Promise Constraint Satisfaction: Algebraic Structure and a Symmetric Boolean Dichotomy

A classic result due to Schaefer (1978) classifies all constraint satisfaction problems (CSPs) over the Boolean domain as being either in $\mathsf{P}$ or $\mathsf{NP}$-hard. This paper considers a promise-problem variant of CSPs called PCSPs. A PCSP over a finite set of pairs of constraints $\Gamma$ consists of a pair $(\Psi_P, \Psi_Q)$ of CSPs with the same set of variables such that for every $(P, Q) \in \Gamma$, $P(x_{i_1}, ..., x_{i_k})$ is a clause of $\Psi_P$ if and only if $Q(x_{i_1}, ..., x_{i_k})$ is a clause of $\Psi_Q$. The promise problem $\operatorname{PCSP}(\Gamma)$ is to distinguish, given $(\Psi_P, \Psi_Q)$, between the cases $\Psi_P$ is satisfiable and $\Psi_Q$ is unsatisfiable. Many natural problems including approximate graph and hypergraph coloring can be placed in this framework. This paper is motivated by the pursuit of understanding the computational complexity of Boolean promise CSPs. As our main result, we show that $\operatorname{PCSP}(\Gamma)$ exhibits a dichotomy (it is either polynomial time solvable or $\mathsf{NP}$-hard) when the relations in $\Gamma$ are symmetric and allow for negations of variables. We achieve our dichotomy theorem by extending the weak polymorphism framework of Austrin, Guruswami, and H\aa stad [FOCS '14] which itself is a generalization of the algebraic approach to study CSPs. In both the algorithm and hardness portions of our proof, we incorporate new ideas and techniques not utilized in the CSP case. Furthermore, we show that the computational complexity of any promise CSP (over arbitrary finite domains) is captured entirely by its weak polymorphisms, a feature known as Galois correspondence, as well as give necessary and sufficient conditions for the structure of this set of weak polymorphisms. Such insights call us to question the existence of a general dichotomy for Boolean PCSPs.

[1]  Prasad Raghavendra,et al.  Optimal algorithms and inapproximability results for every CSP? , 2008, STOC.

[2]  Venkatesan Guruswami,et al.  (2+ε)-Sat Is NP-hard , 2014, SIAM J. Comput..

[3]  Sanjeev Arora,et al.  Subexponential Algorithms for Unique Games and Related Problems , 2010, 2010 IEEE 51st Annual Symposium on Foundations of Computer Science.

[4]  Irit Dinur,et al.  The Hardness of 3-Uniform Hypergraph Coloring , 2005, Comb..

[5]  Tomás Feder,et al.  Dichotomy for Digraph Homomorphism Problems (two algorithms) , 2017 .

[6]  Libor Barto,et al.  Constraint Satisfaction Problems Solvable by Local Consistency Methods , 2014, JACM.

[7]  Thomas J. Schaefer,et al.  The complexity of satisfiability problems , 1978, STOC.

[8]  Andrei A. Bulatov,et al.  A Simple Algorithm for Mal'tsev Constraints , 2006, SIAM J. Comput..

[9]  Subhash Khot On the power of unique 2-prover 1-round games , 2002, STOC '02.

[10]  Jaroslav Nesetril,et al.  On the complexity of H-coloring , 1990, J. Comb. Theory, Ser. B.

[11]  Libor Barto,et al.  The CSP Dichotomy Holds for Digraphs with No Sources and No Sinks (A Positive Answer to a Conjecture of Bang-Jensen and Hell) , 2008, SIAM J. Comput..

[12]  Andrei A. Bulatov,et al.  Complexity of conservative constraint satisfaction problems , 2011, TOCL.

[13]  Venkatesan Guruswami,et al.  New Hardness Results for Graph and Hypergraph Colorings , 2016, CCC.

[14]  Peter Jeavons,et al.  Classifying the Complexity of Constraints Using Finite Algebras , 2005, SIAM J. Comput..

[15]  Prasad Raghavendra,et al.  Combinatorial Optimization Algorithms via Polymorphisms , 2015, Electron. Colloquium Comput. Complex..

[16]  A BulatovAndrei A dichotomy theorem for constraint satisfaction problems on a 3-element set , 2006 .

[17]  Andrei A. Bulatov,et al.  Conservative constraint satisfaction re-revisited , 2014, J. Comput. Syst. Sci..

[18]  Manuel Bodirsky,et al.  Non-dichotomies in Constraint Satisfaction Complexity , 2008, ICALP.

[19]  Sangxia Huang,et al.  Improved Hardness of Approximating Chromatic Number , 2013, APPROX-RANDOM.

[20]  Richard E. Ladner,et al.  On the Structure of Polynomial Time Reducibility , 1975, JACM.

[21]  Stanislav Zivny,et al.  The complexity of finite-valued CSPs , 2013, STOC '13.

[22]  Hubie Chen A rendezvous of logic, complexity, and algebra , 2006, SIGA.

[23]  Todd Niven,et al.  A finer reduction of constraint problems to digraphs , 2014, Log. Methods Comput. Sci..

[24]  Tomás Feder,et al.  The Computational Structure of Monotone Monadic SNP and Constraint Satisfaction: A Study through Datalog and Group Theory , 1999, SIAM J. Comput..

[25]  Nathan Linial,et al.  On the Hardness of Approximating the Chromatic Number , 2000, Comb..

[26]  Emil L. Post The two-valued iterative systems of mathematical logic , 1942 .

[27]  Libor Barto,et al.  Constraint Satisfaction Problems of Bounded Width , 2009, 2009 50th Annual IEEE Symposium on Foundations of Computer Science.

[28]  Andrei A. Bulatov,et al.  A Dichotomy Theorem for Nonuniform CSPs , 2017, 2017 IEEE 58th Annual Symposium on Foundations of Computer Science (FOCS).

[29]  Scott Aaronson,et al.  Is P Versus NP Formally Independent? , 2003, Bull. EATCS.

[30]  Tomás Feder,et al.  Dichotomy for Digraph Homomorphism Problems , 2017, ArXiv.

[31]  Peter Jeavons,et al.  On the Algebraic Structure of Combinatorial Problems , 1998, Theor. Comput. Sci..

[32]  Peter Jeavons,et al.  Constraint Satisfaction Problems and Finite Algebras , 2000, ICALP.

[33]  Vladimir Kolmogorov,et al.  The Complexity of General-Valued CSPs , 2015, 2015 IEEE 56th Annual Symposium on Foundations of Computer Science.

[34]  Venkatesan Guruswami,et al.  On the Hardness of 4-Coloring a 3-Colorable Graph , 2004, SIAM J. Discret. Math..

[35]  M. Maróti,et al.  Existence theorems for weakly symmetric operations , 2008 .