On Algorithmic Meta-Theorems for Solution Discovery: Tractability and Barriers
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Solution discovery asks whether a given (infeasible) starting configuration to a problem can be transformed into a feasible solution using a limited number of transformation steps. This paper investigates meta-theorems for solution discovery for graph problems definable in monadic second-order logic (MSO$_1$ and MSO$_2$) and first-order logic (FO) where the transformation step is to slide a token to an adjacent vertex, focusing on parameterized complexity and structural graph parameters that do not involve the transformation budget $b$. We present both positive and negative results. On the algorithmic side, we prove that MSO$_2$-Discovery is in XP when parameterized by treewidth and that MSO$_1$-Discovery is fixed-parameter tractable when parameterized by neighborhood diversity. On the hardness side, we establish that FO-Discovery is W[1]-hard when parameterized by modulator to stars, modulator to paths, as well as twin cover, numbers. Additionally, we prove that MSO$_1$-Discovery is W[1]-hard when parameterized by bandwidth. These results complement the straightforward observation that solution discovery for the studied problems is fixed-parameter tractable when the budget $b$ is included in the parameter (in particular, parameterized by cliquewidth$+b$, where the cliquewidth of a graph is at most any of the studied parameters), and provide a near-complete (fixed-parameter tractability) meta-theorems investigation for solution discovery problems for MSO- and FO-definable graph problems and structural parameters larger than cliquewidth.
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 | 0.022 | 0.094 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.004 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.004 | 0.010 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.005 | 0.005 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.011 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.013 | 0.029 |
| Open science | 0.007 | 0.010 |
| Research integrity | 0.005 | 0.019 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.011 | 0.002 |
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".