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

Tractable Hypergraph Properties for Constraint Satisfaction and Conjunctive Queries

Published: 01 November 2013 Publication History

Abstract

An important question in the study of constraint satisfaction problems (CSP) is understanding how the graph or hypergraph describing the incidence structure of the constraints influences the complexity of the problem. For binary CSP instances (that is, where each constraint involves only two variables), the situation is well understood: the complexity of the problem essentially depends on the treewidth of the graph of the constraints [Grohe 2007; Marx 2010b]. However, this is not the correct answer if constraints with unbounded number of variables are allowed, and in particular, for CSP instances arising from query evaluation problems in database theory. Formally, if H is a class of hypergraphs, then let CSP(H) be CSP restricted to instances whose hypergraph is in H. Our goal is to characterize those classes of hypergraphs for which CSP(H) is polynomial-time solvable or fixed-parameter tractable, parameterized by the number of variables. Note that in the applications related to database query evaluation, we usually assume that the number of variables is much smaller than the size of the instance, thus parameterization by the number of variables is a meaningful question.
The most general known property of H that makes CSP(H) polynomial-time solvable is bounded fractional hypertree width. Here we introduce a new hypergraph measure called submodular width, and show that bounded submodular width of H (which is a strictly more general property than bounded fractional hypertree width) implies that CSP(H) is fixed-parameter tractable. In a matching hardness result, we show that if H has unbounded submodular width, then CSP(H) is not fixed-parameter tractable (and hence not polynomial-time solvable), unless the Exponential Time Hypothesis (ETH) fails. The algorithmic result uses tree decompositions in a novel way: instead of using a single decomposition depending on the hypergraph, the instance is split into a set of instances (all on the same set of variables as the original instance), and then the new instances are solved by choosing a different tree decomposition for each of them. The reason why this strategy works is that the splitting can be done in such a way that the new instances are “uniform” with respect to the number extensions of partial solutions, and therefore the number of partial solutions can be described by a submodular function. For the hardness result, we prove via a series of combinatorial results that if a hypergraph H has large submodular width, then a 3SAT instance can be efficiently simulated by a CSP instance whose hypergraph is H. To prove these combinatorial results, we need to develop a theory of (multicommodity) flows on hypergraphs and vertex separators in the case when the function b(S) defining the cost of separator S is submodular, which can be of independent interest.

