DOCSLIB.ORG

Fast Algorithms for Hard Graph Problems: Bidimensionality, Minors

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Fast Algorithms for Hard Graph Problems: Bidimensionality, Minors FastFast AlgorithmsAlgorithms foforr HardHard GraphGraph Problems:Problems: BidimensionalityBidimensionality,, Minors,Minors, andand (Local)(Local) TreewidthTreewidth MohammadTaghiMohammadTaghi HajiaghayiHajiaghayi CSCS && AIAI LabLab M.I.T.M.I.T. JointJoint workwork mainlymainly withwith ErikErik DemaineDemaine EDD = Erik D. Demaine, MTH = MohammadTaghi Hajiaghayi ReferencesReferences FVF = Fedor Fomin, DMT = Dimitrios Thilikos ❚ EDD & MTH, “Bidimensionality: New ❚ EDD & MTH, “Fast Algorithms for Connections between FPT Algorithms Hard Graph Problems: Bidimen- and PTASs”, SODA 2005. sionality, Minors, and Local ❚ EDD & MTH, “Graphs Excluding a Fixed Treewidth”, GD 2004. Minor have Grids as Large as ❚ EDD, FVF, MTH, & DMT, Treewidth, with Combinatorial and “Bidimensional Parameters and Local Algorithmic Applications through Treewidth”, SIDMA 2005. Bidimensionality”, SODA 2005. ❚ ❚ EDD & MTH, “Diameter and Tree- EDD, MTH & DMT, “Exponential Speed- width in Minor-Closed Graph Fami- up of FPT Algorithms for Classes of lies, Revisited”, Algorithmica 2004. Graphs Excluding Single-Crossing ❚ Graphs as Minors”, Algorithmica 2005. EDD, MTH, & DMT, “The Bidimen- ❚ sional Theory of Bounded-Genus EDD, FVF, MTH, & DMT, “Fixed- Graphs”, SIDMA 2005. Parameter Algorithms for (k, r)-Center ❚ in Planar Graphs and Map Graphs”, ACM EDD & MTH, “Equivalence of Local Trans. on Algorithms 2005. Treewidth and Linear Local ❚ Treewidth and its Algorithmic EDD, MTH, Naomi Nishimura, Applications”, SODA 2004. Prabhakar Ragde, & DMT, “Approx- ❚ imation algorithms for classes of EDD, FVF, MTH, & DMT, “Subexpo- graphs excluding single-crossing graphs nential parameterized algorithms on as minors”, J. Comp & System Sci.2004. graphs of bounded genus and H- ❚ minor-free graphs”, JACM 2005. EDD, MTH, Ken-ichi Kawarabayashi, ❚ “Algorithmic Graph Minor Theory: Uriel Feige, MTH & James R. Lee, Decomposition, Approximation, and “Improved approximation algorithms Coloring’’, FOCS 2005. for vertex separators”, STOC 2005. Motivation:Motivation: HardHard GraphGraph ProblemsProblems ❚ Many NP-hard graph problems ❙ Find minimum-cost Traveling Salesman tour in a graph ❙ Find fewest radius-r facilities to cover graph ❙ Draw a graph with fewest crossings ❙ Etc. ❚ No polynomial-time algorithm unless P = NP ❚ Still want to solve them DealingDealing withwith HardHard GraphGraph ProblemsProblems ❚ Main theoretical approaches to solving NP-hard problems: ❙ Average case (phase transitions, smoothed analys.) ❙ Special instances: Planar graphs, etc. ❙ Approximation algorithms: Within some factor C of the optimal solution ❙ Fixed-parameter algorithms: Parameterize problem by parameter P (typically, the cost of the optimal solution) and aim for f(P) nO(1) (or even f(P) + nO(1)) OurOur ResultsResults atat aa HighHigh LevelLevel ❚ Consider vertex cover, dominating set, feedback vertex set, unweighted TSP, … ❚ Or any graph optimization problem that’s ❙ 2 × Bidimensional: Large (Ω(r )) on r r grid, r never increases when contracting an edge r ❙ Solvable on graphs of bounded treewidth ❚ In most minor-closed graph families: ❙ Treewidth = O(√solution value) ❙ 2O(√k) nO(1) subexponential fixed-parameter alg. ❙ (1+ε)-approximation in 2O(1/ε) nO(1) time OurOur ResultsResults atat aa HighHigh LevelLevel ❚ For any graph problem in a large class (“bidimensional”) ❙ Vertex cover, dominating set, connected dominating set, r-dominating set, feedback vertex set, unweighted TSP, … ❚ In broad classes of graphs (most “minor-closed”graph families) ❚ Obtain: ❙ Strong combinatorial properties ❙ Subexponential fixed-parameter