Location via proxy:   [ UP ]  
[Report a bug]   [Manage cookies]                
skip to main content
research-article

Approximating fractional hypertree width

Published: 06 April 2010 Publication History

Abstract

Fractional hypertree width is a hypergraph measure similar to tree width and hypertree width. Its algorithmic importance comes from the fact that, as shown in previous work, Constraint Satisfaction Problems (CSP) and various problems in database theory are polynomial-time solvable if the input contains a bounded-width fractional hypertree decomposition of the hypergraph of the constraints. In this article, we show that for every fixed w ≥ 1, there is a polynomial-time algorithm that, given a hypergraph H with fractional hypertree width at most w, computes a fractional hypertree decomposition of width O(w3) for H. This means that polynomial-time algorithms relying on bounded-width fractional hypertree decompositions no longer need to be given a decomposition explicitly in the input, since an appropriate decomposition can be computed in polynomial time. Therefore, if H is a class of hypergraphs with bounded fractional hypertree width, then a CSP restricted to instances whose structure is in H is polynomial-time solvable. This makes bounded fractional hypertree width the most general known hypergraph property that makes CSP, Boolean conjunctive queries, and conjunctive query containment polynomial-time solvable.

References

[1]
Adler, I., Gottlob, G., and Grohe, M. 2007. Hypertree width and related hypergraph invariants. Euro. J. Combin. 28, 8, 2167--2181.
[2]
Bodlaender, H. L. 1996. A linear-time algorithm for finding tree-decompositions of small treewidth. SIAM J. Comput. 25, 6, 1305--1317.
[3]
Bodlaender, H. L., Gilbert, J. R., Hafsteinsson, H., and Kloks, T. 1995. Approximating treewidth, pathwidth, frontsize, and shortest elimination tree. J. Algor. 18, 2, 238--255.
[4]
Bulatov, A. A. 2002. A dichotomy theorem for constraints on a three-element set. In Proceedings of the 43th Symposium on Foundations of Computer Science. IEEE, 649--658.
[5]
Bulatov, A. A. 2003. Tractable conservative constraint satisfaction problems. In Proceedings of the 18th Annual IEEE Symposium on Logic in Computer Science (LICS'03). IEEE Computer Society, 321.
[6]
Bulatov, A. A., Krokhin, A. A., and Jeavons, P. 2001. The complexity of maximal constraint languages. In Proceedings of the 33rd ACM Symposium on Theory of Computing. 667--674.
[7]
Chen, H. and Grohe, M. 2006. Constraint satisfaction problems with succinctly specified relations. Manuscript. Preliminary version in Dagstuhl Seminar Proceedings 06401: Complexity of Constraints.
[8]
Chung, F. R. K., Graham, R. L., Frankl, P., and Shearer, J. B. 1986. Some intersection theorems for ordered sets and graphs. J. Combin. Theory Ser. A 43, 1, 23--37.
[9]
Feder, T. and Vardi, M. Y. 1999. The computational structure of monotone monadic SNP and constraint satisfaction: A study through Datalog and group theory. SIAM J. Comput. 28, 1, 57--104.
[10]
Flum, J. and Grohe, M. 2006. Parameterized Complexity Theory. Texts in Theoretical Computer Science. An EATCS Series. Springer, Berlin.
[11]
Fomin, F. V., Golovach, P. A., and Thilikos, D. M. 2009. Approximating acyclicity parameters of sparse hypergraphs. In Proceedings of the 26th International Symposium on Theoretical Aspects of Computer Science (STACS'09), S. Albers and J.-Y. Marion, Eds, 445--456.
[12]
