Introduction to Advanced Results

Similar documents
Detecting Backdoor Sets with Respect to Horn and Binary Clauses

Space Complexity. Master Informatique. Université Paris 5 René Descartes. Master Info. Complexity Space 1/26

Complexity Theory VU , SS The Polynomial Hierarchy. Reinhard Pichler

Outline. Complexity Theory EXACT TSP. The Class DP. Definition. Problem EXACT TSP. Complexity of EXACT TSP. Proposition VU 181.

Non-Deterministic Time

Complete problems for classes in PH, The Polynomial-Time Hierarchy (PH) oracle is like a subroutine, or function in

Fixed-parameter tractable reductions to SAT. Vienna University of Technology

A Collection of Problems in Propositional Logic

Complexity Classes V. More PCPs. Eric Rachlin

Technische Universität München Summer term 2010 Theoretische Informatik August 2, 2010 Dr. J. Kreiker / Dr. M. Luttenberger, J. Kretinsky SOLUTION

Notes for Lecture 2. Statement of the PCP Theorem and Constraint Satisfaction

Complexity of DNF and Isomorphism of Monotone Formulas

an efficient procedure for the decision problem. We illustrate this phenomenon for the Satisfiability problem.

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

Lecture 20: conp and Friends, Oracles in Complexity Theory

An introduction to Parameterized Complexity Theory

Lecture 18: PCP Theorem and Hardness of Approximation I

NP-Completeness and Boolean Satisfiability

Lecture 24: Randomized Complexity, Course Summary

Compendium of Parameterized Problems at Higher Levels of the Polynomial Hierarchy

Polynomial time reduction and NP-completeness. Exploring some time complexity limits of polynomial time algorithmic solutions

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

Complexity Theory Final Exam

CS Lecture 29 P, NP, and NP-Completeness. k ) for all k. Fall The class P. The class NP

Umans Complexity Theory Lectures

The Complexity of Optimization Problems

conp, Oracles, Space Complexity

CS21 Decidability and Tractability

Non-Approximability Results (2 nd part) 1/19

Computational Complexity Theory

Essential facts about NP-completeness:

A.Antonopoulos 18/1/2010

6.045 Final Exam Solutions

Computational Complexity

CSCI 1590 Intro to Computational Complexity

U.C. Berkeley CS278: Computational Complexity Professor Luca Trevisan August 30, Notes for Lecture 1

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

CSE 555 HW 5 SAMPLE SOLUTION. Question 1.

Finish K-Complexity, Start Time Complexity

Computer Sciences Department

Advanced Topics in Theoretical Computer Science

Parameterized model-checking problems

CS154, Lecture 13: P vs NP

Introduction to Complexity Theory

NP Complete Problems. COMP 215 Lecture 20

Chapter 2. Reductions and NP. 2.1 Reductions Continued The Satisfiability Problem (SAT) SAT 3SAT. CS 573: Algorithms, Fall 2013 August 29, 2013

Complexity Theory. Knowledge Representation and Reasoning. November 2, 2005

Computational Complexity of Bayesian Networks

1 PSPACE-Completeness

Lecture 7: Polynomial time hierarchy

Backdoor Sets for DLL Subsolvers

Lecture 23: More PSPACE-Complete, Randomized Complexity

CS154, Lecture 13: P vs NP

The Cook-Levin Theorem

Time and space classes

P is the class of problems for which there are algorithms that solve the problem in time O(n k ) for some constant k.

Review of Complexity Theory

Show that the following problems are NP-complete

Advanced Algorithms (XIII) Yijia Chen Fudan University

De Morgan s a Laws. De Morgan s laws say that. (φ 1 φ 2 ) = φ 1 φ 2, (φ 1 φ 2 ) = φ 1 φ 2.

