A Holant Dichotomy: Is the FKT Algorithm Universal?

May 12, 2015 ยท The Ethereal ยท ๐Ÿ› IEEE Annual Symposium on Foundations of Computer Science

๐Ÿ”ฎ THE ETHEREAL: The Ethereal
Pure theory โ€” exists on a plane beyond code

"No code URL or promise found in abstract"

Evidence collected by the PWNC Scanner

Authors Jin-Yi Cai, Zhiguo Fu, Heng Guo, Tyson Williams arXiv ID 1505.02993 Category cs.CC: Computational Complexity Cross-listed cs.DS Citations 32 Venue IEEE Annual Symposium on Foundations of Computer Science Last Checked 1 month ago
Abstract
We prove a complexity dichotomy for complex-weighted Holant problems with an arbitrary set of symmetric constraint functions on Boolean variables. This dichotomy is specifically to answer the question: Is the FKT algorithm under a holographic transformation a \emph{universal} strategy to obtain polynomial-time algorithms for problems over planar graphs that are intractable in general? This dichotomy is a culmination of previous ones, including those for Spin Systems, Holant, and #CSP. A recurring theme has been that a holographic reduction to FKT is a universal strategy. Surprisingly, for planar Holant, we discover new planar tractable problems that are not expressible by a holographic reduction to FKT. In previous work, an important tool was a dichotomy for #CSP^d, which denotes #CSP where every variable appears a multiple of d times. However its proof violates planarity. We prove a dichotomy for planar #CSP^2. We apply this planar #CSP^2 dichotomy in the proof of the planar Holant dichotomy. As a special case of our new planar tractable problems, counting perfect matchings (#PM) over k-uniform hypergraphs is polynomial-time computable when the incidence graph is planar and k >= 5. The same problem is #P-hard when k=3 or k=4, which is also a consequence of our dichotomy. When k=2, it becomes #PM over planar graphs and is tractable again. More generally, over hypergraphs with specified hyperedge sizes and the same planarity assumption, #PM is polynomial-time computable if the greatest common divisor of all hyperedge sizes is at least 5.
Community shame:
Not yet rated
Community Contributions

Found the code? Know the venue? Think something is wrong? Let us know!

๐Ÿ“œ Similar Papers

In the same crypt โ€” Computational Complexity