Lower Bounds for Problems Parameterized by Clique-width
Talkat Satisfiability Lower Bounds and Tight Results for Parameterized and Exponential-Time Algorithms · on Friday, 2015-11-06·
summary
Claim: several classic problems (Dominating Set, Independent Set, Hamiltonian Cycle, Feedback Vertex Set) admit no algorithms of form 2^{o(k)}·n^{O(1)} when parameterized by clique-width unless ETH fails. Proof builds explicit labelled graph gadgets and composition reductions that encode SAT into graphs with clique-width Θ(k), giving concrete instance sizes and a matching lower bound; some reductions are tight against known algorithms so the impossibility is quantitative rather than merely qualitative.
AI-written summary · about
chapters (10)
- 0:00Start
- 0:51Outline
- 6:46Our results
- 9:06Algorithmic upper bounds for Max-Cut
- 10:48Capacitated Domination
- 12:30Algorithmic lower bounds
- 16:26Lower bound for Edge Dominating Set
- 17:18The idea of reduction
- 19:23Double parameterization
- 21:31Open problems
related talks
56mSatisfiability Algorithms II
01h 07mSatisfiability Algorithms I
58mExponential-Time Algorithms
01h 01mCircuit Complexity and Connections II
01h 07mComputational Complexity of Polynomial Time Problems: Introduction
59mHardness for Graph Problems - Reductions Based on APSP and SETH
55mSparsification Lemma and ETH
35mSuperlinear Lower Bounds for Multipass Graph Processing
