skip to main content
article

A dichotomy theorem for constraint satisfaction problems on a 3-element set

Published: 01 January 2006 Publication History

Abstract

The Constraint Satisfaction Problem (CSP) provides a common framework for many combinatorial problems. The general CSP is known to be NP-complete; however, certain restrictions on a possible form of constraints may affect the complexity and lead to tractable problem classes. There is, therefore, a fundamental research direction, aiming to separate those subclasses of the CSP that are tractable and those which remain NP-complete.Schaefer gave an exhaustive solution of this problem for the CSP on a 2-element domain. In this article, we generalise this result to a classification of the complexity of the CSP on a 3-element domain. The main result states that every subproblem of the CSP is either tractable or NP-complete, and the criterion separating them is that conjectured in Bulatov et al. [2005] and Bulatov and Jeavons [2001b]. We also characterize those subproblems for which standard constraint propagation techniques provide a decision procedure. Finally, we exhibit a polynomial time algorithm which, for a given set of allowed constraints, outputs if this set gives rise to a tractable problem class. To obtain the main result and the algorithm, we extensively use the algebraic technique for the CSP developed in Jeavons [1998b], Bulatov et al.[2005], and Bulatov and Jeavons [2001b].

References

[1]
Allen, J. 1994. Natural Language Understanding. Benjamin Cummings.]]
[2]
Bulatov, A. 2002. Mal'tsev constraints are tractable. Tech. Rep. PRG-RR-02-05, Computing Laboratory, University of Oxford, Oxford, UK.]]
[3]
Bulatov, A. 2006a. Combinatorial problems raised from 2-semilattices. J. Alg., submitted for publication.]]
[4]
Bulatov, A. 2006b. Three-element Mal'tsev algebras. Acta Sci. Math (Szeged). To appear.]]
[5]
Bulatov, A., and Jeavons, P. 2000. Tractable constraints closed under a binary operation. Tech. Rep. PRG-TR-12-00, Computing Laboratory, University of Oxford, Oxford, UK.]]
[6]
Bulatov, A., and Jeavons, P. 2001a. Algebraic approach to multisorted constraints. Tech. Rep. PRG-RR-01-18, Computing Laboratory, University of Oxford, Oxford, UK.]]
[7]
Bulatov, A., and Jeavons, P. 2001b. Algebraic structures in combinatorial problems. Tech. Rep. MATH-AL-4-2001, Technische universität Dresden, Dresden, Germany.]]
[8]
Bulatov, A., and Jeavons, P. 2003. An algebraic approach to multisorted constraits. In Proceedings of the 9th International Conference on Principles and Practice of Constraint Programming (CP'03) (Kinsale, Ireland). 197--202.]]
[9]
Bulatov, A., Jeavons, P., and Krokhin, A. 2001. The complexity of maximal constraint languages. In Proceedings of the 33rd Annual ACM Simposium on Theory of Computing (Hersonissos, Crete, Greece). ACM, New York, 667--674.]]
[10]
Bulatov, A., Jeavons, P., and Krokhin, A. 2005. Classifying the complexity of constraints using finite algebras. SIAM J. Comput. 34, 720--742.]]
[11]
Burris, S., and Sankappanavar, H. 1981. A Course in Universal Algebra. Graduate Texts in Mathematics, vol. 78. Springer-Verlag, New York-Berlin.]]
[12]
Cooper, M. 1989. An optimal k-consistency algorithm. Artif. Intel. 41, 89--95.]]
[13]
Creignou, N., Khanna, S., and Sudan, M. 2001. Complexity Classifications of Boolean Constraint Satisfaction Problems. SIAM Monographs on Discrete Mathematics and Applications, vol. 7. SIAM, Philadelphia, PA.]]
[14]
Dalmau, V. 2000. Computational complexity of problems over generalized formulas. Ph.D. dissertation, Department LSI of the Universitat Politecnica de Catalunya (UPC), Barcelona, Spain.]]
[15]
Dechter, R. 1992. From local to global consistency. Artif. Intel. 55, 1, 87--107.]]
[16]
Dechter, R. 2003. Constraint processing. Morgan-Kaufmann, San Francisco, CA.]]
[17]
Dechter, R., and Dechter, A. 1996. Structure-driven algorithms for truth maintenance. Artif. Intel. 82, 1--2, 1--20.]]
[18]
Dechter, R., and Meiri, I. 1994. Experimental evaluation of preprocessing algorithms for constraint satisfaction problems. Artif. Intel. 68, 211--241.]]
[19]
Dechter, R., and Pearl, J. 1988. Network-based heuristics for constraint satisfaction problems. Artif. Intel. 34, 1, 1--38.]]
[20]
Dechter, R., and van Beek, P. 1997. Local and global relational consistency. Theoret. Comput. Sci. 173, 1, 283--308.]]
[21]
Denecke, K., and Wismath, S. 2002. Universal Algebra and Applications in Theoretical Computer Science. Chapman and Hall/CRC Press.]]
[22]
Feder, T., and Vardi, M. 1998. The computational structure of monotone monadic SNP and constraint satisfaction: A study through datalog and group theory. SIAM J. Comput. 28, 57--104.]]
[23]
Freuder, E. 1982. A sufficient condition for backtrack-free search. J. ACM 29, 1, 24--32.]]
[24]
Gottlob, G., Leone, L., and Scarcello, F. 2000. A comparison of structural CSP decomposition methods. Artif. Intel. 124, 2, 243--282.]]
[25]
Jeavons, P. 1998a. Constructing constraints. In Proceedings 4th International Conference on Constraint Programming---CP'98 (Pisa, Oct.). Lecture Notes in Computer Science, vol. 1520. Springer-Verlag, New York, 2--16.]]
[26]
Jeavons, P. 1998b. On the algebraic structure of combinatorial problems. Theoret. Comput. Sci. 200, 185--204.]]
[27]
Jeavons, P., Cohen, D., and Cooper, M. 1998a. Constraints, consistency and closure. Artif. Intel. 101, 1--2, 251--265.]]
[28]
Jeavons, P., Cohen, D., and Gyssens, M. 1997. Closure properties of constraints. J. ACM 44, 527--548.]]
[29]
Jeavons, P., Cohen, D., and Pearson, J. 1998b. Constraints and universal algebra. Ann. Math. Artif. Intel. 24, 51--67.]]
[30]
Kolaitis, P. 2003. Constraint satisfaction, databases, and logic. In Proceedings of the 17th International Joint Conference on Artificial Intellignece (IJCAI'03).]]
[31]
Kolaitis, P., and Vardi, M. 2000a. Conjunctive-query containment and constraint satisfaction. J. Comput. Syst. Sci. 61, 302--332.]]
[32]
Kolaitis, P., and Vardi, M. 2000b. A game-theoretic approach to constraint satisfaction. In Proceedings of the 17th National (US) Conference on Artificial Intelligence (AAAI'00). 175--181.]]
[33]
Kumar, V. 1992. Algorithms for constraint satisfaction problems: A survey. AI Magazine 13, 1, 32--44.]]
[34]
Ladner, R. 1975. On the structure of polynomial time reducibility. J. ACM 22, 155--171.]]
[35]
McKenzie, R., McNulty, G., and Taylor, W. 1987. Algebras, Lattices and Varieties. Vol. I. Wadsworth and Brooks, California.]]
[36]
Montanari, U. 1974. Networks of constraints: Fundamental properties and applications to picture processing. Inf. Sci. 7, 95--132.]]
[37]
Nadel, B. 1995. Constraint satisfaction in Prolog: Complexity and theory-based heuristics. Inf. Sci. 83, 3--4, 113--131.]]
[38]
Nadel, B., and Lin, J. 1991. Automobile transmission design as a constraint satisfaction problem: Modeling the kinematik level. Artif. Intel. Eng. Des. Anal. Manuf. (AI EDAM) 5, 3, 137--171.]]
[39]
Pöschel, R., and Kalužnin, L. 1979. Funktionen- und Relationenalgebren. DVW, Berlin, Germany.]]
[40]
Post, E. 1941. The Two-Valued Iterative Systems of Mathematical Logic. Annals Mathematical Studies, vol. 5. Princeton University Press.]]
[41]
Schaefer, T. 1978. The complexity of satisfiability problems. In Proceedings of the 10th ACM Symposium on Theory of Computing (STOC'78). ACM, New York, 216--226.]]
[42]
Schwalb, E., and Vila, L. 1998. Temporal constraints: A survey. Constraints 3, 2--3, 129--149.]]
[43]
Szendrei, A. 1990. Simple surjective algebras having no proper subalgebras. J. Austral. Math. Soc. (Ser. A) 48, 434--454.]]
[44]
Tsang, E. 1993. Foundations of Constraint Satisfaction. Academic Press, London, England.]]
[45]
van Hentenryck, P., Deville, Y., and Teng, C.-M. 1992. A generic arc-consistency algorithm and its specializations. Artif. Intel. 57, 291--321.]]
[46]
Vardi, M. 2000. Constraint satisfaction and database theory: A tutorial. In Proceedings of 19th ACM Symposium on Priciples of Database Systems (PODS'00). ACM, New York.]]

