(1 + Ω(1))-Αpproximation to MAX-CUT Requires Linear Space

We consider the problem of estimating the value of MAX-CUT in a graph in the streaming model of computation. We show that there exists a constant ϵ* > 0 such that any randomized streaming algorithm that computes a (1 + ϵ*)-approximation to MAX-CUT requires Ω(n) space on an n vertex graph. By contrast, there are algorithms that produce a (1 + ϵ)-approximation in space O(n/ϵ2) for every ϵ > 0. Our result is the first linear space lower bound for the task of approximating the max cut value and partially answers an open question from the literature [2]. The prior state of the art ruled out (2 − ϵ)-approximation in [EQUATION] space or (1 + ϵ)-approximation in n1−O(ϵ) space, for any ϵ > 0. Previous lower bounds for the MAX-CUT problem relied, in essence, on a lower bound on the communication complexity of the following task: Several players are each given some edges of a graph and they wish to determine if the union of these edges is ϵ-close to forming a bipartite graph, using one-way communication. The previous works proved a lower bound of [EQUATION] for this task when ϵ = 1/2, and n1−O(ϵ) for every ϵ > 0, even when one of the players is given a candidate bipartition of the graph and the graph is promised to be bipartite with respect to this partition or ϵ-far from bipartite. This added information was essential in enabling the previous analyses but also yields a weak bound since, with this extra information, there is an n1−O(ϵ) communication protocol for this problem. In this work, we give an Ω(n) lower bound on the communication complexity of the original problem (without the extra information) for ϵ = Ω(1) in the three-player setting. Obtaining this Ω(n) lower bound on the communication complexity is the main technical result in this paper. We achieve it by a delicate choice of distributions on instances as well as a novel use of the convolution theorem from Fourier analysis combined with graph-theoretic considerations to analyze the communication complexity.

[1]  Sudipto Guha,et al.  Graph Sparsification in the Semi-streaming Model , 2009, ICALP.

[2]  Sanjeev Khanna,et al.  Approximating matching size from random streams , 2014, SODA.

[3]  Krzysztof Onak,et al.  Streaming Algorithms for Estimating the Matching Size in Planar Graphs and Beyond , 2015, SODA.

[4]  Sofya Vorotnikova,et al.  Kernelization via Sampling with Applications to Dynamic Graph Streams , 2015, ArXiv.

[5]  Qin Zhang,et al.  Communication Complexity of Approximate Maximum Matching in Distributed Graph Data , 2013 .

[6]  Jonathan A. Kelner,et al.  Spectral Sparsification in the Semi-streaming Setting , 2012, Theory of Computing Systems.

[7]  Wei Yu,et al.  The streaming complexity of cycle counting, sorting by reversals, and other problems , 2011, SODA '11.

[8]  Andrew McGregor,et al.  Graph stream algorithms: a survey , 2014, SGMD.

[9]  Noga Alon,et al.  The Space Complexity of Approximating the Frequency Moments , 1999 .

[10]  Christian Konrad,et al.  Maximum Matching in Turnstile Streams , 2015, ESA.

[11]  Sanjeev Khanna,et al.  Streaming Lower Bounds for Approximating MAX-CUT , 2014, SODA.

[12]  Ashish Goel,et al.  On the communication and streaming complexity of maximum bipartite matching , 2012, SODA.

[13]  Mikhail Kapralov,et al.  Better bounds for matchings in the streaming model , 2012, SODA.

[14]  Robert Krauthgamer,et al.  Sketching Cuts in Graphs and Hypergraphs , 2014, ITCS.

[15]  Nikhil Srivastava,et al.  Graph Sparsification by Effective Resistances , 2011, SIAM J. Comput..

[16]  Yin Tat Lee,et al.  Single Pass Spectral Sparsification in Dynamic Streams , 2014, 2014 IEEE 55th Annual Symposium on Foundations of Computer Science.

[17]  Rick Durrett,et al.  Random Graph Dynamics (Cambridge Series in Statistical and Probabilistic Mathematics) , 2006 .

[18]  Sudipto Guha,et al.  Analyzing graph structure via linear measurements , 2012, SODA.

[19]  Ran Raz,et al.  Exponential Separation for One-Way Quantum Communication Complexity, with Applications to Cryptography , 2008, SIAM J. Comput..

[20]  Yang Li,et al.  Tight Bounds for Linear Sketches of Approximate Matchings , 2015, ArXiv.

[21]  David R. Karger,et al.  Approximating s-t minimum cuts in Õ(n2) time , 1996, STOC '96.

[22]  David P. Woodruff,et al.  Spanners and sparsifiers in dynamic streams , 2014, PODC.

[23]  Sudipto Guha,et al.  Linear programming in the semi-streaming model with application to the maximum matching problem , 2011, Inf. Comput..

[24]  Nathan Linial,et al.  The Influence of Variables on Boolean Functions (Extended Abstract) , 1988, FOCS 1988.

[25]  Venkatesan Guruswami,et al.  Superlinear Lower Bounds for Multipass Graph Processing , 2013, Computational Complexity Conference.