Search arXiv⌕ Search
Home/Archive/arXiv

arXiv · 1307.0556

The Complexity of Counting Homomorphisms to Cactus Graphs Modulo 2

Andreas Göbel·Leslie Ann Goldberg·David Richerby
View original source ↗Read source document ↗Export metadata ↓

Abstract

A homomorphism from a graph G to a graph H is a function from V(G) to V(H) that preserves edges. Many combinatorial structures that arise in mathematics and computer science can be represented naturally as graph homomorphisms and as weighted sums of graph homomorphisms. In this paper, we study the complexity of counting homomorphisms modulo 2. The complexity of modular counting was introduced by Papadimitriou and Zachos and it has been pioneered by Valiant who famously introduced a problem for which counting modulo 7 is easy but counting modulo 2 is intractable. Modular counting provides a rich setting in which to study the structure of homomorphism problems. In this case, the structure of the graph H has a big influence on the complexity of the problem. Thus, our approach is graph-theoretic. We give a complete solution for the class of cactus graphs, which are connected graphs in which every edge belongs to at most one cycle. Cactus graphs arise in many applications such as the modelling of wireless sensor networks and the comparison of genomes. We show that, for some cactus graphs H, counting homomorphisms to H modulo 2 can be done in polynomial time. For every other fixed cactus graph H, the problem is complete for the complexity class parity-P which is a wide complexity class to which every problem in the polynomial hierarchy can be reduced (using randomised reductions). Determining which H lead to tractable problems can be done in polynomial time. Our result builds upon the work of Faben and Jerrum, who gave a dichotomy for the case in which H is a tree.

Explore related subjects

cs.CCmath.CO

Keep this discovery

Explore connections, maps & timelines

BibTeXRIS

Andreas Göbel, Leslie Ann Goldberg, David Richerby. 2014-04-25. The Complexity of Counting Homomorphisms to Cactus Graphs Modulo 2. https://doi.org/10.1145/2635825

Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.

KEEP EXPLORING

Related papers

arXiv2026

Improved Algorithms for the Remote Point Problem

The Remote Point Problem (RPP) is an algorithmic problem that asks, given a linear subspace $L \subseteq \mathbb{F}^n$ of dimension $k$, to deterministically find a vector $v \in \mathbb{F}^n$ far in Hamming distance from $L$. This problem was introduced by Alon, Panigrahy and Yekhanin [APY09], motivated in part by the matrix rigidity approach for proving circuit lower bounds. An algorithm is said to achieve remoteness $d$ if it finds a vector $v$ whose Hamming distance from $L$ is at least $d$. We observe that over the rational numbers, the problem admits a deterministic polynomial-time algorithm that achieves optimal remoteness $n-k$. Over finite fields, we obtain a (modest) improvement of a result of Alon, Panigrahy and Yekhanin [APY09], and give an algorithm that achieves remoteness $Ω\left(\frac{n}{\max\{k, \log n\}} \log n\right)$.

cs.CC↗
arXiv2026

Bit-counting complexity classes

We define bit-counting complexity classes whose membership depends on the binary profile of the number of accepting paths of non-deterministic polynomial time Turing machines. We study the relationship between this new family of complexity classes and the classical complexity classes. We prove that the complexity class ${\bf PP}$ is contained in our comparison based bit-counting complexity classes ${\bf B_{|0|=|1|}P}$, ${\bf B_{|0|<|1|}P}$ and ${\bf B_{|0|>|1|}P}$. We then show that the comparison based bit-counting complexity classes and the complexity class ${\bf PP}$ are Turing equivalent, that is ${\bf P}^{\bf PP} = {\bf P}^{{\bf B_{|0|=|1|}P}}={\bf P}^{{\bf B_{|0|>|1|}P}}={\bf P}^{{\bf B_{|0|<|1|}P}}$. We then prove that the complexity classes ${\bf NP}$ and ${\bf CoNP}$ are contained in both of our parity based bit-counting complexity classes ${\bf B_{|0| \oplus}P}$ and ${\bf B_{|1| \oplus}P}$. We also show that the Turing closures of the parity based bit-counting complexity classes coincide, that is ${\bf P}^{{\bf B_{|0|\oplus}P}}={\bf P}^{{\bf B_{|1|\oplus}P}}$. We do this by proving that when either parity based bit-counting complexity class is provided as an oracle for a polynomial time Turing machine, then it can simulate the other one, that is ${\bf B_{|1| \oplus}P}\subseteq {\bf P}^{{\bf B_{|0| \oplus}P}}$ and ${\bf B_{|0| \oplus}P}\subseteq {\bf P}^{{\bf B_{|1| \oplus}P}}$.

cs.CC↗
arXiv2026

Geometric Complexity Theory and Graph Isomorphism

We investigate ideas from the Geometric Complexity Theory approach to separating complexity classes (Mulmuley & Sohoni, SIAM J. Comput., 2001) in the setting of graph isomorphism. This provides us a playground of finite combinatorial objects on which to explore these techniques. We seek to separate non-isomorphic pairs of graphs using vector spaces of polynomials that are set-wise invariant under permutations (so-called separating modules). We characterize the power of this method for distinguishing graphs under several different complexity measures: - We show that separating modules of "support-degree" $k$ are equivalent in power to the counts of $O(k)$-vertex subgraphs. - We show that separating modules of symmetric algebraic circuit size $n^{Θ(k)}$ are equivalent to $Θ(k)$-dimensional Weisfeiler-Leman. This generalizes and strengthens the result of Dawar & Wilsenach (CSL '18; ICALP '20; ACM Trans. Comput. Log., 2022; Theory Comput., 2025). - When considering only the representation-theoretic multiplicities of separating modules, we show that two graphs are separated by multiplicities if and only if their automorphism groups have different multiplicity of cycle types (cycle index). The latter result is notable in the analogy with GCT, as it is the only result we are aware of in which the multiplicity approach to separating isomorphism types of objects has been given an "intrinsic" characterization in terms of the objects themselves. We show that for graphs, multiplicity obstructions are stronger than occurrence obstructions. We also connect support size (from the study of WL) to complexity measures on $S_n$ (Dafni, Filmus, Lifshitz, Lindzey, & Vinyals, ITCS '21); as well as connections between invariant polynomials, the Graph Reconstruction Conjectures, and Forman's "invariants of finite type" (Adv. Math., 2004).

cs.CC↗