Hardness of Permutation Pattern Matching
V\'it Jel\'inek, Jan Kyn\v{c}l

TL;DR
This paper proves that Permutation Pattern Matching remains NP-complete even under certain restrictions on the permutations, and identifies cases where the problem is polynomial, establishing a complexity dichotomy based on permutation classes.
Contribution
It demonstrates the NP-completeness of PPM for restricted permutation classes and provides a complete complexity classification for PPM when permutations avoid certain patterns.
Findings
PPM is NP-complete even when permutations avoid specific decreasing subsequences.
PPM is polynomial-time solvable for permutations avoiding certain small patterns.
A complexity dichotomy for PPM based on permutation pattern avoidance is established.
Abstract
Permutation Pattern Matching (or PPM) is a decision problem whose input is a pair of permutations and , represented as sequences of integers, and the task is to determine whether contains a subsequence order-isomorphic to . Bose, Buss and Lubiw proved that PPM is NP-complete on general inputs. We show that PPM is NP-complete even when has no decreasing subsequence of length 3 and has no decreasing subsequence of length 4. This provides the first known example of PPM being hard when one or both of and are restricted to a proper hereditary class of permutations. This hardness result is tight in the sense that PPM is known to be polynomial when both and avoid a decreasing subsequence of length 3, as well as when avoids a decreasing subsequence of length 2. The result is also tight in another sense: we will show that…
Peer Reviews
No public reviews on file for this paper yet. If you reviewed it on a platform where reviews are public (OpenReview, ICLR, NeurIPS, ICML), you can paste yours below so the community can read it here.
Videos
No videos yet. Explain this paper in a talk, walkthrough, or lecture? Add one.
Taxonomy
TopicsAlgorithms and Data Compression · Genome Rearrangement Algorithms · Coding theory and cryptography