Limits to Approximability: When Algorithms Won't Help You. Note: Contents of today s lecture won t be on the exam

Lecture 2 (Notes) 1. The book Computational Complexity: A Modern Approach by Sanjeev Arora and Boaz Barak;

Theory of Computation Time Complexity

Lecture 19: Finish NP-Completeness, conp and Friends

Chapter 5 : Randomized computation

A An Overview of Complexity Theory for the Algorithm Designer

Interactive Proofs. Merlin-Arthur games (MA) [Babai] Decision problem: D;

6.840 Language Membership

2 P vs. NP and Diagonalization

Complexity Classes IV

Lecture 15: A Brief Look at PCP

Complexity, P and NP

satisfiability (sat) Satisfiability unsatisfiability (unsat or sat complement) and validity Any Expression φ Can Be Converted into CNFs and DNFs

1 Non-deterministic Turing Machine

6.045J/18.400J: Automata, Computability and Complexity Final Exam. There are two sheets of scratch paper at the end of this exam.

Enumeration: logical and algebraic approach

20.1 2SAT. CS125 Lecture 20 Fall 2016

Lecture Notes Each circuit agrees with M on inputs of length equal to its index, i.e. n, x {0, 1} n, C n (x) = M(x).

Notes on Complexity Theory Last updated: October, Lecture 6

Principles of Knowledge Representation and Reasoning

A Lower Bound of 2 n Conditional Jumps for Boolean Satisfiability on A Random Access Machine

INAPPROX APPROX PTAS. FPTAS Knapsack P

Week 3: Reductions and Completeness

6.045: Automata, Computability, and Complexity (GITCS) Class 17 Nancy Lynch

CS154, Lecture 18: 1

CS 151 Complexity Theory Spring Solution Set 5

Polynomial-time reductions. We have seen several reductions:

LTCC Course: Graph Theory 2017/18 3: Complexity and Algorithms

Computability and Complexity Theory: An Introduction

Lecture 16: Time Complexity and P vs NP

Lecture 22: Counting

NP-completeness. Chapter 34. Sergey Bereg

Computability and Complexity Theory

Introduction to Complexity Theory. Bernhard Häupler. May 2, 2006

Probabilistically Checkable Proofs. 1 Introduction to Probabilistically Checkable Proofs

Feasibility and Unfeasibility of Off-line Processing

CISC 4090 Theory of Computation

Undecidable Problems. Z. Sawa (TU Ostrava) Introd. to Theoretical Computer Science May 12, / 65

UC Berkeley CS 170: Efficient Algorithms and Intractable Problems Handout 22 Lecturer: David Wagner April 24, Notes 22 for CS 170

Lecture 7: The Polynomial-Time Hierarchy. 1 Nondeterministic Space is Closed under Complement

Transcription:

Introduction to Advanced Results Master Informatique Université Paris 5 René Descartes 2016 Master Info. Complexity Advanced Results 1/26

Outline Boolean Hierarchy Probabilistic Complexity Parameterized Complexity Basics on Parameterized Complexity Backdoors in SAT Master Info. Complexity Advanced Results 2/26

Boolean Hierarchy The Boolean Hierarchy is the set of decision problems defined inductively BH 1 = NP BH 2i = {L = L 1 L 2 L 1 BH 2i 1, L 2 conp} = BH 2i 1 conp BH 2i+1 = {L = L 1 L 2 L 1 BH 2i, L 2 NP} = BH 2i NP BH = i N\{0} BH i P 2 The Boolean Hierarchy is useful to discriminate problems which are NP-hard (or conp-hard), but not in NP (or in conp) Master Info. Complexity Advanced Results 3/26

Inclusion of Boolean Hierarchy Classes i, BH i BH i+1 Intuition: For i 1 (mod 2), L BHi, L = L L All, where L All is the language which contains all possible instances. L All conp, so L = L L All BH i+1 For i 0 (mod 2), L BH i, L = L L, where L is the language which contains no instance at all. L NP, so L = L L BH i+1 Master Info. Complexity Advanced Results 4/26

A Specific Class from BH: DP DP = BH 2 = {L 1 L 2 L 1 NP and L 2 conp} for Difference Polynomial Time DP has been identified before the definition of the Boolean hierarchy [Papadimitirou and Y. 1984] DP = {L1 \ L 2 L 1 NP and L 2 NP} NP DP, conp DP Master Info. Complexity Advanced Results 5/26

