Paper detail

Pre-Reduction Graph Products: Hardnesses of Properly Learning DFAs and Approximating EDP on DAGs

The study of graph products is a major research topic and typically concerns the term $f(G*H)$, e.g., to show that $f(G*H)=f(G)f(H)$. In this paper, we study graph products in a non-standard form $f(R[G*H]$ where $R$ is a "reduction", a transformation of any graph into an instance of an intended optimization problem. We resolve some open problems as applications. (1) A tight $n^{1-ε}$-approximation hardness for the minimum consistent deterministic finite automaton (DFA) problem, where $n$ is the sample size. Due to Board and Pitt [Theoretical Computer Science 1992], this implies the hardness of properly learning DFAs assuming $NP\neq RP$ (the weakest possible assumption). (2) A tight $n^{1/2-ε}$ hardness for the edge-disjoint paths (EDP) problem on directed acyclic graphs (DAGs), where $n$ denotes the number of vertices. (3) A tight hardness of packing vertex-disjoint $k$-cycles for large $k$. (4) An alternative (and perhaps simpler) proof for the hardness of properly learning DNF, CNF and intersection of halfspaces [Alekhnovich et al., FOCS 2004 and J. Comput.Syst.Sci. 2008].

preprint2014arXivOpen access

Signal facts

What is known right now

Open access3 authors1 topic

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.