Exploring Subexponential Parameterized Complexity of Completion Problems

Abstract

Let F be a family of graphs. In the F-Completion problem, we are given a graph G and an integer k as input, and asked whether at most k edges can be added to G so that the resulting graph does not contain a graph from F as an induced subgraph. It appeared recently that special cases of F-Completion, the problem of completing into a chordal graph known as Minimum Fill-in, corresponding to the case of F=\C4,C5,C6,…\, and the problem of completing into a split graph, i.e., the case of F=\C4, 2K2, C5\, are solvable in parameterized subexponential time 2O(kk)nO(1). The exploration of this phenomenon is the main motivation for our research on F-Completion. In this paper we prove that completions into several well studied classes of graphs without long induced cycles also admit parameterized subexponential time algorithms by showing that: - The problem Trivially Perfect Completion is solvable in parameterized subexponential time 2O(kk)nO(1), that is F-Completion for F =\C4, P4\, a cycle and a path on four vertices. - The problems known in the literature as Pseudosplit Completion, the case where F = \2K2, C4\, and Threshold Completion, where F = \2K2, P4, C4\, are also solvable in time 2O(kk) nO(1). We complement our algorithms for F-Completion with the following lower bounds: - For F = \2K2\, F = \C4\, F = \P4\, and F = \2K2, P4\, F-Completion cannot be solved in time 2o(k) nO(1) unless the Exponential Time Hypothesis (ETH) fails. Our upper and lower bounds provide a complete picture of the subexponential parameterized complexity of F-Completion problems for F⊂eq\2K2, C4, P4\.

0

Turn this paper into a lesson

ArcXiv compiles a structured reading guide from this paper's metadata: plain-English importance, contributions, prerequisite concepts, which sections to read first, flashcards, and a quiz. Grounded in the abstract, never invented.

Discussion (0)

Sign in to join the discussion.

Loading comments…