Talk: A Polyhedral Approach To Computing Border Bases (2010)

Motivation Algebra 101 - a quick recap Border bases General characterization Hardness Computational results
A polyhedral approach to
computing border bases
Sebastian Pokutta
Technische Universität Darmstadt

Department of Mathematics
(joint work with Gábor Braun)
Feb 2010 / Darmstadt
Sebastian Pokutta Polyhedral border bases Darmstadt 2010 1 / 30

Why polynomial systems?
Gian-Carlo Rota (Summer 1985): ‘The one contribution

of mine that I hope will be remembered has consisted in
just pointing out that all sorts of problems of combinatorics
can be viewed as problems of location of the zeros of
certain polynomials and in giving these zeros a
combinatorial interpretation. This is now called the critical
problem.’

Polynomial systems naturally occur in discrete optimization.
0/1 solutions to a linear system of equations Ax = b are given by
{x ∈ {0, 1}n | Ax = b, xi2 − xi = 0 ∀i ∈ [n]}.
⇒ System of polynomial equations.
• Graph isomorphism, graph coloring

• Modeling dynamical systems
(Very successful application in oil exploration)

{x ∈ {0, 1}n | Ax = b, xi2 − xi = 0 ∀i ∈ [n]}.


{x ∈ {0, 1}n | Ax = b, xi2 − xi = 0 ∀i ∈ [n]}.


{x ∈ {0, 1}n | Ax = b, xi2 − xi = 0 ∀i ∈ [n]}.


Polynomials
Our objects of interest: polynomials

X
p(X) = am x m
m∈Nn
finite support
Set of indeterminates: X := {x1 , . . . , xn }

Set of monomials: Tn := {x m | m ∈ Nn }
Degree of p: deg(p) := max ||m||1
m∈Nn ,am 6=0
Leading form of p: maximal-degree terms
Polynomials with coefficients in K : K [X]
Example: p(X) = 3x12 x21 x57 + 1x19 x21 − 4x33 x42 − 1

⇒ deg(p) = 10 and LF(p) = 3x12 x21 x57 + 1x19 x21
Polynomials

X
p(X) = am x m
m∈Nn
finite support

m∈Nn ,am 6=0

Polynomials

X
p(X) = am x m
m∈Nn
finite support

m∈Nn ,am 6=0

Polynomials

X
p(X) = am x m
m∈Nn
finite support

m∈Nn ,am 6=0

Polynomials

X
p(X) = am x m
m∈Nn
finite support

m∈Nn ,am 6=0

Polynomials

X
p(X) = am x m
m∈Nn
finite support

m∈Nn ,am 6=0

Polynomials

X
p(X) = am x m
m∈Nn
finite support

m∈Nn ,am 6=0

Polynomials

X
p(X) = am x m
m∈Nn
finite support

m∈Nn ,am 6=0

Vector spaces vs. rings
Polynomials generate a vector space (isomorphic to K ω ):
p, q ∈ K [X], α ∈ K ⇒ p + q ∈ K [X] and αp ∈ K [X]
Polynomials generate a ring:
p, q ∈ K [X] ⇒ p + q ∈ K [X] and pq ∈ K [X]
⇒ K [X] is an associative K -algebra.





Ideals and factors
Ideal :
I ⊆ K [X] subring with p ∈ K [X], q ∈ I then pq ∈ I .
⇒ Ideals are ‘absorbing’.
Factor/epimorphic images: I ⊆ K [X] ideal, then:
K [X]/I := {p + I | p ∈ K [X]}.
A fundamental result that (almost always) holds:
‘Every object is an epimorphic image of a free one.’
Question: What does that mean?

Ideals and factors
Ideal :
K [X]/I := {p + I | p ∈ K [X]}.

Ideals and factors
Ideal :
K [X]/I := {p + I | p ∈ K [X]}.

Ideals and factors
Ideal :
K [X]/I := {p + I | p ∈ K [X]}.

Ideals and factors
One thing to remember: Considering the factor means adding relations.
The result restated:
‘Every object arises as an unrestricted object plus some relations.’
Example 1:
Consider:
xi2 − xi = 0 if and only if xi ∈ {0, 1}.
Define: I := xi2 − xi | i ∈ [n] K [X] and let V := K [X]/I .