References

[1]
Isolde Adler. 2006. Width functions for hypertree decompositions. Ph.D. dissertation, Albert-Ludwigs-Universität Freiburg.
[2]
Isolde Adler, Georg Gottlob, and Martin Grohe. 2007. Hypertree width and related hypergraph invariants. Euro. J. Combin. 28, 8, 2167--2181.
[3]
Amit Agarwal, Noga Alon, and Moses Charikar. 2007. Improved approximation for directed cut problems. In Proceedings of the 39th Annual ACM Symposium on Theory of Computing (STOC’07). ACM, New York, 671--680.
[4]
Noga Alon, Ilan Newman, Alexander Shen, Gábor Tardos, and Nikolai Vereshchagin. 2007. Partitioning multi-dimensional sets in a small number of “uniform” parts. Euro. J. Combin. 28, 1, 134--144.
[5]
Omid Amini, Frédéric Mazoit, Nicolas Nisse, and Stéphan Thomassé. 2009. Submodular partition functions. Discr. Math. 309, 20, 6000--6008.
[6]
Alexandr Andoni, Piotr Indyk, and Mihai Patrascu. 2006. On the optimality of the dimensionality reduction method. In Proceedings of the 47th Annual IEEE Symposium on Foundations of Computer Science (FOCS’06). IEEE Computer Society, Los Alamitos, CA, 449--458.
[7]
Albert Atserias, Andrei A. Bulatov, and Víctor Dalmau. 2007. On the power of k-consistency. In Proceedings of ICALP. 279--290.
[8]
Catriel Beeri, Ronald Fagin, David Maier, Alberto O. Mendelzon, Jeffrey D. Ullman, and Mihalis Yannakakis. 1981. Properties of acyclic database schemes. In Proceedings of STOC. 355--362.
[9]
Catriel Beeri, Ronald Fagin, David Maier, and Mihalis Yannakakis. 1983. On the desirability of acyclic database schemes. J. ACM 30, 3, 479--513.
[10]
Andrei A. Bulatov. 2006. A dichotomy theorem for constraint satisfaction problems on a 3-element set. J. ACM 53, 1, 66--120.
[11]
Andrei A. Bulatov. 2011. Complexity of conservative constraint satisfaction problems. ACM Trans. Comput. Log. 12, 4, Article 24.
[12]
A. A. Bulatov, A. A. Krokhin, and P. Jeavons. 2001. The complexity of maximal constraint languages. In Proceedings of the 33rd ACM Symposium on Theory of Computing. 667--674.
[13]
Ashok K. Chandra and Philip M. Merlin. 1977. Optimal implementation of conjunctive queries in relational data bases. In Proceedings of STOC. 77--90.
[14]
Chandra Chekuri and Anand Rajaraman. 2000. Conjunctive query containment revisited. Theoret. Comput. Sci. 239, 2, 211--229.
[15]
Hubie Chen and Martin Grohe. 2010. Constraint satisfaction with succinctly specified relations. J. Comput. Syst. Sci. 76, 8, 847--860.
[16]
F. R. K. Chung, R. L. Graham, P. Frankl, and J. B. Shearer. 1986. Some intersection theorems for ordered sets and graphs. J. Combin. Theory Ser. A 43, 1, 23--37.
[17]
Víctor Dalmau, Phokion G. Kolaitis, and Moshe Y. Vardi. 2002. Constraint satisfaction, bounded treewidth, and finite-variable logics. In Proceedings of the 8th International Conference on Principles and Practice of Constraint Programming (CP’02). Springer-Verlag, 310--326.
[18]
R. G. Downey and M. R. Fellows. 1999. Parameterized Complexity. Springer, New York.
[19]
Ronald Fagin. 1983. Degrees of acyclicity for hypergraphs and relational database schemes. J. ACM 30, 3, 514--550.
[20]
Tomás Feder and Moshe Y. Vardi. 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.
[21]
Jörg Flum and Martin Grohe. 2006. Parameterized Complexity Theory. Springer, Berlin.
[22]
E. C. Freuder. 1990. Complexity of k-tree structured constraint satisfaction problems. In Proceedings of AAAI-90. 4--9.
[23]
G. Gottlob and S. Szeider. 2008. Fixed-parameter algorithms for artificial intelligence, constraint satisfaction and database problems. Comput. J. 51, 3, 303--325.
[24]
G. Gottlob, N. Leone, and F. Scarcello. 2002a. Hypertree decompositions and tractable queries. J. Comput. System Sci. 64, 579--627.
[25]
Georg Gottlob, Francesco Scarcello, and Martha Sideri. 2002b. Fixed-parameter complexity in AI and nonmonotonic reasoning. Artif. Intell. 138, 1--2, 55--86.
[26]
Gianluigi Greco and Francesco Scarcello. 2010. The power of tree projections: Local consistency, greedy algorithms, and larger islands of tractability. In Proceedings of the 29th ACM SIGMOD-SIGACT-SIGART Symposium on Principles of Database Systems (PODS’10). ACM, New York, 327--338.
