Lift & Project Systems Performing on the Partial-Vertex-Cover Polytope
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
We study integrality gap (IG) lower bounds on strong LP and SDP relaxations derived by the Sherali-Adams (SA), Lovasz-Schrijver-SDP (LS+), and Sherali-Adams-SDP (SA+) lift-and-project (L&P) systems for the t-Partial-Vertex-Cover (t-PVC) problem, a variation of the classic Vertex-Cover problem in which only t edges need to be covered. t-PVC admits a 2-approximation using various algorithmic techniques, all relying on a natural LP relaxation. Starting from this LP relaxation, our main results assert that for every epsilon > 0, level-Theta(n) LPs or SDPs derived by all known L&P systems that have been used for positive algorithmic results (but the Lasserre hierarchy) have IGs at least (1-epsilon)n/t, where n is the number of vertices of the input graph. Our lower bounds are nearly tight. Our results show that restricted yet powerful models of computation derived by many L&P systems fail to witness c-approximate solutions to t-PVC for any constant c, and for t = O(n). This is one of the very few known examples of an intractable combinatorial optimization problem for which LP-based algorithms induce a constant approximation ratio, still lift-and-project LP and SDP tightenings of the same LP have unbounded IGs. We also show that the SDP that has given the best algorithm known for t-PVC has integrality gap n/t on instances that can be solved by the level-1 LP relaxation derived by the LS system. This constitutes another rare phenomenon where (even in specific instances) a static LP outperforms an SDP that has been used for the best approximation guarantee for the problem at hand. Finally, one of our main contributions is that we make explicit of a new and simple methodology of constructing solutions to LP relaxations that almost trivially satisfy constraints derived by all SDP L&P systems known to be useful for algorithmic positive results (except the La system).
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 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 it