The Dichotomy of List Homomorphisms for Digraphs
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The Dichotomy Conjecture for Constraint Satisfaction Problems has been verified for conservative problems (or, equivalently, for list homomorphism problems) by Andrei Bulatov. An earlier case of this dichotomy, for list homomorphisms to undirected graphs, came with an elegant structural distinction between the tractable and intractable cases. Such structural characterization is absent in Bulatov's classification, and Bulatov asked whether one can be found. We provide an answer in the case of digraphs. In the process we give forbidden structure characterizations of the existence of certain polymorphisms relevant in Bulatov's dichotomy classification. The key concept we introduce is that of a digraph asteroidal triple (DAT). The dichotomy then takes the following form. If a digraph H has a DAT, then the list homomorphism problem for H is NP-complete; and a DAT-free digraph H has a polynomial time solvable list homomorphism problem. DAT-free digraphs can be recognized in polynomial time. It follows from our results that the list homomorphism problem for a DAT-free digraph H can be solved by a local consistency algorithm (of width (2,3)).
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.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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 it