We give an FPRAS for Holant problems with parity constraints and not-all-equal constraints, a generalisation of the problem of counting sink-free-orientations. The approach combines a sampler for near-assignments of "windable" functions -- using the cycle-unwinding canonical paths technique of Jerrum and Sinclair -- with a bound on the weight of near-assignments. The proof generalises to a larger class of Holant problems; we characterise this class and show that it cannot be extended by expressibility reductions. We then ask whether windability is equivalent to expressibility by matchings circuits (an analogue of matchgates), and give a positive answer for functions of arity three.
The focus on (the negative side of) expressibility for approximate counting problems appears in @cite_4 , where logsupermodular functions are shown not to express non-logsupermodular functions in the context of @math s.
@cite_4
2010996873 2021217869 2146489966 2951782995
We prove semi-logarithmic inapproximability for a maximization problem called unique coverage: given a collection of sets, find a subcollection that maximizes the number of elements covered exactly once. Specifically, we prove O(1 logσ(e)n) inapproximability assuming that NP n BPTIME(2ne) for some e > 0. We also prove O(1 log1 3-e n) inapproximability, for any e > 0, assuming that refuting random instances of 3SAT is hard on average; and prove O(1 log n) inapproximability under a plausible hypothesis concerning the hardness of another problem, balanced bipartite independent set. We establish matching upper bounds up to exponents, even for a more general (budgeted) setting, giving an Ω(1 log n)-approximation algorithm as well as an Ω(1 log B)-approximation algorithm when every set has at most B elements. We also show that our inapproximability results extend to envy-free pricing, an important problem in computational economics. We describe how the (budgeted) unique coverage problem, motivated by real-world applications, has close connections to other theoretical problems including max cut, maximum coverage, and radio broad-casting. A well known but incorrect piece of functional programming folklore is that ML expressions can be efficiently typed in polynomial time. In probing the truth of that folklore, various researchers, including Wand, Buneman, Kanellakis, and Mitchell, constructed simple counterexamples consisting of typable ML programs having length n , with principal types having O(2 cn ) distinct type variables and length O(2 2cn ). When the types associated with these ML constructions were represented as directed acyclic graphs, their sizes grew as O(2 cn ). The folklore was even more strongly contradicted by the recent result of Kanellakis and Mitchell that simply deciding whether or not an ML expression is typable is PSPACE-hard. We improve the latter result, showing that deciding ML typability is DEXPTIME-hard. As Kanellakis and Mitchell have shown containment in DEXPTIME, the problem is DEXPTIME-complete. The proof of DEXPTIME-hardness is carried out via a generic reduction: it consists of a very straightforward simulation of any deterministic one-tape Turing machine M with input k running in O ( c |k| ) time by a polynomial-sized ML formula P M,k , such that M accepts k iff P M,k is typable. The simulation of the transition function δ of the Turing Machine is realized uniquely through terms in the lambda calculus without the use of the polymorphic let construct. We use let for two purposes only: to generate an exponential amount of blank tape for the Turing Machine simulation to begin, and to compose an exponential number of applications of the ML formula simulating state transition. It is purely the expressive power of ML polymorphism to succinctly express function composition which results in a proof of DEXPTIME-hardness. We conjecture that lower bounds on deciding typability for extensions to the typed lambda calculus can be regarded precisely in terms of this expressive capacity for succinct function composition. To further understand this lower bound, we relate it to the problem of proving equality of type variables in a system of type equations generated from an ML expression with let-polymorphism. We show that given an oracle for solving this problem, deciding typability would be in PSPACE, as would be the actual computation of the principal type of the expression, were it indeed typable. We study compositions of the integer @math in which the first part, successive differences, and the last part are constrained to lie in prescribed sets @math , respectively. A simple condition on @math guarantees that the generating function @math has only a simple pole on its circle of convergence and this at @math , a function independent of @math and @math . Thus the number of compositions is asymptotic to @math for a suitable constant @math . We prove a multivariate central and local limit theorem and apply it to various statistics of random locally restricted compositions of @math , such as number of parts, numbers of parts of given sizes, and number of rises. The first and last parts are shown to have limiting distributions and to be asymptotically independent. If @math has only finitely many positive elements @math , or finitely many negative elements @math , then the largest part and number of distinct part sizes are almost surely @math . On the other hand, when both @math and @math have a positive asymptotic lower "local log-density", we prove that the largest part and number of distinct part sizes are almost surely @math , and we give sufficient conditions for the largest part to be almost surely asymptotic to @math . Propositional model counting (#SAT), i.e., counting the number of satisfying assignments of a propositional formula, is a problem of significant theoretical and practical interest. Due to the inherent complexity of the problem, approximate model counting, which counts the number of satisfying assignments to within given tolerance and confidence level, was proposed as a practical alternative to exact model counting. Yet, approximate model counting has been studied essentially only theoretically. The only reported implementation of approximate model counting, due to Karp and Luby, worked only for DNF formulas. A few existing tools for CNF formulas are bounding model counters; they can handle realistic problem sizes, but fall short of providing counts within given tolerance and confidence, and, thus, are not approximate model counters. We present here a novel algorithm, as well as a reference implementation, that is the first scalable approximate model counter for CNF formulas. The algorithm works by issuing a polynomial number of calls to a SAT solver. Our tool, ApproxMC, scales to formulas with tens of thousands of variables. Careful experimental comparisons show that ApproxMC reports, with high confidence, bounds that are close to the exact count, and also succeeds in reporting bounds with small tolerance and high confidence in cases that are too large for computing exact model counts.