⇒ In V we enforce xi2 − xi = 0 for all i ∈ [n].
(Meta-) Example 2:
Polytopes P ⊆ [0, 1]n arise by taking [0, 1]n and adding inequalities.

Ideals and factors
Example 1:
Consider:

(Meta-) Example 2:

Ideals and factors
Example 1:
Consider:

(Meta-) Example 2:

Ideals and factors
Example 1:
Consider:

(Meta-) Example 2:

Ideals and factors
Example 1:
Consider:

(Meta-) Example 2:

Ideals and factors
Example 1:
Consider:

(Meta-) Example 2:

Ideals and factors
Example 1:
Consider:

(Meta-) Example 2:

Degree filtrations and zero-dimensional ideals
Let I ideal and define I ≤i := {p ∈ I | deg(p) ≤ i}.

Degree filtration of I :
[
I = I ≤i
i<ω
Similarly for the whole polynomial ring:

[
K [X] = K [X]≤i
i<ω
An ideal I is zero-dimensional if and only if
dim(K [X]/I ) < ∞.


[
I = I ≤i
i<ω

[
K [X] = K [X]≤i
i<ω
dim(K [X]/I ) < ∞.


[
I = I ≤i
i<ω

[
K [X] = K [X]≤i
i<ω
dim(K [X]/I ) < ∞.


[
I = I ≤i
i<ω

[
K [X] = K [X]≤i
i<ω
dim(K [X]/I ) < ∞.

Order ideals and borders
Definition (Order ideal)

Let O ⊆ Tn such that whenever m1 ∈ O, m2 ∈ Tn with m2 |m1 it
follows m2 ∈ O. Then O is an order ideal .
Definition (Border of O)
Let O be an order ideal. Then
∂O := {xi m | m ∈ O, i ∈ [n]} \ O
is the border of O.

Definition (Order ideal)

Let O ⊆ Tn such that whenever m1 ∈ O, m2 ∈ Tn with m2 |m1 it
follows m2 ∈ O. Then O is an order ideal .
Definition (Border of O)
Let O be an order ideal. Then
∂O := {xi m | m ∈ O, i ∈ [n]} \ O
is the border of O.

An order ideal and its border in T2

Border bases
Definition (O-border basis)

Let O = {t1 , . . . , tµ } be an order ideal with ∂O := {b1 , . . . , bν }.
Further, let I ⊆ K [X] be a zero-dimensional ideal and
G = {g1 , . . . , gν } ⊆ K [X] a set of polynomials.
Then G is an O-border basis of I if:
P
(i) G is of the form: gj = bj − i∈[µ] αij ti with αij ∈ K ;
(ii) hGiK [X] = I ;
(iii) K [X] = I ⊕ hOiK as vector spaces.

Border bases

P
(ii) hGiK [X] = I ;

Border bases

P
(ii) hGiK [X] = I ;

Border bases

P
(ii) hGiK [X] = I ;

Border bases

P
(ii) hGiK [X] = I ;

Border bases
A necessary and sufficient condition.
Lemma
Let O be an order ideal and I a zero-dimensional ideal. Then O
supports a border basis of I if and only if
K [X] = I ⊕ hOiK as vector spaces.
Order ideals with this property are admissible.

The catch: by far, not every order ideal supports a border basis.
First, even if O ⊆ Tn has the right cardinality, i.e.,
|O| = dim(K [X]/I )
it does not necessarily support a border basis:
Example
Let R := {(−1, 1); (1, 1); (0, 0); (1, 0); (0; −1)} ⊆ A2 (Q). Let
I := {p ∈ K [X] | p(r ) = 0 ∀r ∈ R}.
Then O := {1, x, x 2 , x 3 , x 4 } cannot support a border basis:
hOiK ∩ I 6= {0} as x 3 − x ∈ I .

|O| = dim(K [X]/I )
Example
Let R := {(−1, 1); (1, 1); (0, 0); (1, 0); (0; −1)} ⊆ A2 (Q). Let
I := {p ∈ K [X] | p(r ) = 0 ∀r ∈ R}.
hOiK ∩ I 6= {0} as x 3 − x ∈ I .

