Search arXivSearch

arXiv · 2604.23226

On the Hardness of Finding Temporally Connected Subgraphs of Any Size

Abstract

Temporal graphs are graphs whose edges are present only at certain points in time. Reachability in these graphs is defined via temporal paths, in which edges are traversed in chronological order. A temporal graph is temporally connected (or TC) if every ordered pair of vertices is connected by a temporal path. When the graph itself is not TC, a natural question is whether it admits a TC subgraph (a.k.a.~closed temporal component) of a given size $k$. This question was one of the earliest and most studied in the field, shown to be NP-hard by Bhadra and Ferreira in 2003. We strengthen this result dramatically, showing that deciding if a temporal graph admits a TC subgraph \emph{of any size} (beyond the trivial case of a single vertex in the directed and a single edge in the undirected case) is already NP-hard. Our result holds for all standard temporal graph settings, answering a series of open questions in the field and strengthening several existing results. This sharply separates closed components from open ones (where temporal paths can travel outside the component), for which the analogous problem is trivially solvable in polynomial time. More precisely, our reductions imply that the size of the largest TC subgraph cannot even be approximated within a factor of~$(1-ε)n$ in directed graphs, and within a factor of~$(1-ε)\frac{n}{2}$ in undirected graphs. They also complete the complexity landscape for TC subgraphs of size exactly $k$ when parameterized by $k$ (answering the missing ``non-strict'' case). Our results also have structural implications. In particular, they imply that there exist arbitrarily large TC graphs without nontrivial TC subgraphs, and that there exist TC graphs of arbitrary girth, both facts being of independent interest.

Explore related subjects

Keep this discovery

Explore connections, maps & timelines

BibTeXRIS

Arnaud Casteigts, Christian Komusiewicz, Nils Morawietz. 2026-07-16. On the Hardness of Finding Temporally Connected Subgraphs of Any Size. https://arxiv.org/abs/2604.23226

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

KEEP EXPLORING

Related papers

CVP Is NP-Complete for Principal Cyclotomic Ideals

We prove that exact Euclidean decision-CVP is $\mathsf{NP}$-complete on the coefficient lattices of nonzero principal ideals in the power-of-two cyclotomic rings $R_d:=\mathbb{Z}[y]/(y^d+1)$. Our deterministic reduction from Exact Cover by 3-Sets (X3C) produces a target and a squared threshold $Δ$ such that the closest squared distance is exactly $Δ$ in YES instances and at least $Δ+4$ in NO instances. This also implies $\mathsf{NP}$-hardness of exact search-CVP under polynomial-time Turing reductions. We also transfer the resulting principal-ideal CVP instances to full-rank principal ideals of the cyclic quotient ring $\mathbb{Z}[X]/(X^D-1)$, where $D:=2d$. Their coefficient lattices are invariant under cyclic coordinate shifts. The lift preserves principality and multiplies corresponding squared distances by eight. Thus, on principal cyclic ideal lattices, exact decision-CVP is $\mathsf{NP}$-complete and exact search-CVP is $\mathsf{NP}$-hard. We also obtain uniformly computable fixed cyclotomic and cyclic families in which only the target and threshold depend on the X3C collection. Consequently, a polynomial-time solution to exact decision-CVPP on either family would imply $\mathsf{NP}\subseteq\mathsf{P}/\mathrm{poly}$ and collapse the polynomial hierarchy to $Σ_2^{\mathsf{P}}$. To our knowledge, the cyclic results answer Micciancio's questions of whether exact decision-CVP is $\mathsf{NP}$-hard on cyclic lattices and on a fixed family of cyclic lattices, even when restricted to full-rank principal cyclic ideals. Finally, under the coefficient embedding, we prove that exact decision-module-SIVP is $\mathsf{NP}$-complete on free rank-two modules over the same cyclotomic rings.

cs.CC

Fooling Thresholds of Halfspaces

We initiate the study of constructing explicit pseudorandom generators for thresholds of halfspaces with seed length polylogarithmic in the number of halfspaces. This class of functions lies at the frontier of circuit complexity [CTW26]. We show that the generator designed by O'Donnell, Servedio, and Tan for polytopes [OST22] also fools this broader class. To analyze the generator, we develop a threshold-specific smooth approximation framework based on a Bentkus-type mollifier. We prove derivative bounds for this mollifier and also establish a Boolean anticoncentration theorem for thresholds of halfspaces via a random thinning argument. These ingredients imply that the generator $δ$-fools every $k$-out-of-$m$ threshold of $m$ halfspaces over $\{-1,1\}^n$ with seed length $\widetilde{O}(κ^{6+2\varepsilon}\log^{6+2\varepsilon}\!m\cdotδ^{-(2+2\varepsilon)}\log n)$, for any arbitrarily small constant $\varepsilon>0$, where $κ=\min\{k,m-k+1\}$. The random thinning argument also yields bounds on the noise sensitivity and Gaussian surface area for thresholds of halfspaces, leading to learning algorithms under both the uniform and Gaussian distributions.

cs.CC

An Oracle Separating Conjectures about Incompleteness in the Finite Domain

Pudlák [Pud17] lists several major conjectures from the field of proof complexity and asks for oracles that separate corresponding relativized conjectures. Among these conjectures are: - $\mathsf{DisjNP}$: The class of all disjoint NP-pairs does not have many-one complete elements. - $\mathsf{SAT}$: NP does not contain many-one complete sets that have P-optimal proof systems. - $\mathsf{UP}$: UP does not have many-one complete problems. - $\mathsf{NP}\cap\mathsf{coNP}$: $\text{NP}\cap\text{coNP}$ does not have many-one complete problems. As one answer to this question, we construct an oracle relative to which $\mathsf{DisjNP}$, $\neg \mathsf{SAT}$, $\mathsf{UP}$, and $\mathsf{NP}\cap\mathsf{coNP}$ hold, i.e., there is no relativizable proof for the implication $\mathsf{DisjNP}\wedge \mathsf{UP}\wedge \mathsf{NP}\cap\mathsf{coNP}\Rightarrow\mathsf{SAT}$. In particular, regarding the conjectures by Pudlák this extends a result by Khaniki [Kha19].

cs.CC