Pre-Reduction Graph Products: Hardnesses of Properly Learning DFAs and Approximating EDP on DAGs
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The study of graph products is a major research topic and typically concerns the term $f(G*H)$, e.g., to show that $f(G*H)=f(G)f(H)$. In this paper, we study graph products in a non-standard form $f(R[G*H]$ where $R$ is a "reduction", a transformation of any graph into an instance of an intended optimization problem. We resolve some open problems as applications. (1) A tight $n^{1-ε}$-approximation hardness for the minimum consistent deterministic finite automaton (DFA) problem, where $n$ is the sample size. Due to Board and Pitt [Theoretical Computer Science 1992], this implies the hardness of properly learning DFAs assuming $NP\neq RP$ (the weakest possible assumption). (2) A tight $n^{1/2-ε}$ hardness for the edge-disjoint paths (EDP) problem on directed acyclic graphs (DAGs), where $n$ denotes the number of vertices. (3) A tight hardness of packing vertex-disjoint $k$-cycles for large $k$. (4) An alternative (and perhaps simpler) proof for the hardness of properly learning DNF, CNF and intersection of halfspaces [Alekhnovich et al., FOCS 2004 and J. Comput.Syst.Sci. 2008].
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 | 0.004 | 0.029 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.010 |
| Open science | 0.004 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.008 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.006 | 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".