Papers
Topics
Authors
Recent
Assistant
AI Research Assistant
Well-researched responses based on relevant abstracts and 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 133 tok/s
Gemini 2.5 Pro 51 tok/s Pro
GPT-5 Medium 28 tok/s Pro
GPT-5 High 30 tok/s Pro
GPT-4o 125 tok/s Pro
Kimi K2 188 tok/s Pro
GPT OSS 120B 448 tok/s Pro
Claude Sonnet 4.5 36 tok/s Pro
2000 character limit reached

Tight complexity lower bounds for integer linear programming with few constraints (1811.01296v3)

Published 3 Nov 2018 in cs.DS

Abstract: We consider the ILP Feasibility problem: given an integer linear program ${Ax = b, x\geq 0}$, where $A$ is an integer matrix with $k$ rows and $\ell$ columns and $b$ is a vector of $k$ integers, we ask whether there exists $x\in\mathbb{N}\ell$ that satisfies $Ax = b$. Our goal is to study the complexity of ILP Feasibility when both $k$, the number of constraints (rows of $A$), and $|A|\infty$, the largest absolute value in $A$, are small. Papadimitriou [J. ACM, 1981] was the first to give a fixed-parameter algorithm for ILP Feasibility in this setting, with running time $\left((|A\mid b|\infty) \cdot k\right){O(k2)}$. This was very recently improved by Eisenbrand and Weismantel [SODA 2018], who used the Steinitz lemma to design an algorithm with running time $(k|A|\infty){O(k)}\cdot |b|\infty2$, and subsequently by Jansen and Rohwedder [2018] to $O(k|A|\infty){k}\cdot \log |b|\infty$. We prove that for ${0,1}$-matrices $A$, the dependency on $k$ is probably optimal: an algorithm with running time $2{o(k\log k)}\cdot (\ell+|b|\infty){o(k)}$ would contradict ETH. This improves previous non-tight lower bounds of Fomin et al. [ESA 2018]. We then consider ILPs with many constraints, but structured in a shallow way. Precisely, we consider the dual treedepth of the matrix $A$, which is the treedepth of the graph over the rows of $A$, with two rows adjacent if in some column they both contain a non-zero entry. It was recently shown by Kouteck\'{y} et al. [ICALP 2018] that ILP Feasibility can be solved in time $|A|\infty{2{O(td(A))}}\cdot (k+\ell+\log |b|_\infty){O(1)}$. We present a streamlined proof of this fact and prove optimality: even assuming that all entries of $A$ and $b$ are in ${-1,0,1}$, the existence of an algorithm with running time $2{2{o(td(A))}}\cdot (k+\ell){O(1)}$ would contradict ETH.

Citations (37)

Summary

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

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

Open Problems

We haven't generated a list of open problems mentioned in this paper yet.

Lightbulb Streamline Icon: https://streamlinehq.com

Continue Learning

We haven't generated follow-up questions 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.