1 / 84

CHAPTER 3 The Theory of NP-completeness

CHAPTER 3 The Theory of NP-completeness. S. J. Shyu. An Informal Discussion of the Theory of NP-completeness. NP-cpmpleteness 的理論之所以重要乃在於它指出了一群「困難」的問題( difficult problems, 其 lower bound 似乎有指數函數的 order )亦即 NP-complete 的理論,指出了一群似乎找不到 polynomail time algorithm 的問題。.

linda-brady
Download Presentation

CHAPTER 3 The Theory of NP-completeness

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript


  1. CHAPTER 3The Theory of NP-completeness S. J. Shyu

  2. An Informal Discussion of the Theory of NP-completeness • NP-cpmpleteness 的理論之所以重要乃在於它指出了一群「困難」的問題(difficult problems, 其 lower bound 似乎有指數函數的 order)亦即 NP-complete 的理論,指出了一群似乎找不到 polynomail time algorithm 的問題。

  3. NP-complete 的理論首先定出 NP (Non-deterministic Polynomial)problems;其中有難題也有容易的。

  4. 到目前為止,所有 NP-complete 的問題在 the worst case 下都找不出任何 polynomial algorithm 來解!亦即任一 NP-complete 的問題在 the worst case 時目前最好的 algorithm 都得花 exponential 的時間才能解決。 • 注意:這兒強調的是 the worst case!也就是說有的 NP-complete 問題可能在 the average case 下,可在 polynomial 的時間解決。

  5. NP-complete 理論宣稱:若某個 NP-complete 的問題可在 Polynomial time 內解掉,則所有 NP problem 皆可在 polynomial time 內解決。(或說 NP=P。) • 既然『所有 NP problem 皆可在 P 時間內解掉』似乎不太可能,因此任一 NP-complete 問題可在 P 時間內解決的可能性亦不大。

  6. 不過 NP-complete 的理論並沒有提到 NP-complete 的問題一定找不到 polynomial algorithm!它僅說明 NP-complete 的問題似乎相當不可能找到 polynomial algorithm;其關鍵在於到目前為止,尚未有人提出某個NP-complete 問題的 low bound (一旦這個 low bound 出現,NP-complete 的問題就不可能是 P 的問題,即 NP≠P 了!)。 • 換個角度思考,這個理論提醒了我們:面對 NP-complete 問題時,別去找 Polynomial time 的解法(而是找近似解,或針對其困難尋找應用!)

  7. The Theory of NP-Completeness • P: the class of problems which can be solved by a deterministic polynomial algorithm. • NP : the class of decision problems which can be solved by a non-deterministic polynomial algorithm.

  8. The Theory of NP-Completeness (cont.) • NP-hard:the class of problems to which every NP problem reduces. • NP-complete (NPC): the class of problems which are NP-hard and belong to NP.

  9. Some concepts of NPC • Definition of reduction: Problem A reduces to problem B (A  B) iff A can be solved by a deterministic polynomial time algorithm using a deterministic algorithm that solves B in polynomial time. • Up to now, none of the NPC problems can be solved by a deterministic polynomial time algorithm in the worst case.

  10. Some concepts of NPC (cont.) • It does notseem to have any polynomial time algorithm to solve the NPC problems. • The theory of NP-completeness always considers the worst case. • The lower bound of any NPC problem seems to be in the order of an exponential function.

  11. Some concepts of NPC (cont.) • Not all NP problems are difficult. (e.g. the MST problem is an NP problem.) • If A, B  NPC, then A  B and B  A. • Theory of NP-completeness If any NPC problem can be solved in polynomial time, then all NP problems can be solved in polynomial time. (NP = P)

  12. Decision Problems • The solution is simply “Yes” or “No”. • Optimization problems are more difficult. • e.g. the traveling salesperson problem • Optimization version: Find the shortest tour • Decision version: Is there a tour whose total length is less than or equal to a constant c ?

  13. The satisfiability problem • The satisfiability problem • A logical formula : x1 v x2 v x3 & -x1 & -x2 the assignment : x1 ← F , x2 ← F , x3 ← T will make the above formula true . (-x1, -x2 , x3) represents x1 ← F , x2 ← F , x3 ← T

  14. The satisfiability problem(cont.) • If there is at least one assignment which satisfies a formula, then we say that this formula is satisfiable; otherwise, it is unsatisfiable. • An unsatisfiable formula : x1 v x2 & x1 v -x2 & -x1 v x2 & -x1 v -x2

  15. The satisfiability problem(cont.) • Definition of the satisfiability problem: Given a Boolean formula, determine whether this formula is satisfiable or not. • A literal : xi or -xi • A clause : x1 v x2 v -x3Ci • A formula : conjunctive normal form C1& C2 & … & Cm

  16. The Resolution Principle • Resolution Principle C1 : x1 v x2 C2 : -x1 v x3 C3 : x2 v x3 • From C1 &C2, we can obtain C3, and C3 can be added into the formula. • We have a new formula: C1 &C2 &C3.

