Optimal Union Probability Interval Is NP-Hard

TL;DR

This paper explores the geometric structure of Boole's probability union problem, demonstrating that computing the optimal union probability interval is NP-hard, thus resolving a longstanding open question.

Contribution

It characterizes the geometry of Boole's problem through polytope projections and proves the NP-hardness of computing the optimal union probability interval.

Findings

The problem's geometry is described via coordinate projections of an elementary polytope.

Computing the optimal union probability interval is NP-hard.

The work resolves a gap in the literature on probabilistic logic and geometry.

Abstract

A problem dating back to Boole [Laws of Thought, Walton & Maberly,1854] is what can be computed about the probability of a finite union of events when given as input the probabilities of intersections of some of the events. The modern geometric study of the problem can be traced back to Hailperin [Amer. Math. Monthly 2 (1965) 343--359] who phrased the problem in the language of linear programming and generalized it to logical formulas of the events other than disjunction, heralding a substantial body of work in probabilistic logic [Nilsson, Artif.\ Intell.\ 28 (1986) 71--87], including the probabilistic satisfiability problem of Georgakopoulos, Kavvadis, and Papadimitriou [J.Complexity 4 (1988) 1--11], as well as fundamental connections to the geometry of metrics via cut and correlation polytopes [Deza and Laurent, Geometry of Cuts and Metrics, Springer, 1997] and to the study of marginal polytopes in graphical models of machine learning [Wainwright and Jordan, Found.\ Trends Mach.\ Learn. 1 (2008) 1--305]. This paper (i) describes the pertinent geometry of Boole's problem via coordinate projections of an elementary polytope arising essentially from Hailperin's linear program on the atoms of a Venn diagram, and (ii) shows that computing the optimal interval for the union probability is NP-hard, resolving an apparent gap in the literature highlighted by Pitowsky [Math.\ Programming 50 (1991) 395--414] and Boros et al. [Math.\ Oper.\ Res. 39 (2014) 1311--1329 and 51 (2026) 134--148].