[27]
Martin Grohe. 2006. The structure of tractable constraint satisfaction problems. In Proceedings of MFCS’06. 58--72.
[28]
Martin Grohe. 2007. The complexity of homomorphism and constraint satisfaction problems seen from the other side. J. ACM 54, 1, 1.
[29]
Martin Grohe and Dániel Marx. 2009. On tree width, bramble size, and expansion. J. Combinat. Theory Ser. B 99, 1, 218--228.
[30]
Martin Grohe and Dániel Marx. 2012+. Constraint solving via fractional edge covers. (2012+). To appear. ACM Trans. Algor.
[31]
Anupam Gupta. 2003. Improved results for directed multicut. In Proceedings of the 14th Annual ACM-SIAM Symposium on Discrete Algorithms. ACM, New York, 454--455.
[32]
Mohammad Taghi Hajiaghayi and Harald Räcke. 2006. An O(√n)-approximation algorithm for directed sparsest cut. Inform. Process. Lett. 97, 4, 156--160.
[33]
Petr Hliněný. 2005. A parametrized algorithm for matroid branch-width. SIAM J. Comput. 35, 2, 259--277.
[34]
Petr Hliněný and Sang-il Oum. 2008. Finding branch-decompositions and rank-decompositions. SIAM J. Comput. 38, 3, 1012--1032.
[35]
Petr Hliněný and Geoff Whittle. 2006. Matroid tree-width. European J. Combin. 27, 7, 1117--1128.
[36]
Russell Impagliazzo, Ramamohan Paturi, and Francis Zane. 2001. Which problems have strongly exponential complexity? J. Comput. System Sci. 63, 4, 512--530.
[37]
Satoru Iwata. 2008. Submodular function minimization. Math. Program. 112, 1, Ser. B, 45--64.
[38]
Satoru Iwata, Lisa Fleischer, and Satoru Fujishige. 2001. A combinatorial strongly polynomial algorithm for minimizing submodular functions. J. ACM 48, 4, 761--777.
[39]
P. Jeavons, D. A. Cohen, and M. Gyssens. 1997. Closure properties of constraints. J. ACM 44, 4, 527--548.
[40]
Phokion G. Kolaitis and Moshe Y. Vardi. 2000a. Conjunctive-query containment and constraint satisfaction. J. Comput. Syst. Sci. 61, 2, 302--332.
[41]
Phokion G. Kolaitis and Moshe Y. Vardi. 2000b. A game-theoretic approach to constraint satisfaction. In Proceedings of AAAI/IAAI. 175--181.
[42]
Dániel Marx. 2007. On the optimality of planar and geometric approximation schemes. In Proceedings of the 48th Annual IEEE Symposium on Foundations of Computer Science (FOCS’07). 338--348.
[43]
Dániel Marx. 2010a. Approximating fractional hypertree width. ACM Trans. Algor. 6, 2, 1--17.
[44]
Dániel Marx. 2010b. Can You Beat Treewidth? Theory Comput. 6, 1, 85--112.
[45]
Dániel Marx. 2010c. Tractable hypergraph properties for constraint satisfaction and conjunctive queries. In Proceedings of the 42nd ACM Symposium on Theory of Computing. 735--744.
[46]
Dániel Marx. 2011. Tractable structures for constraint satisfaction with truth tables. Theory Comput. Syst. 48, 444--464.
[47]
Rolf Niedermeier. 2006. Invitation to Fixed-Parameter Algorithms. Oxford Lecture Series in Mathematics and its Applications, Vol. 31, Oxford University Press, Oxford.
[48]
Sang-il Oum. 2005. Approximating rank-width and clique-width quickly. In Proceedings of the 31st International Workshop on Graph-Theoretic Concepts in Computer Science. 49--58.
[49]
Sang-il Oum and Paul Seymour. 2006. Approximating clique-width and branch-width. J. Combin. Theory Ser. B 96, 4, 514--528.
[50]
Sang-il Oum and Paul Seymour. 2007. Testing branch-width. J. Combin. Theory Ser. B 97, 3, 385--393.
[51]
Mihai Pǎtraşcu and Ryan Williams. 2010. On the possibility of faster SAT algorithms. In Proceedings of the 21st ACM/SIAM Symposium on Discrete Algorithms (SODA). 1065--1075.
[52]
Francesco Scarcello, Georg Gottlob, and Gianluigi Greco. 2008. Uniform constraint satisfaction problems and database theory. In Complexity of Constraints, 156--195.
[53]
Thomas J. Schaefer. 1978. The complexity of satisfiability problems. In Conference Record of the 10th Annual ACM Symposium on Theory of Computing. ACM, New York, 216--226.
[54]
Alexander Schrijver. 2000. A combinatorial algorithm minimizing submodular functions in strongly polynomial time. J. Combin. Theory Ser. B 80, 2, 346--355.
[55]
Mihalis Yannakakis. 1981. Algorithms for acyclic database schemes. In Proceedings of VLDB. 82--94.