|O| = dim(K [X]/I )
Example
Let R := {(−1, 1); (1, 1); (0, 0); (1, 0); (0; −1)} ⊆ A2 (Q). Let
I := {p ∈ K [X] | p(r ) = 0 ∀r ∈ R}.
hOiK ∩ I 6= {0} as x 3 − x ∈ I .

|O| = dim(K [X]/I )
Example
Let R := {(−1, 1); (1, 1); (0, 0); (1, 0); (0; −1)} ⊆ A2 (Q). Let
I := {p ∈ K [X] | p(r ) = 0 ∀r ∈ R}.
hOiK ∩ I 6= {0} as x 3 − x ∈ I .

Let σ be a term-ordering. Then
K [X] = I ⊕ hTn \ LTσ (I )iK .
Question: Is every order ideal induced by a term-ordering?
Answer: No, this isn’t the case either!
Example
Consider the ideal I := x 2 + xy + y 2 , xy 2 , y 4 K [X] . Then

LTDegLex (I ) = {x 2 , xy 2 , y 4 } and ODegLex = {1, x, y , xy , y 2 , y 3 }.

Via substitution: O = {1, x, y , x 2 , y 2 , y 3 }.
If now x <σ y , then xy <σ y 2 and if y <σ x, then xy <σ x 2 .
(Deg-2 Gröbner basis element comes from x 2 + xy + y 2 )

Example



Example



Example



Example



Example



The combinatorial problem and a polyhedral description
Finding admissible order ideals - a combinatorial problem.
The problem in finding an admissible order ideal is twofold.
(i) We have to choose dim(K [X]/I ) monomials so that we

obtain an order ideal;
(ii) The chosen monomials have to form a basis of K [X]/I .





The order ideal polytope.
Let z denote the characteristic vector of an order ideal O, i.e.,

zm = 1 if and only if m ∈ O.
zm1 ≥ zm2 ∀m1 , m2 ∈ Tn≤d−1 : m1 | m2

X
zm = d
m∈Tn≤d−1
X
zm ≤ dim hU ∪ I iK /I ∀U ⊆ Tn≤d−1 : |U| = d
m∈U
zm ∈ [0, 1] ∀m ∈ Tn≤d−1
Figure: Order ideal polytope P(I ) with d := dim (K [X]/I )


zm1 ≥ zm2 ∀m1 , m2 ∈ Tn≤d−1 : m1 | m2

X
zm = d
m∈Tn≤d−1
X
m∈U
zm ∈ [0, 1] ∀m ∈ Tn≤d−1


zm1 ≥ zm2 ∀m1 , m2 ∈ Tn≤d−1 : m1 | m2

X
zm = d
m∈Tn≤d−1
X
m∈U
zm ∈ [0, 1] ∀m ∈ Tn≤d−1


zm1 ≥ zm2 ∀m1 , m2 ∈ Tn≤d−1 : m1 | m2

X
zm = d
m∈Tn≤d−1
X
m∈U
zm ∈ [0, 1] ∀m ∈ Tn≤d−1


zm1 ≥ zm2 ∀m1 , m2 ∈ Tn≤d−1 : m1 | m2

X
zm = d
m∈Tn≤d−1
X
m∈U
zm ∈ [0, 1] ∀m ∈ Tn≤d−1

A polyhedral characterization.
Theorem (Braun, Pokutta 2009)

Let I be a zero-dimensional ideal. There is a bijection between its
order ideals and integral points of the order ideal polytope of I .
The bijection is given by
n
ξ : z ∈ P(I ) ∩ ZT 7→ O(z) := {m ∈ Tn | zm = 1}.

Sketch of proof.
First, observe that the condition
zm1 ≥ zm2 ∀m1 , m2 ∈ Tn≤d−1 : m1 | m2
indeed ensures that O(z) is an order ideal.
Second, the condition

X
zm = d
m∈Tn≤d−1
ensures that O(z) is of the right size, i.e., |O(z)| = dim(K [X]/I ).

