Results 1  10
of
819
Improved Approximation Algorithms for Maximum Cut and Satisfiability Problems Using Semidefinite Programming
 Journal of the ACM
, 1995
"... We present randomized approximation algorithms for the maximum cut (MAX CUT) and maximum 2satisfiability (MAX 2SAT) problems that always deliver solutions of expected value at least .87856 times the optimal value. These algorithms use a simple and elegant technique that randomly rounds the solution ..."
Abstract

Cited by 1231 (13 self)
 Add to MetaCart
(Show Context)
We present randomized approximation algorithms for the maximum cut (MAX CUT) and maximum 2satisfiability (MAX 2SAT) problems that always deliver solutions of expected value at least .87856 times the optimal value. These algorithms use a simple and elegant technique that randomly rounds the solution to a nonlinear programming relaxation. This relaxation can be interpreted both as a semidefinite program and as an eigenvalue minimization problem. The best previously known approximation algorithms for these problems had performance guarantees of ...
A Threshold of ln n for Approximating Set Cover
 JOURNAL OF THE ACM
, 1998
"... Given a collection F of subsets of S = f1; : : : ; ng, set cover is the problem of selecting as few as possible subsets from F such that their union covers S, and max kcover is the problem of selecting k subsets from F such that their union has maximum cardinality. Both these problems are NPhar ..."
Abstract

Cited by 778 (5 self)
 Add to MetaCart
(Show Context)
Given a collection F of subsets of S = f1; : : : ; ng, set cover is the problem of selecting as few as possible subsets from F such that their union covers S, and max kcover is the problem of selecting k subsets from F such that their union has maximum cardinality. Both these problems are NPhard. We prove that (1 \Gamma o(1)) ln n is a threshold below which set cover cannot be approximated efficiently, unless NP has slightly superpolynomial time algorithms. This closes the gap (up to low order terms) between the ratio of approximation achievable by the greedy algorithm (which is (1 \Gamma o(1)) ln n), and previous results of Lund and Yannakakis, that showed hardness of approximation within a ratio of (log 2 n)=2 ' 0:72 lnn. For max kcover we show an approximation threshold of (1 \Gamma 1=e) (up to low order terms), under the assumption that P != NP .
A Parallel Repetition Theorem
 SIAM Journal on Computing
, 1998
"... We show that a parallel repetition of any twoprover oneround proof system (MIP(2, 1)) decreases the probability of error at an exponential rate. No constructive bound was previously known. The constant in the exponent (in our analysis) depends only on the original probability of error and on the t ..."
Abstract

Cited by 378 (9 self)
 Add to MetaCart
We show that a parallel repetition of any twoprover oneround proof system (MIP(2, 1)) decreases the probability of error at an exponential rate. No constructive bound was previously known. The constant in the exponent (in our analysis) depends only on the original probability of error and on the total number of possible answers of the two provers. The dependency on the total number of possible answers is logarithmic, which was recently proved to be almost the best possible [U. Feige and O. Verbitsky, Proc. 11th Annual IEEE Conference on Computational Complexity, IEEE Computer Society Press, Los Alamitos, CA, 1996, pp. 7076].
When trees collide: An approximation algorithm for the generalized Steiner problem on networks
, 1994
"... We give the first approximation algorithm for the generalized network Steiner problem, a problem in network design. An instance consists of a network with linkcosts and, for each pair fi; jg of nodes, an edgeconnectivity requirement r ij . The goal is to find a minimumcost network using the a ..."
Abstract

Cited by 256 (39 self)
 Add to MetaCart
We give the first approximation algorithm for the generalized network Steiner problem, a problem in network design. An instance consists of a network with linkcosts and, for each pair fi; jg of nodes, an edgeconnectivity requirement r ij . The goal is to find a minimumcost network using the available links and satisfying the requirements. Our algorithm outputs a solution whose cost is within 2dlog 2 (r + 1)e of optimal, where r is the highest requirement value. In the course of proving the performance guarantee, we prove a combinatorial minmax approximate equality relating minimumcost networks to maximum packings of certain kinds of cuts. As a consequence of the proof of this theorem, we obtain an approximation algorithm for optimally packing these cuts; we show that this algorithm has application to estimating the reliability of a probabilistic network.
Which Problems Have Strongly Exponential Complexity?
 Journal of Computer and System Sciences
, 1998
"... For several NPcomplete problems, there have been a progression of better but still exponential algorithms. In this paper, we address the relative likelihood of subexponential algorithms for these problems. We introduce a generalized reduction which we call SubExponential Reduction Family (SERF) t ..."
Abstract

