1
$\begingroup$

Counting the number of bipartite matchings is #P-hard. Thus every #SAT problem can be reduced to counting the number of bipartite matchings. If a SAT problem is unsatisfiable however, it will have 0 solutions and thus the corresponding bipartite matching problem will have 0 solutions which is detectable in polynomial time (since a single bipartite matching can be found in polynomial time).

This would enable us to solve SAT in poly-time. What's going wrong with this reasoning?

  • 1
    What, precisely, are the requirements on the reductions you're working with here? Are you sure that "$>0$ satisfactions" has to reduce to a problem instance of the form "$>0$ bipartite matchings"?2011-11-09
  • 0
    The reduction I'm working of is given here https://secure.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/wiki/Permanent_is_sharp-P-complete2011-11-09
  • 0
    From the description of the reduction, it seems that the number of #SAT solutions is equal to the number of bipartite matchings multiplied by a constant - so the answer to your question is yes.2011-11-09
  • 0
    It's a different notion of reduction. It is not true that the reduction maps unsatisfable SAT instances to 01 matrices with permanent 0. See http://cstheory.stackexchange.com/questions/8749/permanent-is-p-complete2011-11-09

0 Answers 0