Freuder, E. C. 1990. Complexity of k-tree structured constraint satisfaction problems. In Proceedings of the National Conference on Artificial Intelligence (AAAI-90). 4--9.
[13]
Golumbic, M. C. 1980. Algorithmic Graph Theory and Perfect Graphs. Academic Press, New York.
[14]
Gottlob, G., Grohe, M., Musliu, N., Samer, M., and Scarcello, F. 2005. Hypertree decompositions: Structure, algorithms, and applications. In Graph-Theoretic Concepts in Computer Science. Lecture Notes in Computer Science, vol. 3787. Springer, 1--15.
[15]
Gottlob, G., Leone, N., and Scarcello, F. 2002. Hypertree decompositions and tractable queries. J. Comput. Syst. Sci. 64, 579--627.
[16]
Gottlob, G., Miklós, Z., and Schwentick, T. 2007. Generalized hypertree decompositions: NP-hardness and tractable variants. In Proceedings of the 26th ACM SIGMOD-SIGACT-SIGART Symposium on Principles of Database Systems (PODS'07). ACM, New York, 13--22.
[17]
Gottlob, G. and Szeider, S. 2008. Fixed-Parameter algorithms for artificial intelligence, constraint satisfaction and database problems. The Comput. J. 51, 3, 303--325.
[18]
Grohe, M. 2006. The structure of tractable constraint satisfaction problems. In Proceedings of the Symposium on Mathematical Foundations of Computer Science (MFCS'06). 58--72.
[19]
Grohe, M. 2007. The complexity of homomorphism and constraint satisfaction problems seen from the other side. J. ACM 54, 1, 1.
[20]
Grohe, M. and Marx, D. 2006. Constraint solving via fractional edge covers. In Proceedings of the 17th Annual ACM-SIAM Symposium on Discrete Algorithms (SODA'06). ACM Press, 289--298.
[21]
Grohe, M., Schwentick, T., and Segoufin, L. 2001. When is the evaluation of conjunctive queries tractable? In Proceedings of the 33rd Annual ACM Symposium on Theory of Computing (STOC'01). ACM Press, 657--666.
[22]
Jeavons, P., Cohen, D. A., and Gyssens, M. 1997. Closure properties of constraints. J. ACM 44, 4, 527--548.
[23]
Kolaitis, P. G. and Vardi, M. Y. 2000. Conjunctive-Query containment and constraint satisfaction. J. Comput. Syst. Sci. 61, 2, 302--332.
[24]
Lovász, L. 1978. Kneser's conjecture, chromatic number, and homotopy. J. Combin. Theory Ser. A 25, 3, 319--324.
[25]
Marx, D. 2007. Can you beat treewidth? In Proceedings of the 48th Annual IEEE Symposium on Foundations of Computer Science (FOCS'07). 169--179.
[26]
Marx, D. 2009. Tractable structures for constraint satisfaction with truth tables. In Proceedings of the 26th International Symposium on Theoretical Aspects of Computer Science (STACS'09), S. Albers and J.-Y. Marion, Eds. 649--660.
[27]
Matoušek, J. 2004. A combinatorial proof of Kneser's conjecture. Combinatorica 24, 1, 163--170.
[28]
Oum, S. 2005. Approximating rank-width and clique-width quickly. In Proceedings of the 31st International Workshop on Graph-Theoretic Concepts in Computer Science. 49--58.
[29]
Oum, S. and Seymour, P. 2007. Testing branch-width. J. Combin. Theory Ser. B 97, 3, 385--393.
[30]
Oum, S.-i. and Seymour, P. 2006. Approximating clique-width and branch-width. J. Combin. Theory Ser. B 96, 4, 514--528.
[31]
Schaefer, T. J. 1978. The complexity of satisfiability problems. In Conference Record of the 10th Annual ACM Symposium on Theory of Computing. ACM, New York, 216--226.
[32]
Tarjan, R. E. 1985. Decomposition by clique separators. Discr. Math. 55, 2, 221--232.
[33]
Vazirani, V. 2004. Approximation Algorithms. Springer.
[34]
Whitesides, S. H. 1981. An algorithm for finding clique cut-sets. Inf. Process. Lett. 12, 1, 31--32.

