Fact-checked by Grok 2 weeks ago

Tutte polynomial

The Tutte polynomial is a two-variable invariant in and theory that encodes a wide array of combinatorial structures and properties of graphs and matroids, serving as a universal from which many classical graph polynomials can be derived. Introduced by the British mathematician in his 1947 paper "A ring in graph theory," it encodes information about combinatorial structures including those related to nowhere-zero flows and chromatic polynomials but evolved into a foundational object with applications across , physics, and . The polynomial T(M; x, y) for a M (or G, viewed as the cycle matroid of its edges) admits a recursive definition based on deletion and contraction operations: if M has no elements, then T(M; x, y) = 1; for a non-loop, non-bridge element e, T(M; x, y) = T(M \setminus e; x, y) + T(M / e; x, y); if e is a , T(M; x, y) = y \cdot T(M / e; x, y); and if e is a (or ), T(M; x, y) = x \cdot T(M \setminus e; x, y). This recursion is independent of the , ensuring well-definedness; this recursion was further developed in Tutte's subsequent work on dichromatic polynomials (, ), where a related form was formalized. An equivalent rank-nullity expansion expresses it as T(M; x, y) = \sum_{A \subseteq E} (x-1)^{r(E) - r(A)} (y-1)^{|A| - r(A)}, summing over subsets A of elements, where r denotes the function. Key properties include its multiplicativity under (T(M_1 \sqcup M_2; [x, y](/page/X&Y)) = T(M_1; [x, y](/page/X&Y)) \cdot T(M_2; [x, y](/page/X&Y))) and duality for s (T(M^*; [x, y](/page/X&Y)) = T(M; y, x), where M^* is the dual matroid), which reflect structural symmetries. Notable evaluations include T(G; 1, 1), which counts the number of bases (spanning trees for graphs); T(G; 2, 0), the number of acyclic orientations; and specializations yielding the P_G(\lambda) = (-1)^{|V|-k(G)} \lambda^{k(G)} T(G; 1 - \lambda, 0) (where k(G) is the number of connected components) and the flow polynomial F_G(\lambda) = (-1)^{|E| - |V| + k(G)} T(G; 0, 1 - \lambda). Beyond enumeration, the Tutte polynomial finds applications in (as the partition function of the ), network reliability analysis (via R(G; p) = p^{|V|-k(G)} (1-p)^{|E|-|V|+k(G)} T(G; 1, 1/(1-p))), (linking to the Jones polynomial through ribbon graphs), and (where evaluating it is #P-hard in general, though tractable at points like (1,1) or (-1,-1)). Its universality theorem states that any satisfying deletion-contraction satisfies a with the Tutte polynomial, underscoring its role as a complete for such reductions.

Definitions and basics

Formal definition

The Tutte polynomial is defined for a G = (V, E), where V is the set of vertices and E is the set of edges (allowing for multigraphs, in which multiple edges between the same pair of vertices are permitted). A spanning of G is obtained by selecting a A \subseteq E of edges while retaining all vertices in V, resulting in the (V, A). The rank function r: 2^E \to \mathbb{N} assigns to each A \subseteq E the value r(A) = |V| - k(A), where k(A) denotes the number of connected components in the (V, A); this rank arises from the rank-nullity theorem applied to the cycle matroid of the , measuring the size of a maximum spanning in (V, A). The formal definition of the Tutte polynomial T(G; x, y) is the bivariate given by the sum over all spanning subgraphs: T(G; x, y) = \sum_{A \subseteq E} (x-1)^{r(E) - r(A)} (y-1)^{|A| - r(A)}, where r(E) is the of the full edge set (equal to |V| - k(G), with k(G) the number of connected components of G). An equivalent rank-based formulation expresses the exponents in terms of corank and nullity: the corank of A is \operatorname{corank}(A) = r(E) - r(A), quantifying the deficiency relative to the full graph, while the nullity of A is \nu(A) = |A| - r(A), representing the cyclomatic number or excess edges beyond in (V, A). Thus, T(G; x, y) = \sum_{A \subseteq E} (x-1)^{\operatorname{corank}(A)} (y-1)^{\nu(A)}. This form highlights the polynomial's role in encoding and cycle structure across all edge subsets. This sum formulation is equivalent to W. T. Tutte's original 1947 definition, which counted spanning trees weighted by their internal and external activities—measures of edges that break or preserve cycles and components relative to a fixed ordering of the edges. The equivalence follows by partitioning the sum over subgraphs according to bases (spanning trees) and grouping terms by activity counts, yielding the same generating function. The is well-defined for multigraphs, as the definition depends only on the edge set without assuming , and extends naturally to by replacing the graph's with the on the ground set E.

Equivalent formulations

The Tutte admits several equivalent formulations that underscore its combinatorial significance and algebraic universality. An equivalent expression is T(G; x, y) = \sum_{A \subseteq E} (x-1)^{r(E) - r(A)} (y-1)^{|A| + k(A) - |V|}, where the sum ranges over all subsets A of the edge set E(G), r(\cdot) denotes the (the size of a maximum spanning forest in the subgraph induced by A), k(A) is the number of connected components in that subgraph, and |V| is the number of vertices in G. This formulation encodes the distribution of edge subsets by their corank r(E) - r(A) and nullity |A| + k(A) - |V| = |A| - r(A). Tutte formulated the dichromatic polynomial \chi(G; x, y) in 1954, defined recursively via deletion and of edges, generalizing both the chromatic and polynomials of graphs; this recursive definition coincides with the modern Tutte polynomial up to variable substitution. The Tutte polynomial also possesses a : it is the unique graph (up to scalar multiple) that satisfies the deletion- recurrence T(G; x, y) = T(G - e; x, y) + T(G / e; x, y) for any edge e that is neither a nor a bridge, along with the normalization conditions T(\emptyset; x, y) = 1 for the on any number of vertices and T(K_2; x, y) = x for the single-edge graph on two vertices (with adjustments for loops and bridges via multiplication by y or x, respectively). This universality extends a generalization of the matrix-tree theorem, wherein the evaluation T(G; 1, 1) equals the number of spanning trees in G, computable as the determinant of any cofactor of the graph Laplacian matrix L(G); more broadly, the specialization T(G; x, 1) generates the numbers of spanning forests in G by their number of components (specifically, the coefficient of x^{|V| - k} is the number of spanning forests with k components), and these forest counts relate directly to determinants of modified Laplacians such as \det(\lambda I - L(G)), whose characteristic polynomial yields the forest enumeration up to sign and scaling. Equivalence among these formulations—the rank-generating sum, the recursive dichromatic definition, and the universal property—follows from proofs by induction on the number of edges, reducing arbitrary graphs to the base cases of edgeless or single-edge graphs via repeated application of the deletion-contraction relation, which preserves the polynomial under both the sum and recursive perspectives.

