Inapproximability of Treewidth and Related Problems
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Graphical models, such as Bayesian Networks and Markov networks play an important role in artificial intelligence and machine learning. Inference is a central problem to be solved on these networks. This, and other problems on these graph models are often known to be hard to solve in general, but tractable on graphs with bounded Treewidth. Therefore, finding or approximating the Treewidth of a graph is a fundamental problem related to inference in graphical models. In this paper, we study the approximability of a number of graph problems: Treewidth and Pathwidth of graphs, Minimum Fill-In, One-Shot Black (and Black-White) pebbling costs of directed acyclic graphs, and a variety of different graph layout problems such as Minimum Cut Linear Arrangement and Interval Graph Completion. We show that, assuming the recently introduced Small Set Expansion Conjecture, all of these problems are NP-hard to approximate to within any constant factor in polynomial time.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.005 | 0.043 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.003 | 0.004 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.005 | 0.014 |
| Open science | 0.006 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.004 | 0.009 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.009 | 0.001 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".