A Specific Problem from DP (1) Exact Clique Given a graph G and an integer k, is it true that the maximal clique in G has size exactly k? Complexity of Exact Clique Exact Clique is DP-complete [Papadimitirou and Y. 1984] Master Info. Complexity Advanced Results 6/26

A Specific Problem from DP (2) SAT-UNSAT Given two propositional formulas φ, ψ, is φ satisfiable and ψ unsatisfiable? Complexity of SAT-UNSAT SAT-UNSAT is DP-complete [Papadimitirou and Y. 1984] Master Info. Complexity Advanced Results 7/26

A Specific Problem from DP (3) Unique SAT Given a propositional formula φ, is φ satisfiable with exactly one model? Complexity of Unique SAT Unique SAT is in DP [Papadimitirou and Y. 1984] Master Info. Complexity Advanced Results 8/26

References G. Wechsung, On the Boolean closure of NP. Proc. of the International Conference on Fundamentals of Computation Theory, p 485 493, 1985. C. H. Papadimitriou and M. Yannakakis, The complexity of facets (and some facets of complexity). Journal of Computer and System Sciences 28, p 244 259, 1984. Master Info. Complexity Advanced Results 9/26

Outline Boolean Hierarchy Probabilistic Complexity Parameterized Complexity Basics on Parameterized Complexity Backdoors in SAT Master Info. Complexity Advanced Results 10/26

Deterministic Quick Sort Algorithm 1 DetQuickSort Input: L if L has 0 or 1 element then return L else L 1 = [x j x j < x 1 ] L 2 = [x j x j > x 1 ] return DetQuickSort(L 1 ) [x 1 ] DetQuickSort(L 2 ) end if Master Info. Complexity Advanced Results 11/26

Deterministic Quick Sort Algorithm 2 DetQuickSort Input: L if L has 0 or 1 element then return L else L 1 = [x j x j < x 1 ] L 2 = [x j x j > x 1 ] return DetQuickSort(L 1 ) [x 1 ] DetQuickSort(L 2 ) end if Problem: for some instances, this algorithm needs O(n 2 ) steps Master Info. Complexity Advanced Results 11/26

Probabilistic Quick Sort Algorithm 3 ProbQuickSort Input: L if L has 0 or 1 element then return L else Chose randomly i {1,..., n} L 1 = [x j x j < x i ] L 2 = [x j x j > x i ] return ProbQuickSort(L 1 ) [x i ] ProbQuickSort(L 2 ) end if Master Info. Complexity Advanced Results 12/26

Probabilistic Quick Sort Algorithm 4 ProbQuickSort Input: L if L has 0 or 1 element then return L else Chose randomly i {1,..., n} L 1 = [x j x j < x i ] L 2 = [x j x j > x i ] return ProbQuickSort(L 1 ) [x i ] ProbQuickSort(L 2 ) end if On each instance, the average number of steps is O(n log(n)) Master Info. Complexity Advanced Results 12/26

Probabilistic Turing Machine Definition A Probabilistic Turing Machine M is a TM such that for each configuration (q, x), the transition function δ has two possible results. When executing M on the input i, at each step one of the possible transitions is chosen, independently of the previous steps. We say that M works in time t(n) if for any input i such that i = n, M stops in less than t(n) steps whatever the probabilistic choices. Master Info. Complexity Advanced Results 13/26

Probabilistic Turing Machine Definition A Probabilistic Turing Machine M is a TM such that for each configuration (q, x), the transition function δ has two possible results. When executing M on the input i, at each step one of the possible transitions is chosen, independently of the previous steps. We say that M works in time t(n) if for any input i such that i = n, M stops in less than t(n) steps whatever the probabilistic choices. Intuition: a Probabilistic Turing Machine is able to chose randomly a number. We consider that it just needs to chose a bit 0/1. Integers can be chosen bit by bit For each configuration, the two possible transitions correspond to the choice of a 0 or a 1 Master Info. Complexity Advanced Results 13/26

