Demonstration venue · read-only. Every page can be browsed; the buttons that would change it are switched off. Create an account to run TaxoReview on your own data. A simulation from public publication records: the people listed were not invited and did not agree to review.
? Tutorial for this page

Shon Feller

dblp:259/1355 · DBLP profile ↗
← Back
1ranked-venue papers
0as first author
0since 2021 · last 2020
—ORCID · none

Domains — the database's venue-derived domains; a paper can count in several

Theory of computation · 1

Expertise — from the expertise taxonomy: the topics of the expert's papers under the CCF categories. A weight counts papers with recency: 1 for a paper about the topic, 0.3 when the topic is its context, halved every five years.

Theoretical computer science
1 paper
Computational complexity · 40% Graph algorithms and graph theory · 40% Mathematical optimization · 20%

Topics — the 5 heaviest of 5, each with the papers that count most for it

TopicWeightPapersLastEvidence papers
Graph algorithms and graph theory › shortest path
all-pairs shortest paths
0.412020
On the Fine-Grained Complexity of Parity Problems · ICALP 2020
Computational complexity
fine-grained complexity
0.412020
On the Fine-Grained Complexity of Parity Problems · ICALP 2020
Mathematical optimization
knapsack problem
0.412020
On the Fine-Grained Complexity of Parity Problems · ICALP 2020
Computational complexity › counting complexity › modular counting
parity problems
0.412020
On the Fine-Grained Complexity of Parity Problems · ICALP 2020
Graph algorithms and graph theory
shortest path
0.412020
On the Fine-Grained Complexity of Parity Problems · ICALP 2020

Methods — techniques the papers use, named apart from their topics

reduction · 0.4fine-grained reduction · 0.4
YearPublicationVenuePosition
2020 On the Fine-Grained Complexity of Parity Problems
abstract
We consider the parity variants of basic problems studied in fine-grained complexity. We show that finding the exact solution is just as hard as finding its parity (i.e. if the solution is even or odd) for a large number of classical problems, including All-Pairs Shortest Paths (APSP), Diameter, Radius, Median, Second Shortest Path, Maximum Consecutive Subsums, Min-Plus Convolution, and $0/1$-Knapsack. A direct reduction from a problem to its parity version is often difficult to design. Instead, we revisit the existing hardness reductions and tailor them in a problem-specific way to the parity version. Nearly all reductions from APSP in the literature proceed via the (subcubic-equivalent but simpler) Negative Weight Triangle (NWT) problem. Our new modified reductions also start from NWT or a non-standard parity variant of it. We are not able to establish a subcubic-equivalence with the more natural parity counting variant of NWT, where we ask if the number of negative triangles is even or odd. Perhaps surprisingly, we justify this by designing a reduction from the seemingly-harder Zero Weight Triangle problem, showing that parity is (conditionally) strictly harder than decision for NWT.
Amir Abboud, Shon Feller, Oren Weimann
ICALP2