 Publication Date:
 NSFPAR ID:
 10121531
 Journal Name:
 IEEE Symposium on Foundations of Computer Science
 Sponsoring Org:
 National Science Foundation
More Like this

We study local symmetry breaking problems in the Congest model, focusing on ruling set problems, which generalize the fundamental Maximal Independent Set (MIS) problem. The time (round) complexity of MIS (and ruling sets) have attracted much attention in the Local model. Indeed, recent results (Barenboim et al., FOCS 2012, Ghaffari SODA 2016) for the MIS problem have tried to break the longstanding O(log n)round "barrier" achieved by Luby's algorithm, but these yield o(log n)round complexity only when the maximum degree Delta is somewhat small relative to n. More importantly, these results apply only in the Local model. In fact, the best known time bound in the Congest model is still O(log n) (via Luby's algorithm) even for moderately small Delta (i.e., for Delta = Omega(log n) and Delta = o(n)). Furthermore, message complexity has been largely ignored in the context of local symmetry breaking. Luby's algorithm takes O(m) messages on medge graphs and this is the best known bound with respect to messages. Our work is motivated by the following central question: can we break the Theta(log n) time complexity barrier and the Theta(m) message complexity barrier in the Congest model for MIS or closelyrelated symmetry breaking problems? This papermore »

We study local symmetry breaking problems in the Congest model, focusing on ruling set problems, which generalize the fundamental Maximal Independent Set (MIS) problem. The time (round) complexity of MIS (and ruling sets) have attracted much attention in the Local model. Indeed, recent results (Barenboim et al., FOCS 2012, Ghaffari SODA 2016) for the MIS problem have tried to break the longstanding O(log n)round “barrier” achieved by Luby’s algorithm, but these yield o(log n)round complexity only when the maximum degree is somewhat small relative to n. More importantly, these results apply only in the Local model. In fact, the best known time bound in the Congest model is still O(log n) (via Luby’s algorithm) even for moderately small (i.e., for = (log n) and = o(n)). Furthermore, message complexity has been largely ignored in the context of local symmetry breaking. Luby’s algorithm takes O(m) messages on medge graphs and this is the best known bound with respect to messages. Our work is motivated by the following central question: can we break the (log n) time complexity barrier and the (m) message complexity barrier in the Congest model for MIS or closelyrelated symmetry breaking problems? This papermore »

In recent years several compressed indexes based on variants of the BurrowsWheeler transformation have been introduced. Some of these are used to index structures far more complex than a single string, as was originally done with the FMindex [Ferragina and Manzini, J. ACM 2005]. As such, there has been an increasing effort to better understand under which conditions such an indexing scheme is possible. This has led to the introduction of Wheeler graphs [Gagie et al., Theor. Comput. Sci., 2017]. Gagie et al. showed that de Bruijn graphs, generalized compressed suffix arrays, and several other BWT related structures can be represented as Wheeler graphs and that Wheeler graphs can be indexed in a way which is spaceefficient. Hence, being able to recognize whether a given graph is a Wheeler graph, or being able to approximate a given graph by a Wheeler graph, could have numerous applications in indexing. Here we resolve the open question of whether there exists an efficient algorithm for recognizing if a given graph is a Wheeler graph. We present  The problem of recognizing whether a given graph G=(V,E) is a Wheeler graph is NPcomplete for any edge label alphabet of size sigma >= 2, evenmore »