Examples

The Tutte polynomial provides a concrete way to encode structural properties of graphs via explicit computations on simple examples. For the empty graph K_0 with no vertices or edges, the polynomial evaluates to T(K_0; x, y) = 1, as there are no subsets to sum over in the expansion. Consider the graph consisting of two vertices connected by a single edge, often denoted as the path graph P_2. This is a tree with two vertices, and its Tutte polynomial is T(P_2; x, y) = x. More generally, any tree with n vertices has Tutte polynomial T(G; x, y) = x^{n-1}, reflecting the absence of cycles and the unique spanning tree structure. For the cycle graph C_3, a triangle with three vertices and three edges, the Tutte polynomial is T(C_3; x, y) = x^2 + x + y. This can be computed step-by-step using the subset expansion formula, T(G; x, y) = \sum_{A \subseteq E} (x-1)^{r(G) - r(A)} (y-1)^{|A| - r(A)}, where r denotes the rank function (number of vertices minus the number of connected components in the spanning subgraph induced by A). Here, |V| = 3 and r(G) = 2. The subsets are:
  • A = \emptyset: r(A) = 0, |A| = 0, contribution (x-1)^2.
  • Single-edge subsets (3 choices): r(A) = 1, |A| = 1, each contributes x-1, total $3(x-1).
  • Two-edge subsets (3 choices, each forming a path): r(A) = 2, |A| = 2, each contributes $1, total $3.
  • A = E (the full cycle): r(A) = 2, |A| = 3, contribution y-1.
Summing yields (x-1)^2 + 3(x-1) + 3 + (y-1) = x^2 + x + y. The K_4 on four vertices and six edges has Tutte polynomial T(K_4; x, y) = x^3 + 3x^2 + 2x + 4xy + 2y + 3y^2 + y^3. Computing this directly via subset expansion is feasible but tedious due to the $2^6 = [64](/page/64) subsets; instead, recursive deletion-contraction relations are often applied iteratively to reduce to base cases like and cycles. For instance, deleting one from K_4 yields a graph whose polynomial can be contracted further, accumulating terms that match the expanded form. To illustrate further, consider the H formed by a C_3 with an additional pendant attached to one (four vertices total, four edges). Here, r(H) = 3. The pendant is a , so by the deletion-contraction relation, T(H; x, y) = x \cdot T(C_3 \sqcup K_1; x, y) = x (x^2 + x + y) = x^3 + x^2 + x y, where K_1 is a single isolated and the multiplicativity applies. This highlights how bridges contribute factors of x while cycles introduce y terms.

Properties

Algebraic properties

The Tutte polynomial T(G; x, y) of a G is a in the variables x and y. The Tutte polynomial is multiplicative with respect to disjoint unions of graphs: for graphs G and H, T(G \sqcup H; x, y) = T(G; x, y) \cdot T(H; x, y). It is also normalized such that for the edgeless graph E_n on n vertices, T(E_n; x, y) = 1. As a graph invariant, T(G; x, y) remains unchanged under graph isomorphisms, preserving its value for structurally equivalent graphs. A defining algebraic feature is its uniqueness: the Tutte polynomial is the unique polynomial in x and y that satisfies the base cases for edgeless graphs (yielding 1), graphs consisting of a single (yielding y), and graphs with a (yielding x times the polynomial of the contracted graph), along with the weak deletion-contraction recurrence for ordinary edges (neither loops nor bridges). Specifically, for an ordinary edge e in G, T(G; x, y) = T(G \setminus e; x, y) + T(G / e; x, y), where G \setminus e is G with e deleted and G / e is G with e contracted. This recurrence, combined with the base cases, ensures the polynomial's full invariance under the deletion-contraction operations that characterize minors.

Recurrence relations

The deletion-contraction recurrence is a of the Tutte polynomial, providing a recursive method to compute it by reducing the through edge operations. For a G and an e that is neither a nor a bridge (termed an ordinary edge), the Tutte polynomial satisfies T(G; x, y) = T(G - e; x, y) + T(G / e; x, y), where G - e denotes the deletion of e (removing it without altering vertices), and G / e denotes the contraction of e (merging its endpoints into a single vertex and removing any self-loops created). This relation was originally established by W. T. Tutte as part of his development of graph invariants via ring structures. The recurrence is supported by specific base cases that handle loops, bridges, and edgeless graphs. If e is a loop, then T(G; x, y) = y \cdot T(G - e; x, y), because contraction of a loop yields a graph isomorphic to the deletion. If e is a bridge (an edge whose deletion increases the number of connected components), then T(G; x, y) = x \cdot T(G / e; x, y), reflecting the contribution to connectivity. For an edgeless graph G (possibly disconnected), the polynomial evaluates to T(G; x, y) = 1, though the recurrence typically normalizes to 1 for the single-vertex case and builds from there. More generally, a graph reducible solely to i bridges and j loops (with no other edges) has T(G; x, y) = x^i y^j. These cases ensure the recurrence terminates. A proof of the deletion-contraction recurrence follows from the subset expansion (also known as the rank-nullity generating function) of the Tutte polynomial, T(G; x, y) = \sum_{A \subseteq E(G)} (x-1)^{r(G) - r(A)} (y-1)^{|A| - r(A)}, where r(\cdot) denotes the rank function (size of a maximum forest in the subgraph induced by the edge set). To verify the recurrence for an ordinary edge e, partition the sum into subsets A not containing e (which match the expansion for G - e) and those containing e (let A' = A \setminus \{e\}). For the latter, since e is ordinary, r(A) = r(A') + 1 and the nullity adjusts by 1 relative to G / e, leading to the contributions aligning with the expansion for G / e. This partitioning confirms the additive relation. The same expansion underpins the base cases, as loops increase nullity without rank, contributing the y factor, while bridges increase rank without nullity, contributing x. The recurrence exhibits multiplicativity in certain structural reductions, particularly for parallel edges and series connections. For a graph consisting of k parallel edges between two vertices (with k \geq 1), repeated application of the recurrence yields T(G; x, y) = x + y + y^2 + \cdots + y^{k-1}, derived inductively: the single-edge case (k=1, a bridge) is x, and adding a parallel edge e gives T_k = T_{k-1} + y^{k-1} since contraction turns the remaining k-1 edges into loops. This formula highlights how parallel multiples introduce powers of y, encoding cycle structures. For series reductions—replacing two collinear edges sharing a degree-2 vertex with a single edge—the Tutte polynomial of the original graph equals that of the reduced graph, preserving the invariant under this operation. Parallel reductions similarly merge multiple edges between the same vertices into one, adjusting via the above formula. These reductions are formalized such that the polynomial satisfies specific arithmetic rules for the compositions. For series-parallel graphs, which are built from a single edge via repeated series and connections (equivalently, graphs with no K_4 ), the deletion-contraction recurrence combined with these reduction formulas enables explicit, efficient computation of the Tutte polynomial. By systematically applying series and simplifications, the graph reduces to a base case in linear time relative to the number of edges, avoiding the full exponential branching of general deletion-contraction. This structure underlies the polynomial's evaluability for such graphs without needing the full recursive .