algorithms ❙ Polynomial-time approximation schemes OurOur ResultsResults atat aa HighHigh LevelLevel ❚ For any graph optimization problem that’s ❙ 2 × Bidimensional: Large (Ω(r )) on r r grid, r never increases when contracting an edge r ❙ Solvable on graphs of bounded treewidth ❚ In most minor-closed graph families: ❙ Treewidth = O(√solution value) ❙ 2O(√k) nO(1) subexponential fixed-parameter alg. ❙ (1+ε)-approximation in 2O(1/ε) nO(1) time ResultsResults atat aa veryvery highhigh levellevel ❚ For any graph optimization problem that’s ❙ Bidimensional: Large (Ω(r2)) on r × r grid, never increases when contracting an edge ❙ Solvable on graphs of bounded treewidth 2.5 ❚ There is a fixed-parameter alg. 22k nO(1) ❚ In most minor-closed graph families: ❙ Treewidth = O(√solution value) ❙ 2O(√k) nO(1) subexponential fixed-parameter alg. ❙ PTASs MinorsMinors ❚ A graph G has a minor H if H can be formed by removing and contracting edges of G * delete G H minor of G contract ❚ Otherwise, G is H-minor-free ❚ For example, planar graphs are both K3,3-minor-free and K5-minor-free GraphGraph MinorMinor TheoryTheory [Robertson[Robertson && SeymourSeymour 19841984––2004]2004] ❚ Seminal series of ≥ 20 papers ❚ Powerful results on excluded minors: ❙ Every minor-closed graph property (preserved when taking minors) has a finite set of excluded minors [Wagner’s Conjecture] ❙ Every minor-closed graph property can be decided in polynomial time ❙ For fixed graph H, graphs minor-excluding H have a special structure: drawings on bounded-genus surfaces + “extra features” TreewidthTreewidth [GM2[GM2——RobertsonRobertson && SeymourSeymour 1986]1986] ❚ Treewidth of a graph is the smallest possible width of a tree decomposition ❚ Tree decomposition spreads out each vertex as a connected subtree of a common tree, such that adjacent vertices have Tree Graph overlapping subtrees decomposition ❙ Width = maximum overlap − 1 (width 3) ❚ Treewidth 1 ≡ tree; 2 ≡ series-parallel; … TreewidthTreewidth BasicsBasics ❚ Many fast algorithms for NP-hard problems on graphs of small treewidth ❙ Typical running time: 2O(treewidth) nO(1) ❚ Computing treewidth is NP-hard O(treewidth) ❚ Computable in 22 n time, including a tree decomposition [Bodlaender 1996] ❚ O(1)-approximable in 2O(treewidth) nO(1) time, including a tree decomposition [Amir 2001] ❚ O(√lg opt)-approximable in nO(1) time [Feige, Hajiaghayi, Lee 2004] (using a new framework for vertex separators based on embedding with minimum average distortion into line) TreewidthTreewidth BasicsBasics ❚ Many fast algorithms for NP-hard problems on graphs of small treewidth ❙ Typical running time: 2O(treewidth) nO(1) ❚ Computing treewidth is NP-hard O(treewidth) ❚ Computable in 22 n time, including a tree decomposition [Bodlaender 1996] ❚ O(1)-approximable in 2O(treewidth) nO(1) time, including a tree decomposition [Amir 2001] ❚ 1.5-approximation for planar graphs and single-crossing- minor-free graphs ❚ O(|V(H)|^2)-approximable in nO(1) time in H-minor- free graphs [Feige, Hajiaghayi, Lee 2004] GridGrid MinorsMinors r ❚ r × r grid: ❙ r2 vertices, 2 r (r − 1) edges r ❙ Treewidth ~ r ❚ r × r grid is the canonical planar graph of treewidth Θ(r): every planar graph of treewidth w has an Ω(w) × Ω(w) grid minor [Robertson, Seymour, Thomas 1994] ❙ So any planar graph of large treewidth has an r × r grid minor certifying large treewidth ❙ What about nonplanar graphs? GridGrid MinorsMinors r r ❚ For any fixed graph H, every H-minor-free graph of treewidth ≥ w(r) has an r × r grid minor [GM5—Robertson & Seymour 1986] ❙ Re-proved & strengthened [Robertson, Seymour, Thomas 1994; Reed 1997; Diestel, Jensen, Gorbunov, Thomassen 1999] ❙ Best bound of these: w(r) = 20 5|V(H)|3 r [Robertson, Seymour, Thomas 1994] ❙ New optimal bound: w(r) = Θ(r) [Demaine & Hajiaghayi 