Degrees and Gaps: Tight Complexity Results of General Factor Problems Parameterized by Treewidth and Cutwidth

In the General Factor problem, we are given an undirected graph G and for each vertex v ∈ V (G) a finite set Bv of non-negative integers. The task is to decide if there is a subset S ⊆ E(G) such that degS(v) ∈ Bv for all vertices v of G. Define the max-gap of a finite integer set B to be the largest d ≥ 0 such that there is an a ≥ 0 with [a, a + d + 1] ∩ B = {a, a + d + 1}. Cornuéjols showed in 1988 that if the max-gap of all sets Bv is at most 1, then the decision version of General Factor is polynomial-time solvable. This result was extended 2018 by Dudycz and Paluch for the optimization (i.e. minimization and maximization) versions. We present a general algorithm counting the number of solutions of a certain size in time (M + 1)twnO(1), given a tree decomposition of width tw, where M is the maximum integer over all Bv. By using convolution techniques from van Rooij (2020), we improve upon the previous (M + 1)3twnO(1) time algorithm by Arulselvan et al. from 2018. We prove that this algorithm is essentially optimal for all cases that are not trivial or polynomial time solvable for the decision, minimization or maximization versions. Our lower bounds show that such an improvement is not even possible for B-Factor, which is General Factor on graphs where all sets Bv agree with the fixed set B. We show that for every fixed B where the problem is NP-hard, our (max B + 1)twnO(1) algorithm cannot be significantly improved: assuming the Strong Exponential Time Hypothesis (SETH), no algorithm can solve B-Factor in time (max B + 1 − ε)twnO(1) for any ε > 0. We extend this bound to the counting version of B-Factor for arbitrary, non-trivial sets B, assuming #SETH. We also investigate the parameterization of the problem by cutwidth. Unlike for treewidth, having a larger set B does not appear to make the problem harder: we give a 2cutwnO(1) algorithm for any B and provide a matching lower bound that this is optimal for the NP-hard cases. 2012 ACM Subject Classification Theory of computation → Parameterized complexity and exact algorithms

[1]  Radu Curticapean Parity Separation: A Scientifically Proven Method for Permanent Weight Loss , 2016, ICALP.

[2]  Jin-Yi Cai,et al.  A Computational Proof of Complexity of Some Restricted Counting Problems , 2009, TAMC.

[3]  Xavier Dahan,et al.  Regular graphs of large girth and arbitrary degree , 2011, Comb..

[4]  Michal Pilipczuk,et al.  Problems Parameterized by Treewidth Tractable in Single Exponential Time: A Logical Approach , 2011, MFCS.

[5]  R. Baker Factorization of graphs , 1975 .

[6]  Fedor V. Fomin,et al.  Efficient Computation of Representative Sets with Applications in Parameterized and Exact Algorithms , 2013, SODA.

[7]  Johan M. M. van Rooij Fast Algorithms for Join Operations on Tree Decompositions , 2020, Treewidth, Kernels, and Algorithms.

[8]  L BodlaenderHans,et al.  Deterministic single exponential time algorithms for connectivity problems parameterized by treewidth , 2015 .

[9]  Arie M. C. A. Koster,et al.  Combinatorial Optimization on Graphs of Bounded Treewidth , 2008, Comput. J..

[10]  Pinyan Lu,et al.  Complexity Dichotomies of Counting Problems , 2011, Electron. Colloquium Comput. Complex..

[11]  Jin-Yi Cai,et al.  From Holant to #CSP and Back: Dichotomy for Holantc Problems , 2012, Algorithmica.

[12]  Dániel Marx,et al.  Exponential Time Complexity of the Permanent and the Tutte Polynomial , 2010, TALG.

[13]  L. Lovász The factorization of graphs. II , 1972 .

[14]  David Manlove,et al.  Matchings with Lower Quotas: Algorithms and Complexity , 2014, Algorithmica.

[15]  Leslie G. Valiant,et al.  Holographic Algorithms (Extended Abstract) , 2004, FOCS.

