Numerical 3-dimensional matching

From testwiki
Jump to navigation Jump to search

Numerical 3-dimensional matching is an NP-complete decision problem. It is given by three multisets of integers X, Y and Z, each containing k elements, and a bound b. The goal is to select a subset M of X×Y×Z such that every integer in X, Y and Z occurs exactly once and that for every triple (x,y,z) in the subset x+y+z=b holds. This problem is labeled as [SP16] in.[1]

Example

Take X={3,4,4}, Y={1,4,6} and Z={1,2,5}, and b=10. This instance has a solution, namely {(3,6,1),(4,4,2),(4,1,5)}. Note that each triple sums to b=10. The set {(3,6,1),(3,4,2),(4,1,5)} is not a solution for several reasons: not every number is used (a 4X is missing), a number is used too often (the 3X) and not every triple sums to b (since 3+4+2=9b=10). However, there is at least one solution to this problem, which is the property we are interested in with decision problems. If we would take b=11 for the same X, Y and Z, this problem would have no solution (all numbers sum to 30, which is not equal to kb=33 in this case).

Every instance of the Numerical 3-dimensional matching problem is an instance of both the 3-partition problem, and the 3-dimensional matching problem.

Given an instance of numeric 3d-matching , construct a tripartite hypergraph with sides X, Y and Z, where there is an hyperedge Template:Tmath if and only if x+y+z=T. A matching in this hypergraph corresponds to a solution to ABC-partition.

Proof of NP-completeness

The numerical 3-d matching problem is problem [SP16] of Garey and Johnson.[1] They claim it is NP-complete, and refer to,[2] but the claim is not proved at that source. The NP-hardness of the related problem 3-partition is done in [1] by a reduction from 3-dimensional matching via 4-partition. To prove NP-completeness of the numerical 3-dimensional matching, the proof should be similar, but a reduction from 3-dimensional matching via the numerical 4-dimensional matching problem should be used. Explicit proofs of NP-hardness are given in later papers:

  • Yu, Hoogeveen and Lenstra[3] prove NP-hardness of a very restricted version of Numerical 3-Dimensional Matching, in which two of the three sets contain only the numbers 1,...,k.
  • Caracciolo, Fichera, and Sportiello[4] prove NP-hardness of Numerical 3-Dimensional Matching and related problems by reduction from NAE-SAT. The reduction is linear, that is, the size of the reduced instance is a linear function of the size of the original instance.

References

Template:Reflist

  1. 1.0 1.1 1.2 Garey, Michael R. and David S. Johnson (1979), Computers and Intractability; A Guide to the Theory of NP-Completeness. Template:ISBN
  2. Template:Cite journal
  3. Template:Cite journal
  4. Template:Citation