DOCSLIB.ORG

Structure of Graphs with Locally Restricted Crossings

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Structure of Graphs with Locally Restricted Crossings Structure of Graphs with Locally Restricted Crossings † ‡ § VidaAbstract. Dujmovi´c David Eppstein David R. Wood Wen consider relations between the size, treewidth, andg local crossingk number p (maximum number of crossingsO( (g per+ 1)( edge)k + 1) ofn graphs) embedded on topologicalO((g + 1) surfaces.k) We show that an -vertex graph embedded on a surface of genus withk at most crossings p nper edge has treewidth O( (k + 1)n) and layered treewidthO(k + 1) , and that these bounds are tight up to a constant factor.O((k As+ a 1) special3=4n1=2) case, the -planar graphs with vertices have treewidth and layered treewidth , which are tight bounds thatg < improve m a previouslym known treewidth bound. Analogousg Oresults((m=( areg + proved1)) log2 forg) map graphs defined with respect to any surface. Finally, we show that for , every -edge graph can be embedded on a surface of genus with Keywords. crossings per edge, which is tight to a polylogarithmic factor.k treewidth, pathwidth, layered treewidth, local treewidth, 1-planar, -planar, map graph, graph minor, local crossing number, separator, 1 Introduction This paper studies the structure of graph classes defined by drawings on surfaces in which the crossings are locally restricted in some way.k k-planar k local crossing Thenumber first such example that we considerk are the -planark graphs. A graph is if it can be drawn in the planep × withq × atr most crossings on each edge[p] × [24[q].] × The[r] of the(x; y; graph z)(x + is 1 the; y; zminimum) (x; y; zfor)(x; which y + 1; it z) is (-planarx; y; z)(x; [27 y;, pagesz + 1) 51–53]. An important example is the grid graph, with vertex set and all edges arXiv:1506.04380v2 [math.CO] 20 Feb 2016 of the form or or . A suitable Proc.February 23rd 23, International 2016 Symposium on Graph Drawing and Network Visualization 2015 A preliminary version of this paper entitled “Genus, treewidth, and local crossing number” was published in † , Lecture Notes in [email protected] Science 9411:87–98, Springer, 2015. School of Computer Science and Electrical Engineering, University of Ottawa, Ottawa, Canada ‡ ( ). Supported by NSERC and the Ministry of [email protected] and Innovation, Government of Ontario, Canada. § Department of Computer Science, University of California, Irvine, California, [email protected] ( ). Supported in part by NSF grant CCF-1228639. School of Mathematical Sciences, Monash University, Melbourne, Australia ( ). Supported by the Australian Research Council. 1 p × q × r (r − 1) Figure 1: The grid graph is -planar. (r − 1) linear projection from the natural three-dimensional embedding of this graph to the plane gives a -planar drawing, as illustrated in Figure1. The main way that we describe the structure of a graph is through its treewidth, which is a parameter that measures how similar a graph is to a tree. It is a key measure of the complexity of a graph and is of fundamental importance in algorithmic graph theory and structural graph theory, especially in Robertson and Seymour’s graph minors project. See Section2 for a detailed definition of treewidth. separator Treewidth is closely related to the size of a smallest , a set of vertices whose removal splits the graph into connected components each with at most half the vertices. Graphs of low treewidth necessarily haven small separators, and graphs in which every p p Osubgraph( n) has a small separator have lown treewidth [12, 25]. For example, theO( Lipton-Tarjann) p separator theorem, whichO( n) says that every -vertex planar graph has a separator of order , can be reformulated as every -vertex planar graph has treewidth . Most of our results provide bounds on the treewidth of particular classes of graphs that generalise planarity. In this sense, our results are generalisations of the Lipton-Tarjan separator theorem, and analogous results for other surfaces. k n The starting point for ourO work(k3=4 isn1 the=2) following question: what is the maximum treewidth of -planar graphs on vertices? Grigoriev and Bodlaender [16] studied this question and Theorem 1. The maximum treewidth of -planar -vertex graphs is proved an upper bound of . Wek improven this and give the following tight bound: n p o Θ min n; (k + 1)n : 2 (g; k)-planar g k et al. More generally, a graph is if it can1 be drawn in a surface(2; of k) Euler genus at most with at most crossings on each edge . For instance, Guy [19] investigated the local crossing number of toroidal embeddings—in this notation, the -planar graphs. Theorem 2. The maximum treewidth of (g; k)-planar n-vertex graphs is We again determine an optimal bound on the treewidth of such graphs. n p o Θ min n; (g + 1)(k + 1)n : k = 0 ( ) In both these theorems, the case (withg; k no crossings) is well known [15]. n mOur second contribution is to study theg -planarity of graphs as a functionm of their Ω(minnumberfm of2 edges.