用AI生成复杂性理论中的难题构造,提升近似下界
Reinforced Generation of Combinatorial Structures: Hardness of Approximation
- 用大模型生成图结构和归约构造,突破传统人工设计瓶颈
- 在最大割等难题上获得更紧的不可近似下界,部分超越现有最优结果
- 适合对复杂性理论、算法设计或AI辅助数学证明感兴趣的读者
本文利用基于大语言模型的代码变异代理AlphaEvolve,在三个复杂性理论问题中取得新进展:(a) 改进随机3-4正则图上的最大割与最大独立集认证算法的上下界,通过构造最多含163个顶点的近极值拉马努金图实现下界提升,并以解析方法获得上界;(b) 对最大4-割与最大3-割分别证明其难以在0.987和0.9649因子内近似,优于当前最优结果(0.9883和0.9853),但未达到依赖定制PCP的最优界16/17;(c) 首次证明度量旅行商问题难以在111/110因子内近似,优于现有最优点117/116。过程中构建了可复用的完备性与可靠性论证框架。关键挑战是验证大模型生成构造的开销极高,我们使用AlphaEvolve自身演化出更快的验证程序,速度提升可达一万倍。结果表明,基于构造的证明可从AI工具中获益。
原文摘要 · Abstract (English)
Can AI based methods help us make advances in complexity theory? We provide evidence towards answering this in the affirmative, using AlphaEvolve (an LLM code mutation agent) to obtain new results in three settings: a) We improve a recent result of Kunisky and Yu to obtain near-optimal upper and (conditional) lower bounds on certification algorithms for MAX-CUT and MAX-Independent Set on random 3- and 4-regular graphs. Our improved lower bounds are obtained by constructing nearly extremal Ramanujan graphs on as many as $163$ vertices, and our upper bounds are obtained via analytical arguments. b) We obtain new inapproximability results for MAX-4-CUT and MAX-3-CUT, proving that it is NP-hard to approximate them within factors of $0.987$ and $0.9649$ respectively, using AlphaEvolve to discover new gadget reductions. Our MAX-4-CUT result improves upon the SOTA of $0.9883$, and our MAX-3-CUT result improves on the current best gadget-based inapproximability result of $0.9853$, but falls short of the SOTA of $16/17$ that relies on a custom PCP (rather than a reduction from ``standard'' Håstad-style PCPs). c) Inapproximability for the metric Traveling Salesman Problem (TSP): We show that it is NP-hard to approximate the minimum cost tour within a factor of $111/110$ using AlphaEvolve to discover a new gadget, thus improving the SOTA of $117/116$. Along the way, we provide new modular soundness and completeness arguments that can be of independent interest. A key technical challenge we faced: verifying a candidate construction produced by AlphaEvolve is costly (sometimes requiring time exponential in the size of the construction). We used AlphaEvolve itself to evolve the verification procedure to be faster (sometimes by $10,000\times$ for our gadgets). Our results suggest that gadget based proofs would benefit from a pass through AI-based tools to obtain stronger results.
Thank you to arXiv for use of its open access interoperability. PaperDance 不是 arXiv 官方产品;中文卡片由大模型生成,请以原文为准。