Advertisement

Mathematical Programming

, Volume 160, Issue 1–2, pp 407–431 | Cite as

Average case polyhedral complexity of the maximum stable set problem

  • Gábor Braun
  • Samuel Fiorini
  • Sebastian Pokutta
Full Length Paper

Abstract

We study the minimum number of constraints needed to formulate random instances of the maximum stable set problem via linear programs (LPs), in two distinct models. In the uniform model, the constraints of the LP are not allowed to depend on the input graph, which should be encoded solely in the objective function. There we prove a \(2^{\Omega (n{/}\log n)}\) lower bound with probability at least \(1 - 2^{-2^n}\) for every LP that is exact for a randomly selected set of instances; each graph on at most n vertices being selected independently with probability \(p \geqslant 2^{- \left( {\begin{array}{c}n/4\\ 2\end{array}}\right) + n}\). In the non-uniform model, the constraints of the LP may depend on the input graph, but we allow weights on the vertices. The input graph is sampled according to the G(np) model. There we obtain upper and lower bounds holding with high probability for various ranges of p. We obtain a super-polynomial lower bound all the way from \(p = \Omega \left( \frac{\log ^{6+\varepsilon } n}{n} \right) \) to \(p = o\left( \frac{1}{\log n} \right) \). Our upper bound is close to this as there is only an essentially quadratic gap in the exponent, which currently also exists in the worst-case model. Finally, we state a conjecture that would close this gap, both in the average-case and worst-case models.

Mathematics Subject Classification

Primary 68Q17 Secondary 05C69 05C80 90C05 

Notes

Acknowledgments

Research reported in this paper was partially supported by NSF Grant CMMI-1300144.

References

  1. 1.
    Avis, D., Tiwary, H.R.: On the extension complexity of combinatorial polytopes. Math. Progr. B 153, 95–115 (2015)MathSciNetCrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Bazzi, A., Fiorini, S., Pokutta, S., Svensson, O.: Small linear programs cannot approximate Vertex Cover within a factor of \(2 - \varepsilon \). In: IEEE 56th Annual symposium on foundations of computer science (FOCS), pp. 1123–1142 (2015)Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Braun, G., Pokutta, S.: Common information and unique disjointness. In: IEEE 54th Annual symposium on foundations of computer science (FOCS), pp. 688–697 (2013)Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Braun, G., Pokutta, S.: The matching polytope does not admit fully-polynomial size relaxation schemes. In: Proceedings of the 26th annual ACM-SIAM symposium on discrete algorithms (SODA), pp. 837–846 (2015)Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Braun, G., Fiorini, S., Pokutta, S., Steurer, D.: Approximation limits of linear programs (beyond hierarchies). Math. Oper. Res. 40, 756–772 (2015a)MathSciNetCrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Braun, G., Pokutta, S., Zink, D.: Inapproximability of combinatorial problems via small LPs and SDPs. In: Proceedings of the 47th annual ACM symposium on theory of computing (STOC), pp. 107–116 (2015b)Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Braverman, M., Moitra, A.: An information complexity approach to extended formulations. In: Proceedings of the 45th annual ACM symposium on theory of computing (STOC), pp. 161–170 (2013)Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Chan, S., Lee, J., Raghavendra, P., Steurer, D.: Approximate constraint satisfaction requires large LP relaxations. In: IEEE 54th annual symposium on foundations of computer science (FOCS 2013), pp. 350–359 (2013)Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Conforti, M., Cornuéjols, G., Zambelli, G.: Extended formulations in combinatorial optimization. 4OR 8, 1–48 (2010)MathSciNetCrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Diestel, R.: Graph Theory. Springer, Heidelberg (2005)zbMATHGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Edmonds, J.: Maximum matching and a polyhedron with 0, 1 vertices. J. Res. Natl. Bur. Stand. 69B, 125–130 (1965)MathSciNetCrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Fiorini, S., Massar, S., Pokutta, S., Tiwary, H.R., de Wolf, R.: Linear vs. semidefinite extended formulations: exponential separation and strong lower bounds. In: Proceedings of the 44th annual ACM symposium on theory of computing (STOC) (2012)Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Fiorini, S., Massar, S., Pokutta, S., Tiwary, H., Wolf, Rd: Exponential lower bounds for polytopes in combinatorial optimization. J. ACM 62(2), 17 (2015)MathSciNetCrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Goemans, M.X., Williamson, D.P.: Improved approximation algorithms for maximum cut and satisfiability problems using semidefinite programming. J. ACM 42, 1115–1145 (1995)MathSciNetCrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Kaibel, V.: Extended formulations in combinatorial optimization. Optima 85, 2–7 (2011)Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Kaibel, V., Weltge, S.: A short proof that the extension complexity of the correlation polytope grows exponentially. Discrete Comput. Geom. 53, 397–401 (2014)MathSciNetCrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Lee, J., Raghavendra, P., Steurer, D.: Lower bounds on the size of semidefinite programming relaxations. In: Proceedings of the 47th annual ACM symposium on theory of computing (STOC), pp. 567–576 (2015)Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    Pashkovich, K.: Extended Formulations for Combinatorial Polytopes. PhD thesis, Magdeburg Universität (2012)Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    Pokutta, S., Van Vyve, M.: A note on the extension complexity of the knapsack polytope. Oper. Res. Lett. 41, 347–350 (2013)MathSciNetCrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Razborov, A.A.: On the distributional complexity of disjointness. Theor. Comput. Sci. 106, 385–390 (1992)MathSciNetCrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Rothvoß, T.: Some 0/1 polytopes need exponential size extended formulations. Math. Progr. A 142, 255–268 (2013)MathSciNetCrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Rothvoß, T.: The matching polytope has exponential extension complexity. In: Proceedings of the 46th annual ACM symposium on theory of computing (STOC), pp. 263–272 (2014)Google Scholar
  23. 23.
    Williams, J.: A linear-size zero-one programming model for the minimum spanning tree problem in planar graphs. Networks 39, 53–60 (2002)MathSciNetCrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Wolf, Rd: Nondeterministic quantum query and communication complexities. SIAM J. Comput. 32(3), 681–699 (2003)MathSciNetCrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Yannakakis, M.: Expressing combinatorial optimization problems by linear programs (extended abstract). In: Proceedings of the 20th annual ACM symposium on theory of computing (STOC), pp. 223–228 (1988)Google Scholar
  26. 26.
    Yannakakis, M.: Expressing combinatorial optimization problems by linear programs. J. Comput. Syst. Sci. 43, 441–466 (1991)MathSciNetCrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg and Mathematical Optimization Society 2016

Authors and Affiliations

  • Gábor Braun
    • 1
  • Samuel Fiorini
    • 2
  • Sebastian Pokutta
    • 1
  1. 1.ISyE, Georgia Institute of TechnologyAtlantaUSA
  2. 2.Department of MathematicsUniversité libre de BruxellesBrusselsBelgium

Personalised recommendations