Handling Errors Depending on the sequence of probabilistic choices (i.e. the random number chosen by the machine), a PTM can sometimes reject a positive instance or accept a negative instance To define probabilistic complexity classes, we need to identify PTM which minimize the error rate Master Info. Complexity Advanced Results 14/26

Bounded Error BPP [Gill 1977] BPP (Bounded error Probabilistic Polynomial time) is the set of decision problems P s.t. there is a PTM M s.t. for any instance i of P, if i is a positive instance, then M accepts i for at least 2 3 of the executions if i is a negative instance, then M rejects i for at least 2 3 of the executions Master Info. Complexity Advanced Results 15/26

Bounded Error BPP [Gill 1977] BPP (Bounded error Probabilistic Polynomial time) is the set of decision problems P s.t. there is a PTM M s.t. for any instance i of P, if i is a positive instance, then M accepts i for at least 2 3 of the executions if i is a negative instance, then M rejects i for at least 2 3 of the executions Intuitively: a PTM decides a language if the error rate is less than 1 3 Master Info. Complexity Advanced Results 15/26

Randomized Polynomial Time RP [Gill 1977] RP (Randomized Polynomial time) is the set of decision problems P s.t. there is a PTM M s.t. for any instance i of P, if i is a positive instance, then M accepts i for at least 2 3 of the executions if i is a negative instance, then M rejects i for all possible executions Master Info. Complexity Advanced Results 16/26

Randomized Polynomial Time RP [Gill 1977] RP (Randomized Polynomial time) is the set of decision problems P s.t. there is a PTM M s.t. for any instance i of P, if i is a positive instance, then M accepts i for at least 2 3 of the executions if i is a negative instance, then M rejects i for all possible executions Intuitively: a PTM decides a language if the error rate is less than 1 3 for positive instances, and null for negative instances Master Info. Complexity Advanced Results 16/26

Relations with Classical Classes P RP BPP PSPACE RP NP corp conp corp BPP Master Info. Complexity Advanced Results 17/26

Relations with Classical Classes P RP BPP PSPACE RP NP corp conp corp BPP Probabilistic complexity can be used to distinguish between the complexity of problems which are in PSPACE Master Info. Complexity Advanced Results 17/26

References J. T. Gill, Computational Complexity of Probabilistic Turing Machines. SIAM J. Comput. 6(4): 675 695, 1977. Master Info. Complexity Advanced Results 18/26

Outline Boolean Hierarchy Probabilistic Complexity Parameterized Complexity Basics on Parameterized Complexity Backdoors in SAT Master Info. Complexity Advanced Results 19/26

Intuition of Parameterized Complexity When considering a hard problem, sometimes the difficulty to solve it comes from a specific part of the problem. If, for an instance i, we are sure that the hard part is not too big, then maybe the instance i is not so hard Master Info. Complexity Advanced Results 20/26

Intuition of Parameterized Complexity When considering a hard problem, sometimes the difficulty to solve it comes from a specific part of the problem. If, for an instance i, we are sure that the hard part is not too big, then maybe the instance i is not so hard Intuitive Example: SAT If φ is a DNF formula, it is easy to give all its models Master Info. Complexity Advanced Results 20/26

Intuition of Parameterized Complexity When considering a hard problem, sometimes the difficulty to solve it comes from a specific part of the problem. If, for an instance i, we are sure that the hard part is not too big, then maybe the instance i is not so hard Intuitive Example: SAT If φ is a DNF formula, it is easy to give all its models φ (x 1 x 2 x 3 ) is not a DNF, so it is not (directly) easy to know if it is satisfiable Master Info. Complexity Advanced Results 20/26

Intuition of Parameterized Complexity When considering a hard problem, sometimes the difficulty to solve it comes from a specific part of the problem. If, for an instance i, we are sure that the hard part is not too big, then maybe the instance i is not so hard Intuitive Example: SAT If φ is a DNF formula, it is easy to give all its models φ (x 1 x 2 x 3 ) is not a DNF, so it is not (directly) easy to know if it is satisfiable But since we know all the models of φ, it is easy to know if one of them satisfies x 1 x 2 x 3 Master Info. Complexity Advanced Results 20/26

