Advertisement

Israel Journal of Mathematics

, Volume 223, Issue 1, pp 363–398 | Cite as

The wonderland of reflections

  • Libor BartoEmail author
  • Jakub Opršal
  • Michael Pinsker
Article

Abstract

A fundamental fact for the algebraic theory of constraint satisfaction problems (CSPs) over a fixed template is that pp-interpretations between at most countable ω-categorical relational structures have two algebraic counterparts for their polymorphism clones: a semantic one via the standard algebraic operators H, S, P, and a syntactic one via clone homomorphisms (capturing identities). We provide a similar characterization which incorporates all relational constructions relevant for CSPs, that is, homomorphic equivalence and adding singletons to cores in addition to ppinterpretations. For the semantic part we introduce a new construction, called reflection, and for the syntactic part we find an appropriate weakening of clone homomorphisms, called h1 clone homomorphisms (capturing identities of height 1).

As a consequence, the complexity of the CSP of an at most countable ω-categorical structure depends only on the identities of height 1 satisfied in its polymorphism clone as well as the natural uniformity thereon. This allows us in turn to formulate a new elegant dichotomy conjecture for the CSPs of reducts of finitely bounded homogeneous structures.

Finally, we reveal a close connection between h1 clone homomorphisms and the notion of compatibility with projections used in the study of the lattice of interpretability types of varieties.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. [1]
    L. Barto, The constraint satisfaction problem and universal algebra, Bull. Symb. Log. 2015 (2015), 319᾿37.MathSciNetCrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  2. [2]
    L. Barto and M. Kozik, Absorbing subalgebras, cyclic terms, and the constraint satisfaction problem, Log. Methods Comput. Sci. 8 (2012), paper 7, 27 pages.MathSciNetzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  3. [3]
    L. Barto and M. Kozik, Constraint satisfaction problems solvable by local consistency methods, J. ACM 61 (2014), article 3, 19 pages.MathSciNetzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  4. [4]
    W. Bentz and L. Sequeira, Taylor’s modularity conjecture holds for linear idempotent varieties, Algebra Universalis 2014 (2014), 101᾿07.MathSciNetCrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  5. [5]
    C. Bergman, Universal Algebra: Fundamentals and Selected Topics, Pure and Applied Mathematics (Boca Raton), Vol. 301, CRC Press, Boca Raton, FL, 2012.Google Scholar
  6. [6]
    G. Birkhoff, On the structure of abstract algebras, Mathematical Proceedings of the Cambridge Philosophical Society 1935 (1935), 433᾿54.CrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  7. [7]
    M. Bodirsky, Cores of countably categorical structures, Log. Methods Comput. Sci. 3 (2007), paper 2, 16 pages.MathSciNetzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  8. [8]
    M. Bodirsky, Constraint satisfaction problems with infinite templates, in Complexity of Constraints: An Overview of Current Research Themes, Lecture Notes in Comput. Sci., Vol. 5250, Springer Berlin Heidelberg, 2008, pp. 196᾿28.Google Scholar
  9. [9]
    M. Bodirsky, Complexity classification in infinite-domain constraint satisfaction, Mémoire d’habilitation à diriger des recherches, Université Diderot–Paris 7 (2012), Available at arXiv:1201.0856.Google Scholar
  10. [10]
    M. Bodirsky, V. Dalmau, B. Martin and M. Pinsker, Distance constraint satisfaction problems, in Mathematical foundations of computer science 2010, Lecture Notes in Comput. Sci., Vol. 6281, Springer, Berlin, 2010, pp. 162᾿73.Google Scholar
  11. [11]
    M. Bodirsky and J. Kára, The complexity of temporal constraint satisfaction problems, J. ACM 57 (2010), article 9, 41 pages.MathSciNetzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  12. [12]
    M. Bodirsky, B. Martin and A. Mottet, Constraint satisfaction problems over the integers with successor, in Automata, languages, and programming. Part I, Lecture Notes in Comput. Sci., Vol. 9134, Springer, Heidelberg, 2015, pp. 256᾿67.Google Scholar
  13. [13]
    M. Bodirsky and J. Nešetřil, Constraint satisfaction with countable homogeneous templates, J. Logic Comput. 2006 (2006), 359᾿73.MathSciNetCrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  14. [14]
