arXiv++ Combinatorics

A classical result by Lovász asserts that two graphs $G$ and $H$ are isomorphic if and only if they have the same left profile, that is, for every graph $F$, the number of homomorphisms from $F$ to $G$ coincides with the number of homomorphisms from $F$ to $H$. Dvor{á}k and later on Dell, Grohe, and Rattan showed that restrictions of the left profile to a class of graphs can capture several different relaxations of isomorphism, including equivalence in counting logics with a fixed number of variables (which contains fractional isomorphism as a special case) and co-spectrality (i.e., two graphs having the same characteristic polynomial). On the other side, a result by Chaudhuri and Vardi asserts that isomorphism is also captured by the right profile, that is, two graphs $G$ and $H$ are isomorphic if and only if for every graph $F$, the number of homomorphisms from $G$ to $F$ coincides with the number of homomorphisms from $H$ to $F$. In this paper, we embark on a study of the restrictions of the right profile by investigating relaxations of isomorphism that can or cannot be captured by restricting the right profile to a fixed class of graphs. Our results unveil striking differences between the expressive power of the left profile and the right profile. We show that fractional isomorphism, equivalence in counting logics with a fixed number of variables, and co-spectrality cannot be captured by restricting the right profile to a class of graphs. In the opposite direction, we show that chromatic equivalence cannot be captured by restricting the left profile to a class of graphs, while, clearly, it can be captured by restricting the right profile to the class of all cliques.

We investigate when non-dictatorial aggregation is possible from an algorithmic perspective, where non-dictatorial aggregation means that the votes cast by the members of a society can be aggregated in such a way that there is no single member of the society that always dictates the collective outcome. We consider the setting in which the members of a society take a position on a fixed collection of issues, where for each issue several different alternatives are possible, but the combination of choices must belong to a given set X of allowable voting patterns. Such a set X is called a possibility domain if there is an aggregator that is non-dictatorial, operates separately on each issue, and returns values among those cast by the society on each issue. We design a polynomial-time algorithm that decides, given a set X of voting patterns, whether or not X is a possibility domain. Furthermore, if X is a possibility domain, then the algorithm constructs in polynomial time a non-dictatorial aggregator for X. Furthermore, we show that the question of whether a Boolean domain X is a possibility domain is in NLOGSPACE. We also design a polynomial-time algorithm that decides whether X is a uniform possibility domain, that is, whether X admits an aggregator that is non-dictatorial even when restricted to any two positions for each issue. As in the case of possibility domains, the algorithm also constructs in polynomial time a uniform non-dictatorial aggregator, if one exists. Then, we turn our attention to the case where X is given implicitly, either as the set of assignments satisfying a propositional formula, or as a set of consistent evaluations of a sequence of propositional formulas. In both cases, we provide bounds to the complexity of deciding if X is a (uniform) possibility domain.

We consider the problem of aggregating votes cast by a society on a fixed set of issues, where each member of the society may vote for one of several positions on each issue, but the combination of votes on the various issues is restricted to a set of feasible voting patterns. We require the aggregation to be supportive, i.e. for every issue $j$ the corresponding component $f_j$ of every aggregator on every issue should satisfy $f_j(x_1, ,\ldots, x_n) \in \{x_1, ,\ldots, x_n\}$. We prove that, in such a set-up, non-dictatorial aggregation of votes in a society of some size is possible if and only if either non-dictatorial aggregation is possible in a society of only two members or a ternary aggregator exists that either on every issue $j$ is a majority operation, i.e. the corresponding component satisfies $f_j(x,x,y) = f_j(x,y,x) = f_j(y,x,x) =x, \forall x,y$, or on every issue is a minority operation, i.e. the corresponding component satisfies $f_j(x,x,y) = f_j(x,y,x) = f_j(y,x,x) =y, \forall x,y.$ We then introduce a notion of uniformly non-dictatorial aggregator, which is defined to be an aggregator that on every issue, and when restricted to an arbitrary two-element subset of the votes for that issue, differs from all projection functions. We first give a characterization of sets of feasible voting patterns that admit a uniformly non-dictatorial aggregator. Then making use of Bulatov's dichotomy theorem for conservative constraint satisfaction problems, we connect social choice theory with combinatorial complexity by proving that if a set of feasible voting patterns $X$ has a uniformly non-dictatorial aggregator of some arity then the multi-sorted conservative constraint satisfaction problem on $X$, in the sense introduced by Bulatov and Jeavons, with each issue representing a sort, is tractable; otherwise it is NP-complete.

The classical zero-one law for first-order logic on random graphs says that for any first-order sentence $φ$ in the theory of graphs, as n approaches infinity, the probability that the random graph G(n, p) satisfies $φ$ approaches either 0 or 1. It is well known that this law fails to hold for any formalism that can express the parity quantifier: for certain properties, the probability that G(n, p) satisfies the property need not converge, and for others the limit may be strictly between 0 and 1. In this paper, we capture the limiting behavior of properties definable in first order logic augmented with the parity quantier, FO[parity], over G(n, p), thus eluding the above hurdles. Specifically, we establish the following "modular convergence law": For every FO[parity] sentence $φ$, there are two rational numbers a_0, a_1, such that for i in {0,1}, as n approaches infinity, the probability that the random graph G(2n+i, p) satisfies $φ$ approaches a_i. Our results also extend appropriately to first order logic equipped with Mod-q quantiers for prime q. Our approach is based on multivariate polynomials over finite fields, in particular, on a new generalization of the Gowers norm. The proof generalizes the original quantifier elimination approach to the zero-one law, and has analogies with the Razborov-Smolensky method for lower bounds for AC0 with parity gates.