Intuition of Parameterized Complexity When considering a hard problem, sometimes the difficulty to solve it comes from a specific part of the problem. If, for an instance i, we are sure that the hard part is not too big, then maybe the instance i is not so hard Intuitive Example: SAT If φ is a DNF formula, it is easy to give all its models φ (x 1 x 2 x 3 ) is not a DNF, so it is not (directly) easy to know if it is satisfiable But since we know all the models of φ, it is easy to know if one of them satisfies x 1 x 2 x 3 More generally, for φ ψ, with φ a DNF, the size of ψ is a parameter of the difficulty: the smaller ψ, the easier it is to solve SAT for φ ψ Master Info. Complexity Advanced Results 20/26

Parameters of a Problem Instead of measuring the complexity of a problem with just the size of the problem, we consider several parameters Each parameter correspond to a different source of difficulty to solve the problem If some parameters are fixed (or bounded), then the problem becomes simpler than in the general case Master Info. Complexity Advanced Results 21/26

Parameterized Language [Downey and Fellows 1995] Definition Given an alphabet Σ, a parameterized language L is a subset of Σ Σ. For (x, y) L, we call x the main part and y the parameter. Master Info. Complexity Advanced Results 22/26

Parameterized Language [Downey and Fellows 1995] Definition Given an alphabet Σ, a parameterized language L is a subset of Σ Σ. For (x, y) L, we call x the main part and y the parameter. Definition A parameterized language L is fixed-parameter tractable if it can be decided in O(f(k)q(n)), for (x, k) L, with n = x, q(n) a polynomial, and f(k) any function. The class of fixed-parameter tractable problems is called FPT Master Info. Complexity Advanced Results 22/26

Examples of Natural Parameters The size of a database query The number of variables in a logical formula The number of moves in a game [Abrahamson et al. 1995] Master Info. Complexity Advanced Results 23/26

Examples of Natural Parameters The size of a database query The number of variables in a logical formula The number of moves in a game [Abrahamson et al. 1995] The number of Boolean variables to be assigned to move a formula in a tractable class Master Info. Complexity Advanced Results 23/26

Backdoors in SAT Target Class Given C a class of propositional formulas, C is a target class if C can be recognized in polynomial time satisfiability of formulas in C can be checked in polynomial time C is closed under isomorphism (i.e. is two formulas are identical except for the names of the variables, then either both or none belong to C) Definition A strong-c-backdoor of a CNF formula φ is a set of variables B such that for all interpretations τ 2 B, φ τ C If we know a strong-c-backdoor of φ of size k, then the satisfiability of φ is reduced to the satisfiability of 2 k formulas φ 1,..., φ 2 k C. So SAT becomes fixed-parameter tractable in k Master Info. Complexity Advanced Results 24/26

Examples of Base Classes Horn Formulas A Horn formula is a CNF with only Horn clauses, i.e. clauses with at most one positive literal 2CNF Formulas A 2CNF formula is a CNF with only unary and binary clauses This means that if a formula has a backdoor of size k to Horn or 2CNF, then it is FPT in parameter k More details in [Gaspers and Szeider 2012] Master Info. Complexity Advanced Results 25/26

References R. G. Downey and M. R. Fellows, Fixed-Parameter Tractability and Completeness I: Basic Results. SIAM J. Comput. 24(4): 873 921, 1995. K. R. Abrahamson, R. G. Downey and M. R. Fellows, Fixed-Parameter Tractability and Completeness IV: On Completeness for W[P] and PSPACE Analogues. Ann. Pure Appl. Logic 73(3): 235 276, 1995. S. Gaspers and S. Szeider, Backdoors to Satisfaction. The Multivariate Algorithmic Revolution and Beyond, 287 317, 2012. Master Info. Complexity Advanced Results 26/26