    M. Bodirsky and M. Pinsker, Reducts of Ramsey structures, in Model theoretic methods in finite combinatorics, Contemp. Math., Vol. 558, Amer. Math. Soc., Providence, RI, 2011, pp. 489᾿19.MathSciNetCrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  15. [15]
    M. Bodirsky and M. Pinsker, Schaefer’s theorem for graphs, J. ACM 62 (2015), article 19, 52 pages.MathSciNetzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  16. [16]
    M. Bodirsky and M. Pinsker, Topological Birkhoff, Trans. Amer.Math. Soc. 2015 (2015), 2527᾿549.MathSciNetzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  17. [17]
    M. Bodirsky, M. Pinsker and A. Pongrácz, Projective clone homomorphisms, Journal of Symbolic Logic, to appear. Preprint available arXiv:1409.4601 (2014).Google Scholar
  18. [18]
    M. Bodirsky, M. Pinsker and A. Pongrácz, Reconstructing the topology of clones, Trans. Amer. Math. Soc. 2017 (2017), 3707᾿740.MathSciNetCrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  19. [19]
    M. Bodirsky, M. Pinsker and T. Tsankov, Decidability of definability, J. Symbolic Logic 2013 (2013), 1036᾿054.MathSciNetCrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  20. [20]
    A. Bulatov, P. Jeavons and A. Krokhin, Classifying the complexity of constraints using finite algebras, SIAM J. Comput. 2005 (2005), 720᾿42.MathSciNetCrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  21. [21]
    S. N. Burris and H. P. Sankappanavar, A course in universal algebra, Graduate Texts in Mathematics, Vol. 78, Springer-Verlag, New York-Berlin, 1981.Google Scholar
  22. [22]
    T. Feder and M. Y. Vardi, The computational structure of monotone monadic SNP and constraint satisfaction: a study through Datalog and group theory, SIAM J. Comput. 1999 (1999), 57᾿04.MathSciNetzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  23. [23]
    O. C. García and W. Taylor, The lattice of interpretability types of varieties, Mem.Amer. Math. Soc. 50 (1984), v+125.MathSciNetzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  24. [24]
    M. Gehrke and M. Pinsker, Uniform Birkhoff, Journal of Pure and Applied Algebra, in press (2016).Google Scholar
  25. [25]
    J. Hagemann and A. Mitschke, On n-permutable congruences, Algebra Universalis 1973 (1973), 8᾿2.MathSciNetCrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  26. [26]
    W. Hodges, A shorter model theory, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 1997.zbMATHGoogle Scholar
  27. [27]
    K. Kearnes, P. Marković and R. McKenzie, Optimal strong Mal’cev conditions for omitting type 1 in locally finite varieties, Algebra Universalis 2014 (2014), 91᾿00.MathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  28. [28]
    K. A. Kearnes and S. T. Tschantz, Automorphism groups of squares and of free algebras, Internat. J. Algebra Comput. 2007 (2007), 461᾿05.MathSciNetCrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  29. [29]
    B. Larose and L. Zádori, Bounded width problems and algebras, Algebra Universalis 2007 (2007), 439᾿66.MathSciNetCrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  30. [30]
    W. D. Neumann, On Malcev conditions, J. Austral. Math. Soc. 1974 (1974), 376᾿84. Collection of articles dedicated to the memory of Hanna Neumann, VII.MathSciNetCrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  31. [31]
    M. Pinsker, Algebraic and model theoretic methods in constraint satisfaction, arXiv:1507.00931 (2015).Google Scholar
  32. [32]
    L. Sequeira, Maltsev filters, 2001, Thesis (Ph.D.)–University of Lisbon, Portugal.Google Scholar
  33. [33]
    M. H. Siggers, A strong Mal’cev condition for locally finite varieties omitting the unary type, Algebra Universalis 2010 (2010), 15᾿0.MathSciNetCrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  34. [34]
    Á. Szendrei, Clones in universal algebra, Séminaire de Mathématiques Supérieures [Seminar on Higher Mathematics], Vol. 99, Presses de l’Université de Montréal, Montreal, QC, 1986.Google Scholar
  35. [35]
    W. Taylor, Varieties obeying homotopy laws, Canad. J. Math. 1977 (1977), 498᾿27.MathSciNetCrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  36. [36]
    S. T. Tschantz, Congruence permutability is join prime, unpublished (1996).Google Scholar
  37. [37]
    M. Valeriote and R. Willard, Idempotent n-permutable varieties, Bull. Lond. Math. Soc. 2014 (2014), 870᾿80.MathSciNetCrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Hebrew University of Jerusalem 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of AlgebraMFF UKPraha 8Czech Republic

Personalised recommendations