Cited By

View all
  • (2024)Tight Fine-Grained Bounds for Direct Access on Join QueriesACM Transactions on Database Systems10.1145/370744850:1(1-44)Online publication date: 6-Dec-2024
  • (2024)Solving Promise Equations over Monoids and GroupsACM Transactions on Computational Logic10.1145/369810626:1(1-24)Online publication date: 27-Sep-2024
  • (2024)Insert-Only versus Insert-Delete in Dynamic Query EvaluationProceedings of the ACM on Management of Data10.1145/36958372:5(1-26)Online publication date: 7-Nov-2024
  • Show More Cited By

Index Terms

  1. Tractable Hypergraph Properties for Constraint Satisfaction and Conjunctive Queries

      Recommendations

      Comments

      Information & Contributors

      Information

      Published In

      cover image Journal of the ACM
      Journal of the ACM  Volume 60, Issue 6
      November 2013
      239 pages
      ISSN:0004-5411
      EISSN:1557-735X
      DOI:10.1145/2555516
      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 the author(s) 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: 01 November 2013
      Accepted: 01 August 2013
      Revised: 01 March 2013
      Received: 01 December 2011
      Published in JACM Volume 60, Issue 6

      Permissions

      Request permissions for this article.

      Check for updates

      Author Tags

      1. Constraint satisfaction
      2. fractional edge covers
      3. hypergraphs
      4. hypertree width

      Qualifiers

      • Research-article
      • Research
      • Refereed

      Funding Sources

      Contributors

      Other Metrics

      Bibliometrics & Citations

      Bibliometrics

      Article Metrics

      • Downloads (Last 12 months)82
      • Downloads (Last 6 weeks)11
      Reflects downloads up to 02 Feb 2025

      Other Metrics

      Citations

      Cited By

      View all
      • (2024)Tight Fine-Grained Bounds for Direct Access on Join QueriesACM Transactions on Database Systems10.1145/370744850:1(1-44)Online publication date: 6-Dec-2024
      • (2024)Solving Promise Equations over Monoids and GroupsACM Transactions on Computational Logic10.1145/369810626:1(1-24)Online publication date: 27-Sep-2024
      • (2024)Insert-Only versus Insert-Delete in Dynamic Query EvaluationProceedings of the ACM on Management of Data10.1145/36958372:5(1-26)Online publication date: 7-Nov-2024
      • (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)Counting Subgraphs in Somewhere Dense GraphsSIAM Journal on Computing10.1137/22M153566853:5(1409-1438)Online publication date: 27-Sep-2024
      • (2024)On the non-efficient PAC learnability of conjunctive queriesInformation Processing Letters10.1016/j.ipl.2023.106431183(106431)Online publication date: Jan-2024
      • (2024)Improving speculative query execution support by the use of the hypergraph representationFuture Generation Computer Systems10.1016/j.future.2023.07.030150(186-201)Online publication date: Jan-2024
      • (2023)Space-Time Tradeoffs for Conjunctive Queries with Access PatternsProceedings of the 42nd ACM SIGMOD-SIGACT-SIGAI Symposium on Principles of Database Systems10.1145/3584372.3588675(59-68)Online publication date: 18-Jun-2023
      • (2023)Incremental Updates of Generalized Hypertree DecompositionsACM Journal of Experimental Algorithmics10.1145/357826627(1-28)Online publication date: 3-Mar-2023
      • 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