Papers
Topics
Authors
Recent
Detailed Answer
Quick Answer
Concise responses based on abstracts only
Detailed Answer
Well-researched responses based on abstracts and relevant paper content.
Custom Instructions Pro
Preferences or requirements that you'd like Emergent Mind to consider when generating responses
Gemini 2.5 Flash
Gemini 2.5 Flash 89 tok/s
Gemini 2.5 Pro 48 tok/s Pro
GPT-5 Medium 15 tok/s Pro
GPT-5 High 19 tok/s Pro
GPT-4o 90 tok/s Pro
Kimi K2 211 tok/s Pro
GPT OSS 120B 459 tok/s Pro
Claude Sonnet 4 36 tok/s Pro
2000 character limit reached

The Hardness of Subgraph Isomorphism (1504.02876v1)

Published 11 Apr 2015 in cs.DS

Abstract: Subgraph Isomorphism is a very basic graph problem, where given two graphs $G$ and $H$ one is to check whether $G$ is a subgraph of $H$. Despite its simple definition, the Subgraph Isomorphism problem turns out to be very broad, as it generalizes problems such as Clique, $r$-Coloring, Hamiltonicity, Set Packing and Bandwidth. However, for all of the mentioned problems $2{\mathcal{O}(n)}$ time algorithms exist, so a natural and frequently asked question in the past was whether there exists a $2{\mathcal{O}(n)}$ time algorithm for Subgraph Isomorphism. In the monograph of Fomin and Kratsch [Springer'10] this question is highlighted as an open problem, among few others. Our main result is a reduction from 3-SAT, producing a subexponential number of sublinear instances of the Subgraph Isomorphism problem. In particular, our reduction implies a $2{\Omega(n \sqrt{\log n})}$ lower bound for Subgraph Isomorphism under the Exponential Time Hypothesis. This shows that there exist classes of graphs that are strictly harder to embed than cliques or Hamiltonian cycles. The core of our reduction consists of two steps. First, we preprocess and pack variables and clauses of a 3-SAT formula into groups of logarithmic size. However, the grouping is not arbitrary, since as a result we obtain only a limited interaction between the groups. In the second step, we overcome the technical hardness of encoding evaluations as permutations by a simple, yet fruitful scheme of guessing the sizes of preimages of an arbitrary mapping, reducing the case of arbitrary mapping to bijections. In fact, when applying this step to a recent independent result of Fomin et al.[arXiv:1502.05447 (2015)], who showed hardness of Graph Homomorphism, we can transfer their hardness result to Subgraph Isomorphism, implying a nearly tight lower bound of $2{\Omega(n \log n / \log \log n)}$.

Citations (3)
List To Do Tasks Checklist Streamline Icon: https://streamlinehq.com

Collections

Sign up for free to add this paper to one or more collections.

Summary

We haven't generated a summary for this paper yet.

Dice Question Streamline Icon: https://streamlinehq.com

Follow-Up Questions

We haven't generated follow-up questions for this paper yet.