Parameterized complexity
In computer science, parameterized complexity is a branch of computational complexity theory that focuses on classifying computational problems according to their inherent difficulty with respect to multiple parameters of the input or output. The complexity of a problem is then measured as a function in those parameters. This allows the classification of NPhard problems on a finer scale than in the classical setting, where the complexity of a problem is only measured by the number of bits in the input. The first systematic work on parameterized complexity was done by Downey & Fellows (1999).
Under the assumption that P ≠ NP, there exist many natural problems that require superpolynomial running time when complexity is measured in terms of the input size only, but that are computable in a time that is polynomial in the input size and exponential or worse in a parameter k. Hence, if k is fixed at a small value and the growth of the function over k is relatively small then such problems can still be considered "tractable" despite their traditional classification as "intractable".
The existence of efficient, exact, and deterministic solving algorithms for NPcomplete, or otherwise NPhard, problems is considered unlikely, if input parameters are not fixed; all known solving algorithms for these problems require time that is exponential (or at least superpolynomial) in the total size of the input. However, some problems can be solved by algorithms that are exponential only in the size of a fixed parameter while polynomial in the size of the input. Such an algorithm is called a fixedparameter tractable (fpt)algorithm, because the problem can be solved efficiently for small values of the fixed parameter.
Problems in which some parameter k is fixed are called parameterized problems. A parameterized problem that allows for such an fptalgorithm is said to be a fixedparameter tractable problem and belongs to the class FPT, and the early name of the theory of parameterized complexity was fixedparameter tractability.
Many problems have the following form: given an object x and a nonnegative integer k, does x have some property that depends on k? For instance, for the vertex cover problem, the parameter can be the number of vertices in the cover. In many applications, for example when modelling error correction, one can assume the parameter to be "small" compared to the total input size. Then it is interesting to see whether we can find an algorithm which is exponential only in k, and not in the input size.
In this way, parameterized complexity can be seen as twodimensional complexity theory. This concept is formalized as follows:
 A parameterized problem is a language , where is a finite alphabet. The second component is called the parameter of the problem.
 A parameterized problem L is fixedparameter tractable if the question “?” can be decided in running time , where f is an arbitrary function depending only on k. The corresponding complexity class is called FPT.
For example, there is an algorithm which solves the vertex cover problem in time, ^{[1]} where n is the number of vertices and k is the size of the vertex cover. This means that vertex cover is fixedparameter tractable with the size of the solution as the parameter.
Contents
Complexity classes
FPT
FPT contains the fixed parameter tractable problems, which are those that can be solved in time for some computable function f. Typically, this function is thought of as single exponential, such as but the definition admits functions that grow even faster. This is essential for a large part of the early history of this class. The crucial part of the definition is to exclude functions of the form , such as . The class FPL (fixed parameter linear) is the class of problems solvable in time for some computable function f Grohe (1999). FPL is thus a subclass of FPT.
An example is the satisfiability problem, parameterised by the number of variables. A given formula of size m with k variables can be checked by brute force in time . A vertex cover of size k in a graph of order n can be found in time , so this problem is also in FPT.
An example of a problem that is thought not to be in FPT is graph coloring parameterised by the number of colors. It is known that 3coloring is NPhard, and an algorithm for graph kcolouring in time for would run in polynomial time in the size of the input. Thus, if graph coloring parameterised by the number of colors were in FPT, then P = NP.
There are a number of alternative definitions of FPT. For example, the running time requirement can be replaced by . Also, a parameterised problem is in FPT if it has a socalled kernel. Kernelization is a preprocessing technique that reduces the original instance to its "hard kernel", a possibly much smaller instance that is equivalent to the original instance but has a size that is bounded by a function in the parameter.
FPT is closed under a parameterised reduction called fptreduction, which simultaneously preserves the instance size and the parameter.
Obviously, FPT contains all polynomialtime computable problems. Moreover, it contains all optimisation problems in NP that allow a Fully polynomialtime approximation scheme.
W hierarchy
The W hierarchy is a collection of computational complexity classes. A parameterised problem is in the class W[i], if every instance can be transformed (in fpttime) to a combinatorial circuit that has weft at most i, such that if and only if there is a satisfying assignment to the inputs, which assigns 1 to at most k inputs. The height thereby is the largest number of logical units with unbounded fanin on any path from an input to the output. The number of logical units with bounded fanin on the paths must be limited by a constant that holds for all instances of the problem.
