Bounded diameter tree-decompositions

Abstract

When does a graph admit a tree-decomposition in which every bag has small diameter? For finite graphs, this is a property of interest in algorithmic graph theory, where it is called having bounded ``tree-length''. We will show that this is equivalent to being ``boundedly quasi-isometric to a tree'', which for infinite graphs is a much-studied property from metric geometry. One object of this paper is to tie these two areas together. We will prove that there is a tree-decomposition in which each bag has small diameter, if and only if there is a map φ from V(G) into the vertex set of a tree T, such that for all u,v∈ V(G), the distances dG(u,v), dT(φ(u),φ(v)) differ by at most a constant. A ``geodesic loaded cycle'' in G is a pair (C,F), where C is a cycle of G and F⊂eq E(C), such that for every pair u,v of vertices of C, one of the paths of C between u,v contains at most dG(u,v) F-edges, where dG(u,v) is the distance between u,v in G. We will show that a graph G admits a tree-decomposition in which every bag has small diameter, if and only if |F| is small for every geodesic loaded cycle (C,F). Our proof is an extension of an algorithm to approximate tree-length in finite graphs by Dourisboure and Gavoille. In metric geometry, there is a similar theorem that characterizes when a graph is quasi-isometric to a tree, ``Manning's bottleneck criterion''. The goal of this paper is to tie all these concepts together, and add a few more related ideas. For instance, we prove a conjecture of Rose McCarty, that G admits a tree-decomposition in which every bag has small diameter, if and only if for all vertices u,v,w of G, some ball of small radius meets every path joining two of u,v,w.

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…