Michael Dom
Abstract
In parameterized complexity, each problem instance comes with a parameter k, and a parameterized problem is said to admit a polynomial kernel if there are polynomial time preprocessing rules that reduce the input instance to an instance with size polynomial in k. Many problems have been shown to admit polynomial kernels, but it is only recently that a framework for showing the nonexistence of polynomial kernels for specific problems has been developed by Bodlaender et al. [2009] and Fortnow and Santhanam [2008]. With few exceptions, all known kernelization lower bounds results have been obtained by directly applying this framework. In this article, we show how to combine these results with combinatorial reductions that use colors and IDs in order to prove kernelization lower bounds for a variety of basic problems. To follow we give a summary of our main results. All results are under the assumption that the polynomial hierarchy does not collapse to the third level.
—We show that the Steiner Tree problem parameterized by the number of terminals and solution size k, and the Connected Vertex Cover and Capacitated Vertex Cover problems do not admit a polynomial kernel. The two latter results are surprising because the closely related Vertex Cover problem admits a kernel with at most 2k vertices.
—Alon and Gutner [2008] obtain a kpoly(h) kernel for Dominating Set in H-Minor Free Graphs parameterized by h = |H| and solution size k, and ask whether kernels of smaller size exist. We partially resolve this question by showing that Dominating Set in H-Minor Free Graphs does not admit a kernel with size polynomial in k + h.
—Harnik and Naor [2007] obtain a “compression algorithm” for the Sparse Subset Sum problem. We show that their algorithm is essentially optimal by showing that the instances cannot be compressed further.
—The Hitting Set and Set Cover problems are among the most-studied problems in algorithmics. Both problems admit a kernel of size kO(d) when parameterized by solution size k and maximum set size d. We show that neither of them, along with the Unique Coverage and Bounded Rank Disjoint Sets problems, admits a polynomial kernel.
The existence of polynomial kernels for several of the problems mentioned previously was an open problem explicitly stated in the literature [Alon and Gutner 2008; Betzler 2006; Guo and Niedermeier 2007; Guo et al. 2007; Moser et al. 2007]. Many of our results also rule out the existence of compression algorithms, a notion similar to kernelization defined by Harnik and Naor [2007], for the problems in question.
- F. N. Abu-Khzam. 2007. Kernelization algorithms for d-hitting set problems. In Proc. 10th WADS. LNCS, Vol. 4618. Springer, 434--445. Google Scholar
Digital Library
- J. Alber, M. R. Fellows, and R. Niedermeier. 2004. Polynomial-time data reduction for dominating set. J. ACM 51, 3, 363--384. Google ScholarDigital Library
- N. Alon and S. Gutner. 2008. Kernels for the Dominating Set Problem on Graphs with an Excluded Minor. Technical Report TR08-066, Electronic Colloquium on Computational Complexity.Google Scholar
- N. Betzler. 2006. Steiner Tree Problems in the Analysis of Biological Networks. Diploma thesis, Wilhelm-Schickard-Institut für Informatik, Universität Tübingen, Germany.Google Scholar
- A. Björklund, , T. Husfeldt, P. Kaski, and M. Koivisto. 2007. Fourier meets Möbius: Fast subset convolution. In Proc. 39th STOC. ACM, 67--74. Google ScholarDigital Library
- H. L. Bodlaender, R. G. Downey, M. R. Fellows, and D. Hermelin. 2009. On problems without polynomial kernels. J. Comput. Syst. Sci. 75, 8, 423--434. Google ScholarDigital Library
- H. L. Bodlaender, B. M. P. Jansen, and S. Kratsch. 2011. Cross-composition: A new technique for kernelization lower bounds. In STACS. LIPIcs, Vol. 9. 165--176.Google Scholar
- H. L. Bodlaender, S. Thomassé, and A. Yeo. 2009. Kernel bounds for disjoint cycles and disjoint paths. In ESA. LNCS, Vol. 5757. 635--646.Google Scholar
- J. Chen, H. Fernau, I. A. Kanj, and G. Xia. 2007. Parametric duality and kernelization: Lower bounds and upper bounds on kernel size. SIAM J. Comput. 37, 4, 1077--1106. Google ScholarDigital Library
- J. Chen, I. A. Kanj, and W. Jia. 2001. Vertex Cover: Further observations and further improvements. J. Algorithms 41, 2, 280--301. Google ScholarDigital Library
- M. Cygan, M. Pilipczuk, M. Pilipczuk, and J. Wojtaszczyk. 2010. Kernelization hardness of connectivity problems in d-degenerate graphs. In WG. LNCS, Vol. 6410. 147--158. Google ScholarDigital Library
