Rigorous location of phase transitions in hard optimization problems

It is widely believed that for many optimization problems, no algorithm is substantially more efficient than exhaustive search. This means that finding optimal solutions for many practical problems is completely beyond any current or projected computational capacity. To understand the origin of this extreme ‘hardness’, computer scientists, mathematicians and physicists have been investigating for two decades a connection between computational complexity and phase transitions in random instances of constraint satisfaction problems. Here we present a mathematically rigorous method for locating such phase transitions. Our method works by analysing the distribution of distances between pairs of solutions as constraints are added. By identifying critical behaviour in the evolution of this distribution, we can pinpoint the threshold location for a number of problems, including the two most-studied ones: random k-SAT and random graph colouring. Our results prove that the heuristic predictions of statistical physics in this context are essentially correct. Moreover, we establish that random instances of constraint satisfaction problems have solutions well beyond the reach of any analysed algorithm.

[1]  Stephen A. Cook,et al.  The complexity of theorem-proving procedures , 1971, STOC.

[2]  P. Anderson,et al.  Application of statistical mechanics to NP-complete problems in combinatorial optimisation , 1986 .

[3]  K. Appel,et al.  Every Planar Map Is Four Colorable , 2019, Mathematical Solitaires & Games.

[4]  Peter C. Cheeseman,et al.  Where the Really Hard Problems Are , 1991, IJCAI.

[5]  Hector J. Levesque,et al.  Hard and Easy Distributions of SAT Problems , 1992, AAAI.

[6]  S Kirkpatrick,et al.  Critical Behavior in the Satisfiability of Random Boolean Expressions , 1994, Science.

[7]  Alan M. Frieze,et al.  Analysis of Two Simple Heuristics on a Random Instance of k-SAT , 1996, J. Algorithms.

[8]  L. Kirousis,et al.  Approximating the unsatisfiability threshold of random formulas , 1998, Random Struct. Algorithms.

[9]  Rémi Monasson,et al.  Determining computational complexity from characteristic ‘phase transitions’ , 1999, Nature.

[10]  E. Friedgut,et al.  Sharp thresholds of graph properties, and the -sat problem , 1999 .

[11]  Olivier Dubois,et al.  Typical random 3-SAT formulae and the satisfiability threshold , 2000, SODA '00.

[12]  Cristopher Moore,et al.  The asymptotic order of the random k-SAT threshold , 2002, The 43rd Annual IEEE Symposium on Foundations of Computer Science, 2002. Proceedings..

[13]  Lefteris M. Kirousis,et al.  The probabilistic analysis of a greedy satisfiability algorithm , 2002, Random Struct. Algorithms.

[14]  B. Selman,et al.  Satisfied with Physics , 2002, Science.

[15]  M. Mézard,et al.  Random K-satisfiability problem: from an analytic solution to an efficient algorithm. , 2002, Physical review. E, Statistical, nonlinear, and soft matter physics.

[16]  M. Mézard,et al.  Analytic and Algorithmic Solution of Random Satisfiability Problems , 2002, Science.

[17]  Mohammad Taghi Hajiaghayi,et al.  Random MAX SAT, random MAX CUT, and their phase transitions , 2003, SODA '03.

[18]  Yuval Peres,et al.  The threshold for random k-SAT is 2k (ln 2 - O(k)) , 2003, STOC '03.

[19]  Assaf Naor,et al.  The two possible values of the chromatic number of a random graph , 2004, STOC '04.

[20]  Dimitris Achlioptas,et al.  THE THRESHOLD FOR RANDOM k-SAT IS 2k log 2 O(k) , 2004, FOCS 2004.

[21]  Florent Krzakala,et al.  Threshold values, stability analysis and high-q asymptotics for the coloring problem on random graphs , 2004, Physical review. E, Statistical, nonlinear, and soft matter physics.

[22]  Alan M. Frieze,et al.  Random graphs , 2006, SODA '06.

[23]  Riccardo Zecchina,et al.  Threshold values of random K‐SAT from the cavity method , 2003, Random Struct. Algorithms.

[24]  Yuval Peres,et al.  On the maximum satisfiability of random formulas , 2007, JACM.