[16]  Lutz Volkmann,et al.  On unique k-factors and unique [1, k]-factors in graphs , 2004, Discret. Math..

[17]  Jin-Yi Cai,et al.  Holant Problems for 3-Regular Graphs with Complex Edge Functions , 2016, Theory of Computing Systems.

[18]  Russell Impagliazzo,et al.  The Complexity of Satisfiability of Small Depth Circuits , 2009, IWPEC.

[19]  Dániel Marx,et al.  Lower bounds based on the Exponential Time Hypothesis , 2011, Bull. EATCS.

[20]  Russell Impagliazzo,et al.  Complexity of k-SAT , 1999, Proceedings. Fourteenth Annual IEEE Conference on Computational Complexity (Formerly: Structure in Complexity Theory Conference) (Cat.No.99CB36317).

[21]  Yossi Shiloach Another Look at the Degree Constrained Subgraph Problem , 1981, Inf. Process. Lett..

[22]  F. Lazebnik,et al.  A new series of dense graphs of high girth , 1995, math/9501231.

[23]  Peter Rossmanith,et al.  Dynamic Programming on Tree Decompositions Using Generalised Fast Subset Convolution , 2009, ESA.

[24]  Bruno Courcelle,et al.  The Monadic Second-Order Logic of Graphs. I. Recognizable Sets of Finite Graphs , 1990, Inf. Comput..

[25]  A. Bonato,et al.  Graphs and Hypergraphs , 2022 .

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

[27]  Szymon Dudycz,et al.  Optimal General Matchings , 2017, WG.

[28]  Gérard Cornuéjols,et al.  General factors of graphs , 1988, J. Comb. Theory, Ser. B.

[29]  P. Lu,et al.  On the Complexity of Holant Problems , 2017, The Constraint Satisfaction Problem.

[30]  J. Edmonds Paths, Trees, and Flowers , 1965, Canadian Journal of Mathematics.

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

[32]  Wilfried Imrich,et al.  Explicit construction of regular graphs without small cycles , 1984, Comb..

[33]  Michal Pilipczuk,et al.  Solving Connectivity Problems Parameterized by Treewidth in Single Exponential Time , 2011, 2011 IEEE 52nd Annual Symposium on Foundations of Computer Science.

[34]  Geoffrey Exoo,et al.  Recursive constructions of small regular graphs of given degree and girth , 2012, Discret. Math..

[35]  H. Sachs,et al.  Regukre Graphen gegebener Taillenweite mit minimaler Knotenzahl , 1963 .

[36]  Dániel Marx,et al.  Tight conditional lower bounds for counting perfect matchings on graphs of bounded treewidth, cliquewidth, and genus , 2016, SODA.

[37]  Stefan Kratsch,et al.  Deterministic Single Exponential Time Algorithms for Connectivity Problems Parameterized by Treewidth , 2013, ICALP.

[38]  Ilya Volkovich,et al.  The Complexity of Finding {$S$}-factors in Regular Graphs , 2019, Electron. Colloquium Comput. Complex..

[39]  Stefan Kratsch,et al.  Fast Hamiltonicity Checking Via Bases of Perfect Matchings , 2012, J. ACM.

[40]  Yoshio Okamoto,et al.  On Problems as Hard as CNF-SAT , 2011, 2012 IEEE 27th Conference on Computational Complexity.

[41]  Bruno Courcelle,et al.  The monadic second-order logic of graphs III: tree-decompositions, minor and complexity issues , 1992, RAIRO Theor. Informatics Appl..

[42]  Liming Cai,et al.  On the existence of subexponential parameterized algorithms , 2003, J. Comput. Syst. Sci..

[43]  Víctor Dalmau,et al.  Generalized Satisfability with Limited Occurrences per Variable: A Study through Delta-Matroid Parity , 2003, MFCS.

[44]  Dániel Marx,et al.  Known algorithms on graphs of bounded treewidth are probably optimal , 2010, SODA '11.

[45]  Tomás Feder,et al.  Fanout limitations on constraint systems , 2001, Theor. Comput. Sci..