2005] ❘ Grids certify large treewidth in H-minor-free graph BidimensionalityBidimensionality atat aa HighHigh LevelLevel ❚ Parameter = function P assigning nonnegative integer P(G) to every graph G ❙ Parameter ↔ graph optimization problem ❚ Parameter P is bidimensional if ❙ Never increases when contracting an edge ❙ P is “large” on r × r “grid-like graphs” typically, think e.g. partially r Ω(r2) triangulated grid with a few extra edges r GraphGraph ClassesClasses planar bounded-genus single-crossing- minor-free apex-minor-free map graphs H-minor-free general planar GraphGraph ClassesClasses bounded-genus single-crossing- minor-free apex-minor-free map graphs ❚ Drawings on H-minor-free surfaces: ❙ Planar graphs general ❘ Drawable in plane/sphere without crossings ❘ = K3,3-minor-free & K5-minor-free graphs ❙ Bounded-genus graphs ❘ One family for each integer g ≥ 0 ❘ Drawable in the genus-g orientable surface without crossings planar GraphGraph ClassesClasses bounded-genus single-crossing- minor-free apex-minor-free map graphs ❚ Drawings on H-minor-free surfaces: ❙ general Map graph New York Times ❘ Given embedded planar graph ❘ Given face 2-coloring as nations and lakes ❘ Vertex for each nation ❘ Edge between nations that share a vertex ❙ More generally, fixed powers of graph family ❘ Map graphs = half-square of planar bipartite planar GraphGraph ClassesClasses bounded-genus single-crossing- minor-free apex-minor-free map graphs ❚ Drawings on H-minor-free surfaces: ❙ general Map graph New York Times ❘ Given embedded planar graph ❘ Given face 2-coloring as nations and lakes ❘ Vertex for each nation ❘ Edge between nations that share a vertex ❙ More generally, fixed powers of graph family ❘ Map graphs = half-square of planar bipartite planar GraphGraph ClassesClasses bounded-genus single-crossing- minor-free ❚ Excluding minors: apex-minor-free map graphs ❙ X-minor-free = class of graphs H-minor-free excluding a fixed general graph from family X ❙ H-minor-free = exclude any fixed graph H ❙ Apex graph = planar graph + one vertex + any incident edges ❙ Single-crossing graph = minor of a graph that can be drawn with at most one crossing
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Constrained Representations of Map Graphs and Half-Squares
    Constrained Representations of Map Graphs and Half-Squares Hoang-Oanh Le Berlin, Germany [email protected] Van Bang Le Universität Rostock, Institut für Informatik, Rostock, Germany [email protected] Abstract The square of a graph H, denoted H2, is obtained from H by adding new edges between two distinct vertices whenever their distance in H is two. The half-squares of a bipartite graph B = (X, Y, EB ) are the subgraphs of B2 induced by the color classes X and Y , B2[X] and B2[Y ]. For a given graph 2 G = (V, EG), if G = B [V ] for some bipartite graph B = (V, W, EB ), then B is a representation of G and W is the set of points in B. If in addition B is planar, then G is also called a map graph and B is a witness of G [Chen, Grigni, Papadimitriou. Map graphs. J. ACM, 49 (2) (2002) 127-138]. While Chen, Grigni, Papadimitriou proved that any map graph G = (V, EG) has a witness with at most 3|V | − 6 points, we show that, given a map graph G and an integer k, deciding if G admits a witness with at most k points is NP-complete. As a by-product, we obtain NP-completeness of edge clique partition on planar graphs; until this present paper, the complexity status of edge clique partition for planar graphs was previously unknown. We also consider half-squares of tree-convex bipartite graphs and prove the following complexity 2 dichotomy: Given a graph G = (V, EG) and an integer k, deciding if G = B [V ] for some tree-convex bipartite graph B = (V, W, EB ) with |W | ≤ k points is NP-complete if G is non-chordal dually chordal and solvable in linear time otherwise.
