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 49 tok/s
Gemini 2.5 Pro 53 tok/s Pro
GPT-5 Medium 19 tok/s Pro
GPT-5 High 16 tok/s Pro
GPT-4o 103 tok/s Pro
Kimi K2 172 tok/s Pro
GPT OSS 120B 472 tok/s Pro
Claude Sonnet 4 39 tok/s Pro
2000 character limit reached

SoS and Planted Clique: Tight Analysis of MPW Moments at all Degrees and an Optimal Lower Bound at Degree Four (1507.05230v1)

Published 18 Jul 2015 in cs.CC

Abstract: The problem of finding large cliques in random graphs and its "planted" variant, where one wants to recover a clique of size $\omega \gg \log{(n)}$ added to an \Erdos-\Renyi graph $G \sim G(n,\frac{1}{2})$, have been intensely studied. Nevertheless, existing polynomial time algorithms can only recover planted cliques of size $\omega = \Omega(\sqrt{n})$. By contrast, information theoretically, one can recover planted cliques so long as $\omega \gg \log{(n)}$. In this work, we continue the investigation of algorithms from the sum of squares hierarchy for solving the planted clique problem begun by Meka, Potechin, and Wigderson (MPW, 2015) and Deshpande and Montanari (DM,2015). Our main results improve upon both these previous works by showing: 1. Degree four SoS does not recover the planted clique unless $\omega \gg \sqrt n poly \log n$, improving upon the bound $\omega \gg n{1/3}$ due to DM. A similar result was obtained independently by Raghavendra and Schramm (2015). 2. For $2 < d = o(\sqrt{\log{(n)}})$, degree $2d$ SoS does not recover the planted clique unless $\omega \gg n{1/(d + 1)} /(2d poly \log n)$, improving upon the bound due to MPW. Our proof for the second result is based on a fine spectral analysis of the certificate used in the prior works MPW,DM and Feige and Krauthgamer (2003) by decomposing it along an appropriately chosen basis. Along the way, we develop combinatorial tools to analyze the spectrum of random matrices with dependent entries and to understand the symmetries in the eigenspaces of the set symmetric matrices inspired by work of Grigoriev (2001). An argument of Kelner shows that the first result cannot be proved using the same certificate. Rather, our proof involves constructing and analyzing a new certificate that yields the nearly tight lower bound by "correcting" the certificate of previous works.

Citations (24)

Summary

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

List To Do Tasks Checklist Streamline Icon: https://streamlinehq.com

Collections

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

Lightbulb On Streamline Icon: https://streamlinehq.com

Continue Learning

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