Does robustness imply tractability? A lower bound for planted clique in the semi-random model · HackerPapers discussionshttps://hackerpaper.kaipfister.de/p/1704.05120/Collected HN comments and submissions linking this paper.enMon, 02 Nov 2026 11:16:22 GMTDoes robustness imply tractability? A lower bound for planted clique in the semi-random model — mentioned by espeedhttps://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=20341358urn:hackerpapers:mention:1704.05120:20341358Wed, 03 Jul 2019 03:24:46 GMT<p>Earlier today when I was looking for potential correspondences between Interval Graph Theory [1] and Flow Graph Theory [2] (Reducible Flow Graphs), I happened upon this 2017 blog post and paper [3] by Jacob Steinhardt: &quot;Does Pigeonhole Degrade Gracefully?&quot;... The celebrated pigeonhole principle says... If we have disjoint sets S_1, S_2, ..., S_m subsets in [n] each of size s, then m (the number of sets) is at most [n/s]. Suppose that instead of being disjoint, we require that every pair of sets has intersection at most 1. How much can this change the maximum number of sets m? Is it still…</p><p><a href="https://hackerpaper.kaipfister.de/p/1704.05120/">Paper and discussion history</a>. A mention is not an endorsement.</p>cs.CC