Abstract In a Merlin–Arthur proof system, the proof verifier (Arthur) accepts valid proofs (from Merlin) with probability 1, and rejects invalid proofs with probability arbitrarily close to 1. The running time of such a system is defined to be the length of Merlin’s proof plus the running time of Arthur. We provide new Merlin–Arthur proof systems for some key problems in finegrained complexity. In several cases our proof systems have optimal running time. Our main results include:
Certifying that a list of
n integers has no 3SUM solution can be done in Merlin–Arthur time . Previously, Carmosino et al. [ITCS 2016] showed that the problem has a nondeterministic algorithm running in$$\tilde{O}(n)$$ $\stackrel{~}{O}\left(n\right)$ time (that is, there is a proof system with proofs of length$$\tilde{O}(n^{1.5})$$ $\stackrel{~}{O}\left({n}^{1.5}\right)$ and a deterministic verifier running in$$\tilde{O}(n^{1.5})$$ $\stackrel{~}{O}\left({n}^{1.5}\right)$ time).$$\tilde{O}(n^{1.5})$$ $\stackrel{~}{O}\left({n}^{1.5}\right)$Counting the number of
k cliques with total edge weight equal to zero in ann node graph can be done in Merlin–Arthur time (where$${\tilde{O}}(n^{\lceil k/2\rceil })$$ $\stackrel{~}{O}\left({n}^{\lceil k/2\rceil}\right)$ ). For odd$$k\ge 3$$ $k\ge 3$k , this bound can be further improved for sparse graphs: for example, counting the number of zeroweight triangles in anm edge graph can be done in Merlin–Arthur time . Previous Merlin–Arthur protocols by Williams [CCC’16] and Björklund and Kaski [PODC’16] could only count$${\tilde{O}}(m)$$ $\stackrel{~}{O}\left(m\right)$k cliques in unweighted graphs, and had worse running times for smallk .Computing the AllPairsmore »
Certifying that an
n variablek CNF is unsatisfiable can be done in Merlin–Arthur time . We also observe an algebrization barrier for the previous$$2^{n/2  n/O(k)}$$ ${2}^{n/2n/O\left(k\right)}$ time Merlin–Arthur protocol of R. Williams [CCC’16] for$$2^{n/2}\cdot \textrm{poly}(n)$$ ${2}^{n/2}\xb7\text{poly}\left(n\right)$ SAT: in particular, his protocol algebrizes, and we observe there is no algebrizing protocol for$$\#$$ $\#$k UNSAT running in time. Therefore we have to exploit nonalgebrizing properties to obtain our new protocol.$$2^{n/2}/n^{\omega (1)}$$ ${2}^{n/2}/{n}^{\omega \left(1\right)}$ Due to the centrality of these problems in finegrained complexity, our results have consequences for many other problems of interest. For example, our work implies that certifying there is no Subset Sum solution toCertifying a Quantified Boolean Formula is true can be done in Merlin–Arthur time
. Previously, the only nontrivial result known along these lines was an Arthur–Merlin–Arthur protocol (where Merlin’s proof depends on some of Arthur’s coins) running in$$2^{4n/5}\cdot \textrm{poly}(n)$$ ${2}^{4n/5}\xb7\text{poly}\left(n\right)$ time.$$2^{2n/3}\cdot \textrm{poly}(n)$$ ${2}^{2n/3}\xb7\text{poly}\left(n\right)$n integers can be done in Merlin–Arthur time , improving on the previous best protocol by Nederlof [IPL 2017] which took$$2^{n/3}\cdot \textrm{poly}(n)$$ ${2}^{n/3}\xb7\text{poly}\left(n\right)$ time.$$2^{0.49991n}\cdot \textrm{poly}(n)$$ ${2}^{0.49991n}\xb7\text{poly}\left(n\right)$ 
A streaming algorithm is considered to be adversarially robust if it provides correct outputs with high probability even when the stream updates are chosen by an adversary who may observe and react to the past outputs of the algorithm. We grow the burgeoning body of work on such algorithms in a new direction by studying robust algorithms for the problem of maintaining a valid vertex coloring of an nvertex graph given as a stream of edges. Following standard practice, we focus on graphs with maximum degree at most Δ and aim for colorings using a small number f(Δ) of colors. A recent breakthrough (Assadi, Chen, and Khanna; SODA 2019) shows that in the standard, nonrobust, streaming setting, (Δ+1)colorings can be obtained while using only Õ(n) space. Here, we prove that an adversarially robust algorithm running under a similar space bound must spend almost Ω(Δ²) colors and that robust O(Δ)coloring requires a linear amount of space, namely Ω(nΔ). We in fact obtain a more general lower bound, trading off the space usage against the number of colors used. From a complexitytheoretic standpoint, these lower bounds provide (i) the first significant separation between adversarially robust algorithms and ordinary randomized algorithms for amore »