  17. The Resolution Principle (cont.) • Another example of resolution principle C1 : -x1 v -x2 v x3 C2 : x1 v x4 C3 : -x2 v x3 v x4 • If no new clauses can be deduced, then it is satisfiable. -x1 v -x2 v x3 (1) x1 (2) x2 (3) (1) & (2) -x2 v x3 (4) (4) & (3) x3 (5) (1) & (3) -x1 v x3 (6) Thus this set of clauses is satisfiable.

  18. The Resolution Principle (cont.) • If an empty clause is deduced, then it is unsatisfiable. - x1 v -x2 v x3 (1) x1 v -x2 (2) x2 (3) - x3 (4)  deduce   (1) & (2) -x2 v x3 (5) (4) & (5) -x2 (6) (6) & (3) □ (7) Not satisfiable.

  19. The Resolution Principle (cont.) -x1-x2 x3 (1) x1 x4 (2) x2  -x1 . (3) A semantic tree. Satisfiable

  20. The Resolution Principle (cont.) x1 (1) -x1 (2) A semantic tree. Unsatisfiable

  21. The Resolution Principle (cont.) • In a semantic tree, each path from the root to a leaf node represents a class of assignments. • If each leaf node is attached with a clause, then it is unsatisfiable.

  22. Nondeterministic Algorithms • A nondeterminstic algorithm consists of phase 1: guessingand phase 2: checking • If the checking phase of a nondeterministic algorithm is of polynomial time-complexity, then this algorithm is called an NP (nondeterministic polynomial) algorithm.

  23. Nondeterministic Algorithms (cont.) • NP problems : (must be decision problems) • e.g. searching, • MST sorting satisfiability problem (SAT) traveling salesperson problem (TSP)

  24. Decision Problems • Decision version of sorting: Given a1, a2,…, an and c, is there a permutation of ais ( a1, a2 , … ,an ) such that∣a2–a1∣+∣a3–a2∣+ … +∣an–an-1∣< c ?

  25. Decision Problems (cont.) • Not all decision problems are NP problems. • E.g. halting problem : • Given a program with a certain input data, will the program terminate or not? • NP-hard • Undecidable

  26. Guessing and Checking [Horowitz 1998] • Choice(S) : arbitrarily chooses one of the elements in set S • Failure : an unsuccessful completion • Success : a successful completion • Nonderministic searching algorithm: j ← choice(1 : n) /* guessing */ if A(j) = x then success /* checking */ else failure

  27. Guessing and Checking (cont.) • A nondeterministic algorithm terminates unsuccessfully iff there exist no set of choices leading to a success completion. • The time required for choice(1: n) is O(1).

  28. Cook’s theorem NP = P iff the satisfiability problem is a P problem. • SAT is NP-complete. • It was the first NP-complete problem proved. • Every NP problem reduces to SAT.

  29. Transforming searching to SAT • Does there exist a number in { x(1), x(2), …, x(n) }, which is equal to 7? • Assume n = 2. nondeterministic algorithm: i = choice(1,2) if x(i)=7 then SUCCESS else FAILURE

  30. Transforming searching to SAT (cont.) i=1 v i=2 & i=1 → i≠2 & i=2 → i≠1 & x(1)=7 & i=1 → SUCCESS & x(2)=7 & i=2 → SUCCESS & x(1)≠7 & i=1 → FAILURE & x(2)≠7 & i=2 → FAILURE & FAILURE → -SUCCESS & SUCCESS (Guarantees a successful termination) & x(1)=7 (Input Data) & x(2)≠7

  31. Transforming searching to SAT (cont.) • CNF (conjunctive normal form) : i=1 v i=2 (1) i≠1 v i≠2 (2) x(1)≠7 v i≠1 v SUCCESS (3) x(2)≠7 v i≠2 v SUCCESS (4) x(1)=7 v i≠1 v FAILURE (5) x(2)=7 v i≠2 v FAILURE (6) -FAILURE v –SUCCESS (7) SUCCESS (8) x(1)=7 (9) x(2)≠7 (10)

  32. Transforming searching to SAT (cont.) • Satisfiable with the following assignment : i=1 satisfying (1) i≠2 satisfying (2), (4) and (6) SUCCESS satisfying (3), (4) and (8) -FAILURE satisfying (7) x(1)=7 satisfying (5) and (9) x(2)≠7 satisfying (4) and (10)

