 2 1 8 9

Proof: Better Way of Finding Graver-Best Steps Let x be a feasible l X m X n table at some iteration of minimizing w over such tables with given line-sums and let G be the Graver basis. Let V(l,m) := {v : v is sum of at most g(l,m) many l X m circuit matrices} For each c in Z construct the following dynamic program v i-1 h i := v i v i-1 inv(l,m) x i +ch i v i length w i h i S ={} S i -1 =V(l,m) S i =V(l,m) S n ={}

Proof: Better Way of Finding Graver-Best Steps Lemma: Each feasible step ch = (ch 1,..., ch n ) with h in G gives dipath (, v 1,..., v n ) in the dynamic program, with each v i = h 1 +... + h i in V(l,m). v i-1 h i := v i v i-1 inv(l,m) x i +ch i v i length w i h i S ={} S i -1 =V(l,m) S i =V(l,m) S n ={}

Proof: Better Way of Finding Graver-Best Steps Lemma: Each feasible step ch = (ch 1,..., ch n ) with h in G gives dipath (, v 1,..., v n ) in the dynamic program, with each v i = h 1 +... + h i in V(l,m). Lemma: A Graver-best step for x can be computed in O(n 2 ) time, solving O( V(l,m) n) dynamic programs each in time O( V(l,m) 2 n). v i-1 h i := v i v i-1 inv(l,m) x i +ch i v i length w i h i S ={} S i -1 =V(l,m) S i =V(l,m) S n ={}

Proof: Better Way of Finding Graver-Best Steps Example: for 3 X 3 X n tables, V(3,3) consists of 42931 matrices such as 9-2 -7-4 5-1 -5-3 8 so finding a single Graver-best step in a single iteration involves some 1 14 n 2 arithmetic operations per iteration.

Huge Multiway Tables

Huge Multiway Tables Consider the problem of deciding existence of an l X m X n huge table with t given types of row-sums and column-sums having n k layers of each type k with the n k encoded in binary. n 6 3 3 5 1 4 2 1 8 1 9

Huge Multiway Tables Consider the problem of deciding existence of an l X m X n huge table with t given types of row-sums and column-sums having n k layers of each type k with the n k encoded in binary. n 6 3 3 5 1 4 2 1 8 1 9 Theorem: For fixed t the problem is in P. For variable t it is in NP and conp. Reference: Huge Multiway Table Problems (Onn), posted on the Arxiv last week

Graver Approximation Hierarchy

Graver Approximation Hierarchy Our algorithm naturally enables a hierarchy of approximations of the universal integer program over 3 X m X n tables with variable m,n.

Graver Approximation Hierarchy Our algorithm naturally enables a hierarchy of approximations of the universal integer program over 3 X m X n tables with variable m,n. At level d of this hierarchy, we find approximated Graver-best steps in time O(m 9d n 2 ), approximating V(3,m) in the dynamic programs by V d (3,m) :={v : v is sum of at most d many 3 X m circuit matrices}

Graver Approximation Hierarchy Our algorithm naturally enables a hierarchy of approximations of the universal integer program over 3 X m X n tables with variable m,n. At level d of this hierarchy, we find approximated Graver-best steps in time O(m 9d n 2 ), approximating V(3,m) in the dynamic programs by V d (3,m) :={v : v is sum of at most d many 3 X m circuit matrices} We apply Graver-best steps while possible. If the approximation is satisfactory then we stop, else we proceed to the next level.

Some Bibliography (available at http://ie.technion.ac.il/~onn) - The complexity of 3-way tables (SIAM J. Comp.) - Convex combinatorial optimization (Disc. Comp. Geom.) - Markov bases of 3-way tables (J. Symb. Comp.) - All linear and integer programs are slim 3-way programs (SIAM J. Opt.) - Graver complexity of integer programming (Annals Combin.) - N-fold integer programming (Disc. Opt. in memory of Dantzig) - Convex integer maximization via Graver bases (J. Pure App. Algebra) - Polynomial oracle-time convex integer minimization (Math. Prog.) - The quadratic Graver cone, quadratic integer minimization & extensions (Math Prog.) - N-fold integer programming in cubic time (Math. Prog.) - Huge multiway table problems (Arxiv)

Comprehensive development is in my monograph available electronically from my homepage (with kind permission of EMS) (excluding fixed-parameter result and huge multiway table results)