Polynomial Pass Semi-Streaming Lower Bounds for K-Cores and Degeneracy
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The following question arises naturally in the study of graph streaming algorithms: Is there any graph problem which is "not too hard", in that it can be solved efficiently with total communication (nearly) linear in the number n of vertices, and for which, nonetheless, any streaming algorithm with Õ(n) space (i.e., a semi-streaming algorithm) needs a polynomial n^Ω(1) number of passes? Assadi, Chen, and Khanna [STOC 2019] were the first to prove that this is indeed the case. However, the lower bounds that they obtained are for rather non-standard graph problems. Our first main contribution is to present the first polynomial-pass lower bounds for natural "not too hard" graph problems studied previously in the streaming model: k-cores and degeneracy. We devise a novel communication protocol for both problems with near-linear communication, thus showing that k-cores and degeneracy are natural examples of "not too hard" problems. Indeed, previous work have developed single-pass semi-streaming algorithms for approximating these problems. In contrast, we prove that any semi-streaming algorithm for exactly solving these problems requires (almost) Ω(n^{1/3}) passes. The lower bound follows by a reduction from a generalization of the hidden pointer chasing (HPC) problem of Assadi, Chen, and Khanna, which is also the basis of their earlier semi-streaming lower bounds. Our second main contribution is improved round-communication lower bounds for the underlying communication problems at the basis of these reductions: - We improve the previous lower bound of Assadi, Chen, and Khanna for HPC to achieve optimal bounds for this problem. - We further observe that all current reductions from HPC can also work with a generalized version of this problem that we call MultiHPC, and prove an even stronger and optimal lower bound for this generalization. These two results collectively allow us to improve the resulting pass lower bounds for semi-streaming algorithms by a polynomial factor, namely, from n^{1/5} to n^{1/3} passes.
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 | 0.042 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.004 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.004 | 0.005 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.006 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.006 | 0.029 |
| Open science | 0.009 | 0.010 |
| Research integrity | 0.004 | 0.018 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.022 | 0.007 |
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".