Note that and for all . The classes in the W hierarchy are also closed under fptreduction.
Many natural computational problems occupy the lower levels, W[1] and W[2].
W[1]
Examples of W[1]complete problems include
 deciding if a given graph contains a clique of size k
 deciding if a given graph contains an independent set of size k
 deciding if a given nondeterministic singletape Turing machine accepts within k steps ("short Turing machine acceptance" problem)
W[2]
Examples of W[2]complete problems include
 deciding if a given graph contains a dominating set of size k
 deciding if a given nondeterministic multitape Turing machine accepts within k steps ("short multitape Turing machine acceptance" problem)
W[t]
can be defined using the family of Weighted WefttDepthd SAT problems for : is the class of parameterized problems that fptreduce to this problem, and .
Here, Weighted WefttDepthd SAT is the following problem:
 Input: A Boolean formula of depth at most d and weft at most t, and a number k. The depth is the maximal number of gates on any path from the root to a leaf, and the weft is the maximal number of gates of fanin at least three on any path from the root to a leaf.
 Question: Does the formula have a satisfying assignment of Hamming weight at most k?
It can be shown that the problem Weighted tNormalize SAT is complete for under fptreductions.^{[2]} Here, Weighted tNormalize SAT is the following problem:
 Input: A Boolean formula of depth at most t with an ANDgate on top, and a number k.
 Question: Does the formula have a satisfying assignment of Hamming weight at most k?
W[P]
W[P] is the class of problems that can be decided by a nondeterministic time Turingmachine that makes at most nondeterministic choices in the computation on (a krestricted Turingmachine). Flum & Grohe (2006)
It is known that FPT is contained in W[P], and the inclusion is believed to be strict. However, resolving this issue would imply a solution to the P versus NP problem.
Other connections to unparameterised computational complexity are that FPT equals W[P] if and only if circuit satisfiability can be decided in time , or if and only if there is a computable, nondecreasing, unbounded function f such that all languages recognised by a nondeterministic polynomialtime Turing machine using f(n)log n nondeterministic choices are in P.
XP
XP is the class of parameterized problems that can be solved in time for some computable function f.
This section needs expansion. You can help by adding to it. (April 2011)

A hierarchy
The A hierarchy is a collection of computational complexity classes similar to the W hierarchy. However, while the W hierarchy is a hierarchy contained in NP, the A hierarchy more closely mimics the polynomialtime hierarchy from classical complexity. It is known that A[1] = W[1] holds.
Notes
 ^ Chen, Kanj & Xia 2006
 ^ Buss, Jonathan F, Islam, Tarique (2006). "Simplifying the weft hierarchy". Theoretical Computer Science. Elsevier. 351 (3): 303–313. doi:10.1016/j.tcs.2005.10.002.
References
 Chen, Jianer; Kanj, Iyad A.; Xia, Ge (2006). "Improved Parameterized Upper Bounds for Vertex Cover". Mfcs 2006. 4162: 238–249. doi:10.1007/11821069_21.
 Cygan, Marek; Fomin, Fedor V.; Kowalik, Lukasz; Lokshtanov, Daniel; Marx, Daniel; Pilipczuk, Marcin; Pilipczuk, Michal; Saurabh, Saket (2015). Parameterized Algorithms. Springer. p. 555. ISBN 9783319212746.
 Downey, Rod G.; Fellows, Michael R. (1999). Parameterized Complexity. Springer. ISBN 038794883X.
 Flum, Jörg; Grohe, Martin (2006). Parameterized Complexity Theory. Springer. ISBN 9783540299523.
 Niedermeier, Rolf (2006). Invitation to FixedParameter Algorithms. Oxford University Press. ISBN 0198566077. Archived from the original on 20080924.
 Grohe, Martin (1999). "Descriptive and Parameterized Complexity". Computer Science Logic. Lecture Notes in Computer Science. 1683. Springer Berlin Heidelberg. pp. 14–31. ISBN 9783540665366.
 The Computer Journal. Volume 51, Numbers 1 and 3 (2008). The Computer Journal. Special Double Issue on Parameterized Complexity with 15 survey articles, book review, and a Foreword by Guest Editors R. Downey, M. Fellows and M. Langston.
External links
 Wiki on parameterized complexity
 Compendium of Parameterized Problems