Spanning Paths and Cycles: Structural Limitations of the Irrelevant Vertex Technique

Abstract

The Irrelevant Vertex Technique is one of the cornerstones of algorithmic graph theory, underlying Robertson and Seymour's algorithm for Disjoint Paths and much of the algorithmic Graph Minors theory. We show that, in the setting of spanning routing, this technique exhibits an exact combinatorial limitation. Unlike classical routing problems, spanning routing is not governed by the number of distinguished vertices but by the way they are distributed throughout the graph. The input is a triple (G,R,T) where (G,R) is an annotated graph and T is a set of terminal pairs. The goal is to determine if G contains a family of internally disjoint paths connecting the pairs in T such that the union of the paths spans the set R. We identify a new structural parameter of annotated graphs, called depth2, that measures precisely this phenomenon. Our main result is a complete combinatorial dichotomy: for every red-minor-closed class of annotated graphs, the Irrelevant Vertex Technique applies to Spanning Disjoint Paths if and only if the class has bounded depth2. Thus depth2 forms the exact structural boundary between classes where the Robertson-Seymour paradigm survives and those where it breaks down. Our proof combines a new local structure theorem for annotated graphs of bounded depth2 with a spanning analogue of the celebrated Vital Linkage Theorem. The resulting algorithm solves Spanning Disjoint Paths in time 22poly(k+d)· n2 where d is the depth2 of the input instance. We provide matching lower bounds showing that beyond bounded depth2 no irrelevant-vertex rule can exist, even on planar graphs. In particular, depth2 is the exact combinatorial barrier for the Irrelevant Vertex Technique under spanning constraints.

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…