Presentation is loading. Please wait.

Presentation is loading. Please wait.

Introduction to PCP and Hardness of Approximation Dana Moshkovitz Princeton University and The Institute for Advanced Study 1.

Similar presentations


Presentation on theme: "Introduction to PCP and Hardness of Approximation Dana Moshkovitz Princeton University and The Institute for Advanced Study 1."— Presentation transcript:

1 Introduction to PCP and Hardness of Approximation Dana Moshkovitz Princeton University and The Institute for Advanced Study 1

2 This Talk A Groundbreaking Discovery! 2 (From 1991-2) The PCP Theorem and Hardness of Approximation

3 A Canonical Optimization Problem MAX-3SAT: Given a 3CNF Á, what fraction of the clauses can be satisfied simultaneously? 3 Á = (x 7  : x 12  x 1 ) Æ … Æ ( : x 5  : x 9  x 28 ) x1x1 x2x2 x3x3 x4x4 x5x5 x6x6 x7x7 x8x8 x n-3 x n-2 x n-1 xnxn...

4 4 Good Assignment Exists Claim: There must exist an assignment that satisfies at least 7/8 fraction of clauses. Proof: Consider a random assignment. x1x1 x2x2 x3x3 xnxn...

5 5 1. Find the Expectation Let Y i be the random variable indicating whether the i-th clause is satisfied. For any 1  i  m,  FFFF FFTT FTFT FTTT TFFT TFTT TTFT TTTT

6 6 1. Find the Expectation The number of clauses satisfied is a random variable Y=  Y i. By the linearity of the expectation: E[Y] = E[  Y i ] =  E[Y i ] = 7/8m

7 7 2. Conclude Existence Thus, there exists an assignment which satisfies at least the expected fraction (7/8) of clauses.

8 8 ® -Approximation (Max Version) OPT OPT(x) For every input x, computed value C(x): ® ¢ OPT(x) · C(x) · OPT(x) Corollary: There is an efficient ⅞-approximation algorithm for MAX-3SAT.

9 Better Approximation? Fact: An efficient tighter than ⅞-approximation algorithm is not known. Our Question: Can we prove that if P≠NP such algorithm does not exist? 9

10 10 Computation  Decision Hardness of distinguishing far off instances  Hardness of approximation AB gap OPT(x) OPT

11 11 Gap Problems (Max Version) Instance: … Problem: to distinguish between the following two cases: The maximal solution ≥ B The maximal solution < A

12 12 Gap NP-Hard  Approximation NP-hard Claim: If the [A,B]-gap version of a problem is NP-hard, then that problem is NP-hard to approximate to within factor A/B.

13 13 Gap NP-Hard  Approximation NP-hard Proof (for maximization): Suppose there is an approximation algorithm that, for every x, outputs C(x) ≤ OPT so that C(x) ≥ A/B ¢ OPT. Distinguisher(x): * If C(x) ≥ A, return ‘YES’ * Otherwise return ‘NO’ AB

14 14 (1) If OPT(x) ≥ B (the correct answer is ‘YES’), then necessarily, C(x) ≥ A/B ¢ OPT(x) ≥ A/B·B = A (we answer ‘YES’) (2) If OPT(x)<A (the correct answer is ‘NO’), then necessarily, C(x) ≤ OPT(x) < A (we answer ‘NO’). Gap NP-Hard  Approximation NP-hard

15 New Focus: Gap Problems Can we prove that gap-MAX-3SAT is NP-hard? 15

16 Connection to Probabilistic Checking of Proofs [FGLSS91,AS92,ALMSS92] Claim: If [A,1]-gap-MAX-3SAT is NP-hard, then every NP language L has a probabilistically checkable proof (PCP): There is an efficient randomized verifier that queries 3 proof symbols: x  L: There exists a proof that is always accepted. x  L: For any proof, the probability to err and accept is ≤A. Note: Can get error probability ² by making O(log1/ ² ) queries. 16

17 Probabilistic Checking of x  L? 17 If yes, all of Á clauses are satisfied. If no, fraction ≤A of Á clauses can be satisfied. x1x1 x2x2 x3x3 x4x4 x5x5 x6x6 x7x7 x8x8 x n-3 x n-2 x n-1 xnxn... Prove x  L! This assignment satisfies Á ! Enough to check a random clause!

