aalto1 untyped-item.component.html

Dense Subset Sum may be the hardest

Loading...
Thumbnail Image

Access rights

openAccess
publishedVersion

URL

Journal Title

Journal ISSN

Volume Title

A4 Artikkeli konferenssijulkaisussa

Major/Subject

Mcode

Degree programme

Language

en

Pages

Series

Leibniz International Proceedings in Informatics: LIPIcs, Volume 47, pp. 1-12

Abstract

The Subset Sum problem asks whether a given set of n positive integers contains a subset of elements that sum up to a given target t. It is an outstanding open question whether the O∗(2n/2)-time algorithm for Subset Sum by Horowitz and Sahni [J. ACM 1974] can be beaten in the worst-case setting by a "truly faster", O∗(2(0.5-δ)n)-time algorithm, with some constant δ > 0. Continuing an earlier work [STACS 2015], we study Subset Sum parameterized by the maximum bin size β, defined as the largest number of subsets of the n input integers that yield the same sum. For every ∈ > 0 we give a truly faster algorithm for instances with β ≤ 2(0.5-∈)n, as well as instances with β ≥ 20.661n. Consequently, we also obtain a characterization in terms of the popular density parameter n/log2 t: if all instances of density at least 1.003 admit a truly faster algorithm, then so does every instance. This goes against the current intuition that instances of density 1 are the hardest, and therefore is a step toward answering the open question in the affirmative. Our results stem from a novel combinatorial analysis of mixings of earlier algorithms for Subset Sum and a study of an extremal question in additive combinatorics connected to the problem of Uniquely Decodable Code Pairs in information theory.

Description

Other note

Citation

Austrin, P, Kaski, P, Koivisto, M & Nederlof, J 2016, Dense Subset Sum may be the hardest. in N Ollinger & H Vollmer (eds), Leibniz International Proceedings in Informatics : LIPIcs. vol. 47, 13, Schloss Dagstuhl - Leibniz-Zentrum für Informatik, pp. 1-12, Symposium on Theoretical Aspects of Computer Science, Orleans, France, 17/02/2016. https://doi.org/10.4230/LIPIcs.STACS.2016.13

Endorsement

Review

Supplemented By

Referenced By