Paper detail

Spectral Planting and the Hardness of Refuting Cuts, Colorability, and Communities in Random Graphs

We study the problem of efficiently refuting the k-colorability of a graph, or equivalently certifying a lower bound on its chromatic number. We give formal evidence of average-case computational hardness for this problem in sparse random regular graphs, showing optimality of a simple spectral certificate. This evidence takes the form of a computationally-quiet planting: we construct a distribution of d-regular graphs that has significantly smaller chromatic number than a typical regular graph drawn uniformly at random, while providing evidence that these two distributions are indistinguishable by a large class of algorithms. We generalize our results to the more general problem of certifying an upper bound on the maximum k-cut. This quiet planting is achieved by minimizing the effect of the planted structure (e.g. colorings or cuts) on the graph spectrum. Specifically, the planted structure corresponds exactly to eigenvectors of the adjacency matrix. This avoids the pushout effect of random matrix theory, and delays the point at which the planting becomes visible in the spectrum or local statistics. To illustrate this further, we give similar results for a Gaussian analogue of this problem: a quiet version of the spiked model, where we plant an eigenspace rather than adding a generic low-rank perturbation. Our evidence for computational hardness of distinguishing two distributions is based on three different heuristics: stability of belief propagation, the local statistics hierarchy, and the low-degree likelihood ratio. Of independent interest, our results include general-purpose bounds on the low-degree likelihood ratio for multi-spiked matrix models, and an improved low-degree analysis of the stochastic block model.

preprint2020arXivOpen access

Signal facts

What is known right now

Open access5 authors5 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.