=g; m2=n Forg) (global) crossing number, it is known thatO((m a2 graphlog2 g with)=g) vertices and edges drawn on a surface of genus (sufficiently small withΩ( respectm=g) to ) may require crossings, and it can be drawn with crossings [29]. In particular, the lower bound implies that some graphs require crossings per edge on average, and therefore also in the worst case. We prove a nearly-matching upper bound Theorem 3. For every graph G with m edges, for every integer g 1, there is a drawing which implies the above-mentioned upper bound on the total number> of crossings: of G in the orientable surface with at most g handles and with m log2 g O g crossings per edge. G0 g Our third contribution concernsG0 map graphs, which ared defined asG follows. Start with a graph embedded in a surfaceG0 of Euler genus , with each face labelledG a ‘nation’ or a ‘lake’, whereG0 each vertex of is incidentG with at most(g; d)-mapnations. graph Let (0be; d the) graph whose vertices are the nationsd-map graph of , where two vertices are adjacent in if the corresponding faces in share a vertex.(g; 3) Then is called a .A -map graph is gcalled a (plane) ; suchg = 0 graphs have been(g; extensively d) studied [14, 3, 6, 4, 2]. It is easily seen that -map graphs are precisely2 theG graphs of Euler genus at most (which is well known in the case [4]) . So -map graphs provide a natural Euler genus h 2h Euler genus generalisation of graphs embedded in a surface. Note that may contain arbitrarily large 1 c c Euler genus G G The of an orientable surface with handles is . The of a non-orientable surface withG cross-caps is . The of a graph is the minimumg EulerM( genusG) of amedial surface in which G 2 embeds (with no crossings).E(G) M(G) Let be a graph embedded in a surface of Euler genus at most . Let be the graph of . This graph has vertex set where two vertices of are adjacent whenever the corresponding 3 g = 0 H d G Kd cliques even in the case, since if a vertex of is incident with nations then containsG . H G G If is the mapG graph associated with an embedded graph , then considerH the natural vdrawingH of in whichd each vertex of is positioned inside the correspondingv nation, and beachd−2 cd edged−2 e of is drawn as a( curveg; d) through the corresponding(g; b d−2 cd d−2 e) vertex of . If a vertex 2 2 p2 2 of is incident to(g; dnations,) then each edge passingO(d through(g + 1)n)is crossed by at most edges. Thus every -map graph is -planar, and Theorem2 implies that every -map graph has treewidth . We improve on this Theorem 4. The maximum treewidth of ( )-map graphs on vertices is result as follows. g; d n n p o Θ min n; (g + 1)(d + 1)n : layered treewidth (Weg; k prove) our treewidth upper(g; d) bounds by using the concept of [10], which is of independent interest (see Section2). We prove matching lower bounds by finding -planar graphs and -map graphs without small separators and using the known relations between separator size and treewidth. 2 Background and Discussion 2 (0; 1) S G -separator G 1 2 G − S jV (G)j = 2 = 3 For , a set of vertices in a graph is an of if each component of has at most vertices. It is conventional to set or but the precise choice makes no difference to the asymptotic size of a separator. Several results that follow depend on expanders; see [21] for a survey. The following Lemma 5. For every 2 (0 1) there exists 0, such that for all 3 and + 1 folklore result provides a property; of expandersβ > that is the key to ourk applications.> n > k (such that n is even if k is odd), there exists a k-regular n-vertex graph H (called an expander) in which every -separator in H has size at least βn. G G M(G) G M(G) edges in G are consecutive in theM cyclic(G) ordering of edges incident to aG common vertex in the embedding of M.( NoteG) that embeds in theG same surface as , where eachM(G face) of corresponds tovw a vertexG or a face of . Label the faces of thatv correspondw to vertices of as nations, and labelG the faces of that correspondM to(G faces) ofG as lakes.(g; 2) The vertex of corresponding(g; 3) to an edge of is incident to the(g; nations3) corresponding to and (and is incident to no other nations).