    [Show full text]
  • New Bounds on the Number of Edges in a K-Map Graph
    New bounds on the edge number of a k-map graph ∗ Zhi-Zhong Chen y Abstract It is known that for every integer k 4, each k-map graph with n vertices has at most ≥ kn 2k edges. Previously, it was open whether this bound is tight or not. We show that this − bound is tight for k = 4, 5. We also show that this bound is not tight for large enough k (namely, k 374); more precisely, we show that for every 0 < < 3 and for every integer k 140 , ≥ 328 ≥ 41 each k-map graph with n vertices has at most ( 325 + )kn 2k edges. This result implies the 328 − first polynomial (indeed linear) time algorithm for coloring a given k-map graph with less than 2k colors for large enough k. We further show that for every positive multiple k of 6, there are 11 1 infinitely many integers n such that some k-map graph with n vertices has at least ( 12 k + 3 )n edges. Key words. Planar graph, plane embedding, sphere embedding, map graph, k-map graph, edge number. AMS subject classifications. 05C99, 68R05, 68R10. Abbreviated title. Edge Number of k-Map Graphs. 1 Introduction Chen, Grigni, and Papadimitriou [6] studied a modified notion of planar duality, in which two nations of a (political) map are considered adjacent when they share any point of their boundaries (not necessarily an edge, as planar duality requires). Such adjacencies define a map graph. The map graph is called a k-map graph for some positive integer k, if no more than k nations on the map meet at a point.
    [Show full text]
  • The Bidimensionality Theory and Its Algorithmic
    The Bidimensionality Theory and Its Algorithmic Applications by MohammadTaghi Hajiaghayi B.S., Sharif University of Technology, 2000 M.S., University of Waterloo, 2001 Submitted to the Department of Mathematics in partial ful¯llment of the requirements for the degree of DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY at the MASSACHUSETTS INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY June 2005 °c MohammadTaghi Hajiaghayi, 2005. All rights reserved. The author hereby grants to MIT permission to reproduce and distribute publicly paper and electronic copies of this thesis document in whole or in part. Author.............................................................. Department of Mathematics April 29, 2005 Certi¯ed by. Erik D. Demaine Associate Professor of Electrical Engineering and Computer Science Thesis Supervisor Accepted by . Rodolfo Ruben Rosales Chairman, Applied Mathematics Committee Accepted by . Pavel I. Etingof Chairman, Department Committee on Graduate Students 2 The Bidimensionality Theory and Its Algorithmic Applications by MohammadTaghi Hajiaghayi Submitted to the Department of Mathematics on April 29, 2005, in partial ful¯llment of the requirements for the degree of DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY Abstract Our newly developing theory of bidimensional graph problems provides general techniques for designing e±cient ¯xed-parameter algorithms and approximation algorithms for NP- hard graph problems in broad classes of graphs. This theory applies to graph problems that are bidimensional in the sense that (1) the solution value for the k £ k grid graph (and similar graphs) grows with k, typically as ­(k2), and (2) the solution value goes down when contracting edges and optionally when deleting edges. Examples of such problems include feedback vertex set, vertex cover, minimum maximal matching, face cover, a series of vertex- removal parameters, dominating set, edge dominating set, r-dominating set, connected dominating set, connected edge dominating set, connected r-dominating set, and unweighted TSP tour (a walk in the graph visiting all vertices).