Sketch of proof.
First, observe that the condition
zm1 ≥ zm2 ∀m1 , m2 ∈ Tn≤d−1 : m1 | m2
indeed ensures that O(z) is an order ideal.
Second, the condition

X
zm = d
m∈Tn≤d−1
ensures that O(z) is of the right size, i.e., |O(z)| = dim(K [X]/I ).

Sketch of proof.
It remains to show that

X
m∈U
is equivalent to
I ∩ hO(z)iK = {0},
i.e., the image of O(z) is linearly independent in the factor
K [X]/I .
⇒ together with |O(z)| = dim(K [X]/I ) it follows
K [X] = I ⊕ hOiK .

Sketch of proof.
It remains to show that

X
m∈U
is equivalent to
I ∩ hO(z)iK = {0},
i.e., the image of O(z) is linearly independent in the factor
K [X]/I .
⇒ together with |O(z)| = dim(K [X]/I ) it follows
K [X] = I ⊕ hOiK .

Sketch of proof.
With our interpretation of z being the characteristic vector

X
m∈U
can be rewritten as
|U ∩ O(z)| ≤ dim(hU ∪ I iK /I ).
The size of U ∩ O(z) is at most the dimension of the vector space

generated by the image of U in the factor K [X]/I .
⇒ Obviously necessary for directness.

Sketch of proof.
With our interpretation of z being the characteristic vector

X
m∈U
can be rewritten as
|U ∩ O(z)| ≤ dim(hU ∪ I iK /I ).
The size of U ∩ O(z) is at most the dimension of the vector space

generated by the image of U in the factor K [X]/I .
⇒ Obviously necessary for directness.

Sketch of proof.
For sufficiency choose U := O(z) in
|U ∩ O(z)| ≤ dim(hU ∪ I iK /I ),
so that we obtain
|O(z)| ≤ dim(hO(z) ∪ I iK /I ).
The dimension of the vector space generated by

the image of O(z) in the factor K [X]/I is at least |O(z)|.
⇒ Sufficient for directness.


Sketch of proof.
For sufficiency choose U := O(z) in
|U ∩ O(z)| ≤ dim(hU ∪ I iK /I ),
so that we obtain
|O(z)| ≤ dim(hO(z) ∪ I iK /I ).
The dimension of the vector space generated by

the image of O(z) in the factor K [X]/I is at least |O(z)|.
⇒ Sufficient for directness.


A complexity theoretic consideration
A common problem.
Given a zero-dimensional ideal I , find a ‘nice’ basis of K [X]/I , i.e.,

one that contains a favorable mix of monomials.
Question: How hard is it to choose an order ideal with respect to a

(linear) preference?

A common problem.
Given a zero-dimensional ideal I , find a ‘nice’ basis of K [X]/I , i.e.,

one that contains a favorable mix of monomials.
Question: How hard is it to choose an order ideal with respect to a

(linear) preference?

Choosing nice bases is NP-hard
Theorem (Braun, Pokutta 2009)

n
Let I ⊆ K [X] be a zero-dimensional ideal and let c ∈ ZT .
Computing an order ideal O that is admissible for I and maximizes
c is NP-hard.

A zero-dimensional ideal that solves k-Clique.
We will establish hardness by a reduction from k-Clique.
For this, for any graph Γ, we will construct a zero-dimensional ideal

IΓ whose order ideals are in one-to-one with the graph’s cliques.
We define
Fn,k := {vj | j ∈ [n − k]} ∪ Tn=3
jx
P
with vj := i∈[n] i i and define In,k := hFn,k iK [X] .


We define
Fn,k := {vj | j ∈ [n − k]} ∪ Tn=3
jx
P


We define
Fn,k := {vj | j ∈ [n − k]} ∪ Tn=3
jx
P

Characterizing the order ideals of In,k .
Lemma
Let n ∈ N and k ∈ [n]. Then In,k is a zero-dimensional ideal such
that an order ideal O is admissible if and only if
(i) O=1 ⊆ Tn=1 with |O=1 | = k;
(ii) O=2 = {xy | x, y ∈ O=1 };
(iii) O=` = ∅ for ` ≥ 3.
Therefore, the order ideals of In,k are in one-to-one correspondence

with the choices of k vertices and the associated edges on a
complete graph Kn .