18 Other Direction: PCP  Gap-MAX-3SAT NP-Hard Note: Every predicate on O(1) Boolean variables can be written as a conjunction of O(1) 3-clauses on the same variables, as well as, perhaps, O(1) more variables. – If the predicate is satisfied, then there exists an assignment for the additional variables, so that all 3-clauses are satisfied. – If the predicate is not satisfied, then for any assignment to the additional variables, at least one 3-clause is not satisfied. 18

19 The PCP Theorem Theorem […,AS92,ALMSS92]: Every NP language L has a probabilistically checkable proof (PCP): There is an efficient randomized verifier that queries O(1) proof symbols: x  L: There exists a proof that is always accepted. x  L: For any proof, the probability to accept is ≤½. Remark: Elegant combinatorial proof by Dinur, 05. 19

20 Conclusion Probabilistic Checking of Proofs (PCP) 20 Hardness of Approximation

21 Tight Inapproximability? Corollary: NP-hard to approximate MAX-3SAT to within some constant factor. Question: Can we get tight ⅞-hardness? 21

22 The Bellare-Goldreich-Sudan Paradigm, 1995 Projection Games Theorem (aka Hardness of Label-Cover, or low error two-query projection PCP) 22 Tight Hardness of Approximating 3SAT [Håstad97] Long-code based reduction

23 The Bellare-Goldreich-Sudan Paradigm, 1995 Projection Games Theorem (aka Hardness of Label-Cover, or low error two-query projection PCP) 23 Tight Hardness of Approximation for Many Problems Long-code based reduction e.g., Set-Cover [Feige96]

24 Projection Games & Label-Cover 24 A B Bipartite graph G=(A,B,E) Two sets of labels § A, § B Projections ¼ e : § A  § B Players A & B label vertices Verifier picks random e=(a,b) 2 E Verifier checks ¼ e (A(a)) = B(b) Value = max A,B P(verifier accepts) ¼e¼e Label-Cover: given projection game, compute value.

25 Equivalent Formulation of PCP Thm Theorem […,AS92,ALMSS92]: NP-hard to approximate Label-Cover within some constant. Proof: by reduction to Label- Cover (see picture). 25 Verifier randomness Proof entries Verifier queries… Accepting verifier view Projection = consistency check symbol

26 Projection Games Theorem: Low Error PCP Theorem Claim: There is an efficient 1/k-approximation algorithm for projection games on k labels (i.e., | § A |,| § B | · k). 26 Projection Games Theorem For every ² >0, there is k=k( ² ), such that it is NP- hard to decide for a given projection game on k labels whether its value = 1 or < ².

27 The Bellare-Goldreich-Sudan Paradigm Projection Games Theorem (aka Hardness of Label-Cover, or low error two-query projection PCP) 27 Tight Hardness of Approximation for Many Problems

28 ?? How To Prove The Projection Games Theorem? 28 Hardness of Approximation Projection Games Theorem [AS92,ALMSS92] PCP Theorem Parallel repetition Theorem [Raz94] [M-Raz08] Construction

29 The Khot Paradigm, 2002 Unique Games Conjecture 29 Tight Hardness of Approximation for More Problems e.g., Vertex-Cover [DS02,KR03] e.g., Max-Cut [KKMO05] Long-code based reduction Constraint Satisfaction Problems [Raghavendra08]

30 Thank You! 30


Download ppt "Introduction to PCP and Hardness of Approximation Dana Moshkovitz Princeton University and The Institute for Advanced Study 1."

Similar presentations


Ads by Google