  33. The semantic tree

  34. Searching for 7, but x(1)7, x(2)7 • CNF (conjunctive normal form) : i=1 v i=2 (1) i1 v i2 (2) x(1)7 v i1 v SUCCESS (3) x(2)7 v i2 v SUCCESS (4) x(1)=7 v i1 v FAILURE (5) x(2)=7 v i2 v FAILURE (6) SUCCESS (7) -SUCCESS v -FAILURE (8) x(1)  7 (9) x(2)  7 (10)

  35. Searching for 7, but x(1)7, x(2)7 (cont.) • Apply resolution principle : (9) & (5) i1 v FAILURE (11) (10) & (6) i2 v FAILURE (12) (7) & (8) -FAILURE (13) (13) & (11) i1 (14) (13) & (12) i2 (15) (14) & (1) i=2 (16) (15) & (16) □ (17) We get an empty clause  unsatisfiable  7 does not exit in x(1) or x(2).

  36. Searching for 7, where x(1)=7, x(2)=7 • CNF: i=1 v i=2 (1) i1 v i2 (2) x(1)7 v i1 v SUCCESS (3) x(2)7 v i2 v SUCCESS (4) x(1)=7 v i1 v FAILURE (5) x(2)=7 v i2 v FAILURE (6) SUCCESS (7) -SUCCESS v -FAILURE (8) x(1)=7 (9) x(2)=7 (10)

  37. The semantic tree It implies that both assignments (i=1, i=2) satisfy the clauses.

  38. The Node Cover Problem • Def: Given a graph G=(V, E), S is the node cover of G if S  V and for ever edge (u, v)  E, (u, v) is incident to a node in S. • Decision problem :  S  S  K  node cover : {1, 3} {5, 2, 4}

  39. Transforming the Node Cover Problem to SAT BEGIN i1 choice({1, 2, …, n}) i2 choice({1, 2, …, n} – {i1})  ik choice({1, 2, …, n} – {i1, i2, …, ik-1}). For j=1 to m do BEGIN if ej is not incident to one of Vit(1tk) then FAILURE END SUCCESS

  40. A Graph i1 = 1 i1 = 2 i1 = 3 (1) i1 ≠ 1 v1e1FAILURE (2) i1 ≠ 1 v1e2FAILURE (3) i1 ≠ 2 v2e1FAILURE (4) i1 ≠ 2 v2e2FAILURE (5) i1 ≠ 3 v3e1FAILURE (6) i1 ≠ 3 v3e2FAILURE (7) v1 e1 (8) v2e1 (9) v2e2 (10) v3e2 (11) SUCCESS (12) -SUCCESS  -FAILURE . (13) Transforming the Node Cover Problem to SAT (cont.)

  41. Proofs to Cook’s Theorem NP = P iff the satisfiability problem is a P problem. • => • If NP=P, since SATNP (SAT has an NP algorithm), thus SATP. • <= • Consider ANP. A has an NP algorithm including guessing and checking. We could transform steps of guessing and checking into a boolean formula such that ASAT. • Then A can be solved by the P algorithm solving SAT. Therefore, NP=P.

  42. Definition of NP-completeness A problem A is NP-complete if • (1) ANP • (2) every NP problem reduces to A。

  43. SAT is NP-complete (1) SAT is an NP problem. (2) SAT is NP-hard: • Every NP problem can be transformed in polynomial time to SAT such that SAT is satisfiable if and only if the answer for the original NP problem is “YES”. • That is, every NP problem  SAT . • By (1) and (2), SAT is NP-complete.

  44. The Transitivity of Reduction • If A1  A2 and A2  A3 , then A1  A3 . • (by definition)

  45. Proof of NP-Completeness • To show that any problem A is NP-complete: (I)Prove that A is an NP problem. (II)Prove that  B  NPC, B  A.  A  NPC. • Why ?

  46. SAT 3SAT 3DM VC PARTITION HC CLIQUE Six Basic Problems (Garey and Johnson 1979)

  47. 3-satisfiability problem (3-SAT) • Def: Each clause contains exactly three literals. • (I)3-SAT is an NP problem (obviously) • (II)SAT  3-SAT Proof: (1) One literal L1 in a clause in SAT : In 3-SAT : L1 v y1 v y2 L1 v -y1 v y2 L1 v y1 v -y2 L1 v -y1 v -y2

  48. 3-satisfiability problem (3-SAT) (cont.) (2)Two literals L1, L2 in a clause in SAT : In 3-SAT : L1 v L2 v y1 L1 v L2 v -y1 (3)Three literals in a clause : remain unchanged.

  49. 3-satisfiability problem (3-SAT) (cont.) (4) More than 3 literals L1, L2, …, Lk in a clause : in 3-SAT : L1 v L2 v y1 L3 v -y1 v y2  Lk-2 v -yk-4 v yk-3 Lk-1 v Lk v -yk-3

More Related