@InProceedings{FewestClues_FUN2016,
AUTHOR = {Erik D. Demaine and Fermi Ma and Erik Waingarten and Ariel Schvartzman and Scott Aaronson},
TITLE = {The Fewest Clues Problem},
BOOKTITLE = {Proceedings of the 8th International Conference on Fun with Algorithms (FUN 2016)},
bookurl = {http://www2.idsia.ch/cms/fun16/},
ADDRESS = {La Maddalena, Italy},
MONTH = {June 8--10},
YEAR = 2016,
PAGES = {12:1--12:12},
papers = {FewestClues_TCS},
withstudent = 1,
doi = {https://dx.doi.org/10.4230/LIPIcs.FUN.2016.12},
dblp = {https://dblp.org/rec/conf/fun/DemaineMSWA16},
comments = {This paper is also available from <A HREF="https://doi.org/10.4230/LIPIcs.FUN.2016.12">LIPIcs</A>.},
}
Given an instance to a puzzle, what is the minimum number of clues we must add in order to make the instance uniquely solvable?
We analyze this question for the Nikoli puzzles Sudoku, Shakashaka, and Akari. Solving these puzzles is NP-complete, and we show their FCP versions are ΣP2-complete. Along the way, we show that the FCP versions of 3SAT, 1-in-3 SAT, Triangle Partition, Planar 3SAT, and Latin Square are all ΣP2-complete. We show that even problems in P have difficult FCP versions, sometimes even ΣP2-complete, though “closed under cluing” problems are in the (presumably) smaller class NP; for example, FCP 2SAT is NP-complete.