Robust algorithms with polynomial loss for near-unanimity CSPs
July 16, 2016 Β· Declared Dead Β· π ACM-SIAM Symposium on Discrete Algorithms
"No code URL or promise found in abstract"
Evidence collected by the PWNC Scanner
Authors
VΓctor Dalmau, Marcin Kozik, Andrei Krokhin, Konstantin Makarychev, Yury Makarychev, Jakub OprΕ‘al
arXiv ID
1607.04787
Category
cs.DS: Data Structures & Algorithms
Cross-listed
cs.CC,
cs.LO
Citations
16
Venue
ACM-SIAM Symposium on Discrete Algorithms
Last Checked
3 months ago
Abstract
An instance of the Constraint Satisfaction Problem (CSP) is given by a family of constraints on overlapping sets of variables, and the goal is to assign values from a fixed domain to the variables so that all constraints are satisfied. In the optimization version, the goal is to maximize the number of satisfied constraints. An approximation algorithm for CSP is called robust if it outputs an assignment satisfying a $(1-g(\varepsilon))$-fraction of constraints on any $(1-\varepsilon)$-satisfiable instance, where the loss function $g$ is such that $g(\varepsilon)\rightarrow 0$ as $\varepsilon\rightarrow 0$. We study how the robust approximability of CSPs depends on the set of constraint relations allowed in instances, the so-called constraint language. All constraint languages admitting a robust polynomial-time algorithm (with some $g$) have been characterised by Barto and Kozik, with the general bound on the loss $g$ being doubly exponential, specifically $g(\varepsilon)=O((\log\log(1/\varepsilon))/\log(1/\varepsilon))$. It is natural to ask when a better loss can be achieved: in particular, polynomial loss $g(\varepsilon)=O(\varepsilon^{1/k})$ for some constant $k$. In this paper, we consider CSPs with a constraint language having a near-unanimity polymorphism. We give two randomized robust algorithms with polynomial loss for such CSPs: one works for any near-unanimity polymorphism and the parameter $k$ in the loss depends on the size of the domain and the arity of the relations in $Ξ$, while the other works for a special ternary near-unanimity operation called dual discriminator with $k=2$ for any domain size. In the latter case, the CSP is a common generalisation of Unique Games with a fixed domain and 2-SAT. In the former case, we use the algebraic approach to the CSP. Both cases use the standard semidefinite programming relaxation for CSP.
Community Contributions
Found the code? Know the venue? Think something is wrong? Let us know!
π Similar Papers
In the same crypt β Data Structures & Algorithms
π
π
The Cartographer
R.I.P.
π»
Ghosted
Route Planning in Transportation Networks
R.I.P.
π»
Ghosted
Near-linear time approximation algorithms for optimal transport via Sinkhorn iteration
R.I.P.
π»
Ghosted
Hierarchical Clustering: Objective Functions and Algorithms
R.I.P.
π»
Ghosted
Graph Isomorphism in Quasipolynomial Time
π
π
The Cartographer
Simulation optimization: A review of algorithms and applications
Died the same way β π» Ghosted
R.I.P.
π»
Ghosted
Federated Learning: Strategies for Improving Communication Efficiency
R.I.P.
π»
Ghosted
In-Datacenter Performance Analysis of a Tensor Processing Unit
R.I.P.
π»
Ghosted
Deep Convolutional Neural Networks for Computer-Aided Detection: CNN Architectures, Dataset Characteristics and Transfer Learning
R.I.P.
π»
Ghosted