skip to main content
research-article

One Hierarchy Spawns Another: Graph Deconstructions and the Complexity Classification of Conjunctive Queries

Authors Info & Claims
Published:03 November 2017Publication History
Skip Abstract Section

Abstract

We study the problem of conjunctive query evaluation relative to a class of queries. This problem is formulated here as the relational homomorphism problem relative to a class of structures A, in which each instance must be a pair of structures such that the first structure is an element of A. We present a comprehensive complexity classification of these problems, which strongly links graph-theoretic properties of A to the complexity of the corresponding homomorphism problem. In particular, we define a binary relation on graph classes, which is a preorder, and completely describe the resulting hierarchy given by this relation. This relation is defined in terms of a notion that we call graph deconstruction and that is a variant of the well-known notion of tree decomposition. We then use this hierarchy of graph classes to infer a complexity hierarchy of homomorphism problems that is comprehensive up to a computationally very weak notion of reduction, namely, a parameterized version of quantifier-free, first-order reduction. In doing so, we obtain a significantly refined complexity classification of homomorphism problems as well as a unifying, modular, and conceptually clean treatment of existing complexity classifications. We then present and develop the theory of Ehrenfeucht-Fraïssé-style pebble games, which solve the homomorphism problems where the cores of the structures in A have bounded tree depth. This condition characterizes those classical homomorphism problems decidable in logarithmic space, assuming a hypothesis from parameterized space complexity. Finally, we use our framework to classify the complexity of model checking existential sentences having bounded quantifier rank.

References

  1. Serge Abiteboul, Richard Hull, and Victor Vianu. 1995. Foundations of Databases. Addison-Wesley, New York, NY. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  2. Albert Atserias, Andrei A. Bulatov, and Victor Dalmau. 2007. On the power of k-consistency. In 34th International Colloquium on Automata, Languages and Programming (ICALP’07). 279--290. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  3. Albert Atserias and Mark Weyer. 2009. Decidable relationships between consistency notions for constraint satisfaction problems. In 18th Annual Conference of the European Association for Computer Science Logic (CSL’09). 102--116. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  4. Libor Barto and Marcin Kozik. 2009. Constraint satisfaction problems of bounded width. In 50th Annual IEEE Symposium on Foundations of Computer Science (FOCS’09). 595--603. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  5. Achim Blumensath and Bruno Courcelle. 2010. On the monadic second-order transduction hierarchy. Logical Methods in Computer Science 6, 2. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  6. Hans L. Bodlaender. 1998. A partial k-arboretum of graphs with bounded treewidth. Theoretical Computer Science 209, 1--45. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  7. Andrei A. Bulatov, Andrei A. Krokhin, and Benoit Larose. 2008. Dualities for constraint satisfaction problems. In Complexity of Constraints. 93--124. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  8. Ashok K. Chandra and Philip M. Merlin. 1977. Optimal implementation of conjunctive queries in relational data bases. In 9th Annual ACM Symposium on Theory of Computing (STOC’77). 77--90. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  9. Hubie Chen and Victor Dalmau. 2005. Beyond hypertree width: Decomposition methods without decompositions. In 11th International Conference on Principles and Practice of Constraint Programming. 167--181. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  10. Hubie Chen, Victor Dalmau, and Berit Grußien. 2013. Arc consistency and friends. Journal of Logic and Computation. 23, 1, 87--108. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  11. Hubie Chen and Moritz Müller. 2014. One hierarchy spawns another: Graph deconstructions and the complexity classification of conjunctive queries. Joint 23rd EACSL Computer Science Logic and 29th ACM/IEEE Symposium Logic in Computer Science (CSL-LICS’14), 32:1--32:10. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  12. Hubie Chen and Moritz Müller. 2015. The fine classification of conjunctive queries and parameterized logarithmic space complexity. Transactions on Computation Theory 7, 2, Article No. 7. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  13. Yijia Chen, Jörg Flum, and Martin Grohe. 2003. Bounded nondeterminism and alternation in parameterized complexity theory. In 18th IEEE Conference on Computational Complexity (CCC’03). 13--29.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  14. Yijia Chen and Moritz Müller. 2014. Bounded variable logic, parameterized logarithmic space, and Savitch’s theorem. In 39th International Symposium Mathematical Foundations of Computer Science (MFCS’14). Lecture Notes in Computer Science, Vol. 8634, Springer, Berlin, 183--195.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  15. Victor Dalmau. 2005. Linear datalog and bounded path duality of relational structures. Logical Methods in Computer Science 1, 1. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  16. Victor Dalmau, Phokion G. Kolaitis, and Moshe Y. Vardi. 2002. Constraint satisfaction, bounded treewidth, and finite-variable logics. In Principles and Practice of Constraint Programming (CP). Lecture Notes in Computer Science, Vol. 2470. Springer, Berlin, 310--326. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  17. Anuj Dawar and Yuguo He. 2009. Parameterized complexity classes under logical reductions. In 34th International Symposium Mathematical Foundations of Computer Science (MFCS’09). Lecture Notes in Computer Science, Vol. 5734, Springer, Berlin, 258--269. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  18. Reinhard Diestel. 2012. Graph Theory, 4th Edition. Graduate Texts in Mathematics, Vol. 173. Springer. I--XVIII, 1--436 pages.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  19. Rodney G. Downey and Michael R. Fellows. 2013. Fundamentals of Parameterized Complexity. Springer. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  20. Heinz-Dieter Ebbinghaus and Jörg Flum. 1995. Finite Model Theory. Springer.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  21. Michael Elberfeld, Cristoph Stockhusen, and Till Tantau. 2012. On the space complexity of parameterized problems. 7th International Symposium of Parameterized and Exact Computation (IPEC’12). Lecture Notes in Computer Science, Vol. 7535, Springer, Berlin, 206--217. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  22. Jörg Flum and Martin Grohe. 2001. Fixed-parameter tractability, definability and model checking. SIAM Journal on Computing 31, 113--145. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  23. Jörg Flum and Martin Grohe. 2003. Describing parameterized complexity classes. Information and Computation 187, 2, 291--319. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  24. Jörg Flum and Martin Grohe. 2006. Parameterized Complexity Theory. Springer. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  25. Georg Gottlob, Nicola Leone, and Francesco Scarcello. 2001. The complexity of acyclic conjunctive queries. Journal of the ACM 48, 3, 431--498. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  26. Georg Gottlob, Nicola Leone, and Francesco Scarcello. 2002. Hypertree decompositions and tractable queries. Journal of Computer and System Sciences 64, 3, 579--627. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  27. Martin Grohe. 2007. The complexity of homomorphism and constraint satisfaction problems seen from the other side. Journal of the ACM 54, 1. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  28. Martin Grohe, Thomas Schwentick, and Luc Segoufin. 2001. When is the evaluation of conjunctive queries tractable? In 33rd Annual ACM Symposium on Theory of Computing (STOC’01). 657--666. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  29. Neil Immerman. Descriptive Complexity. Springer, 1998.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  30. Phokion G. Kolaitis and Moshe Y. Vardi. 1995. On the expressive power of Datalog: Tools and a case study. Journal of Computer and System Sciences 51, 110--134. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  31. Phokion G. Kolaitis and Moshe Y. Vardi. 2000a. Conjunctive-query containment and constraint satisfaction. Journal of Computer and System Sciences 61, 302--332. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  32. Phokion G. Kolaitis and Moshe Y. Vardi. 2000b. A game-theoretic approach to constraint satisfaction. In 17th National Conference on AI. 175--181. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  33. Dániel Marx. 2013. Tractable hypergraph properties for constraint satisfaction and conjunctive queries. Journal of the ACM 60, 6, Article No. 42. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  34. Jaroslav Nešetřil and Patrice Ossona de Mendez. Tree depth, subgraph coloring, and homomorphism bounds. European Journal of Combinatorics 27, 6, 1022--1041. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  35. Christos H. Papadimitriou and Mihalis Yannakakis. 1999. On the complexity of database queries. Journal of Computer and System Sciences 58, 3, 407--427. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  36. Neil Robertson and P. D. Seymour. 1983. Graph minors. I. Excluding a forest. Journal of Combinatorial Theory, Series B 35, 1, 39--61. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  37. Neil Robertson and P. D. Seymour. 1986. Graph minors. V. Excluding a planar graph. Journal of Combinatorial Theory, Series B 41, 1, 92--114, Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  38. Nicole Schweikardt, Thomas Schwentick, and Luc Segoufin. 2009. Database theory: Query languages. In Algorithms and Theory of Computation Handbook (2nd ed.), Mikhail J. Atallah and Marina Blanton (Eds.). Vol. 2: Special Topics and Techniques. CRC Press, Boca Raton, FL.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library