Cited By

View all
  • (2024)Approximately Counting Answers to Conjunctive Queries with Disequalities and NegationsACM Transactions on Algorithms10.1145/368963421:1(1-29)Online publication date: 23-Aug-2024
  • (2024)Counting Answers to Unions of Conjunctive Queries: Natural Tractability Criteria and Meta-ComplexityProceedings of the ACM on Management of Data10.1145/36516142:2(1-17)Online publication date: 14-May-2024
  • (2024)Efficient Approximation of Fractional Hypertree Width2024 IEEE 65th Annual Symposium on Foundations of Computer Science (FOCS)10.1109/FOCS61266.2024.00053(754-779)Online publication date: 27-Oct-2024
  • Show More Cited By

Recommendations

Comments

Information & Contributors

Information

Published In

cover image ACM Transactions on Algorithms
ACM Transactions on Algorithms  Volume 6, Issue 2
March 2010
373 pages
ISSN:1549-6325
EISSN:1549-6333
DOI:10.1145/1721837
Issue’s Table of Contents
Permission to make digital or hard copies of all or part of this work for personal or classroom use is granted without fee provided that copies are not made or distributed for profit or commercial advantage and that copies bear this notice and the full citation on the first page. Copyrights for components of this work owned by others than ACM must be honored. Abstracting with credit is permitted. To copy otherwise, or republish, to post on servers or to redistribute to lists, requires prior specific permission and/or a fee. Request permissions from [email protected]

Publisher

Association for Computing Machinery

New York, NY, United States

Publication History

Published: 06 April 2010
Accepted: 01 March 2009
Revised: 01 March 2009
Received: 01 November 2008
Published in TALG Volume 6, Issue 2

Permissions

Request permissions for this article.

Check for updates

Author Tags

  1. Treewidth
  2. constraint satisfaction
  3. fractional hypertree width

Qualifiers

  • Research-article
  • Research
  • Refereed

Funding Sources

Contributors

Other Metrics

Bibliometrics & Citations

Bibliometrics

Article Metrics

  • Downloads (Last 12 months)48
  • Downloads (Last 6 weeks)8
Reflects downloads up to 07 Mar 2025

Other Metrics

Citations

Cited By

View all
  • (2024)Approximately Counting Answers to Conjunctive Queries with Disequalities and NegationsACM Transactions on Algorithms10.1145/368963421:1(1-29)Online publication date: 23-Aug-2024
  • (2024)Counting Answers to Unions of Conjunctive Queries: Natural Tractability Criteria and Meta-ComplexityProceedings of the ACM on Management of Data10.1145/36516142:2(1-17)Online publication date: 14-May-2024
  • (2024)Efficient Approximation of Fractional Hypertree Width2024 IEEE 65th Annual Symposium on Foundations of Computer Science (FOCS)10.1109/FOCS61266.2024.00053(754-779)Online publication date: 27-Oct-2024
  • (2022)Approximately Counting Answers to Conjunctive Queries with Disequalities and NegationsProceedings of the 41st ACM SIGMOD-SIGACT-SIGAI Symposium on Principles of Database Systems10.1145/3517804.3526231(315-324)Online publication date: 12-Jun-2022
  • (2021)Complexity Analysis of Generalized and Fractional Hypertree DecompositionsJournal of the ACM10.1145/345737468:5(1-50)Online publication date: 13-Sep-2021
  • (2020)The relational data borg is learningProceedings of the VLDB Endowment10.14778/3415478.341557213:12(3502-3515)Online publication date: 14-Sep-2020
  • (2020)Constant delay enumeration for conjunctive queriesACM SIGLOG News10.1145/3385634.33856367:1(4-33)Online publication date: 24-Feb-2020
  • (2020)The Impact of Negation on the Complexity of the Shapley Value in Conjunctive QueriesProceedings of the 39th ACM SIGMOD-SIGACT-SIGAI Symposium on Principles of Database Systems10.1145/3375395.3387664(285-297)Online publication date: 14-Jun-2020
  • (2020)Efficiently enumerating minimal triangulationsDiscrete Applied Mathematics10.1016/j.dam.2020.05.034Online publication date: Jun-2020
  • (2019)Solving Graph Problems via Potential Maximal CliquesACM Journal of Experimental Algorithmics10.1145/330129724(1-19)Online publication date: 18-Feb-2019
  • Show More Cited By

View Options

Login options

Full Access

View options

PDF

View or Download as a PDF file.

PDF

eReader

View online with eReader.

eReader

Figures

Tables

Media

Share

Share

Share this Publication link

Share on social media