The Hardness of Subgraph Isomorphism
April 11, 2015 Β· Declared Dead Β· π arXiv.org
"No code URL or promise found in abstract"
Evidence collected by the PWNC Scanner
Authors
Marek Cygan, Jakub Pachocki, Arkadiusz SocaΕa
arXiv ID
1504.02876
Category
cs.DS: Data Structures & Algorithms
Citations
4
Venue
arXiv.org
Last Checked
4 months ago
Abstract
Subgraph Isomorphism is a very basic graph problem, where given two graphs $G$ and $H$ one is to check whether $G$ is a subgraph of $H$. Despite its simple definition, the Subgraph Isomorphism problem turns out to be very broad, as it generalizes problems such as Clique, $r$-Coloring, Hamiltonicity, Set Packing and Bandwidth. However, for all of the mentioned problems $2^{\mathcal{O}(n)}$ time algorithms exist, so a natural and frequently asked question in the past was whether there exists a $2^{\mathcal{O}(n)}$ time algorithm for Subgraph Isomorphism. In the monograph of Fomin and Kratsch [Springer'10] this question is highlighted as an open problem, among few others. Our main result is a reduction from 3-SAT, producing a subexponential number of sublinear instances of the Subgraph Isomorphism problem. In particular, our reduction implies a $2^{Ξ©(n \sqrt{\log n})}$ lower bound for Subgraph Isomorphism under the Exponential Time Hypothesis. This shows that there exist classes of graphs that are strictly harder to embed than cliques or Hamiltonian cycles. The core of our reduction consists of two steps. First, we preprocess and pack variables and clauses of a 3-SAT formula into groups of logarithmic size. However, the grouping is not arbitrary, since as a result we obtain only a limited interaction between the groups. In the second step, we overcome the technical hardness of encoding evaluations as permutations by a simple, yet fruitful scheme of guessing the sizes of preimages of an arbitrary mapping, reducing the case of arbitrary mapping to bijections. In fact, when applying this step to a recent independent result of Fomin et al.[arXiv:1502.05447 (2015)], who showed hardness of Graph Homomorphism, we can transfer their hardness result to Subgraph Isomorphism, implying a nearly tight lower bound of $2^{Ξ©(n \log n / \log \log n)}$.
Community Contributions
Found the code? Know the venue? Think something is wrong? Let us know!
π Similar Papers
In the same crypt β Data Structures & Algorithms
π
π
The Cartographer
R.I.P.
π»
Ghosted
Route Planning in Transportation Networks
R.I.P.
π»
Ghosted
Near-linear time approximation algorithms for optimal transport via Sinkhorn iteration
R.I.P.
π»
Ghosted
Hierarchical Clustering: Objective Functions and Algorithms
R.I.P.
π»
Ghosted
Graph Isomorphism in Quasipolynomial Time
π
π
The Cartographer
Simulation optimization: A review of algorithms and applications
Died the same way β π» Ghosted
R.I.P.
π»
Ghosted
Federated Learning: Strategies for Improving Communication Efficiency
R.I.P.
π»
Ghosted
In-Datacenter Performance Analysis of a Tensor Processing Unit
R.I.P.
π»
Ghosted
Deep Convolutional Neural Networks for Computer-Aided Detection: CNN Architectures, Dataset Characteristics and Transfer Learning
R.I.P.
π»
Ghosted