Duality and symmetry

One of the key symmetry properties of the Tutte polynomial concerns its behavior under graph duality. For a connected planar graph G and its plane dual G^*, the Tutte polynomial satisfies the relation T(G; x, y) = T(G^*; y, x). This formula highlights the interchangeability of the variables x and y, which corresponds to the primal-dual swap: features encoded by x in the original graph are captured by y in the dual, and vice versa. Combinatorially, this symmetry arises from the interpretations of the variables in terms of the graph's cycle space and cocycle space (also known as the cut space or coboundary space). The variable x primarily accounts for and internally active edges relative to spanning trees, linking to coboundaries or cutsets that preserve components. In contrast, y relates to cycles and externally active edges, encoding dependencies within the cycle space. Duality interchanges these spaces: cycles in G become cocycles in G^*, and vice versa, thereby swapping the roles of x and y. For self-dual planar graphs, where G is isomorphic to its G^*, the implies T(G; x, y) = T(G; y, x). This symmetry means that when expanded as T(G; x, y) = \sum_{i,j \geq 0} a_{i,j} x^i y^j, the coefficients satisfy a_{i,j} = a_{j,i}, resulting in a palindromic structure. The duality relation generalizes beyond graphs to arbitrary s. For a M on ground set E with dual M^*, the Tutte polynomial obeys T(M; x, y) = T(M^*; y, x). Here, the symmetry reflects the duality between the cycle space of M (spanning sets circuits) and the cocycle space of M^* (spanning sets cocircuits), providing a unified framework for the polynomial's behavior across combinatorial structures.

History

Discovery by Tutte

The Tutte polynomial originated from the work of William T. Tutte during and after , where his efforts at in code-breaking influenced his algebraic approach to graph enumeration problems. While his wartime contributions focused on of the German Lorenz cipher using statistical and algorithmic methods, Tutte's subsequent academic pursuits shifted toward formalizing graph-theoretic structures, motivated by the need to enumerate spanning trees, colorings, and network configurations through linear algebraic tools. This background in during military applications, including the development of early computing aids for code-breaking, underscored the practical importance of systematic graph counting. Tutte first introduced foundational ideas for the polynomial in his 1947 paper "A in ," where he established deletion-contraction relations for s and formed a ring structure to facilitate enumeration. These relations provided a recursive framework for computing graph invariants, emerging from his thesis work on an algebraic of graphs. In this early formulation, Tutte treated graphs as representing binary matroids, defining rank polynomials based on the rank function of the cycle matroid to capture and spanning substructures. A key advancement came in Tutte's 1954 paper "A Contribution to the Theory of ," which explicitly linked his rank-generating function to graph colorings and formalized the polynomial now known as the Tutte polynomial. Here, he demonstrated how the polynomial evaluates to the under specific substitutions, bridging enumeration of proper colorings with broader matroidal properties. This work built directly on his 1948 PhD thesis, "An Algebraic Theory of Graphs," which extended the polynomial to binary matroids via rank-nullity considerations, emphasizing its role in generalizing linear dependence in vector spaces over GF(2). Tutte's ideas gained wider formalization in subsequent publications, including his 1965 paper "Menger's Theorem for Matroids," which refined the polynomial's application to connectivity. Overall, these contributions established the Tutte polynomial as a universal invariant for s and s, rooted in Tutte's wartime-inspired drive for algebraic efficiency in combinatorial analysis.

Subsequent developments

In the , the Tutte polynomial gained recognition as a universal invariant among graph polynomials that satisfy deletion-contraction recurrences, a property formalized by Brylawski who demonstrated that it serves as the free object in the of such invariants. This universality underscored its role in encoding a wide array of properties, influencing subsequent theoretical advancements. Brylawski also conjectured that the Tutte polynomial of a connected is irreducible over the integers, a claim verified by , de Mier, and Noy in 2001 using structural characterizations. During the 1980s, connections emerged between the Tutte polynomial and , particularly through the introduced by Jones in 1985. Thistlethwaite's 1987 theorem established that the of an alternating link can be computed from the Tutte polynomial of its associated , bridging with topological invariants. The Tutte polynomial's generalization to matroids built on precursors from Whitney's 1935 introduction of matroids as abstractions of and graph cycles. This extension, formalized by Crapo in 1969 and inherent in Tutte's earlier work, allowed the polynomial to apply beyond graphs to broader combinatorial structures, including oriented matroids. Tutte himself formalized the modern two-variable form in his 1967 paper "On dichromatic polynomials." The 1990s saw increased focus on computational aspects, driven by complexity results showing that evaluating the Tutte polynomial is #P-hard for most points in the , as proven by Jaeger, Vertigan, and Welsh in 1990. Recent developments up to 2025 have expanded the Tutte polynomial to quantum contexts, including applications to leveraging generalizations for computations. Additionally, connections to quantum graphs appear in 2024 work linking Dirac traces in to Tutte evaluations.

Specializations

Chromatic polynomial

The chromatic polynomial of a graph G, denoted P(G; \lambda), counts the number of proper vertex colorings of G using \lambda colors, where adjacent vertices receive distinct colors. Its coefficients provide information about the number of ways to partition the vertices into sets of specified sizes. This polynomial satisfies a deletion-contraction recurrence: for any edge e, P(G; \lambda) = P(G \setminus e; \lambda) - P(G / e; \lambda), mirroring the structure of the Tutte polynomial's defining relation. The arises as a of the Tutte polynomial T(G; x, y). Specifically, P(G; \lambda) = (-1)^{|V(G)| - k(G)} \lambda^{k(G)} T(G; 1 - \lambda, 0), where k(G) is the number of connected components of G. This evaluation at (1 - \lambda, 0) yields the number of proper \lambda-colorings directly, with the sign and power adjustments accounting for the graph's and vertex structure. The relation unifies the combinatorial interpretations of subgraphs in the Tutte polynomial with coloring constraints. Hassler Whitney introduced the in 1932 as a tool for studying graph colorings, establishing its basic properties and recurrence. extended this in the by developing the dichromatic polynomial—now known as the Tutte polynomial—as a bivariate that encompasses both chromatic and flow polynomials, providing a unified framework for these invariants. For the complete graph K_n, the chromatic polynomial is the falling factorial P(K_n; \lambda) = \lambda (\lambda - 1) \cdots (\lambda - n + 1), which counts the permutations of \lambda colors assigned to n vertices with no repetitions. This follows from evaluating the Tutte polynomial of K_n at (1 - \lambda, 0) and applying the specialization formula, confirming the exact number of proper colorings as \lambda! when \lambda \geq n.

