Paper detail

A Holant Dichotomy: Is the FKT Algorithm Universal?

We prove a complexity dichotomy for complex-weighted Holant problems with an arbitrary set of symmetric constraint functions on Boolean variables. This dichotomy is specifically to answer the question: Is the FKT algorithm under a holographic transformation a \emph{universal} strategy to obtain polynomial-time algorithms for problems over planar graphs that are intractable in general? This dichotomy is a culmination of previous ones, including those for Spin Systems, Holant, and #CSP. A recurring theme has been that a holographic reduction to FKT is a universal strategy. Surprisingly, for planar Holant, we discover new planar tractable problems that are not expressible by a holographic reduction to FKT. In previous work, an important tool was a dichotomy for #CSP^d, which denotes #CSP where every variable appears a multiple of d times. However its proof violates planarity. We prove a dichotomy for planar #CSP^2. We apply this planar #CSP^2 dichotomy in the proof of the planar Holant dichotomy. As a special case of our new planar tractable problems, counting perfect matchings (#PM) over k-uniform hypergraphs is polynomial-time computable when the incidence graph is planar and k >= 5. The same problem is #P-hard when k=3 or k=4, which is also a consequence of our dichotomy. When k=2, it becomes #PM over planar graphs and is tractable again. More generally, over hypergraphs with specified hyperedge sizes and the same planarity assumption, #PM is polynomial-time computable if the greatest common divisor of all hyperedge sizes is at least 5.

preprint2015arXivOpen access

Signal facts

What is known right now

Open access4 authors2 topics

Next steps

Decide what to do with this paper

Use like or dislike for the fast social read. The more specific scholarly feedback stays available below when needed.

Log in to curate

Reading frame

Keep the important context close to the paper

Keep the important signals around this paper in one place: votes, save state, collection context, reviews and the metadata you need before deciding what to do next.

Institutions

Add specific reaction

Move through the context

Research map

Open full explorer

Move through nearby people, institutions, topics and adjacent work without leaving the paper page.

Building this map preview

BZPEER is loading the nearby papers, people, topics and institutions for this page.

Structured reviews

0 review(s)

ContributeLeave structured feedbackUse the review template when you have a concrete strength, concern or method question.Open review form

No structured reviews yet. High-signal critique starts here.

Work discussion

0 comment(s)

DiscussAdd a high-signal commentKeep quick notes, caveats and replication pointers separate from formal reviews.Open comment form

No discussion yet. The first strong comment sets the tone.