Cited By

View all

Recommendations

Comments

Information & Contributors

Information

Published In

cover image Journal of the ACM
Journal of the ACM  Volume 53, Issue 1
January 2006
206 pages
ISSN:0004-5411
EISSN:1557-735X
DOI:10.1145/1120582
Issue’s Table of Contents
Permission to make digital or hard copies of all or part of this work for personal or classroom use is granted without fee provided that copies are not made or distributed for profit or commercial advantage and that copies bear this notice and the full citation on the first page. Copyrights for components of this work owned by others than ACM must be honored. Abstracting with credit is permitted. To copy otherwise, or republish, to post on servers or to redistribute to lists, requires prior specific permission and/or a fee. Request permissions from [email protected]

Publisher

Association for Computing Machinery

New York, NY, United States

Publication History

Published: 01 January 2006
Published in JACM Volume 53, Issue 1

Permissions

Request permissions for this article.

Check for updates

Author Tags

  1. Constraint satisfaction problem
  2. complexity
  3. dichotomy theorem
  4. homomorphism problem

Qualifiers

  • Article

Contributors

Other Metrics

Bibliometrics & Citations

Bibliometrics

Article Metrics

  • Downloads (Last 12 months)21
  • Downloads (Last 6 weeks)2
Reflects downloads up to 25 Dec 2024

Other Metrics

Citations

Cited By

View all

View Options

Login options

Full Access

View options

PDF

View or Download as a PDF file.

PDF

eReader

View online with eReader.

eReader

Media

Figures

Other

Tables

Share

Share

Share this Publication link

Share on social media