Flow polynomial

The flow polynomial of a G is a univariate of the Tutte polynomial that enumerates nowhere-zero flows on the edges of G. It is defined by the relation F(G; \lambda) = (-1)^{|E| - |V| + k(G)} T(G; 0, 1-\lambda), where |E| is the number of edges in G, |V| is the number of vertices, k(G) is the number of connected components of G, and T(G; x, y) is the Tutte polynomial of G. This polynomial provides a count of the number of nowhere-zero \lambda-flows over the integers on G, where a nowhere-zero \lambda-flow is an assignment of integer values to the edges satisfying the Kirchhoff current law at each vertex (with values bounded appropriately by \lambda) and non-zero on every edge. By a theorem of Tutte, this count coincides with the number of nowhere-zero flows modulo \lambda, i.e., using the cyclic group \mathbb{Z}_\lambda. For cubic graphs (3-regular graphs), the flow polynomial evaluates the cyclomatic number \beta(G) = |E| - |V| + k(G) as its degree, reflecting the dimension of the cycle space over which flows are defined; this degree determines the leading term \lambda^{\beta(G)} and provides key structural insight into the graph's cyclic complexity. The evaluation of the Tutte polynomial along the line x = 0 is dual to the chromatic polynomial via the relation T(G; 0, y) = (-1)^{|E| - |V| + k(G)} F(G; 1 - y), which underscores the symmetry between flow and coloring interpretations in the broader framework of the Tutte polynomial, particularly for planar graphs where flows on G correspond to colorings on the dual.

Reliability polynomial

The reliability polynomial of an undirected graph G = (V, E) with |V| = n vertices and |E| = m edges, denoted R(G; p), is defined as the sum \sum p^{|A|} (1-p)^{m - |A|} over all subsets A \subseteq E such that the spanning subgraph (V, A) is connected. This polynomial represents the probability that G remains connected when each edge fails independently with probability $1-p (or, equivalently, is present with probability p \in [0,1]). For a connected , the reliability polynomial can be expressed in terms of the Tutte polynomial T(G; x, y) as R(G; p) = p^{n-1} (1-p)^{m - n + 1} T\left(G; 1, \frac{1}{1-p}\right). This relation allows the reliability polynomial to inherit properties and computational techniques from the Tutte polynomial, such as its evaluation along the line x=1. Computing R(G; p) is feasible in polynomial time for series-parallel graphs using reliability-preserving reductions or direct evaluation of the Tutte polynomial, which admits linear-time algorithms in such cases. However, for general graphs, determining the reliability polynomial (or even evaluating it at a fixed p) is #P-complete, reflecting the inherent difficulty of enumerating connected spanning subgraphs. The reliability polynomial originated in the 1950s as a probabilistic model for functionality and gained prominence in the 1970s through applications in , particularly for assessing in communication and transportation networks under edge failures.

Evaluations at specific points

The Tutte polynomial T(G; x, y) of a G yields a variety of combinatorial invariants when evaluated at specific points, particularly integer coordinates. These evaluations often correspond to counts of subgraphs, orientations, or other structural features, providing insights into the graph's , acyclicity, and spanning properties. Such interpretations stem from the polynomial's rank-nullity expansion and have been extensively studied since the 1970s, with key results appearing in seminal works on and matroids. For connected graphs, the evaluation at (1,1) counts the number of spanning trees, linking directly to Kirchhoff's matrix-tree theorem. At (2,1), it enumerates all forests (acyclic subgraphs), while (1,2) tallies connected spanning subgraphs. Points on the axes, such as (2,0) and (0,2), relate to orientations: the former to acyclic ones and the latter to totally cyclic (Eulerian) orientations. These counts generalize to matroids and have applications in reliability and . Further evaluations at points like (2,2) simply yield $2^{|E(G)|}, the total number of subgraphs. For planar graphs, T(G; 3, 3) admits interpretations in terms of claw coverings (spanning subgraphs without K_{1,3} components) or, in grid graphs, T-tetromino tilings. At (0, -2), for 4-regular graphs, it counts ice configurations, which are perfect matchings of the hexagonal lattice dual with specific dimer placements. These specialized counts highlight the polynomial's versatility, though interpretations grow more context-dependent away from the principal axes.
Evaluation pointCombinatorial interpretationReference
(1,1)Number of spanning trees (for connected G)
(2,1)Number of forests (acyclic subgraphs)
(1,2)Number of connected spanning subgraphs (for connected G)
(2,0)Number of acyclic orientations
(0,2)Number of totally cyclic orientations (for connected G)
(2,2)$ 2^{E(G)
(3,3)Number of claw coverings (for planar G)
(0,-2)Number of ice configurations (for 4-regular G)

Jones polynomial

The Jones polynomial of a link L is connected to the Tutte polynomial through the medial of a link diagram, viewed as a 4-valent where correspond to crossings and to arc segments between crossings. The medial G is constructed by placing a at the of each in this 4-valent and connecting them with new edges that follow the boundaries around each crossing, resulting in a 4-regular . For alternating links, the Jones polynomial arises as a of the Tutte T(G; x, y) of this medial via the x = -A^2 - A^{-2}, y = -A^3 - A^{-3}. The Kauffman bracket polynomial \langle L \rangle(A), introduced by Kauffman in , provides a state-sum formulation for unoriented diagrams and satisfies a linear recurrence analogous to the deletion-contraction relation defining the Tutte polynomial. This bracket is derived from the Tutte polynomial of the medial graph under the above substitution, up to a multiplicative factor depending on the number of components: specifically, \langle L \rangle(A) = (-A^3)^{c-1} T(G; -A^2 - A^{-2}, -A^3 - A^{-3}), where c is the number of components. The Jones polynomial V(L; t) is then obtained by normalizing the bracket with the writhe w(L) of an oriented diagram D of L: V(L; t) = (-A^3)^{-w(D)} \langle L \rangle(A), with the change of variable t = A^4 (or equivalently A = t^{-1/4}). This substitution yields V(L; t) directly from T(G; x(A), y(A)). Kauffman established this in 1987 for alternating using the combinatorial of their diagrams, where the medial captures the without over- or undercrossings ambiguities. The construction extends to all through the state-sum definition of the , which computes the invariant via summations over all possible smoothings of crossings (A- and B-states), preserving the deletion-contraction-like recurrence even for non-alternating cases. As a consequence, the Jones is an invariant of for oriented , independent of the choice of diagram. Computationally, this link enables the use of algorithms for the Tutte , such as deletion-contraction recursion or matrix-tree methods, to evaluate the Jones efficiently for diagrams with manageable crossing numbers.