    [Show full text]
  • Applications of Bipartite Matching to Problems in Object Recognition
    Applications of Bipartite Matching to Problems in Object Recognition Ali Shokoufandeh Sven Dickinson Department of Mathematics and Department of Computer Science and Computer Science Center for Cognitive Science Drexel University Rutgers University Philadelphia, PA New Brunswick, NJ Abstract The matching of hierarchical (e.g., multiscale or multilevel) image features is a common problem in object recognition. Such structures are often represented as trees or directed acyclic graphs, where nodes represent image feature abstractions and arcs represent spatial relations, mappings across resolution levels, component parts, etc. Such matching problems can be formulated as largest isomorphic subgraph or largest isomorphic subtree problems, for which a wealth of literature exists in the graph algorithms community. However, the nature of the vision instantiation of this problem often precludes the direct application of these methods. Due to occlusion and noise, no significant isomorphisms may exists between two graphs or trees. In this paper, we review our application of a more general class of matching methods, called bipartite matching, to two problems in object recognition. 1 Introduction The matching of hierarchical (e.g., multiscale or multilevel) image features is a common problem in object recognition. Such structures are often represented as trees or directed acyclic graphs, where nodes represent image feature abstractions and arcs represent spatial relations, mappings across resolution levels, compo- nent parts, etc. The requirements of matching include computing a correspondence between nodes in an image structure and nodes in a model structure, as well as computing an overall measure of distance (or, alternatively, similarity) between the two structures. Such matching problems can be formulated as largest isomorphic subgraph or largest isomorphic subtree problems, for which a wealth of literature exists in the graph algorithms community.
    [Show full text]
  • Graph Theory and Graph Algorithms Basics Václav Hlaváč
    Graph theory and graph algorithms basics Václav Hlaváč Czech Technical University in Prague Czech Institute of Informatics, Robotics and Cybernetics 160 00 Prague 6, Jugoslávských partyzánů 1580/3, Czech Republic http://people.ciirc.cvut.cz/hlavac, [email protected] Courtesy: Paul Van Dooren, Jeff Erickson, Jaehyun Park, Jianbo Shi Outline of the talk: Graph-based image segmentation, ideas Special graphs Graphs, concepts Computer representation of graphs Graph traversal Flow network, graph cut Graph coloring Minimum spanning tree Graphs, concepts 2/60 It is assumed that a student has studied related graph theory elsewhere. Main concepts are reminded here only. http://web.stanford.edu/class/cs97si/, lecture 6, 7 https://www.cs.indiana.edu/~achauhan/Teaching/B403/LectureNotes/10-graphalgo.html https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Glossary_of_graph_theory_terms Concepts Related graph algorithms Graphs: directed, undirected Shortest path Adjacency, similarity matrices Max graph flow = min graph cut Path in a graph Minimum spanning tree Special graphs Undirected/directed graph 3/60 Undirected graph, also graph Directed graph E.g. a city map without one-way streets. E.g. a city map with one-way streets. G = (V, E) is composed of vertices V G = (V, E) is composed of vertices V and undirected edges E ⊂ V × V representing an and directed edges E representing an unordered relation between two vertices. ordered relation between two vertices. Oriented edge e = (u, v) has the tail u The number of vertices |V | = n and the and the head v (shown as the arrow 2 number of edges |E| = m = O(|V | ) is →). The edge e is different from assumed finite.
