English

Tight complexity lower bounds for integer linear programming with few constraints

Data Structures and Algorithms 2019-07-24 v3

Abstract

We consider the ILP Feasibility problem: given an integer linear program {Ax=b,x0}\{Ax = b, x\geq 0\}, where AA is an integer matrix with kk rows and \ell columns and bb is a vector of kk integers, we ask whether there exists xNx\in\mathbb{N}^\ell that satisfies Ax=bAx = b. Our goal is to study the complexity of ILP Feasibility when both kk, the number of constraints (rows of AA), and A\|A\|_\infty, the largest absolute value in AA, are small. Papadimitriou [J. ACM, 1981] was the first to give a fixed-parameter algorithm for ILP Feasibility in this setting, with running time ((Ab)k)O(k2)\left((\|A\mid b\|_\infty) \cdot k\right)^{O(k^2)}. This was very recently improved by Eisenbrand and Weismantel [SODA 2018], who used the Steinitz lemma to design an algorithm with running time (kA)O(k)b2(k\|A\|_\infty)^{O(k)}\cdot \|b\|_\infty^2, and subsequently by Jansen and Rohwedder [2018] to O(kA)klogbO(k\|A\|_\infty)^{k}\cdot \log \|b\|_\infty. We prove that for {0,1}\{0,1\}-matrices AA, the dependency on kk is probably optimal: an algorithm with running time 2o(klogk)(+b)o(k)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 AA, which is the treedepth of the graph over the rows of AA, 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 A2O(td(A))(k++logb)O(1)\|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 AA and bb are in {1,0,1}\{-1,0,1\}, the existence of an algorithm with running time 22o(td(A))(k+)O(1)2^{2^{o(td(A))}}\cdot (k+\ell)^{O(1)} would contradict ETH.

Keywords

Cite

@article{arxiv.1811.01296,
  title  = {Tight complexity lower bounds for integer linear programming with few constraints},
  author = {Dušan Knop and Michał Pilipczuk and Marcin Wrochna},
  journal= {arXiv preprint arXiv:1811.01296},
  year   = {2019}
}

Comments

Added Corollary 2, extended Conclusions