arXiv Science⌕ Search
Home/Archive/arXiv

arXiv · 2610.09065

Separating comb inequalities is NP-hard

Yohan Finet·Victor Drouin-Touchette
View original source ↗Read source document ↗Export metadata ↓

Abstract

Comb inequalities are important cutting planes for the symmetric travelling salesman problem, yet the complexity of their exact separation has remained a longstanding question in polyhedral combinatorics. We present a reduction from 3-SAT proving that deciding whether a comb inequality is violated is NP-complete and that the corresponding separation problem is NP-hard. This result holds even when the input vector belongs to the subtour elimination polytope, every edge value is zero, one half or one and the support graph is nonplanar with maximum degree four. The reduction constructs a graph in which six-vertex ladder gadgets encode Boolean relations and cubic graphs enforce consistency among occurrences of each logical variable. For a propositional logic formula with $v$ variables and $m$ clauses, the constructed graph has $40v+70m+30$ vertices and a linear number of positive edges. The reduction also proves hardness when every permitted tooth has two or four vertices with half of the tooth in the handle. We discuss consequences for approximating the maximum comb violation, optimization over the comb relaxation and explain why hardness of separation does not automatically transfer to larger inequality families.

Explore related subjects

cs.CC

Keep this discovery

Explore connections, maps & timelines

BibTeXRIS

Yohan Finet, Victor Drouin-Touchette. 2026-10-06. Separating comb inequalities is NP-hard. https://arxiv.org/abs/2610.09065

Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.

KEEP EXPLORING

Related papers

arXiv2026

Near-Inverse-Linear Barriers for Explicit Affine Witness Isolation

We study randomized nonuniform polynomial-size transformations that output explicit binary affine filters for circuit inputs whose nonempty satisfying sets are affine. The filter may depend on the entire input description; no affine basis is supplied. For every fixed $δ<1$, a worst-case singleton success guarantee $Ω(n^{-δ})$, where $n$ is the witness arity, implies $NP\subseteq P/poly$. More generally, any success guarantee $ω(\log n/n)$ yields satisfiability circuits of size $(s+2)^{O(1)}2^{o(v)}$ for length-$s$ descriptions with at most $v$ witness variables, hence subexponential in $v$ when $s=v^{O(1)}$. Conversely, SAT search-to-decision gives deterministic perfect isolation, making polynomial-resource fixed-exponent strong affine isolation equivalent to $NP\subseteq P/poly$. For explicit unions of at most $n^β$ affine components, success $Ω(n^{-δ})$ implies the same collapse whenever $β,δ\ge0$ and $β+δ<1$. The inverse-linear endpoint is not claimed.

cs.CC↗
arXiv2026

Countability versus Computability

The concept of {\em countable sets} is attributed to Georg Cantor, who established the distinction between countable and uncountable sets in 1874. The concept of {\em computable sets} emerged in the 1930s through the foundational work on computing models by \Godel, Church, and Turing. In this paper, we investigate the connection between countability and computability. A {\em counting bijection} of a set $S$ is a bijection from the set of natural numbers to $S$. We say $S$ is {\em enumerable} if it is either finite or admitting a computable counting bijection. Our initial investigation shows that a set $S$ is enumerable if and only if it is computable. This equivalence offers new insights into set theory and computability theory. We further show that a set is countable if and only if it admits a {\em counting order}, which is a well order satisfying the {\em proximal} property. Based on this concept, we provide a procedure whose existence gives a necessary and sufficient condition for a set to be countable. This procedure is an algorithm if and only if the set is computable. A counting bijection $f$ is {\em increasing} if $f(x)>f(y)$ whenever $x>y$. We prove that an infinite set $S$ of natural numbers is definable in first-order arithmetic if and only if $S$ has an increasing counting bijection. This result has a significant implication: the standard proof that every set $S$ of natural numbers is countable is invalid. This is because the existing proof establishes that $S$ has an increasing counting bijection, which (by our result) would imply that $S$ is definable in first-order arithmetic. This leads to a contradiction with Tarski's undefinability theorem when $S$ is the set of \Godel\ numbers of the true arithmetic sentences.

cs.CC↗