    [Show full text]
  • An Annotated Bibliography on 1-Planarity
    An annotated bibliography on 1-planarity Stephen G. Kobourov1, Giuseppe Liotta2, Fabrizio Montecchiani2 1Dep. of Computer Science, University of Arizona, Tucson, USA [email protected] 2Dip. di Ingegneria, Universit`adegli Studi di Perugia, Perugia, Italy fgiuseppe.liotta,[email protected] July 21, 2017 Abstract The notion of 1-planarity is among the most natural and most studied generalizations of graph planarity. A graph is 1-planar if it has an embedding where each edge is crossed by at most another edge. The study of 1-planar graphs dates back to more than fifty years ago and, recently, it has driven increasing attention in the areas of graph theory, graph algorithms, graph drawing, and computational geometry. This annotated bibliography aims to provide a guiding reference to researchers who want to have an overview of the large body of literature about 1-planar graphs. It reviews the current literature covering various research streams about 1-planarity, such as characterization and recognition, combinatorial properties, and geometric representations. As an additional contribution, we offer a list of open problems on 1-planar graphs. 1 Introduction Relational data sets, containing a set of objects and relations between them, are commonly modeled by graphs, with the objects as the vertices and the relations as the edges. A great deal is known about the structure and properties of special types of graphs, in particular planar graphs. The class of planar graphs is fundamental for both Graph Theory and Graph Algorithms, and is extensively studied. Many structural properties of planar graphs are known and these properties can be used in the development of efficient algorithms for planar graphs, even where the more general problem is NP-hard [11].
    [Show full text]
  • Decomposition of Map Graphs with Applications Fedor V
    Decomposition of Map Graphs with Applications Fedor V. Fomin University of Bergen, Norway, [email protected] Daniel Lokshtanov University of California, Santa Barbara, USA, [email protected] Fahad Panolan University of Bergen, Norway, [email protected] Saket Saurabh The Institute of Mathematical Sciences, HBNI, Chennai, India, [email protected] Meirav Zehavi Ben-Gurion University of the Negev, Beer-Sheva, Israel, [email protected] Abstract Bidimensionality is the most common technique to design subexponential-time parameterized algorithms on special classes of graphs, particularly planar graphs. The core engine behind it is a combinatorial√ lemma√ of Robertson, Seymour and Thomas√ that states that every planar graph either has a k × k-grid as a minor, or its treewidth is O( k). However, bidimensionality theory cannot be extended directly to several well-known√ √ classes of geometric graphs. The reason is very simple: a clique on k − 1 vertices has no k × k-grid as a minor and its treewidth is k − 2, while classes of geometric graphs such as unit disk graphs or map graphs can have arbitrarily large cliques. Thus, the combinatorial lemma of Robertson, Seymour and Thomas is inapplicable to these classes of geometric graphs. Nevertheless, a relaxation of this lemma has been proven useful for unit disk graphs. Inspired by this, we prove a new decomposition lemma for map graphs, the intersection graphs of finitely many simply-connected and interior-disjoint regions of the Euclidean plane. Informally, our lemma states the following. For any map graph G, there√ exists√ a collection (U1,...,Ut) of cliques of G with the following property: G either contains√ a k × k-grid as a minor, or it admits a tree decomposition where every bag is the union of O( k) of the cliques in the above collection.
