Can You Solve Closest String Faster than Exhaustive Search?
Authors:
Amir Abboud,
Nick Fischer,
Elazar Goldenberg,
Karthik C. S.,
Ron Safier
Abstract:
We study the fundamental problem of finding the best string to represent a given set, in the form of the Closest String problem: Given a set $X \subseteq Σ^d$ of $n$ strings, find the string $x^*$ minimizing the radius of the smallest Hamming ball around $x^*$ that encloses all the strings in $X$. In this paper, we investigate whether the Closest String problem admits algorithms that are faster th…
▽ More
We study the fundamental problem of finding the best string to represent a given set, in the form of the Closest String problem: Given a set $X \subseteq Σ^d$ of $n$ strings, find the string $x^*$ minimizing the radius of the smallest Hamming ball around $x^*$ that encloses all the strings in $X$. In this paper, we investigate whether the Closest String problem admits algorithms that are faster than the trivial exhaustive search algorithm. We obtain the following results for the two natural versions of the problem:
$\bullet$ In the continuous Closest String problem, the goal is to find the solution string $x^*$ anywhere in $Σ^d$. For binary strings, the exhaustive search algorithm runs in time $O(2^d poly(nd))$ and we prove that it cannot be improved to time $O(2^{(1-ε) d} poly(nd))$, for any $ε> 0$, unless the Strong Exponential Time Hypothesis fails.
$\bullet$ In the discrete Closest String problem, $x^*$ is required to be in the input set $X$. While this problem is clearly in polynomial time, its fine-grained complexity has been pinpointed to be quadratic time $n^{2 \pm o(1)}$ whenever the dimension is $ω(\log n) < d < n^{o(1)}$. We complement this known hardness result with new algorithms, proving essentially that whenever $d$ falls out of this hard range, the discrete Closest String problem can be solved faster than exhaustive search. In the small-$d$ regime, our algorithm is based on a novel application of the inclusion-exclusion principle.
Interestingly, all of our results apply (and some are even stronger) to the natural dual of the Closest String problem, called the Remotest String problem, where the task is to find a string maximizing the Hamming distance to all the strings in $X$.
△ Less
Submitted 29 May, 2023; v1 submitted 26 May, 2023;
originally announced May 2023.
Listing 4-Cycles
Authors:
Amir Abboud,
Seri Khoury,
Oree Leibowitz,
Ron Safier
Abstract:
In this note we present an algorithm that lists all $4$-cycles in a graph in time $\tilde{O}(\min(n^2,m^{4/3})+t)$ where $t$ is their number. Notably, this separates $4$-cycle listing from triangle-listing, since the latter has a $(\min(n^3,m^{3/2})+t)^{1-o(1)}$ lower bound under the $3$-SUM Conjecture.
Our upper bound is conditionally tight because (1) $O(n^2,m^{4/3})$ is the best known bound f…
▽ More
In this note we present an algorithm that lists all $4$-cycles in a graph in time $\tilde{O}(\min(n^2,m^{4/3})+t)$ where $t$ is their number. Notably, this separates $4$-cycle listing from triangle-listing, since the latter has a $(\min(n^3,m^{3/2})+t)^{1-o(1)}$ lower bound under the $3$-SUM Conjecture.
Our upper bound is conditionally tight because (1) $O(n^2,m^{4/3})$ is the best known bound for detecting if the graph has any $4$-cycle, and (2) it matches a recent $(\min(n^3,m^{3/2})+t)^{1-o(1)}$ $3$-SUM lower bound for enumeration algorithms.
The latter lower bound was proved very recently by Abboud, Bringmann, and Fischer [arXiv, 2022] and independently by Jin and Xu [arXiv, 2022].
In an independent work, Jin and Xu [arXiv, 2022] also present an algorithm with the same time bound.
△ Less
Submitted 17 November, 2022;
originally announced November 2022.
