Induced subgraphs and tree decompositions XII. Grid theorem for pinched graphs

Abstract

Given an integer c∈ N, we say a graph G is c-pinched if G does not contain an induced subgraph consisting of c cycles, all going through a single common vertex and otherwise pairwise disjoint and with no edges between them. What can be said about the structure of c-pinched graphs? For instance, 1-pinched graphs are exactly graphs of treewidth 1. However, bounded treewidth for c>1 is immediately seen to be a false hope because complete graphs, complete bipartite graphs, subdivided walls and line graphs of subdivided walls are all examples of 2-pinched graphs with arbitrarily large treewidth. There is even a fifth obstruction for larger values of c, discovered by Pohoata and later independently by Davies, consisting of 3-pinched graphs with unbounded treewidth and no large induced subgraph isomorphic to any of the first four obstructions. We fuse the above five examples into a grid-type theorem fully describing the unavoidable induced subgraphs of pinched graphs with large treewidth. More precisely, we prove that for every integer c∈ N, a c-pinched graph G has large treewidth if and only if G contains one of the following as an induced subgraph: a large complete graph, a large complete bipartite graph, a subdivision of a large wall, the line-graph of a subdivision of a large wall, or a large graph from the Pohoata-Davies construction. Our main result also generalizes to an extension of pinched graphs where the lengths of excluded cycles are lower-bounded.

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…