    [Show full text]
  • Fixed-Parameter Algorithms for (K,R)-Center in Planar Graphs And
    Fixed-Parameter Algorithms for (k, r)-Center in Planar Graphs and Map Graphs ERIK D. DEMAINE MIT, Cambridge, Massachusetts FEDOR V. FOMIN University of Bergen, Bergen, Norway MOHAMMADTAGHI HAJIAGHAYI MIT, Cambridge, Massachusetts AND DIMITRIOS M. THILIKOS Universitat Politecnica` de Catalunya, Barcelona, Spain Abstract. The (k, r)-center problem asks whether an input graph G has ≤ k vertices (called centers) such that every vertex of G is within distance ≤ r from some center. In this article, we prove that the (k, r)-center problem, parameterized by k and r,isfixed-parameter tractable (FPT) on planar graphs, O(1) i.e., it admits an algorithm of complexity f (√k, r)n where the function f is independent of n.In particular, we show that f (k, r) = 2O(r log r) k , where the exponent of the exponential term grows sublinearly in the number of centers. Moreover, we prove that the same type of FPT algorithms can be designed for the more general class of map graphs introduced by Chen, Grigni, and Papadimitriou. Our results combine dynamic-programming algorithms for graphs of small branchwidth and a graph- theoretic result bounding this parameter in terms of k and r. Finally, a byproduct of our algorithm is the existence of a PTAS for the r-domination problem in both planar graphs and map graphs. Our approach builds on the seminal results of Robertson and Seymour on Graph Minors, and as a result is much more powerful than the previous machinery of Alber et al. for exponential speedup A preliminary version of this article appeared in the Proceedings of the 30th International Colloquium on Automata, Languages and Programming (ICALP’03).
    [Show full text]
  • Decomposition of Map Graphs with Applications Fedor V
    Decomposition of Map Graphs with Applications Fedor V. Fomin University of Bergen, Norway, [email protected] Daniel Lokshtanov University of California, Santa Barbara, USA, [email protected] Fahad Panolan University of Bergen, Norway, [email protected] Saket Saurabh The Institute of Mathematical Sciences, HBNI, Chennai, India, [email protected] Meirav Zehavi Ben-Gurion University of the Negev, Beer-Sheva, Israel, [email protected] Abstract Bidimensionality is the most common technique to design subexponential-time parameterized algorithms on special classes of graphs, particularly planar graphs. The core engine behind it is a combinatorial√ lemma√ of Robertson, Seymour and Thomas√ that states that every planar graph either has a k × k-grid as a minor, or its treewidth is O( k). However, bidimensionality theory cannot be extended directly to several well-known√ √ classes of geometric graphs. The reason is very simple: a clique on k − 1 vertices has no k × k-grid as a minor and its treewidth is k − 2, while classes of geometric graphs such as unit disk graphs or map graphs can have arbitrarily large cliques. Thus, the combinatorial lemma of Robertson, Seymour and Thomas is inapplicable to these classes of geometric graphs. Nevertheless, a relaxation of this lemma has been proven useful for unit disk graphs. Inspired by this, we prove a new decomposition lemma for map graphs, the intersection graphs of finitely many simply-connected and interior-disjoint regions of the Euclidean plane. Informally, our lemma states the following. For any map graph G, there√ exists√ a collection (U1,...,Ut) of cliques of G with the following property: G either contains√ a k × k-grid as a minor, or it admits a tree decomposition where every bag is the union of O( k) of the cliques in the above collection.
    [Show full text]
  • Notes on Graph Product Structure Theory
    Notes on Graph Product Structure Theory Zdenekˇ Dvorák,ˇ Tony Huynh, Gwenaël Joret, Chun-Hung Liu, and David R. Wood Abstract It was recently proved that every planar graph is a subgraph of the strong product of a path and a graph with bounded treewidth. This paper surveys gener- alisations of this result for graphs on surfaces, minor-closed classes, various non- minor-closed classes, and graph classes with polynomial growth. We then explore how graph product structure might be applicable to more broadly defined graph classes. In particular, we characterise when a graph class defined by a cartesian or strong product has bounded or polynomial expansion. We then explore graph prod- uct structure theorems for various geometrically defined graph classes, and present several open problems. Zdenekˇ Dvorákˇ Charles University, Prague, Czech Republic Supported by project 17-04611S (Ramsey-like aspects of graph coloring) of Czech Science Foun- dation e-mail: [email protected] Tony Huynh and David R. Wood School of Mathematics, Monash University, Melbourne, Australia Research supported by the Australian Research Council e-mail: [email protected],[email protected] Gwenaël Joret Département d’Informatique, Université libre de Bruxelles, Brussels, Belgium Research supported by the Wallonia-Brussels Federation of Belgium, and by the Australian Re- search Council e-mail: [email protected] Chun-Hung Liu Department of Mathematics, Texas A&M University, College Station, Texas, USA Partially supported by the NSF under Grant No. DMS-1929851 e-mail: [email protected] 1 2 Zdenekˇ Dvorák,ˇ Tony Huynh, Gwenaël Joret, Chun-Hung Liu, and David R.