Cited by 249 (9 self)
 Add to MetaCart
(Show Context)
For several NPcomplete problems, there have been a progression of better but still exponential algorithms. In this paper, we address the relative likelihood of subexponential algorithms for these problems. We introduce a generalized reduction which we call SubExponential Reduction Family (SERF) that preserves subexponential complexity. We show that CircuitSAT is SERFcomplete for all NPsearch problems, and that for any fixed k, kSAT, kColorability, kSet Cover, Independent Set, Clique, Vertex Cover, are SERFcomplete for the class SNP of search problems expressible by second order existential formulas whose first order part is universal. In particular, subexponential complexity for any one of the above problems implies the same for all others. We also look at the issue of proving strongly exponential lower bounds for AC 0 ; that is, bounds of the form 2 \Omega\Gamma n) . This problem is even open for depth3 circuits. In fact, such a bound for depth3 circuits with even l...
Approximate graph coloring by semidefinite programming
 Proc. 35 th IEEE FOCS, IEEE
, 1994
"... a coloring is called the chromatic number of�, and is usually denoted by��.Determining the chromatic number of a graph is known to be NPhard (cf. [19]). Besides its theoretical significance as a canonical NPhard problem, graph coloring arises naturally in a variety of applications such as register ..."
Abstract

Cited by 212 (6 self)
 Add to MetaCart
(Show Context)
a coloring is called the chromatic number of�, and is usually denoted by��.Determining the chromatic number of a graph is known to be NPhard (cf. [19]). Besides its theoretical significance as a canonical NPhard problem, graph coloring arises naturally in a variety of applications such as register allocation [11, 12, 13] is the maximum degree of any vertex. Beand timetable/examination scheduling [8, 40]. In many We consider the problem of coloring�colorable graphs with the fewest possible colors. We give a randomized polynomial time algorithm which colors a 3colorable graph on vertices with� � ���� colors where sides giving the best known approximation ratio in terms of, this marks the first nontrivial approximation result as a function of the maximum degree. This result can be generalized to�colorable graphs to obtain a coloring using�� � ��� � � � �colors. Our results are inspired by the recent work of Goemans and Williamson who used an algorithm for semidefinite optimization problems, which generalize linear programs, to obtain improved approximations for the MAX CUT and MAX 2SAT problems. An intriguing outcome of our work is a duality relationship established between the value of the optimum solution to our semidefinite program and the Lovász�function. We show lower bounds on the gap between the optimum solution of our semidefinite program and the actual chromatic number; by duality this also demonstrates interesting new facts about the�function. 1
The Maximum Clique Problem
, 1999
"... Contents 1 Introduction 2 1.1 Notations and Definitions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 2 Problem Formulations 4 2.1 Integer Programming Formulations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5 2.2 Continuous Formulations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8 3 Computation ..."
Abstract

Cited by 195 (21 self)
 Add to MetaCart
Contents 1 Introduction 2 1.1 Notations and Definitions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 2 Problem Formulations 4 2.1 Integer Programming Formulations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5 2.2 Continuous Formulations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8 3 Computational Complexity 12 4 Bounds and Estimates 15 5 Exact Algorithms 19 5.1 Enumerative Algorithms . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19 5.2 Exact Algorithms for the Unweighted Case . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21 5.3 Exact Algorithms for the Weighted Case . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 25 6 Heuristics 27 6.1 Sequential Greedy Heuristics . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 28 6.2 Local Search Heuristics . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 29 6.3 Advanced Search Heuristics . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 30 6.3.1 Simulated annealing . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 30 6.3.2 Neural networks . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
The Complexity of Multiterminal Cuts
 SIAM Journal on Computing
, 1994
"... In the Multiterminal Cut problem we are given an edgeweighted graph and a subset of the vertices called terminals, and asked for a minimum weight set of edges that separates each terminal from all the others. When the number k of terminals is two, this is simply the mincut, maxflow problem, and ..."
Abstract

Cited by 190 (0 self)
 Add to MetaCart
(Show Context)
In the Multiterminal Cut problem we are given an edgeweighted graph and a subset of the vertices called terminals, and asked for a minimum weight set of edges that separates each terminal from all the others. When the number k of terminals is two, this is simply the mincut, maxflow problem, and can be solved in polynomial time. We show that the problem becomes NPhard as soon as k = 3, but can be solved in polynomial time for planar graphs for any fixed k. The planar problem is NPhard, however, if k is not fixed. We also describe a simple approximation algorithm for arbitrary graphs that is guaranteed to come within a factor of 2  2/k of the optimal cut weight.