Space Complexity of Reachability in Simple Path Graphs

Krishnamoorthy Dinesh; Chandana Sasidharan

Home/Archive/arXiv

arXiv · 2610.27879

Space Complexity of Reachability in Simple Path Graphs

Krishnamoorthy Dinesh·Chandana Sasidharan

View original source ↗Read source document ↗Export metadata ↓

Abstract

One of the central questions in space complexity is whether nondeterministic logspace computations ($\textsf{NL}$) can be simulated in unambiguous logspace ($\textsf{UL}$). A stronger notion, \emph{reach unambiguity} ($\textsf{RUL} \subseteq \textsf{UL} \cap \textsf{co}\textsf{UL}$), requires every configuration reachable from the start to have exactly one computation path (Buntrock et.al. 91). While directed graph reachability is $\textsf{NL}$-complete, planar graph reachability is in $\textsf{UL}$ and undirected graph reachability is in deterministic logspace ($\textsf{L}$). In this work, we study the space complexity of reachability problem for restricted directed graph families and show the following. - For reach unambiguous graphs (graphs with at most one path from start vertex to every vertex), Lange (Lange 97) showed that reachability is in $\textsf{RUL}$. As our main result, we show that for simple path graphs (introduced in Kannan et.al. 08), which contains reach unambiguous graphs), where each vertex has at most one simple path from the start, we show that the reachability problem lies in $\textsf{UL} \cap \textsf{co}\textsf{UL}$. - Our first result can also be equivalently stated as: the recognition problem for simple path is in $\textsf{UL} \cap \textsf{co}\textsf{UL}$ if and only if the reachability problem restricted to simple path graphs is also in $\textsf{UL} \cap \textsf{co}\textsf{UL}$. Inspired by this, we investigate the complexity of graph recognition versus graph reachability for graph classes. Observe that for any graph class, solving reachability (for the class) also solves the recognition problem for that class. We show that for reach unambiguous graphs, solving recognition is as hard as solving reachability (making both of them $\textsf{RUL}$-complete). (Abstract shortened to meet arXiv limits)

Explore related subjects

cs.CC

Keep this discovery

Explore connections, maps & timelines

BibTeX RIS

Krishnamoorthy Dinesh, Chandana Sasidharan. 2026-10-20. Space Complexity of Reachability in Simple Path Graphs. https://arxiv.org/abs/2610.27879

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

KEEP EXPLORING

Related papers

arXiv2026

NP-Completeness and ETH-Based Additive Inapproximability of Deterministic Communication Complexity via Relaxed Interlacing

How difficult is it to find an efficient communication protocol when the entire truth table of the function is given? We give a unified interlacing proof of NP-completeness for exact optimisation and of hardness of approximation. Assuming the Exponential Time Hypothesis, there is a computable, nondecreasing additive error allowance tending to infinity for which approximation is impossible in polynomial time. The proof uses interlacing, which asks the players to solve one problem selected by Alice from a collection of inputs held by Bob. For suitable matrices, a short protocol must reveal enough of Alice's selection to encode a solution to a combinatorial problem. This produces a one-bit communication gap in a polynomial-size matrix and proves exact hardness. Repeating the construction is harder: earlier messages can remove the inputs on which a later lower bound depends. Restriction bounds that survive the construction make the one-bit gain repeatable. A smaller, balanced family of interlaced columns controls the truth-table size. For every fixed number of applications, the construction takes subexponential time in the source length. This rules out every fixed additive error under ETH. A general computability argument then yields the stated unbounded allowance.

cs.CC↗

arXiv2026

A Simple Algebraic Proof of the PCP Theorem

We give the simplest known algebraic proof of the PCP theorem, involving only ingredients like code concatenation, polynomial interpolation, and polynomial multiplication. Specifically, we prove that graph 3-coloring has a polynomial-sized proof that can be verified by a verifier tossing logarithmically many coins and querying a constant number of bits in the proof. In particular, our proof does not involve any PCP compositions; notably, it does not invoke the NP-completeness of any fixed problem, such as SAT or 3-coloring, in the construction of the verifier. The main innovation in our work is a clean, coding theoretic, way to encode univariate polynomials that allows us to implement ``low-degree testing'' using just a constant number of bits of queries. Insights from recent attempts to simplify the PCP proof by the authors (STOC 2026) and Goldreich (ECCC 2025) allow us to observe that low-degree was the key bottleneck in converting previous algebraic constructions of the PCP verifier into a constant query PCP. Thus, by overcoming this bottleneck, we get the full PCP verifier using elementary and self-contained steps. As concrete support for the claimed simplicity, we include the full pseudocode of the PCP verifier, assuming finite field arithmetic, and a full description of the completeness (aka ``honest'') prover, assuming multivariate polynomial arithmetic including interpolation and evaluation, that fit in about a page each.

cs.CC↗

arXiv2026

An Optimal Gap-Majority Lemma for Bounded-Round Communication

Recent work of Sawettamalya and Yu (FOCS 2026) initiated the study of \emph{gap-majority} composition in randomized communication. They showed that if computing a $\{\pm 1\}$-valued function $f$ in $r$ rounds requires $I$ bits of information, then distinguishing whether $\sum_{i=1}^n f(X_i,Y_i)$ is at least $0.01\sqrt{n}$ or at most $-0.01\sqrt{n}$ in $r$ rounds requires $n \cdot (I-O(\log n))$ bits of information. They also conjectured that the $O(\log n)$-additive ``loss'' can be further reduced to $O(1)$. In this note, we show that a minor adaptation of their approach, together with a more refined analysis, achieves the conjectured $O(1)$ loss, establishing a gap-majority lemma for bounded-round communication that is optimal up to constant factors.

cs.CC↗