Potts and Ising models

The q-state is a model defined on a G = (V, E), where each is assigned one of q colors or states, and the energy favors neighboring vertices having the same state. The partition function of the model in zero external field is Z(G; q, v) = \sum_{\sigma: V \to \{1, \dots, q\}} \exp\left( \beta \sum_{\{i,j\} \in E} \delta_{\sigma_i, \sigma_j} \right), where \beta = 1/(k_B T) is the inverse , k_B is Boltzmann's , T is , and v = e^\beta - 1 parameterizes the ferromagnetic interaction strength for v > 0. Through the Fortuin-Kasteleyn representation, this partition function admits a combinatorial expansion as a sum over spanning subgraphs: Z(G; q, v) = \sum_{A \subseteq E} q^{k(A)} v^{|A|}, where k(A) is the number of connected components in the subgraph (V, A). This representation, introduced by Fortuin and Kasteleyn, establishes the Potts model as a correlated percolation process known as the random-cluster model. The Potts partition function is directly related to the Tutte polynomial T(G; x, y) via the substitution Z(G; q, v) = q^{k(G)} \, T\left(G; 1 + \frac{v}{q}, 1 + v \right), where k(G) is the number of connected components of G; for connected graphs, this simplifies to Z(G; q, v) = q \, T(G; 1 + v/q, 1 + v). This , derived from matching the spanning expansions of both polynomials, allows combinatorial tools for the Tutte polynomial to analyze thermodynamic properties of the . The two-state (q=2) recovers the classical for ferromagnetic interactions (v > 0), where spins are \pm 1 and the interaction term \delta_{\sigma_i, \sigma_j} corresponds to the standard bilinear coupling. In this limit, the partition function encodes magnetic properties, such as below the critical . Phase transitions in the Potts model occur at critical values of v determined by the graph's geometry; for example, on two-dimensional self-dual lattices like the , the ferromagnetic critical point is at v_c = \sqrt{q}, corresponding to evaluation of the Tutte polynomial at x_c = 1 + 1/\sqrt{q}, y_c = 1 + \sqrt{q}. The roots and singularities of the Tutte polynomial in the provide insights into the locations of these transitions in the , reflecting the model's analytic structure.

Dichromatic polynomial

The dichromatic polynomial of a G = (V, E), denoted Q(G; x, y), is defined as Q(G; x, y) = \sum_{A \subseteq E} x^{k(A)} y^{c(A)}, where the sum runs over all subsets A of the edge set E, k(A) denotes the number of connected components in the spanning (V, A), and c(A) = |A| - |V| + k(A) is the cyclomatic number (or nullity) of (V, A). This formulation arises from Tutte's original construction, which enumerates subgraphs weighted by their connectivity and excess edges beyond . As a , Q(G; x, y) captures the distribution of s based on the number of components tracked by x and the number of cycles (via the cyclomatic number) tracked by y, providing a combinatorial summary of the graph's structure. The coefficient of x^i y^j counts the number of edge subsets inducing exactly i components and j independent cycles. Introduced by in the 1940s during his work on electrical s, the dichromatic polynomial emerged as a tool to analyze properties such as and impedance through enumerations. Specifically, evaluations of Q(G; x, y) relate to determinants of matrices, linking combinatorial structure to physical interpretations in circuit theory. The dichromatic polynomial is equivalent to the Tutte polynomial T(G; x, y) through the change-of-variables relation T(G; x, y) = (x-1)^{-k(G)} Q\left(G; x-1, (x-1)(y-1)\right), where k(G) is the number of connected components of G. This transformation maps the exponents in the expansion of Q to those of T while normalizing for the overall of G, preserving all combinatorial information. The full equivalence is established by a bijection on the edge subsets: each term x^{k(A)} y^{c(A)} in Q(G; x, y) corresponds uniquely to a term in T(G; x, y) after substitution, with the exponents adjusting via the linear shifts in the variables to match the standard Tutte form. This bijection ensures that both polynomials satisfy identical deletion-contraction recurrences, confirming their as graph invariants.

Martin polynomial

The Martin polynomial is a one-variable defined for oriented Eulerian digraphs, particularly those that are 2-in, 2-out (each has indegree and outdegree 2). Introduced by Pierre in his doctoral thesis, it provides a for circuit partitions in such graphs, encoding combinatorial information about families of edge-disjoint cycles that cover the arc set. The polynomial was motivated by problems in analysis, including reliability assessments for directed where arcs may fail independently, with evaluations yielding probabilities that the surviving arcs form connected structures analogous to spanning trees in undirected cases. For an oriented 2-in, 2-out \tilde{G}, the m(\tilde{G}; y) is defined combinatorially as m(\tilde{G}; y) = \sum_{T \in \mathcal{T}(\tilde{G})} (y - 1)^{k(T) - c(\tilde{G})}, where \mathcal{T}(\tilde{G}) is the set of (compatible arc subsets corresponding to choices of Eulerian tours or circuit decompositions), k(T) is the number of circuits in the partition induced by T, and c(\tilde{G}) is the number of connected components of \tilde{G}. This sum runs over arc subsets satisfying compatibility conditions derived from arborescence packings: in 2-in, 2-out , each corresponds to a collection of arc-disjoint spanning arborescences (rooted directed trees) whose union supports Eulerian orientations, with the exponent tracking excess cycles beyond a forest structure. The satisfies a deletion-contraction analogous to the Tutte : for a non-loop arc e, m(\tilde{G}; y) = m(\tilde{G} \setminus e; y) + m(\tilde{G}/e; y), allowing computation via recursive reduction on the arc set. The Martin polynomial is closely related to the Tutte polynomial of the underlying undirected , with adjustments for . Specifically, for a plane G and its directed medial \tilde{G}_m (obtained by placing vertices at edge midpoints and orienting arcs so black faces lie to the left, yielding an Eulerian ), the relation is m(\tilde{G}_m; x) = T(G; x, x), where T is the Tutte polynomial. This connection holds because circuit partitions in the medial correspond to spanning trees and bonds in the original , with the diagonal T(G; x, x) capturing nullity-based enumerations. A signed arises at y = 0, yielding m(\tilde{G}; 0) = \sum_{T \in \mathcal{T}(\tilde{G})} (-1)^{k(T) - c(\tilde{G})}, which counts compatible arborescence unions with sign given by the nullity (cyclomatic number) of the excess arcs beyond a spanning . Generalizations by Las Vergnas in extended the definition to arbitrary Eulerian , resolving early questions on universality for non-4-regular cases.

