Minimizing and Computing the Inverse Geodesic Length on Trees

Abstract

For any fixed measure H that maps graphs to real numbers, the MinH problem is defined as follows: given a graph G, an integer k, and a target τ, is there a set S of k vertices that can be deleted, so that H(G - S) is at most τ? In this paper, we consider the MinH problem on trees. We call H "balanced on trees" if, whenever G is a tree, there is an optimal choice of S such that the components of G-S have sizes bounded by a polynomial in n/k. We show that MinH on trees is FPT for parameter n/k, and furthermore, can be solved in subexponential time, and polynomial space, if H is additive, balanced on trees, and computable in polynomial time. A measure of interest is the Inverse Geodesic Length (IGL), which is used to gauge the connectedness of a graph. It is defined as the sum of inverse distances between every two vertices: IGL(G)=Σ\u,v\ ⊂eq V 1dG(u,v). While MinIGL is W[1]-hard for parameter treewidth, and cannot be solved in 2o(k+n+m) time, even on bipartite graphs with n vertices and m edges, the complexity status of the problem remains open on trees. We show that IGL is balanced on trees, to give a 2O((n n)5/6) time, polynomial space algorithm. The distance distribution of G is the sequence \ai\ describing the number of vertex pairs distance i apart in G: ai=|\\u, v\: dG(u, v)=i\|. We show that the distance distribution of a tree can be computed in O(n2 n) time by reduction to polynomial multiplication. We extend our result to graphs with small treewidth by showing that the first p values of the distance distribution can be computed in 2O(tw(G)) n1+ p time, and the entire distance distribution can be computed in 2O(tw(G)) n1+ time, when the diameter of G is O(n') for every '>0.

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…