Lemma
(i) O=1 ⊆ Tn=1 with |O=1 | = k;
(ii) O=2 = {xy | x, y ∈ O=1 };
(iii) O=` = ∅ for ` ≥ 3.

complete graph Kn .

Lemma
(i) O=1 ⊆ Tn=1 with |O=1 | = k;
(ii) O=2 = {xy | x, y ∈ O=1 };
(iii) O=` = ∅ for ` ≥ 3.

complete graph Kn .

Lemma
(i) O=1 ⊆ Tn=1 with |O=1 | = k;
(ii) O=2 = {xy | x, y ∈ O=1 };
(iii) O=` = ∅ for ` ≥ 3.

complete graph Kn .

Sketch of proof.
Observe, that the polynomials vj are homogeneous of degree one

and the coefficient matrix A := (vj )j∈[n−k] is a Vandermonde
matrix, i.e., every square submatrix is invertible.
If we thus remove any k columns (belonging to k variables of

{x1 , . . . , xn }) from A we obtain an invertible matrix. (without loss
of generality we choose {x1 , . . . , xk }).
Therefore, {x1 , . . . , xk , v1 , . . . , vn−k } is a basis for the

homogeneous polynomials of degree one. So K [X] is also a
polynomial ring in those variables.

Sketch of proof.




Sketch of proof.




Sketch of proof.
We can therefore conclude

. D E
∼ ∼
hOiK = K [x1 , . . . , xn ] hFn,k iK [X] = K [x1 , . . . , xk ] Tk=3 .
K [X]
Substitution preserves degrees, homogeneity, etc.

Thus for any order ideal: |O=1 | = k, O=2 = {xy | x, y ∈ O=1 },
and O=` = ∅ for all ` ≥ 3.
The other direction follows similary.

Sketch of proof.
We can therefore conclude

. D E
∼ ∼
hOiK = K [x1 , . . . , xn ] hFn,k iK [X] = K [x1 , . . . , xk ] Tk=3 .
K [X]
Substitution preserves degrees, homogeneity, etc.

Thus for any order ideal: |O=1 | = k, O=2 = {xy | x, y ∈ O=1 },
and O=` = ∅ for all ` ≥ 3.
The other direction follows similary.

Proving hardness.
Let Γ = (V , E ) with n := |V | and k ∈ [n] be an instance of

k-Clique.
n
We consider In,k and define c ∈ ZT≤3 via
(
1, if m = xu xv and either (u, v ) ∈ E or u = v ;
cm =
0, otherwise.
Observe that there exists an admissible order ideal O with score

k(k+1)
2 if and only if Γ contains a clique of size k

Proving hardness.

k-Clique.
n
(
cm =
0, otherwise.

k(k+1)

Proving hardness.

k-Clique.
n
(
cm =
0, otherwise.

k(k+1)

polynomial system order ideal signature optimization [s] counting [s] # order ideals
x 3 , xy 2 + y 3 (1, 3, 1, 1, 1) < 0.01 0.02 3
vanishing ideal of the points (1, 4, 2) < 0.01 0.02 45
(0, 0, 0, 1), (1, 0, 0, 2),
(3, 0, 0, 2), (5, 0, 0, 3),
(−1, 0, 0, 4), (4, 4, 4, 5),
(0, 0, 7, 6)).
x + y + z − u − v , x 2 − x, (1, 4, 5) < 0.01 0.35 1,260
y − y , z − z, u 2 − u, v 2 − v
2 2
x + y + z − u − v , x 3 − x, (1, 4, 7, 6) 0.02 51.50 106,820

y 3 − y , z 2 − z, u 2 − u, v 2 − v
x + y + z − u − v , x 3 − x, (1, 4, 8, 9) 0.02 53.00 108,900
y 3 − y , z 3 − z, u 2 − u, v 2 − v
x + y + z − u − v , x 3 − x, (1, 4, 9, 12, 9) 0.08 300.00* > 1,349,154
y 3 − y , z 3 − z, u 3 − u, v 2 − v
x + y + z − u − v + a, (1, 5, 9) < 0.01 8.68 30,030
x 2 − x, y 2 − y , z 2 − z,
u 2 − u, v 2 − v , a2 − a
Table: Computational results (performed with SCIP and CoCoA).