Algorithms

Deletion-contraction recursion

The deletion-contraction recursion forms the classical algorithm for computing the Tutte polynomial T(G; x, y) of a graph G. It relies on recursively applying edge deletions and contractions while handling special cases for loops and bridges. Specifically, T(G; x, y) = 1 for the empty graph (with no edges); if an edge e is a loop, then T(G; x, y) = y \cdot T(G - e; x, y); if e is a bridge (also called an isthmus), then T(G; x, y) = x \cdot T(G - e; x, y); and for an ordinary edge e that is neither a loop nor a bridge, T(G; x, y) = T(G - e; x, y) + T(G / e; x, y). These relations stem from the universal properties of the Tutte polynomial, ensuring that any graph invariant satisfying deletion-contraction reductions is an evaluation of it. In practice, graphs are represented using adjacency lists to enable efficient modifications during , such as removing an edge for deletion or merging vertices for while preserving multiple edges and loops. is crucial for efficiency, achieved by caching the polynomials of subgraphs identified up to (often using tools like nauty for labeling). This avoids recomputing identical minors, reducing the number of unique subproblems from the full tree. The unoptimized recursion produces a binary decision tree with depth equal to the number of edges |E|, yielding $2^{|E|} terminal calls and exponential time complexity O(2^{|E|}) in the worst case, as each ordinary edge branches into two subproblems. With and careful edge selection (e.g., prioritizing loops, bridges, or edges leading to isomorphic subgraphs), the algorithm becomes feasible for small graphs with up to about 20 edges, completing computations in reasonable time on modern hardware. This method is implemented in symbolic software like , which employs the with caching for exact evaluation. For series-parallel graphs, the recursion can be optimized using parallel and series reductions, which decompose the graph into two-terminal subnetworks while updating the polynomial via multiplicative factors derived from the relations. These reductions process the graph in a single pass proportional to its size, enabling linear-time computation O(|V| + |E|).

Matrix-based methods

Matrix-based methods for computing the Tutte polynomial rely on algebraic representations of graphs or matroids, particularly through their incidence matrices or generalized Laplacian matrices, to derive the polynomial via linear algebra techniques over polynomial rings. For linear matroids, the Tutte polynomial admits a parametrized extension where each () is associated with a , allowing an interpretation in terms of the of submatrices over the of polynomials in these variables. This approach, developed by Traldi in the late and early , unifies earlier work on and parametrized variants and provides a framework for symbolic computation. The algorithm proceeds by constructing the representation (such as the for graphic matroids) with symbolic entries corresponding to the parameters. Gaussian is then applied symbolically to compute the necessary determinants or to determine the structure that generates the coefficients. This elimination step runs in O(n^3) time for a matrix of size n × m, where n is the number of vertices and m the number of edges, analogous to standard linear algebra complexity, but the symbolic operations lead to expressions whose size grows with the degree of the polynomial. Methods may involve modifications of the to incorporate variables capturing corank and nullity, with the Tutte polynomial related to symbolic determinants or minors. However, for graphs with many edges, the resulting high-degree polynomials become dense and computationally intensive, limiting practicality to small or structured graphs.

Monte Carlo approaches

Monte Carlo approaches to approximating the Tutte polynomial rely on probabilistic sampling techniques, primarily (MCMC) methods, to estimate values at fixed points or along specific curves in the parameter space. These methods are particularly effective for large graphs where exact computation via deletion-contraction or matrix methods becomes infeasible due to exponential . By sampling from distributions over spanning subgraphs weighted by their contributions to the polynomial, one can approximate evaluations such as the number of forests at the point (2,1). A foundational MCMC framework was developed by Jerrum and Sinclair in the early 1990s, yielding a fully randomized approximation scheme (FPRAS) for evaluating the Tutte polynomial along the positive branch of the H_2: (x-1)(y-1)=2, which corresponds to the ferromagnetic (q=2 ). Their algorithm uses self-reducibility to approximate the partition function by sampling configurations via local updates, achieving a (1 ± ε)- in expected time in the graph size and 1/ε. For the fixed point (2,1), which enumerates forests, an FPRAS exists for dense graphs, extending similar sampling techniques to estimate the relevant subgraph counts. Approximating the full polynomial—i.e., all coefficients—is significantly harder, with no general FPRAS known, as it requires effectively estimating multiple evaluations or the entire sum over 2^{|E|} terms. To improve mixing times in MCMC chains, especially for poorly connected state spaces, the Swendsen-Wang algorithm samples via the random-cluster representation of the Potts model, generating random cluster configurations by bonding edges with probability dependent on the interaction parameter and then assigning labels to clusters. This cluster-flipping approach, originally for the Potts model, maps directly to Tutte evaluations along hyperbolae H_q: (x-1)(y-1)=q for integer q ≥ 2, allowing estimation of partition functions and thus polynomial values through averaged samples. Techniques like coupling from the past can provide exact samples from the stationary distribution in finite time, enhancing reliability for coefficient estimation, while self-avoiding walk analyses help bound variances in certain lattice graphs. The Potts model connection briefly references the equivalence where the q-state Potts partition function Z(G, q, v) = \sum_{A \subseteq E} v^{|A|} q^{c(A)} = q^n (1-v)^{n-c(E)} T(G, 1+q/(1-v), 1+v/(q(1-v))), enabling cross-application of sampling methods. These approaches find key applications in simulating large for statistical physics, such as estimating phase transitions in Potts models on , where Tutte evaluations inform and criticality properties. Post-2010 advancements have refined mixing time analyses; notably, and Jerrum established polynomial-time mixing (O(n^{10})) for the Swendsen-Wang on ferromagnetic Ising models across all temperatures, resolving long-standing conjectures and enabling scalable approximations for broader classes.

Computational complexity

Exact evaluation

The exact evaluation of the Tutte polynomial T(G; x, y) for a graph G at fixed rational points (x, y) is #P-hard in general, except at a small set of special points such as (1,1) and certain algebraic points where it reduces to tractable counting problems like the number of spanning trees. This hardness holds even for evaluations at single points away from these exceptions, as established through interreducibility along specific curves in the complex plane that connect most rational points to known #P-hard instances. For restricted graph classes, such as series-parallel graphs, the Tutte polynomial can be computed exactly in polynomial time using recursive decompositions based on the graph's two-terminal series-parallel structure. In contrast, for general graphs, the problem is NP-hard in the sense that even decision versions related to its values, such as determining if T(G; [x, y](/page/X&Y)) equals a given for fixed x, y > 1, inherit hardness from underlying counting problems. The #P-hardness proofs typically involve polynomial-time reductions from the #P-complete problem of proper k-colorings of graphs (for fixed k \geq 3), since the P(G; k) relates to the Tutte polynomial via P(G; k) = (-1)^{|V(G)| - k(G)} k^{k(G)} T(G; 1 - k, 0), and counting colorings reduces from #3-SAT. These reductions preserve the in computational cost, making exact evaluation intractable for arbitrary graphs. Computing individual coefficients of the Tutte polynomial is also #P-complete for most terms; specifically, for any fixed positive integers i, j, determining the coefficient of x^i y^j in T(G; x, y) is , even though the decision problem of whether a coefficient is non-zero reduces to checking the existence of certain spanning subgraphs, which remains hard in general. As of 2025, no major algorithmic breakthroughs have resolved the #P-hardness for exact evaluation on general graphs, though quantum algorithms have been proposed for specific cases like planar graphs, offering potential speedups but remaining impractical due to current hardware limitations and focus on approximations rather than exact computation.