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Expander Graphs
    4 Expander Graphs Now that we have seen a variety of basic derandomization techniques, we will move on to study the first major “pseudorandom object” in this survey, expander graphs. These are graphs that are “sparse” yet very “well-connected.” 4.1 Measures of Expansion We will typically interpret the properties of expander graphs in an asymptotic sense. That is, there will be an infinite family of graphs Gi, with a growing number of vertices Ni. By “sparse,” we mean that the degree Di of Gi should be very slowly growing as a function of Ni. The “well-connectedness” property has a variety of different interpretations, which we will discuss below. Typically, we will drop the subscripts of i and the fact that we are talking about an infinite family of graphs will be implicit in our theorems. As in Section 2.4.2, we will state many of our definitions for directed multigraphs (which we’ll call digraphs for short), though in the end we will mostly study undirected multigraphs. 80 4.1 Measures of Expansion 81 4.1.1 Vertex Expansion The classic measure of well-connectedness in expanders requires that every “not-too-large” set of vertices has “many” neighbors: Definition 4.1. A digraph G isa(K,A) vertex expander if for all sets S of at most K vertices, the neighborhood N(S) def= {u|∃v ∈ S s.t. (u,v) ∈ E} is of size at least A ·|S|. Ideally, we would like D = O(1), K =Ω(N), where N is the number of vertices, and A as close to D as possible.
    [Show full text]
  • Arxiv:1711.08757V3 [Cs.CV] 26 Jul 2018 1 Introduction
    Deep Expander Networks: Efficient Deep Networks from Graph Theory Ameya Prabhu? Girish Varma? Anoop Namboodiri Center for Visual Information Technology Kohli Center on Intelligent Systems, IIIT Hyderabad, India [email protected], fgirish.varma, [email protected] https://github.com/DrImpossible/Deep-Expander-Networks Abstract. Efficient CNN designs like ResNets and DenseNet were pro- posed to improve accuracy vs efficiency trade-offs. They essentially in- creased the connectivity, allowing efficient information flow across layers. Inspired by these techniques, we propose to model connections between filters of a CNN using graphs which are simultaneously sparse and well connected. Sparsity results in efficiency while well connectedness can pre- serve the expressive power of the CNNs. We use a well-studied class of graphs from theoretical computer science that satisfies these properties known as Expander graphs. Expander graphs are used to model con- nections between filters in CNNs to design networks called X-Nets. We present two guarantees on the connectivity of X-Nets: Each node influ- ences every node in a layer in logarithmic steps, and the number of paths between two sets of nodes is proportional to the product of their sizes. We also propose efficient training and inference algorithms, making it possible to train deeper and wider X-Nets effectively. Expander based models give a 4% improvement in accuracy on Mo- bileNet over grouped convolutions, a popular technique, which has the same sparsity but worse connectivity. X-Nets give better performance trade-offs than the original ResNet and DenseNet-BC architectures. We achieve model sizes comparable to state-of-the-art pruning techniques us- ing our simple architecture design, without any pruning.
    [Show full text]
  • Expander Graphs
    Basic Facts about Expander Graphs Oded Goldreich Abstract. In this survey we review basic facts regarding expander graphs that are most relevant to the theory of computation. Keywords: Expander Graphs, Random Walks on Graphs. This text has been revised based on [8, Apdx. E.2]. 1 Introduction Expander graphs found numerous applications in the theory of computation, ranging from the design of sorting networks [1] to the proof that undirected connectivity is decidable in determinstic log-space [15]. In this survey we review basic facts regarding expander graphs that are most relevant to the theory of computation. For a wider perspective, the interested reader is referred to [10]. Loosely speaking, expander graphs are regular graphs of small degree that exhibit various properties of cliques.1 In particular, we refer to properties such as the relative sizes of cuts in the graph (i.e., relative to the number of edges), and the rate at which a random walk converges to the uniform distribution (relative to the logarithm of the graph size to the base of its degree). Some technicalities. Typical presentations of expander graphs refer to one of several variants. For example, in some sources, expanders are presented as bi- partite graphs, whereas in others they are presented as ordinary graphs (and are in fact very far from being bipartite). We shall follow the latter convention. Furthermore, at times we implicitly consider an augmentation of these graphs where self-loops are added to each vertex. For simplicity, we also allow parallel edges. We often talk of expander graphs while we actually mean an infinite collection of graphs such that each graph in this collection satisfies the same property (which is informally attributed to the collection).
