BZPEERReading, trust and collaboration for researchDiscover
Workspaces
Network
Opportunities
Account
Researcher profile
Radu Curticapean contributes to research discovery and scholarly infrastructure.
Trust snapshot
Actions
Research graph
Inspect adjacent work, topics, institutions and collaborators without jumping out to a separate graph page.
BZPEER is loading the nearby papers, people, topics and institutions for this page.
Published work
We give a new combinatorial explanation for well-known relations between determinants and traces of matrix powers. Such relations can be used to obtain polynomial-time and poly-logarithmic space algorithms for the determinant. Our new explanation avoids linear-algebraic arguments and instead exploits a classical connection between subgraph and homomorphism counts.
Given an integer $n\geq 1$ and an irreducible character $χ_λ$ of $S_{n}$ for some partition $λ$ of $n$, the immanant $\mathrm{imm}_λ:\mathbb{C}^{n\times n}\to\mathbb{C}$ maps matrices $A\in\mathbb{C}^{n\times n}$ to $\mathrm{imm}_λ(A)=\sum_{π\in S_{n}}χ_λ(π)\prod_{i=1}^{n}A_{i,π(i)}$. Important special cases include the determinant and permanent, which are the immanants associated with the sign and trivial character, respectively. It is known that immanants can be evaluated in polynomial time for characters that are close to the sign character: Given a partition $λ$ of $n$ with $s$ parts, let $b(λ):=n-s$ count the boxes to the right of the first column in the Young diagram of $λ$. For a family of partitions $Λ$, let $b(Λ):=\max_{λ\inΛ}b(λ)$ and write Imm$(Λ)$ for the problem of evaluating $\mathrm{imm}_λ(A)$ on input $A$ and $λ\inΛ$. If $b(Λ)<\infty$, then Imm$(Λ)$ is known to be polynomial-time computable. This subsumes the case of the determinant. On the other hand, if $b(Λ)=\infty$, then previously known hardness results suggest that Imm$(Λ)$ cannot be solved in polynomial time. However, these results only address certain restricted classes of families $Λ$. In this paper, we show that the parameterized complexity assumption FPT $\neq$ #W[1] rules out polynomial-time algorithms for Imm$(Λ)$ for any computationally reasonable family of partitions $Λ$ with $b(Λ)=\infty$. We give an analogous result in algebraic complexity under the assumption VFPT $\neq$ VW[1]. Furthermore, if $b(λ)$ even grows polynomially in $Λ$, we show that Imm$(Λ)$ is hard for #P and VNP. This concludes a series of partial results on the complexity of immanants obtained over the last 35 years.
We consider the problem of counting matchings in planar graphs. While perfect matchings in planar graphs can be counted by a classical polynomial-time algorithm, the problem of counting all matchings (possibly containing unmatched vertices, also known as defects) is known to be #P-complete on planar graphs. To interpolate between the hard case of counting matchings and the easy case of counting perfect matchings, we study the parameterized problem of counting matchings with exactly k unmatched vertices in a planar graph G, on input G and k. This setting has a natural interpretation in statistical physics, and it is a special case of counting perfect matchings in k-apex graphs (graphs that can be turned planar by removing at most k vertices). Starting from a recent #W[1]-hardness proof for counting perfect matchings on k-apex graphs, we obtain that counting matchings with k unmatched vertices in planar graphs is #W[1]-hard. In contrast, given a plane graph G with s distinguished faces, there is an $O(2^s \cdot n^3)$ time algorithm for counting those matchings with k unmatched vertices such that all unmatched vertices lie on the distinguished faces. This implies an $f(k,s)\cdot n^{O(1)}$ time algorithm for counting perfect matchings in k-apex graphs whose apex neighborhood is covered by s faces.
We identify and study relevant structural parameters for the problem PerfMatch of counting perfect matchings in a given input graph $G$. These generalize the well-known tractable planar case, and they include the genus of $G$, its apex number (the minimum number of vertices whose removal renders $G$ planar), and its Hadwiger number (the size of a largest clique minor). To study these parameters, we first introduce the notion of combined matchgates, a general technique that bridges parameterized counting problems and the theory of so-called Holants and matchgates: Using combined matchgates, we can simulate certain non-existing gadgets $F$ as linear combinations of $t=O(1)$ existing gadgets. If a graph $G$ features $k$ occurrences of $F$, we can then reduce $G$ to $t^k$ graphs that feature only existing gadgets, thus enabling parameterized reductions. As applications of this technique, we simplify known $4^g n^{O(1)}$ time algorithms for PerfMatch on graphs of genus $g$. Orthogonally to this, we show #W[1]-hardness of the permanent on $k$-apex graphs, implying its #W[1]-hardness under the Hadwiger number. Additionally, we rule out $n^{o(k/\log k)}$ time algorithms under the counting exponential-time hypothesis #ETH. Finally, we use combined matchgates to prove parity-W[1]-hardness of evaluating the permanent modulo $2^k$, complementing an $O(n^{4k-3})$ time algorithm by Valiant and answering an open question of Björklund. We also obtain a lower bound of $n^{Ω(k/\log k)}$ under the parity version of the exponential-time hypothesis.
