arXivDaily arXiv每日学术速递 周一至周五更新
arXiv cs/0412042cs.CC
收藏

三值MAX CSP的逼近性

The approximability of three-valued MAX CSP

Peter Jonsson, Mikael Klasson, Andrei Krokhin

摘要:

在最大约束满足问题(Max CSP)中,给定一个有限的集合(可能加权)约束重叠的变量集,目标是从一个给定的域分配值的变量,以最大限度地满足约束的数量(或总重量,加权的情况下)。这个问题一般是NP难的,因此,研究限制允许的约束类型如何影响问题的可逼近性是很自然的。众所周知,每个布尔(即,二值)Max CSP问题与允许的约束类型的有限集是精确地在多项式时间内可解的,或者是APX完全的(因此,除非P=NP,否则没有多项式时间近似方案)。这是一个开放的问题,几年来,这一结果是否可以扩展到非布尔最大CSP,这是更难以分析比布尔情况。在本文中,我们在这个方向上的第一步,建立这个结果的最大CSP在一个三元域。此外,我们提出了一个简单的描述,我们的问题的所有多项式时间可解的情况下。这种描述使用了著名的超模块性的代数组合性质。我们还证明了每个三值硬MaxCSP问题在某种特定意义下包含两个基本硬MaxCSP问题之一,这两个基本硬MaxCSP问题是k= 2,3的最大k列子图问题.

英文摘要:

In the maximum constraint satisfaction problem (Max CSP), one is given a finite collection of (possibly weighted) constraints on overlapping sets of variables, and the goal is to assign values from a given domain to the variables so as to maximize the number (or the total weight, for the weighted case) of satisfied constraints. This problem is NP-hard in general, and, therefore, it is natural to study how restricting the allowed types of constraints affects the approximability of the problem. It is known that every Boolean (that is, two-valued) Max CSP problem with a finite set of allowed constraint types is either solvable exactly in polynomial time or else APX-complete (and hence can have no polynomial time approximation scheme unless P=NP. It has been an open problem for several years whether this result can be extended to non-Boolean Max CSP, which is much more difficult to analyze than the Boolean case. In this paper, we make the first step in this direction by establishing this result for Max CSP over a three-element domain. Moreover, we present a simple description of all polynomial-time solvable cases of our problem. This description uses the well-known algebraic combinatorial property of supermodularity. We also show that every hard three-valued Max CSP problem contains, in a certain specified sense, one of the two basic hard Max CSP problems which are the Maximum k-colourable subgraph problems for k=2,3.

机构、总结、中文摘要均由AI分析而来,可能存在错误,请以论文正文为准。

↑