On the connection between interval size functions and path counting

We investigate the complexity of hard (#P-complete) counting problems that have easy decision version. By ‘easy decision,’ we mean that deciding whether the result of counting is nonzero is in P. This property is shared by several well-known problems, such as counting the number of perfect matchings in a given graph or counting the number of satisfying assignments of a given DNF formula. We focus on classes of such hard-to-count easy-to-decide problems which emerged through two seemingly disparate approaches: one taken by Hemaspaandra et al. (SIAM J Comput 36(5):1264–1300, 2007), who defined classes of functions that count the size of intervals of ordered strings, and one followed by Kiayias et al. (Lect Notes Comput Sci 2563:453–463, 2001), who defined the classTotP, consisting of functions that count the total number of paths of NP computations. We provide inclusion and separation relations between TotP and interval size counting classes, by means of new classes that we define in this work. Our results imply that many known #P-complete problems with easy decision are contained in the classes defined by Hemaspaandra et al., but are unlikely to be complete for these classes under reductions under which these classes are downward closed, e.g., parsimonious reductions. This, applied to the #MONSAT problem, partially answers an open question of Hemaspaandra et al. We also define a new class of interval size functions which strictly contains FP and is strictly contained in TotP under reasonable complexity-theoretic assumptions. We show that this new class contains hard counting problems.

[1]  Osamu Watanabe,et al.  Polynomial Time 1-Turing Reductions from #PH to #P , 1992, Theor. Comput. Sci..

[2]  Kai Virtanen,et al.  Manuscript received... , 2009 .

[3]  Leslie G. Valiant,et al.  The Complexity of Computing the Permanent , 1979, Theor. Comput. Sci..

[4]  Aggelos Kiayias,et al.  Acceptor-Definable Counting Classes , 2001, Panhellenic Conference on Informatics.

[5]  K. V. Subrahmanyam,et al.  Descriptive Complexity of #P Functions , 1995, J. Comput. Syst. Sci..

[6]  Martin E. Dyer,et al.  On the relative complexity of approximate counting problems , 2000, APPROX.

[7]  Lane A. Hemaspaandra,et al.  The Complexity of Computing the Size of an Interval , 2007, SIAM J. Comput..

[8]  Lane A. Hemaspaandra,et al.  The Complexity Theory Companion , 2002, Texts in Theoretical Computer Science An EATCS Series.

[9]  Martin E. Dyer,et al.  The Relative Complexity of Approximate Counting Problems , 2000, Algorithmica.

[10]  Eric Vigoda,et al.  A polynomial-time approximation algorithm for the permanent of a matrix with nonnegative entries , 2004, JACM.

[11]  Pinyan Lu,et al.  FPTAS for Counting Weighted Edge Covers , 2014, ESA.

[12]  Carme Àlvarez,et al.  A Very Hard log-Space Counting Class , 1993, Theor. Comput. Sci..

[13]  Richard M. Karp,et al.  Monte-Carlo Approximation Algorithms for Enumeration Problems , 1989, J. Algorithms.

[14]  Aris Pagourtzis,et al.  On the Connection between Interval Size Functions and Path Counting , 2009, TAMC.

[15]  Dror Weitz,et al.  Counting independent sets up to the tree threshold , 2006, STOC '06.

[16]  Seinosuke Toda,et al.  PP is as Hard as the Polynomial-Time Hierarchy , 1991, SIAM J. Comput..

[17]  Leslie G. Valiant,et al.  The Complexity of Enumeration and Reliability Problems , 1979, SIAM J. Comput..

[18]  Aris Pagourtzis,et al.  The Complexity of Counting Functions with Easy Decision Version , 2006, MFCS.

[19]  Harald Hempel,et al.  The Operators min and max on the Polynomial Hierarchy , 1997, STACS.