mlsanityData to 7 Oct 2026

Cut Sparsification and Succinct Representation of Submodular Hypergraphs

arXiv 2307.09110 ↗First posted 18 Jul 2023cs.DScited by 3

Not on the map. Why?

Abstract (arXiv)

In cut sparsification, all cuts of a hypergraph H=(V,E,w) are approximated within 1±ε factor by a small hypergraph H'. This widely applied method was generalized recently to a setting where the cost of cutting each hyperedge e is provided by a splitting function ge: 2e→ℝ_+. This generalization is called a submodular hypergraph when the functions gee∈ E are submodular, and it arises in machine learning, combinatorial optimization, and algorithmic game theory. Previous work studied the setting where H' is a reweighted sub-hypergraph of H, and measured the size of H' by the number of hyperedges in it. In this setting, we present two results: (i) all submodular hypergraphs admit sparsifiers of size polynomial in n=|V| and ε-1; (ii) we propose a new parameter, called spread, and use it to obtain smaller sparsifiers in some cases. We also show that for a natural family of splitting functions, relaxing the requirement that H' be a reweighted sub-hypergraph of H yields a substantially smaller encoding of the cuts of H (almost a factor n in the number of bits). This is in contrast to graphs, where the most succinct representation is attained by reweighted subgraphs. A new tool in our construction of succinct representation is the notion of deformation, where a splitting function ge is decomposed into a sum of functions of small description, and we provide upper and lower bounds for deformation of common splitting functions.

Key facts. Cited by 3 papers in the map (data through 7 Oct 2026). First posted on arXiv 18 Jul 2023.

Builds on

No reference list yet.

Built on by

Cited by year (2026 to 7 Oct)

Citing papers per year: 2024: 2; 2025: 0; 2026: 1.

3 papers.