    [Show full text]
  • Connections Between Graph Theory and Cryptography
    Connections between graph theory and cryptography Connections between graph theory and cryptography Natalia Tokareva G2C2: Graphs and Groups, Cycles and Coverings September, 24–26, 2014. Novosibirsk, Russia Connections between graph theory and cryptography Introduction to cryptography Introduction to cryptography Connections between graph theory and cryptography Introduction to cryptography Terminology Cryptography is the scientific and practical activity associated with developing of cryptographic security facilities of information and also with argumentation of their cryptographic resistance. Plaintext is a secret message. Often it is a sequence of binary bits. Ciphertext is an encrypted message. Encryption is the process of disguising a message in such a way as to hide its substance (the process of transformation plaintext into ciphertext by virtue of cipher). Cipher is a family of invertible mappings from the set of plaintext sequences to the set of ciphertext sequences. Each mapping depends on special parameter a key. Key is removable part of the cipher. Connections between graph theory and cryptography Introduction to cryptography Terminology Deciphering is the process of turning a ciphertext back into the plaintext that realized with known key. Decryption is the process of receiving the plaintext from ciphertext without knowing the key. Connections between graph theory and cryptography Introduction to cryptography Terminology Cryptography is the scientific and practical activity associated with developing of cryptographic security
    [Show full text]
  • Layouts of Expander Graphs
    CHICAGO JOURNAL OF THEORETICAL COMPUTER SCIENCE 2016, Article 1, pages 1–21 http://cjtcs.cs.uchicago.edu/ Layouts of Expander Graphs † ‡ Vida Dujmovic´∗ Anastasios Sidiropoulos David R. Wood Received January 20, 2015; Revised November 26, 2015, and on January 3, 2016; Published January 14, 2016 Abstract: Bourgain and Yehudayoff recently constructed O(1)-monotone bipartite ex- panders. By combining this result with a generalisation of the unraveling method of Kannan, we construct 3-monotone bipartite expanders, which is best possible. We then show that the same graphs admit 3-page book embeddings, 2-queue layouts, 4-track layouts, and have simple thickness 2. All these results are best possible. Key words and phrases: expander graph, monotone layout, book embedding, stack layout, queue layout, track layout, thickness 1 Introduction Expanders are classes of highly connected graphs that are of fundamental importance in graph theory, with numerous applications, especially in theoretical computer science [31]. While the literature contains various definitions of expanders, this paper focuses on bipartite expanders. For e (0;1], a bipartite 2 graph G with bipartition V(G) = A B is a bipartite e-expander if A = B and N(S) > (1 + e) S for A [ j j j j j j j j every subset S A with S j j . Here N(S) is the set of vertices adjacent to some vertex in S. An infinite ⊂ j j 6 2 family of bipartite e-expanders, for some fixed e > 0, is called an infinite family of bipartite expanders. There has been much research on constructing and proving the existence of expanders with various desirable properties.
    [Show full text]
  • Expander Graphs and Their Applications
    Expander Graphs and their Applications Lecture notes for a course by Nati Linial and Avi Wigderson The Hebrew University, Israel. January 1, 2003 Contents 1 The Magical Mystery Tour 7 1.1SomeProblems.............................................. 7 1.1.1 Hardnessresultsforlineartransformation............................ 7 1.1.2 ErrorCorrectingCodes...................................... 8 1.1.3 De-randomizing Algorithms . .................................. 9 1.2MagicalGraphs.............................................. 10 ´Òµ 1.2.1 A Super Concentrator with Ç edges............................. 12 1.2.2 ErrorCorrectingCodes...................................... 12 1.2.3 De-randomizing Random Algorithms . ........................... 13 1.3Conclusions................................................ 14 2 Graph Expansion & Eigenvalues 15 2.1Definitions................................................. 15 2.2ExamplesofExpanderGraphs...................................... 16 2.3TheSpectrumofaGraph......................................... 16 2.4TheExpanderMixingLemmaandApplications............................. 17 2.4.1 DeterministicErrorAmplificationforBPP........................... 18 2.5HowBigCantheSpectralGapbe?.................................... 19 3 Random Walks on Expander Graphs 21 3.1Preliminaries............................................... 21 3.2 A random walk on an expander is rapidly mixing. ........................... 21 3.3 A random walk on an expander yields a sequence of “good samples” . ............... 23 3.3.1 Application: amplifying
    [Show full text]
  • Large Minors in Expanders
    Large Minors in Expanders Julia Chuzhoy∗ Rachit Nimavaty January 26, 2019 Abstract In this paper we study expander graphs and their minors. Specifically, we attempt to answer the following question: what is the largest function f(n; α; d), such that every n-vertex α-expander with maximum vertex degree at most d contains every graph H with at most f(n; α; d) edges and vertices as a minor? Our main result is that there is some universal constant c, such that f(n; α; d) ≥ n α c c log n · d . This bound achieves a tight dependence on n: it is well known that there are bounded- degree n-vertex expanders, that do not contain any grid with Ω(n= log n) vertices and edges as a minor. The best previous result showed that f(n; α; d) ≥ Ω(n= logκ n), where κ depends on both α and d. Additionally, we provide a randomized algorithm, that, given an n-vertex α-expander with n α c maximum vertex degree at most d, and another graph H containing at most c log n · d vertices and edges, with high probability finds a model of H in G, in time poly(n) · (d/α)O(log(d/α)). We also show a simple randomized algorithm with running time poly(n; d/α), that obtains a similar result with slightly weaker dependence on n but a better dependence on d and α, namely: if G is α3n an n-vertex α-expander with maximum vertex degree at most d, and H contains at most c0d5 log2 n edges and vertices, where c0 is an absolute constant, then our algorithm with high probability finds a model of H in G.