Index Terms

  1. One Hierarchy Spawns Another: Graph Deconstructions and the Complexity Classification of Conjunctive Queries

      Recommendations

      Comments

      Login options

      Check if you have access through your login credentials or your institution to get full access on this article.

      Sign in

      Full Access

      • Published in

        cover image ACM Transactions on Computational Logic
        ACM Transactions on Computational Logic  Volume 18, Issue 4
        October 2017
        251 pages
        ISSN:1529-3785
        EISSN:1557-945X
        DOI:10.1145/3143777
        • Editor:
        • Orna Kupferman
        Issue’s Table of Contents

        Copyright © 2017 ACM

        Permission to make digital or hard copies of all or part of this work for personal or classroom use is granted without fee provided that copies are not made or distributed for profit or commercial advantage and that copies bear this notice and the full citation on the first page. Copyrights for components of this work owned by others than ACM must be honored. Abstracting with credit is permitted. To copy otherwise, or republish, to post on servers or to redistribute to lists, requires prior specific permission and/or a fee. Request permissions from [email protected]

        Publisher

        Association for Computing Machinery

        New York, NY, United States

        Publication History

        • Published: 3 November 2017
        • Revised: 1 September 2017
        • Accepted: 1 September 2017
        • Received: 1 March 2016
        Published in tocl Volume 18, Issue 4

        Permissions

        Request permissions about this article.

        Request Permissions

        Check for updates

        Qualifiers

        • research-article
        • Research
        • Refereed

      PDF Format

      View or Download as a PDF file.

      PDF

      eReader

      View online with eReader.

      eReader