Given an edge-weighted graph G, let PerfMatch(G) denote the weighted sum over all perfect matchings M in G, weighting each matching M by the product of weights of edges in M. If G is unweighted, this plainly counts the perfect matchings of G. In this paper, we introduce parity separation, a new method for reducing PerfMatch to unweighted instances: For graphs G with edge-weights -1 and 1, we construct two unweighted graphs G1 and G2 such that PerfMatch(G) = PerfMatch(G1) - PerfMatch(G2). This yields a novel weight removal technique for counting perfect matchings, in addition to those known from classical #P-hardness proofs. We derive the following applications: 1. An alternative #P-completeness proof for counting unweighted perfect matchings. 2. C=P-completeness for deciding whether two given unweighted graphs have the same number of perfect matchings. To the best of our knowledge, this is the first C=P-completeness result for the "equality-testing version" of any natural counting problem that is not already #P-hard under parsimonious reductions. 3. An alternative tight lower bound for counting unweighted perfect matchings under the counting exponential-time hypothesis #ETH. Our technique is based upon matchgates and the Holant framework. To make our #P-hardness proof self-contained, we also apply matchgates for an alternative #P-hardness proof of PerfMatch on graphs with edge-weights -1 and 1.
For a class $\mathcal{H}$ of graphs, #Sub$(\mathcal{H})$ is the counting problem that, given a graph $H\in \mathcal{H}$ and an arbitrary graph $G$, asks for the number of subgraphs of $G$ isomorphic to $H$. It is known that if $\mathcal{H}$ has bounded vertex-cover number (equivalently, the size of the maximum matching in $\mathcal{H}$ is bounded), then #Sub$(\mathcal{H})$ is polynomial-time solvable. We complement this result with a corresponding lower bound: if $\mathcal{H}$ is any recursively enumerable class of graphs with unbounded vertex-cover number, then #Sub$(\mathcal{H})$ is #W[1]-hard parameterized by the size of $H$ and hence not polynomial-time solvable and not even fixed-parameter tractable, unless FPT = #W[1]. As a first step of the proof, we show that counting $k$-matchings in bipartite graphs is #W[1]-hard. Recently, Curticapean [ICALP 2013] proved the #W[1]-hardness of counting $k$-matchings in general graphs; our result strengthens this statement to bipartite graphs with a considerably simpler proof and even shows that, assuming the Exponential Time Hypothesis (ETH), there is no $f(k)n^{o(k/\log k)}$ time algorithm for counting $k$-matchings in bipartite graphs for any computable function $f(k)$. As a consequence, we obtain an independent and somewhat simpler proof of the classical result of Flum and Grohe [SICOMP 2004] stating that counting paths of length $k$ is #W[1]-hard, as well as a similar almost-tight ETH-based lower bound on the exponent.
A graph $H$ is single-crossing if it can be drawn in the plane with at most one crossing. For any single-crossing graph $H$, we give an $O(n^4)$ time algorithm for counting perfect matchings in graphs excluding $H$ as a minor. The runtime can be lowered to $O(n^{1.5})$ when $G$ excludes $K_5$ or $K_{3,3}$ as a minor. This is the first generalization of an algorithm for counting perfect matchings in $K_{3,3}$-free graphs (Little 1974, Vazirani 1989). Our algorithm uses black-boxes for counting perfect matchings in planar graphs and for computing certain graph decompositions. Together with an independent recent result (Straub et al. 2014) for graphs excluding $K_5$, it is one of the first nontrivial algorithms to not inherently rely on Pfaffian orientations.
Let $P$ be a set of $n$ points in the plane. A crossing-free structure on $P$ is a plane graph with vertex set $P$. Examples of crossing-free structures include triangulations of $P$, spanning cycles of $P$, also known as polygonalizations of $P$, among others. In this paper we develop a general technique for computing the number of crossing-free structures of an input set $P$. We apply the technique to obtain algorithms for computing the number of triangulations, matchings, and spanning cycles of $P$. The running time of our algorithms is upper bounded by $n^{O(k)}$, where $k$ is the number of onion layers of $P$. In particular, for $k = O(1)$ our algorithms run in polynomial time. In addition, we show that our algorithm for counting triangulations is never slower than $O^{*}(3.1414^{n})$, even when $k = Θ(n)$. Given that there are several well-studied configurations of points with at least $Ω(3.464^{n})$ triangulations, and some even with $Ω(8^{n})$ triangulations, our algorithm asymptotically outperforms any enumeration algorithm for such instances. In fact, it is widely believed that any set of $n$ points must have at least $Ω(3.464^{n})$ triangulations. If this is true, then our algorithm is strictly sub-linear in the number of triangulations counted. We also show that our techniques are general enough to solve the "Restricted-Triangulation-Counting-Problem", which we prove to be $W[2]$-hard in the parameter $k$. This implies a "no free lunch" result: In order to be fixed-parameter tractable, our general algorithm must rely on additional properties that are specific to the considered class of structures.