Approximation schemes

Fully polynomial randomized approximation schemes (FPRAS) exist for evaluating the Tutte polynomial at points in the region x \geq 1, y \geq 1, leveraging Markov chain Monte Carlo (MCMC) methods to approximate the partition function of the ferromagnetic Potts model, a direct specialization of the Tutte polynomial via the relation Z(G; q, v) = q^{k(G)} (1 + v)^{n - k(G)} T(G; 1 + v, 1 + v/q), where Z is the Potts partition function, q \geq 2 is the number of states, and v > 0 is the interaction strength. These schemes, pioneered by Jerrum and Sinclair in the 1990s for the Ising model (q=2) and extended to general fixed q, achieve relative error \epsilon with success probability at least $1 - \delta in time polynomial in n, $1/\epsilon, and \log(1/\delta), where n is the number of vertices. For instance, evaluation at (1,2) yields the number of spanning trees, computable exactly via the matrix-tree theorem, while the MCMC approach provides a general framework applicable across the region. At the boundary point (2,1), the Tutte polynomial counts the number of spanning forests, for which an FPRAS exists for dense graphs (minimum degree \Omega(n)) using randomized approximation techniques based on sampling subgraphs. More broadly, the all-terminal reliability polynomial R(G;p), which expresses the probability that a graph remains connected when each fails independently with probability $1-p, is a R(G;p) = p^{n-k(G)} (1-p)^{m-n+k(G)} T(G; 1, 1/(1-p)) for $0 < p < 1, and admits an FPRAS for any fixed p > 0 via min-cut sampling and , running in time polynomial in n, $1/\epsilon, and \log(1/\delta). No FPRAS is known for evaluating the Tutte polynomial at arbitrary points (x,y) or for approximating the full bivariate polynomial itself; in fact, under the assumption \mathrm{RP} \neq \mathrm{NP}, no FPRAS exists for points where x < -1 or y < -1 (excluding trivial cases), and for large regions including parts of the negative quadrant and boundaries like x < 0, y < 0 with sufficiently negative values. Approximation within constant multiplicative factors is possible at certain points using volume estimation techniques, such as self-reducible sampling for counting bases in matroids (related to T(2,1)), or semidefinite programming relaxations for bounding evaluations tied to cut or matching problems. For the reliability polynomial at fixed p > 0, a polynomial-time approximation scheme (PTAS) exists, providing a (1 + \epsilon)-approximation in time n^{O(1/\epsilon)}, though the stronger FPRAS supersedes it for practical purposes. Hardness results establish that approximating T(G;x,y) within a constant factor is NP-hard for points outside the approximable region, such as in the antiferromagnetic Potts regime (v < 0) or negative evaluations. In the 2020s, tensor network contraction methods have emerged for approximating coefficients of the Tutte polynomial in planar graphs, exploiting the graph's embedding to represent the polynomial as a tensor network whose contraction yields near-exact values for low-treewidth approximations or statistical ensembles, achieving exponential speedup over naive methods for large instances. These approaches map the deletion-contraction recurrence to tensor contractions, enabling scalable approximations for applications like quantum simulation where exact computation is infeasible.

