An Almost Linear Time Approximation Algorithm for the Permanent of a Random (0-1) Matrix

  • Martin Fürer
  • Shiva Prasad Kasiviswanathan
Conference paper
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 3328)


We present a simple randomized algorithm for approximating permanents. The algorithm with inputs A, ε> 0 produces an output X A with (1 − ε)per(A) ≤ X A  ≤ (1 + ε) per (A) for almost all (0-1) matrices A. For any positive constant ε > 0 , and almost all (0-1) matrices the algorithm runs in time O(n 2 ω), i.e., almost linear in the size of the matrix, where ω = ω(n) is any function satisfying ω(n) → ∞ as n → ∞. This improves the previous bound of O(n 3 ω) for such matrices. The estimator can also be used to estimate the size of a backtrack tree.


Random Matrix Unbiased Estimator Random Graph Model Polynomial Time Deterministic Algorithm Polynomial Time Turing Machine 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. 1.
    Bollobás, B.: Random Graphs. Academic Press, London (1985)Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Chien, S., Rasmussen, L., Sinclair, A.: Clifford algebras and approximating the permanent. In: Proceedings of the 34th ACM Symposium on Theory of Computing, pp. 222–231 (2002)Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Frieze, A., Jerrum, M.: An analysis of a Monte-Carlo algorithm for approximating the permanent. Combinatorica, 67–83 (1995)Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Godsil, C., Gutman, I.: On the matching polynomial of a graph. Algebraic Methods in Graph Theory, 241–249 (1981)Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Jerrum, M., Sinclair, A.: Approximating the permanent. SIAM Journal of Computing 18, 1149–1178 (1989)zbMATHCrossRefMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Jerrum, M., Sinclair, A., Vigoda, E.: A polynomial time approximation algorithm for the permanent of a matrix with non-negative entries. Journal of the ACM 51(4) (2004)Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Jerrum, M., Valiant, L., Vazirani, V.: Random generation of combinatorial structures from a uniform distribution. Theoretical Computer Science 43, 169–188 (1986)zbMATHCrossRefMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Karmarkar, N., Karp, R., Lipton, R., Lovsáz, L., Luby, M.: A Monte-Carlo algorithm for estimating the permanent. SIAM Journal of Computing 22, 284–293 (1993)zbMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Knuth, D.E.: Estimating the efficiency of backtrack programs. Mathematics of Computation 29, 121–136 (1974)CrossRefMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    la Pena, V.D., Giné, E.: Decoupling, from Dependence to Independence. Springer, New York (1999)Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Minc, H.: Permanents, Encyclopedia of Mathematics and its Applications. Addison-Wesley Publishing Company, Reading (1982)Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Purdom, P.W.: Tree size by partial backtracking. SIAM Journal on Computing 7(4), 481–491 (1978)zbMATHCrossRefMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Rasmussen, L.: Approximating the permanent:A simple approach. Random Structures and Algorithms 5, 349–361 (1994)zbMATHCrossRefMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Ryser, H.: Combinatorial Mathematics, The Carus Mathematical Monographs. The Mathematical Association of America, Washington DC (1963)Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Stein, C., Karger, D.R.: A new approach to the minimum cut problem. Journal of the ACM 43(4), 601–640 (1996)zbMATHCrossRefMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Valiant, L.: The complexity of computing the permanent. Theoretical Computer Science 8, 189–201 (1979)zbMATHCrossRefMathSciNetGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2004

Authors and Affiliations

  • Martin Fürer
    • 1
  • Shiva Prasad Kasiviswanathan
    • 1
  1. 1.Computer Science and EngineeringPennsylvania State UniversityUniversity Park

Personalised recommendations