Paper detail

Almost-Linear Planted Cliques Elude the Metropolis Process

A seminal work of Jerrum (1992) showed that large cliques elude the Metropolis process. More specifically, Jerrum showed that the Metropolis algorithm cannot find a clique of size $k=Θ(n^α), α\in (0,1/2)$, which is planted in the Erdős-Rényi random graph $G(n,1/2)$, in polynomial time. Information theoretically it is possible to find such planted cliques as soon as $k \ge (2+ε) \log n$. Since the work of Jerrum, the computational problem of finding a planted clique in $G(n,1/2)$ was studied extensively and many polynomial time algorithms were shown to find the planted clique if it is of size $k = Ω(\sqrt{n})$, while no polynomial-time algorithm is known to work when $k=o(\sqrt{n})$. Notably, the first evidence of the problem&#39;s algorithmic hardness is commonly attributed to the result of Jerrum from 1992. In this paper we revisit the original Metropolis algorithm suggested by Jerrum. Interestingly, we find that the Metropolis algorithm actually fails to recover a planted clique of size $k=Θ(n^α)$ for any constant $0 \leq α< 1$. Moreover, we strengthen Jerrum&#39;s results in a number of other ways including: Like many results in the MCMC literature, the result of Jerrum shows that there exists a starting state (which may depend on the instance) for which the Metropolis algorithm fails. For a wide range of temperatures, we show that the algorithm fails when started at the most natural initial state, which is the empty clique. This answers an open problem stated in Jerrum (1992). We also show that the simulated tempering version of the Metropolis algorithm, a more sophisticated temperature-exchange variant of it, also fails at the same regime of parameters. Finally, our results confirm recent predictions by Gamarnik and Zadik (2019) and Angelini, Fachin, de Feo (2021).

preprint2022arXivOpen access
0citations
0reviews
0saves
Nocode
Nodataset
0institutions

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 graph slice

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.