References

  1. [1]
    [PDF] The Tutte polynomial - UC Davis Math
    1. INTRODUCTION. The Tutte polynomial is a polynomial in two variables x; y which can be defined for a graph, matrix, or, even more generally, a matroid.
  2. [2]
    A ring in graph theory - Cambridge University Press & Assessment
    A RING IN GRAPH THEORY. BY W. T. TUTTE. Received 10 April 1946. 1. INTRODUCTION. We call a point set in a complex K a O-cell if it contains just one point of K ...
  3. [3]
    [PDF] Graph Polynomials and Their Applications I: The Tutte ... - arXiv
    Jun 28, 2008 · The Tutte polynomial may be defined by a linear recursion relation given by deleting and contracting ordinary edges. The “most simple” terminal ...
  4. [4]
    The Tutte polynomial | Aequationes mathematicae
    Tutte, W. T.,Lectures on Matroids, J. Res. Nat. Bur. of Standards, U.S.A. ... Cite this article. Crapo, H.H. The Tutte polynomial. Aeq. Math. 3, 211–229 ...
  5. [5]
    A CONTRIBUTION TO THE THEORY OF CHROMATIC ...
    SUMMARY. Two polynomials 6(G, n) and <f>(G, n) connected with the colourings of a graph G or of associated maps are discussed. A result believed to be new ...
  6. [6]
  7. [7]
    Connected Matroids with Symmetric Tutte Polynomials
    May 24, 2001 · We show that connected matroids with symmetric Tutte polynomials are not necessarily self-dual; in fact, we construct matroids that are not self ...
  8. [8]
    [PDF] The Tutte polynomial of some matroids - arXiv
    Mar 1, 2012 · The Tutte polynomial of a graph or a matroid, named after W. T.. Tutte, has the important universal property that essentially any mul-.
  9. [9]
    [PDF] The contributions of W.T. Tutte to matroid theory - MATRIX
    He also made groundbreaking contributions to matroid theory including proving the first excluded-minor theorems for matroids, one of which generalized ...
  10. [10]
    [PDF] William T. Tutte, 1917–2002 - LSU Math
    in terms of graphs in his 1947 paper “A ring in graph theory” [4, pp. 55–69] ... Tutte, Graph Theory, Cambridge University Press, New York, 2001.
  11. [11]
    A ring in graph theory | Mathematical Proceedings of the Cambridge ...
    A ring in graph theory. Published online by Cambridge University Press: 24 October 2008. W. T. Tutte. Show author details ...
  12. [12]
    A Contribution to the Theory of Chromatic Polynomials
    A Contribution to the Theory of Chromatic Polynomials. Published online by Cambridge University Press: 20 November 2018. W. T. Tutte. Show author details ...
  13. [13]
    [PDF] New aspects of quantum topological data analysis - arXiv
    Jul 1, 2025 · Abstract. The application of quantum computation to topological data analysis (TDA) has received growing attention.Missing: Tutte 2020-2025
  14. [14]
    The Coloring of Graphs - jstor
    Introduction. In another paper, L,8 the author has given a proof of a formula for M(2), the number of ways of coloring a graph in A colors, due to Birkhoff.
  15. [15]
    Reliability Polynomial -- from Wolfram MathWorld
    C(p) is known as the reliability polynomial of G . The reliability polynomial is directly expressible in terms of the Tutte polynomial of a given graph as. C ...
  16. [16]
    A Linear-Time Algorithm for Computing K-Terminal Reliability in ...
    For some series-parallel graphs, 𝑅 ⁡ ( 𝐺 𝐾 ) can be computed in polynomial time by repeated application of well-known reliability-preserving reductions. However ...
  17. [17]
    The Complexity of Counting Cuts and of Computing the Probability ...
    Several enumeration and reliability problems are shown to be # P-complete, and hence, at least as hard as NP-complete problems.
  18. [18]
    Sixty Years of Network Reliability | Mathematics in Computer Science
    Jun 21, 2018 · If all the edges have the same probability of failing, this leads to the so-called reliability polynomial of the network. Sixty years later, a ...
  19. [19]
    [PDF] On the Evaluation of the Tutte Polynomial at the Points (1, −1) and (2
    In particular, for q ∈ N the Tutte polynomial special- izes on Hq to the partition function of the q-state Potts model. Two interpretations especially related ...
  20. [20]
    Note On the evaluation at (3, 3) of the Tutte polynomial of a graph
    We give a combinatorial interpretation of the evaluation at (3, 3) of the Tutte polynomial of a planar graph. As a corollary we obtain a divisibility property.
  21. [21]
    [PDF] The Tutte Polynomial
    A contribution to the theory of chromatic polynomials, (1954) . • On dichromatic polynomials, (1967) . • Some polynomials associated with graphs (1974). • The ...
  22. [22]
  23. [23]
  24. [24]
    [PDF] The Circuit Partition Polynomial with Applications and Relation to ...
    Graph polynomials such as the Martin, CPP, Tutte, and interlace are a unique and dynamic aspect of the world of graph theory. Their applicability is tremendous, ...
  25. [25]
    [PDF] The Interlace Polynomial and the Tutte-Martin Polynomial - LIACS
    Dec 18, 2014 · We show that the interlace polynomial satisfies recursive relations involving the graph operations of local complementation and local edge ...
  26. [26]
    None
    ### Summary of Connection Between Tutte Polynomial and Jones Polynomial
  27. [27]
    [PDF] Computing Tutte Polynomials - David J. Pearce
    The Tutte polynomial of a graph is a 2-variable polynomial graph invariant of considerable impor- tance in both combinatorics and statistical physics.
  28. [28]
    Tutte polynomial - Graph Theory - SageMath Documentation
    This module implements a deletion-contraction algorithm for computing the Tutte polynomial as described in the paper [HPR2010].
  29. [29]
    [PDF] Tutte polynomials computable in polynomial time
    The Tutte polynomial of a series-parallel matroid is computable in polynomial time. The evaluation of the Tutte polynomial of a graph ... Wood, A linear-time ...
  30. [30]
    [PDF] Polynomial-Time Approximation Algorithms for the Ising Model
    Abstract. The paper presents a randomised algorithm which evaluates the partition function of an arbitrary ferromagnetic Ising system to any specified ...
  31. [31]
    Polynomial-Time Approximation Algorithms for the Ising Model
    Mark Jerrum; ,; Alistair Sinclair. Abstract. A randomised approximation scheme for the permanent of a 0–1s presented. The task of estimating a permanent is ...
  32. [32]
    A Randomised Approximation Algorithm for Counting the Number of ...
    Sep 12, 2008 · Using this, a fully polynomial randomised approximation scheme (fpras) for counting the number of forests in a dense graph is created.
  33. [33]
    [0804.2468] A Little Statistical Mechanics for the Graph Theorist - arXiv
    Apr 15, 2008 · We present the surprising equivalence of the Potts model partition function and one of the most renowned graph invariants, the Tutte polynomial ...
  34. [34]
    Random cluster dynamics for the Ising model is rapidly mixing - arXiv
    Apr 30, 2016 · We show that the mixing time of Glauber (single edge update) dynamics for the random cluster model at q=2 is bounded by a polynomial in the size ...
  35. [35]
    [PDF] On the computational complexity of the Jones and Tutte polynomials
    (Jaeger [15], Thistlethwaite[40]). The Jones polynomial could be regarded as lying somewhere between the Alexander-Conway polynomial and these two other link.
  36. [36]
    On the computational complexity of the Jones and Tutte polynomials
    Oct 24, 2008 · We show that determining the Jones polynomial of an alternating link is #P-hard. This is a special case of a wide range of results on the general ...
  37. [37]
    Series-parallel posets and the Tutte polynomial - ScienceDirect.com
    We investigate the Tutte polynomial f(P; t, z) of a series-parallel partially ordered set P. We show that f(P) can be computed in polynomial-time when P is ...
  38. [38]
    (PDF) The exact complexity of the Tutte polynomial - ResearchGate
    Oct 22, 2019 · This is a survey on the exact complexity of computing the Tutte polynomial. It is the longer 2017 version of Chapter 25 of the CRC Handbook ...
  39. [39]
    [PDF] Chromatic, Flow, and Reliability Polynomials: the Complexity of their ...
    Oct 19, 2001 · Abstract. We study the complexity of computing the coefficients of three classical polynomials, namely the chromatic, flow and reliability ...
  40. [40]
    The complexities of the coefficients of the Tutte polynomial
    On the computational complexity of the Jones and Tutte polynomials. Math. Proc. Cambridge Philos. Soc., 108 (1990), pp. 35-53. View in Scopus Google Scholar.
  41. [41]
    [PDF] The complexity of counting problems
    Theorem For any positive (constant) integers i, j and k, computing the co- efficient ofxlyi in the Tutte polynomial of an arbitrary graph is #P-complete.
  42. [42]
    Simulating quantum computations with Tutte polynomials - Nature
    Sep 24, 2021 · It is an open problem to understand the complexity of evaluating the Tutte polynomial at (1,1) over any fixed field.
  43. [43]
    Efficient quantum algorithms for an additive approximation ... - PIRSA
    The Tutte polynomial captures an extremely wide range of interesting combinatorial properties of graphs, including the partition function of the q-state Potts ...
  44. [44]
    Polynomial Time Approximation Schemes for Dense Instances of NP ...
    We present a unified framework for designing polynomial time approximation schemes (PTASs) for “dense” instances of many N P -hard optimization problems, ...
  45. [45]
    A Randomized Fully Polynomial Time Approximation Scheme for the ...
    The classic all-terminal network reliability problem posits a graph, each of whose edges fails independently with some given probability.Missing: #p-complete
  46. [46]
    Inapproximability of the Tutte polynomial - ScienceDirect.com
    A corollary of our results is that, under the assumption RP ≠ NP , there is no FPRAS at the point ( x , y ) = ( 0 , 1 - λ ) when λ > 2 is a positive integer.
  47. [47]
    Approximating the Tutte polynomial of a binary matroid and other ...
    ► For the Tutte poly of a binary matroid with q ⩾ 2 and this is NP-hard. ► This is also hard under a stronger assumption for q ⩾ 2 and .