    [Show full text]
  • Construction Algorithms for Expander Graphs
    Trinity College Trinity College Digital Repository Senior Theses and Projects Student Scholarship Spring 2014 Construction Algorithms for Expander Graphs Vlad S. Burca Trinity College, [email protected] Follow this and additional works at: https://digitalrepository.trincoll.edu/theses Part of the Algebra Commons, Other Applied Mathematics Commons, Other Computer Sciences Commons, and the Theory and Algorithms Commons Recommended Citation Burca, Vlad S., "Construction Algorithms for Expander Graphs". Senior Theses, Trinity College, Hartford, CT 2014. Trinity College Digital Repository, https://digitalrepository.trincoll.edu/theses/393 Construction Algorithms for Expander Graphs VLAD Ș. BURCĂ ’14 Adviser: Takunari Miyazaki Graphs are mathematical objects that are comprised of nodes and edges that connect them. In computer science they are used to model concepts that exhibit network behaviors, such as social networks, communication paths or computer networks. In practice, it is desired that these graphs retain two main properties: sparseness and high connectivity. This is equivalent to having relatively short distances between two nodes but with an overall small number of edges. These graphs are called expander graphs and the main motivation behind studying them is the efficient network structure that they can produce due to their properties. We are specifically interested in the study of k-regular expander graphs, which are expander graphs whose nodes are each connected to exactly k other nodes. The goal of this project is to compare explicit and random methods of generating expander graphs based on the quality of the graphs they produce. This is done by analyzing the graphs’ spectral property, which is an algebraic method of comparing expander graphs.
    [Show full text]
  • Lecture 7: Expander Graphs in Computer Science 1 Spectra of Graphs
    Great Ideas in Theoretical Computer Science Summer 2013 Lecture 7: Expander Graphs in Computer Science Lecturer: Kurt Mehlhorn & He Sun Over the past decades expanders have become one basic tool in various areas of computer science, including algorithm design, complexity theory, coding theory, and etc. Informally, expanders are regular graphs with low degree and high connectivity. We can use different ways to define expander graphs. 1. Combinatorically, expanders are highly connected graphs, and to disconnect a large part of the graph, one has to sever many edges. 2. Geometrically, every vertex set has a relatively large boundary. 3. From the Probabilistic view, expanders are graphs whose behavior is \like" ran- dom graphs. 4. Algebraically, expanders are the real-symmetric matrix whose first positive eigen- value of the Laplace operator is bounded away from zero. 1 Spectra of Graphs Definition 1. Let G = (V; E) be an undirected graph with vertex set [n] , f1; : : : ; ng. The adjacency matrix of G is an n by n matrix A given by ( 1 if i and j are adjacent A = i;j 0 otherwise If G is a multi-graph, then Ai;j is the number of edges between vertex i and vertex j. By definition, the adjacency matrix of graphs has the following properties: (1) The sum of elements in every row/column equals the degree of the corresponding vertex. (2) If G is undirected, then A is symmetric. Example. The adjacency matrix of a triangle is 0 0 1 1 1 @ 1 0 1 A 1 1 0 Given a matrix A, a vector x 6= 0 is defined to be an eigenvector of A if and only if there is a λ 2 C such that Ax = λx.
