On Integer Programs That Look Like Paths
Marcin Briański, Alexandra Lassota, Kristýna Pekárková, Michał Pilipczuk, Janina Reuter
TL;DR
The paper investigates integer programs with path-like constraint matrices, where each nonzero entry of $A$ lies in at most two consecutive constraints. It establishes NP-hardness for feasibility even when $\|A\|_\infty \le 8$ via a 3-SAT–driven layered reduction, and provides an ETH-based lower bound in that regime. By contrast, it identifies a tractable frontier: hollow staircase matrices with $A \in \{-1,0,1\}$ and $\mathbf{x} \ge 0$ allow polynomial-time minimization of a linear objective, supported by a universal $\ell_\infty$ bound of $2$ on Graver basis elements, enabling augmentation. The work also raises open questions about tightening the hardness constant below $8$ and the complexity of the unbounded-variable version, highlighting the nuanced boundary between tractability and hardness for path-like IPs.
Abstract
Solving integer programs of the form $\min \{\mathbf{x} \mid A\mathbf{x} = \mathbf{b}, \mathbf{l} \leq \mathbf{x} \leq \mathbf{u}, \mathbf{x} \in \mathbb{Z}^n \}$ is, in general, $\mathsf{NP}$-hard. Hence, great effort has been put into identifying subclasses of integer programs that are solvable in polynomial or $\mathsf{FPT}$ time. A common scheme for many of these integer programs is a star-like structure of the constraint matrix. The arguably simplest form that is not a star is a path. We study integer programs where the constraint matrix $A$ has such a path-like structure: every non-zero coefficient appears in at most two consecutive constraints. We prove that even if all coefficients of $A$ are bounded by 8, deciding the feasibility of such integer programs is $\mathsf{NP}$-hard via a reduction from 3-SAT. Given the existence of efficient algorithms for integer programs with star-like structures and a closely related pattern where the sum of absolute values is column-wise bounded by 2 (hence, there are at most two non-zero entries per column of size at most 2), this hardness result is surprising.