- H. Dell and D. van Melkebeek. 2010. Satisfiability allows no nontrivial sparsification unless the polynomial-time hierarchy collapses. In STOC. 251--260. Google ScholarDigital Library
- M. Dom, D. Lokshtanov, S. Saurabh, and Y. Villanger. 2008. Capacitated domination and covering: A parameterized perspective. In Proc. 3rd IWPEC. LNCS, Vol. 5018. Springer, 78--90. Google ScholarDigital Library
- R. G. Downey and M. R. Fellows. 1999. Parameterized Complexity. Springer. Google ScholarDigital Library
- A. Drucker. 2012. New limits to classical and quantum instance compression. In FOCS. 609--618. Google ScholarDigital Library
- H. Fernau, F. V. Fomin, D. Lokshtanov, D. Raible, S. Saurabh, and Y. Villanger. 2009. Kernel(s) for problems with no kernel: On out-trees with many leaves. In Proc. 26th STACS. LIPIcs, Vol. 3. 421--432.Google Scholar
- J. Flum and M. Grohe. 2006. Parameterized Complexity Theory. Springer. Google ScholarDigital Library
- F. V. Fomin, D. Kratsch, and G. J. Woeginger. 2004. Exact (exponential) algorithms for the dominating set problem. In Proc. 30th WG. LNCS, Vol. 3353. Springer, 245--256. Google ScholarDigital Library
- L. Fortnow and R. Santhanam. 2008. Infeasibility of instance compression and succinct PCPs for NP. In Proc. 40th STOC. ACM, 133--142. Google ScholarDigital Library
- M. R. Garey and D. S. Johnson. 1979. Computers and Intractability: A Guide to the Theory of NP-Completeness. Freeman. Google ScholarDigital Library
- J. Guo and R. Niedermeier. 2007. Invitation to data reduction and problem kernelization. SIGACT News 38, 1, 31--45. Google ScholarDigital Library
- J. Guo, R. Niedermeier, and S. Wernicke. 2007. Parameterized complexity of Vertex Cover variants. Theory Comput. Syst. 41, 3, 501--520. Google ScholarDigital Library
- D. Harnik and M. Naor. 2007. On the compressibility of NP instances and cryptographic applications. In Proc. 47th FOCS. IEEE, 719--728. Google ScholarDigital Library
- J. Kratochvíl and M. Krivánek. 1988. On the computational complexity of codes in graphs. In Proc. 13th MFCS. LNCS, Vol. 324. Springer, 396--404. Google ScholarDigital Library
- S. Kratsch. 2012. Co-nondeterminism in compositions: A kernelization lower bound for a Ramsey-type problem. In SODA. 114--122. Google ScholarDigital Library
- S. Kratsch and M. Wahlström. 2010. Preprocessing of min ones problems: A dichotomy. In ICALP. LNCS, Vol. 6198. 653--665. Google ScholarDigital Library
- N. Misra, G. Philip, V. Raman, S. Saurabh, and S. Sikdar. 2010. FPT algorithms for connected feedback vertex set. In WALCOM. LNCS, Vol. 5942. 269--280. Google ScholarDigital Library
- D. Mölle, S. Richter, and P. Rossmanith. 2008. Enumerate and expand: Improved algorithms for connected vertex cover and tree cover. Theory Comput. Syst. 43, 2, 234--253. Google ScholarCross Ref
- H. Moser, V. Raman, and S. Sikdar. 2007. The parameterized complexity of the unique coverage problem. In Proc. 18th ISAAC. LNCS, Vol. 4835. Springer, 621--631. Google ScholarDigital Library
- G. L. Nemhauser and L. E. Trotter. 1975. Vertex packings: Structural properties and algorithms. Math. Program. 8, 232--248.Google ScholarDigital Library
- R. Niedermeier. 2006. Invitation to Fixed-Parameter Algorithms. Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
- S. Thomassé. 2009. A quadratic kernel for feedback vertex set. In Proc. 20th SODA. ACM/SIAM, 115--119. Google ScholarDigital Library
Index Terms
- Kernelization Lower Bounds Through Colors and IDs
Recommendations
Lower bounds on kernelization
Preprocessing (data reduction or kernelization) to reduce instance size is one of the most commonly deployed heuristics in the implementation practice to tackle computationally hard problems. However, a systematic theoretical study of them has remained ...
A Completeness Theory for Polynomial (Turing) Kernelization
The framework of Bodlaender et al. (J Comput Sys Sci 75(8):423---434, 2009 ) and Fortnow and Santhanam (J Comput Sys Sci 77(1):91---106, 2011 ) allows us to exclude the existence of polynomial kernels for a range of problems under reasonable complexity-...
Kernelization Lower Bounds by Cross-Composition
We introduce the framework of cross-composition for proving kernelization lower bounds. A classical problem $L$ \and/or-cross-composes into a parameterized problem $\mathcal{Q}$ if it is possible to efficiently construct an instance of $\mathcal{Q}$ with ...
Comments