Fine-Grained Dichotomies for the Tutte Plane and Boolean #CSP

Jaeger, Vertigan, and Welsh [15] proved a dichotomy for the complexity of evaluating the Tutte polynomial at fixed points: The evaluation is #P-hard almost everywhere, and the remaining points admit polynomial-time algorithms. Dell, Husfeldt, and Wahlen [9] and Husfeldt and Taslaman [12], in combination with Curticapean [7], extended the #P-hardness results to tight lower bounds under the counting exponential time hypothesis #ETH, with the exception of the line $y=1$, which was left open. We complete the dichotomy theorem for the Tutte polynomial under #ETH by proving that the number of all acyclic subgraphs of a given $n$-vertex graph cannot be determined in time $exp(o(n))$ unless #ETH fails. Another dichotomy theorem we strengthen is the one of Creignou and Hermann [6] for counting the number of satisfying assignments to a constraint satisfaction problem instance over the Boolean domain. We prove that all #P-hard cases are also hard under #ETH. The main ingredient is to prove that the number of independent sets in bipartite graphs with $n$ vertices cannot be computed in time $exp(o(n))$ unless #ETH fails. In order to prove our results, we use the block interpolation idea by Curticapean [7] and transfer it to systems of linear equations that might not directly correspond to interpolation.

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

[2]  Russell Impagliazzo,et al.  On the Complexity of k-SAT , 2001, J. Comput. Syst. Sci..

[3]  Andreas Björklund,et al.  Counting perfect matchings as fast as Ryser , 2011, SODA.

[4]  Jin-Yi Cai,et al.  Computational Complexity of Holant Problems , 2011, SIAM J. Comput..

[5]  D. Welsh,et al.  On the computational complexity of the Jones and Tutte polynomials , 1990, Mathematical Proceedings of the Cambridge Philosophical Society.

[6]  J. Scott Provan,et al.  The Complexity of Counting Cuts and of Computing the Probability that a Graph is Connected , 1983, SIAM J. Comput..

[7]  Andreas Björklund,et al.  Computing the Tutte Polynomial in Vertex-Exponential Time , 2007, 2008 49th Annual IEEE Symposium on Foundations of Computer Science.

[8]  Xi Chen,et al.  Complexity of Counting CSP with Complex Weights , 2011, J. ACM.

[9]  Cedric E. Ginestet Combinatorics, Complexity, and Chance: a Tribute to Dominic Welsh , 2008 .

[10]  Dirk Llewellyn Vertigan On the computational complexity of tutte, jones, homfly and kauffman invariants (tutte polynomial, jones polynomial, homfly polynomial, kauffman polynomial) , 1991 .

[11]  Russell Impagliazzo,et al.  A duality between clause width and clause density for SAT , 2006, 21st Annual IEEE Conference on Computational Complexity (CCC'06).

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

[13]  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).

[14]  Alan D. Sokal The multivariate Tutte polynomial (alias Potts model) for graphs and matroids , 2005, Surveys in Combinatorics.

[15]  Nadia Creignou,et al.  Complexity of Generalized Satisfiability Counting Problems , 1996, Inf. Comput..

[16]  Russell Impagliazzo,et al.  Which problems have strongly exponential complexity? , 1998, Proceedings 39th Annual Symposium on Foundations of Computer Science (Cat. No.98CB36280).

[17]  Thore Husfeldt,et al.  The Exponential Time Complexity of Computing the Probability That a Graph Is Connected , 2010, IPEC.

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