corollaryroutine
Constant-factor hardness for cut and clustering problems
So cut and clustering problems are NP-hard to approximate within any constant
payoff of the main theorem
Corollary·
cor:cut-clustering·§8.3 Cut, deletion, and clustering consequencesStatement (paper)
For every fixed real constant , it is NP-hard to approximate
each of the four minimization problems above within factor .
For \textsc{Sparsest Cut}, this is hardness of the search task under
polynomial-time Cook reductions: the algorithm must output a cutset,
not only an estimate of the optimum. Consequently, unless
, none of these problems admits a deterministic
polynomial-time approximation with any fixed constant factor.
In plain English
For every fixed constant , each of the four minimization problems in this section (including Sparsest Cut) is NP-hard to approximate within factor . For Sparsest Cut this holds for the search task under polynomial-time Cook reductions, where the algorithm must output a cutset. Hence unless P=NP, none of these problems has a deterministic polynomial-time constant-factor approximation.
Why it's here
This corollary transfers the gap in the Unique Games Theorem to the cut, deletion and clustering problems, so that satisfiable and unsatisfiable 3SAT formulas map to instances whose optima differ by more than factor . Any constant-factor approximation would then decide 3SAT, which gives the P=NP conclusion.
Classified routine:
Follows from the Unique Games Theorem via the known UG-hardness reductions for Multicut, Sparsest Cut, Min-2CNF-Deletion and Correlation Clustering (Khot–Vishnoi 2005; Chawla–Krauthgamer–Kumar–Rabani–Sivakumar 2006), with the conditional statements becoming unconditional NP-hardness.
Uses
Used by
Nothing in the paper
Sources
PaperOpen
- Section
- §8.3 Cut, deletion, and clustering consequences
- Page
- —
- Label
cor:cut-clustering- Line
sections/07-consequences.tex:261
Leannot aligned
Phase 2 aligns this node to a Lean declaration.