    [Show full text]
  • 10 Excluded Grid Minors and Efficient Polynomial-Time Approximation
    Excluded Grid Minors and Eficient Polynomial-Time Approximation Schemes FEDOR V. FOMIN and DANIEL LOKSHTANOV, University of Bergen SAKET SAURABH, University of Bergen and the Institute of Mathematical Sciences Two of the most widely used approaches to obtain polynomial-time approximation schemes (PTASs) on pla- nar graphs are the Lipton-Tarjan separator-based approach and Baker’s approach. In 2005, Demaine and Hajiaghayi strengthened both approaches using bidimensionality and obtained efcient polynomial-time ap- proximation schemes (EPTASs) for several problems, including Connected Dominating Set and Feedback Vertex Set. In this work, we unify the two strengthened approaches to combine the best of both worlds. We develop a framework allowing the design of EPTAS on classes of graphs with the subquadratic grid minor (SQGM) property. Roughly speaking, a class of graphs has the SQGM property if, for every graph G from the class, the fact that G contains no t t grid as a minor guarantees that the treewidth of G is subquadratic in × t. For example, the class of planar graphs and, more generally, classes of graphs excluding some fxed graph as a minor, have the SQGM property. At the heart of our framework is a decomposition lemma stating that for “most” bidimensional problems on a graph class with the SQGM property, there is a polynomial-time G algorithm that, given a graph G as input and an ϵ > 0, outputs a vertex set X of size ϵ OPT such that ∈G · the treewidth of G X is f (ϵ). Here, OPT is the objective function value of the problem in question and f is a − function depending only on ϵ.
    [Show full text]
  • Bidimensionality, Map Graphs, and Grid Minors
    Bidimensionality, Map Graphs, and Grid Minors Erik D. Demaine∗ MohammadTaghi Hajiaghayi∗ Abstract In this paper we extend the theory of bidimensionality to two families of graphs that do not exclude fixed minors: map graphs and power graphs. In both cases we prove a polynomial relation between the treewidth of a graph in the family and the size of the largest grid minor. These bounds improve the running times of a broad class of fixed-parameter algorithms. Our novel technique of using approximate max-min relations between treewidth and size of grid minors is powerful, and we show how it can also be used, e.g., to prove a linear relation between the treewidth of a bounded-genusgraph and the treewidth of its dual. 1 Introduction The newly developing theory of bidimensionality, developed in a series of papers [DHT05, DHN+04, DFHT05, DH04b, DFHT04b, DH04a, DFHT04a, DHT04, DH05b, DH05a], provides general techniques for designing efficient fixed-parameter algorithms and approximation algorithms for NP-hard graph prob- lems in broad classes of graphs. This theory applies to graph problems that are bidimensional in the sense that (1) the solution value for r × r “grid-like” graphs grows with r, typically as Ω(r2), and (2) the solution value goes down when contracting edges and optionally when deleting edges (i.e., taking minors). Exam- ples of such problems include feedback vertex set, vertex cover, minimum maximal matching, face cover, a series of vertex-removal parameters, dominating set, edge dominating set, R-dominating set, connected dominating set, connected edge dominating set, connected R-dominating set, and unweighted TSP tour (a walk in the graph visiting all vertices).
    [Show full text]