    [Show full text]
  • Properties of Expander Graphs Disclaimer 15.1 Overview 15.2 Expanders As Approximations of the Complete Graph
    Spectral Graph Theory Lecture 15 Properties of Expander Graphs Daniel A. Spielman October 26, 2015 Disclaimer These notes are not necessarily an accurate representation of what happened in class. The notes written before class say what I think I should say. I sometimes edit the notes after class to make them way what I wish I had said. There may be small mistakes, so I recommend that you check any mathematically precise statement before using it in your own work. These notes were last revised on October 25, 2015. 15.1 Overview We say that a d-regular graph is a good expander if all of its adjacency matrix eigenvalues are small. To quantify this, we set a threshold > 0, and require that each adjacency matrix eigenvalue, other than d, has absolute value at most d. This is equivalent to requiring all non-zero eigenvalues of the Laplacian to be within d of d. In this lecture, we will: 1. Recall that this condition is equivalent to saying that the graph approximates the complete graph. 2. Prove that this condition implies that the number of edges between sets of vertices in the graph is approximately the same as in a random graph. 3. Prove Tanner's Theorem: that small sets of vertices have many neighbors. 4. Derive the Alon-Boppana bound on how small can be. 15.2 Expanders as Approximations of the Complete Graph For this lecture, we define an -expander to be a d-regular graph such that jµij ≤ d for µi ≥ 2, where µ1 ≥ · · · ≥ µn are the eigenvalues of the adjacency matrix.
    [Show full text]
  • Applications of Expander Graphs in Cryptography
    Applications of Expander Graphs in Cryptography Aleksander Maricq May 16, 2014 Abstract Cryptographic hash algorithms form an important part of information secu- rity. Over time, advances in technology lead to better, more efficient attacks on these algorithms. Therefore, it is beneficial to explore either improvements on existing algorithms or novel methods of hash algorithm construction. In this paper, we explore the creation of cryptographic hash algorithms from families of expander graphs. We begin by introducing the requisite back- ground information in the subjects of graph theory and cryptography. We then define what an expander graph is, and explore properties held by this type of graph. We conclude this paper by discussing the construction of hash functions from walks on expander graphs, giving examples of expander hash functions found in literature, and covering general cryptanalytic attacks on these algorithms. Contents 1 Introduction 1 2 Fundamental Graph Theory 4 2.1 Basic Concepts . .4 2.2 Cayley Graphs . .7 3 Fundamental Cryptography 9 3.1 Hash Functions . .9 3.2 Computational Security . 11 3.3 The Merkle-Damgård transform . 14 3.4 Cryptanalysis . 16 3.4.1 Generic Attacks . 17 3.4.2 Attacks on Iterated Hash Functions . 18 3.4.3 Differential Cryptanalysis . 19 3.5 Examples of Hash Functions . 20 3.5.1 MD5 . 21 3.5.2 SHA-1 . 25 4 Expander Graphs 29 4.1 Graph Expansion . 29 4.2 Spectral Graph Theory . 33 4.3 Eigenvalue Bound and Ramanujan Graphs . 35 4.4 Expansion in Cayley Graphs . 37 4.5 Expanders and Random Graphs . 38 5 Random Walks and Expander Hashes 40 5.1 Introduction to Random Walks .
    [Show full text]
  • Expander Graph and Communication-Efficient Decentralized Optimization
    1 Expander Graph and Communication-Efficient Decentralized Optimization Yat-Tin Chow1, Wei Shi2, Tianyu Wu1 and Wotao Yin1 1Department of Mathematics, University of California, Los Angeles, CA 2 Department of Electrical & Computer Engineering, Boston University, Boston, MA Abstract—In this paper, we discuss how to design the graph Directly connecting more pairs of agents, for example, gener- topology to reduce the communication complexity of certain al- ates more communication at each iteration but also tends to gorithms for decentralized optimization. Our goal is to minimize make faster progress toward the solution. To reduce the total the total communication needed to achieve a prescribed accuracy. We discover that the so-called expander graphs are near-optimal communication for reaching a solution accuracy, therefore, we choices. must find the balance. In this work, we argue that this balance We propose three approaches to construct expander graphs is approximately reached by the so-called Ramanujan graphs, for different numbers of nodes and node degrees. Our numerical which is a type of expander graph. results show that the performance of decentralized optimization is significantly better on expander graphs than other regular graphs. B. Problem reformulation Index Terms—decentralized optimization, expander graphs, We first reformulate problem (1) to include the graph topo- Ramanujan graphs, communication efficiency. logical information. Consider an undirected graph G = (V, E) that represents the network topology, where V is the set I. INTRODUCTION of vertices and E is the set of edges. Take a symmetric A. Problem and background and doubly-stochastic mixing matrix W = We e∈E, i.e. T { } 0 Wij 1, Wij = 1 and W = W .
    [Show full text]