Table of Contents
Fetching ...

The Descriptive Complexity of Relation Modification Problems

Florian Chudigiewitsch, Marlene Gründel, Christian Komusiewicz, Nils Morawietz, Till Tantau

Abstract

A relation modification problem gets a logical structure and a natural number k as input and asks whether k modifications of the structure suffice to make it satisfy a predefined property. We provide a complete classification of the classical and parameterized complexity of relation modification problems - the latter w. r. t. the modification budget k - based on the descriptive complexity of the respective target property. We consider different types of logical structures on which modifications are performed: Whereas monadic structures and undirected graphs without self-loops each yield their own complexity landscapes, we find that modifying undirected graphs with self-loops, directed graphs, or arbitrary logical structures is equally hard w. r. t. quantifier patterns. Moreover, we observe that all classes of problems considered in this paper are subject to a strong dichotomy in the sense that they are either very easy to solve (that is, they lie in paraAC^{0\uparrow} or TC^0) or intractable (that is, they contain W[2]-hard or NP-hard problems).

The Descriptive Complexity of Relation Modification Problems

Abstract

A relation modification problem gets a logical structure and a natural number k as input and asks whether k modifications of the structure suffice to make it satisfy a predefined property. We provide a complete classification of the classical and parameterized complexity of relation modification problems - the latter w. r. t. the modification budget k - based on the descriptive complexity of the respective target property. We consider different types of logical structures on which modifications are performed: Whereas monadic structures and undirected graphs without self-loops each yield their own complexity landscapes, we find that modifying undirected graphs with self-loops, directed graphs, or arbitrary logical structures is equally hard w. r. t. quantifier patterns. Moreover, we observe that all classes of problems considered in this paper are subject to a strong dichotomy in the sense that they are either very easy to solve (that is, they lie in paraAC^{0\uparrow} or TC^0) or intractable (that is, they contain W[2]-hard or NP-hard problems).
Paper Structure (14 sections, 27 theorems, 14 equations, 6 figures, 1 table)

This paper contains 14 sections, 27 theorems, 14 equations, 6 figures, 1 table.

Key Result

theorem 1

Let $p \in \{a,e\}^*$ be a pattern. For each modification operation $\otimes\in \{\mathrm{del}, \mathrm{add}, \mathrm{edit}\}$, we have

Figures (6)

  • Figure 1: Visualization of the reduction in Lemma \ref{['lemma:p-undir-ae']}.
  • Figure 2: Visualization of the reduction in Lemma \ref{['lemma:p-basic-eae']}.
  • Figure 3: Example for the reduction in Lemma \ref{['lemma:basic-eaa']}.
  • Figure 4: Visualization of the reduction in Lemma \ref{['lemma:p-basic-aea']}.
  • Figure 5: Visualization of the reduction in Lemma \ref{['lemma:p-basic-aee']}.
  • ...and 1 more figures

Theorems & Definitions (53)

  • theorem 1
  • lemma 1
  • proof
  • lemma 2
  • proof
  • theorem 2
  • lemma 3
  • proof
  • lemma 4: $\star$
  • lemma 5: $\star$
  • ...and 43 more