Recognition: 1 theorem link
· Lean TheoremThe S-Hamiltonian Cycle Problem
Pith reviewed 2026-05-15 21:04 UTC · model grok-4.3
The pith
The S-Hamiltonian cycle problem is NP-complete for S={2} and S={2,4} but polynomial-time solvable for S={1,2,4}, S={2,4,6}, any superset of these, and the set of all odd positive integers.
A machine-rendered reading of the paper's core claim, the machinery that carries it, and where it could break.
Core claim
An S-Hamiltonian cycle in an undirected graph G is a cyclic ordering of the vertices such that every two consecutive vertices in the ordering are connected by a walk of length belonging to the fixed set S; intermediate vertices of the walks may be revisited. The decision problem is NP-complete when S={2} and when S={2,4}, yet solvable in polynomial time when S contains {1,2,4}, when S contains {2,4,6}, for every superset of these two sets, and when S is the infinite set of all odd positive integers. The same dichotomy holds for S-Hamiltonian paths, and every variant is polynomial-time solvable on graphs of bounded cliquewidth.
What carries the argument
The S-Hamiltonian cycle: a permutation of the vertices in which each consecutive pair admits a walk (possibly revisiting intermediates) whose length is in S.
If this is right
- The same complexity classification applies verbatim to the S-Hamiltonian path problem.
- Every S-Hamiltonian cycle problem becomes polynomial-time solvable once the input graph has bounded cliquewidth.
- Every connected graph possesses a Hamiltonian cycle with respect to the set of all odd positive integers.
- Tractability is preserved under taking any superset of the identified polynomial cases {1,2,4} and {2,4,6}.
Where Pith is reading between the lines
- Parity appears to be the decisive feature separating the open odd-only cases from the settled mixed-parity cases.
- The results suggest that forbidding vertex revisits inside the walks would likely shift the complexity boundary.
- The classification may extend to approximation or parameterized versions of the same problems on general graphs.
- Similar step-set restrictions could be studied for other traversal problems such as Eulerian paths or TSP variants.
Load-bearing premise
The model permits walks to revisit intermediate vertices and treats the input graph as undirected.
What would settle it
A concrete polynomial-time algorithm for the case S={1,3} or a specific connected graph that admits no {2}-Hamiltonian cycle despite the reduction conditions used to prove hardness.
read the original abstract
Determining if an input undirected graph is Hamiltonian, i.e., if it has a cycle that visits every vertex exactly once, is one of the most famous NP-complete problems. We consider the following generalization of Hamiltonian cycles: for a fixed set $S$ of natural numbers, we want to visit each vertex of a graph $G$ exactly once and ensure that any two consecutive vertices can be joined in $k$ hops for some choice of $k \in S$. Formally, an $S$-Hamiltonian cycle is a permutation $(v_0,\ldots,v_{n-1})$ of the vertices of $G$ such that, for $0 \leq i \leq n-1$, there exists a walk between $v_i$ and $v_{i+1 \bmod n}$ whose length is in $S$. (We do not impose any constraints on how many times vertices can be visited as intermediate vertices of walks.) Of course Hamiltonian cycles in the standard sense correspond to $S=\{1\}$. We study the $S$-Hamiltonian cycle problem of deciding whether an input graph $G$ has an $S$-Hamiltonian cycle. Our goal is to determine the complexity of this problem depending on the fixed set $S$. It is already known that the problem remains NP-complete for $S=\{1,2\}$, whereas it is trivial for $S=\{1,2,3\}$ because any connected graph contains a $\{1,2,3\}$-Hamiltonian cycle. Our work classifies the complexity of this problem for most kinds of sets $S$, with the key new results being the following: we have NP-completeness for $S = \{2\}$ and for $S = \{2, 4\}$, but tractability for $S = \{1, 2, 4\}$, for $S = \{2, 4, 6\}$, for any superset of these two tractable cases, and for $S$ the infinite set of all odd integers. The remaining open cases are the non-singleton finite sets of odd integers, in particular $S = \{1, 3\}$. Beyond cycles, we also discuss the complexity of finding $S$-Hamiltonian paths, and show that our problems are all tractable on graphs of bounded cliquewidth.
Editorial analysis
A structured set of objections, weighed in public.
Referee Report
Summary. The paper introduces the S-Hamiltonian cycle problem for a fixed set S of natural numbers: decide whether an undirected graph G admits a cyclic ordering of its vertices such that each consecutive pair is joined by a walk of length in S (intermediates may be revisited arbitrarily). Standard Hamiltonicity is the special case S={1}. The central results classify complexity for most S: NP-completeness holds for S={2} and S={2,4}; polynomial-time algorithms exist for S={1,2,4}, S={2,4,6}, every superset of these two sets, and the infinite set of all odd positive integers. The remaining open cases are the non-singleton finite sets of odd integers (in particular S={1,3}). The manuscript also treats S-Hamiltonian paths and proves tractability on bounded-cliquewidth graphs.
Significance. If the derivations hold, the work supplies a nearly complete complexity dichotomy for a natural walk-length generalization of Hamiltonian cycle. The auxiliary-graph construction G_S (edge uv present precisely when an S-length walk exists) cleanly reduces hardness to ordinary Hamiltonicity on restricted graph families and places the tractable cases inside known polynomial-time classes (complete graphs or balanced complete bipartite graphs). Explicit allowance of intermediate revisits is stated in the model definition, and the parity-based case analysis is consistent with undirected walk semantics. The results on bounded cliquewidth and paths further broaden applicability.
minor comments (3)
- [Introduction] §1 (Introduction): the sentence claiming prior NP-completeness for S={1,2} lacks a citation to the source paper; add the reference for traceability.
- [Preliminaries] Definition 1: the phrase 'natural numbers' is used without explicit range; confirm whether 0 is included (the examples and walk-length arguments suggest positive integers starting at 1).
- [Tractable cases] Theorem 4 (tractability for all-odd S): the reduction to matching or DP on the auxiliary graph should explicitly state the running-time bound in terms of n and |S| (even though |S|=∞ is handled by parity).
Simulated Author's Rebuttal
We thank the referee for the careful reading and positive assessment of our manuscript. The summary accurately captures the main results on the complexity classification for the S-Hamiltonian cycle problem, including the NP-completeness for S={2} and S={2,4}, the polynomial-time cases, and the open problems for finite non-singleton sets of odd integers. We appreciate the recognition of the auxiliary-graph construction and the broader applicability to paths and bounded-cliquewidth graphs. No specific major comments were provided in the report.
Circularity Check
No significant circularity
full rationale
The paper establishes NP-completeness for S={2} and S={2,4} via explicit polynomial reductions from the standard Hamiltonian Cycle problem on undirected graphs, which is an independent, externally known NP-complete problem. Tractability results for S={1,2,4}, S={2,4,6}, their supersets, and the set of all odd integers are obtained by constructing an auxiliary graph G_S (with edges when a walk of length in S exists, allowing revisits) and then invoking known polynomial-time algorithms for Hamiltonicity on the resulting graph classes (complete graphs or balanced complete bipartite graphs). These constructions follow directly from the standard definition of walks in undirected graphs and do not reduce to self-definitions, fitted parameters renamed as predictions, or load-bearing self-citations. The prior result for S={1,2} is cited as already known but is not used to justify the new cases. All steps are self-contained against external benchmarks and standard graph-theoretic facts.
Axiom & Free-Parameter Ledger
axioms (1)
- standard math Standard definitions of undirected graphs, walks (allowing intermediate vertex revisits), and cycles.
discussion (0)
Sign in with ORCID, Apple, or X to comment. Anyone can read and Pith papers without signing in.