The Price of Being Partial: Complexity of Partial Generalized Dominating Set on Bounded-Treewidth Graphs

Abstract

For fixed sets σ, of non-negative integers, the (σ, )-domination framework introduced by Telle [Nord. J. Comput. 1994] captures many classical graph problems. For a graph G, a (σ,)-set is a set S of vertices such that for every v∈ V(G), we have (1) if v ∈ S, then |N(v) S| ∈ σ, and (2) if v S, then |N(v) S| ∈ . We initiate the study of a natural partial variant (σ,)-MinParDomSet of the problem, in which the constraints given by σ, need not be fulfilled for all vertices, but we want to find a set of size at most k that maximizes the number of vertices that are satisfied in the sense that they satisfy (1) or (2) above. Our goal is to understand whether (σ,)-MinParDomSet can be solved in the same running time as the nonpartial version, or whether it is strictly harder. Formally, we consider nonempty finite or simple cofinite sets σ and (simple cofinite sets are of the form Z≥ c), and we try to determine the smallest constant cσ, such that there is a cσ,tw· nO(1) time algorithm for the problem if a tree decomposition of width tw is given. We obtain matching upper and lower bounds on cσ, for every such fixed σ and under the Primal Pathwidth Strong Exponential Time Hypothesis, and establish whether the partial problem is harder than the nonpartial variant. For some sets σ and , the more general (σ,)-MinParDomSet has the same complexity as the nonpartial special case (e.g., for Dominating Set), while for other choices, the partial version is significantly harder (e.g., for Perfect Code).

0

Turn this paper into a full lesson

ArcXiv compiles a staged curriculum from this paper: 8-12 lessons across beginner → advanced, synthesised section guides, visuals, flashcards, a quiz, exercises, and on-demand deep dives per section. Grounded in the abstract, never invented.

Discussion (0)

Sign in to join the discussion.

Loading comments…