Thank you!

Talk: A Polyhedral Approach To Computing Border Bases (2010)

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Talk: A Polyhedral Approach To Computing Border Bases (2010)

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Motivation Algebra 101 - a quick recap Border bases General characterization Hardness Computational results

Technische Universität Darmstadt

(joint work with Gábor Braun)

Feb 2010 / Darmstadt

Sebastian Pokutta Polyhedral border bases Darmstadt 2010 1 / 30

Why polynomial systems?

Gian-Carlo Rota (Summer 1985): ‘The one contribution

Sebastian Pokutta Polyhedral border bases Darmstadt 2010 2 / 30

Why polynomial systems?

Polynomial systems naturally occur in discrete optimization.

0/1 solutions to a linear system of equations Ax = b are given by

{x ∈ {0, 1}n | Ax = b, xi2 − xi = 0 ∀i ∈ [n]}.

⇒ System of polynomial equations.

• Graph isomorphism, graph coloring

Sebastian Pokutta Polyhedral border bases Darmstadt 2010 3 / 30

Why polynomial systems?

Polynomial systems naturally occur in discrete optimization.

0/1 solutions to a linear system of equations Ax = b are given by

{x ∈ {0, 1}n | Ax = b, xi2 − xi = 0 ∀i ∈ [n]}.

⇒ System of polynomial equations.

• Graph isomorphism, graph coloring

Sebastian Pokutta Polyhedral border bases Darmstadt 2010 3 / 30

Why polynomial systems?

Polynomial systems naturally occur in discrete optimization.

0/1 solutions to a linear system of equations Ax = b are given by

{x ∈ {0, 1}n | Ax = b, xi2 − xi = 0 ∀i ∈ [n]}.

⇒ System of polynomial equations.

• Graph isomorphism, graph coloring

Sebastian Pokutta Polyhedral border bases Darmstadt 2010 3 / 30

Why polynomial systems?

Polynomial systems naturally occur in discrete optimization.

0/1 solutions to a linear system of equations Ax = b are given by

{x ∈ {0, 1}n | Ax = b, xi2 − xi = 0 ∀i ∈ [n]}.

⇒ System of polynomial equations.

• Graph isomorphism, graph coloring

Sebastian Pokutta Polyhedral border bases Darmstadt 2010 3 / 30

Our objects of interest: polynomials

Set of indeterminates: X := {x1 , . . . , xn }

Example: p(X) = 3x12 x21 x57 + 1x19 x21 − 4x33 x42 − 1

Our objects of interest: polynomials

Set of indeterminates: X := {x1 , . . . , xn }

Example: p(X) = 3x12 x21 x57 + 1x19 x21 − 4x33 x42 − 1

Our objects of interest: polynomials

Set of indeterminates: X := {x1 , . . . , xn }

Example: p(X) = 3x12 x21 x57 + 1x19 x21 − 4x33 x42 − 1

Our objects of interest: polynomials

Set of indeterminates: X := {x1 , . . . , xn }

Example: p(X) = 3x12 x21 x57 + 1x19 x21 − 4x33 x42 − 1

Our objects of interest: polynomials

Set of indeterminates: X := {x1 , . . . , xn }

Example: p(X) = 3x12 x21 x57 + 1x19 x21 − 4x33 x42 − 1

Our objects of interest: polynomials

Set of indeterminates: X := {x1 , . . . , xn }

Example: p(X) = 3x12 x21 x57 + 1x19 x21 − 4x33 x42 − 1

Our objects of interest: polynomials

Set of indeterminates: X := {x1 , . . . , xn }

Example: p(X) = 3x12 x21 x57 + 1x19 x21 − 4x33 x42 − 1

Our objects of interest: polynomials

Set of indeterminates: X := {x1 , . . . , xn }

Example: p(X) = 3x12 x21 x57 + 1x19 x21 − 4x33 x42 − 1

Vector spaces vs. rings

Polynomials generate a vector space (isomorphic to K ω ):

p, q ∈ K [X], α ∈ K ⇒ p + q ∈ K [X] and αp ∈ K [X]