Optimal Inapproximability Results for MAX‐CUT and Other 2‐Variable CSPs?

Abstract

In this paper we show a reduction from the Unique Games problem to the problem of approximating MAX‐CUT to within a factor of $\alpha_{\text{\tiny{GW}}} + \epsilon$ for all $\epsilon > 0$; here $\alpha_{\text{\tiny{GW}}} \approx .878567$ denotes the approximation ratio achieved by the algorithm of Goemans and Williamson in [J. Assoc. Comput. Mach., 42 (1995), pp. 1115–1145]. This implies that if the Unique Games Conjecture of Khot in [Proceedings of the 34th Annual ACM Symposium on Theory of Computing, 2002, pp. 767–775] holds, then the Goemans–Williamson approximation algorithm is optimal. Our result indicates that the geometric nature of the Goemans–Williamson algorithm might be intrinsic to the MAX‐CUT problem. Our reduction relies on a theorem we call Majority Is Stablest. This was introduced as a conjecture in the original version of this paper, and was subsequently confirmed in [E. Mossel, R. O’Donnell, and K. Oleszkiewicz, Proceedings of the 46th Annual IEEE Symposium on Foundations of Computer Science, 2005, pp. 21–30]. A stronger version of this conjecture called Plurality Is Stablest is still open, although [E. Mossel, R. O’Donnell, and K. Oleszkiewicz, Proceedings of the 46th Annual IEEE Symposium on Foundations of Computer Science, 2005, pp. 21–30] contains a proof of an asymptotic version of it. Our techniques extend to several other two‐variable constraint satisfaction problems. In particular, subject to the Unique Games Conjecture, we show tight or nearly tight hardness results for MAX‐2SAT, MAX‐q‐CUT, and MAX‐2LIN(q). For MAX‐2SAT we show approximation hardness up to a factor of roughly $.943$. This nearly matches the $.940$ approximation algorithm of Lewin, Livnat, and Zwick in [Proceedings of the 9th Annual Conference on Integer Programming and Combinatorial Optimization, Springer‐Verlag, Berlin, 2002, pp. 67–82]. Furthermore, we show that our .943... factor is actually tight for a slightly restricted version of MAX‐2SAT. For MAX‐q‐CUT we show a hardness factor which asymptotically (for large q) matches the approximation factor achieved by Frieze and Jerrum [Improved approximation algorithms for MAX k‐CUT and MAX BISECTION, in Integer Programming and Combinatorial Optimization, Springer‐Verlag, Berlin, pp. 1–13], namely $1 - 1/q + 2({\rm ln}\,q)/q^2$. For MAX‐2LIN(q) we show hardness of distinguishing between instances which are $(1-\epsilon)$‐satisfiable and those which are not even, roughly, $(q^{-\epsilon/2})$‐satisfiable. These parameters almost match those achieved by the recent algorithm of Charikar, Makarychev, and Makarychev [Proceedings of the 38th Annual ACM Symposium on Theory of Computing, 2006, pp. 205–214]. The hardness result holds even for instances in which all equations are of the form $x_i - x_j = c$. At a more qualitative level, this result also implies that $1-\epsilon$ vs. ε hardness for MAX‐2LIN(q) is equivalent to the Unique Games Conjecture.