Hardness of Approximation in P via Short Cycle Removal: Cycle Detection, Distance Oracles, and Beyond

We present a new technique for efficiently removing almost all short cycles in a graph without unintentionally removing its triangles. Consequently, triangle finding problems do not become easy even in almost $k$-cycle free graphs, for any constant $k\geq 4$. Triangle finding is at the base of many conditional lower bounds in P, mainly for distance computation problems, and the existence of many $4$- or $5$-cycles in a worst-case instance had been the obstacle towards resolving major open questions. Hardness of approximation: Are there distance oracles with $m^{1+o(1)}$ preprocessing time and $m^{o(1)}$ query time that achieve a constant approximation? Existing algorithms with such desirable time bounds only achieve super-constant approximation factors, while only $3-\epsilon$ factors were conditionally ruled out (P\u{a}tra\c{s}cu, Roditty, and Thorup; FOCS 2012). We prove that no $O(1)$ approximations are possible, assuming the $3$-SUM or APSP conjectures. In particular, we prove that $k$-approximations require $\Omega(m^{1+1/ck})$ time, which is tight up to the constant $c$. The lower bound holds even for the offline version where we are given the queries in advance, and extends to other problems such as dynamic shortest paths. The $4$-Cycle problem: An infamous open question in fine-grained complexity is to establish any surprising consequences from a subquadratic or even linear-time algorithm for detecting a $4$-cycle in a graph. We prove that $\Omega(m^{1.1194})$ time is needed for $k$-cycle detection for all $k\geq 4$, unless we can detect a triangle in $\sqrt{n}$-degree graphs in $O(n^{2-\delta})$ time; a breakthrough that is not known to follow even from optimal matrix multiplication algorithms.Comment: The abstract was slightly shortened to meet arXiv requirements. Appears in STOC 202