Non-Clashing Teaching Maps for Balls in Graphs

Recently, Kirkpatrick et al. [ALT 2019] and Fallat et al. [JMLR 2023] introduced non-clashing teaching and showed it to be the most efficient machine teaching model satisfying the benchmark for collusion-avoidance set by Goldman and Mathias. A teaching map for a concept class assigns a (teaching) set of examples to each concept . A teaching map is non-clashing if no pair of concepts are consistent with the union of their teaching sets. The size of a non-clashing teaching map (NCTM) is the maximum size of a , . The non-clashing teaching dimension NCTD of is the minimum size of an NCTM for . NCTM and NCTD are defined analogously, except the teacher may only use positive examples. We study NCTMs and NCTMs for the concept class consisting of all balls of a graph . We show that the associated decision problem {\sc B-NCTD} for NCTD is NP-complete in split, co-bipartite, and bipartite graphs. Surprisingly, we even prove that, unless the ETH fails, {\sc B-NCTD} does not admit an algorithm running in time , nor a kernelization algorithm outputting a kernel with vertices, where vc is the vertex cover number of . These are extremely rare results: it is only the second (fourth, resp.) problem in NP to admit a double-exponential lower bound parameterized by vc (treewidth, resp.), and only one of very few problems to admit an ETH-based conditional lower bound on the number of vertices in a kernel. We complement these lower bounds with matching upper bounds. For trees, interval graphs, cycles, and trees of cycles, we derive NCTMs or NCTMs for of size proportional to its VC-dimension. For Gromov-hyperbolic graphs, we design an approximate NCTM for of size 2.
View on arXiv