Linear kernels for edge deletion problems to immersion-closed graph classes
September 25, 2016 Β· Declared Dead Β· π International Colloquium on Automata, Languages and Programming
"No code URL or promise found in abstract"
Evidence collected by the PWNC Scanner
Authors
Archontia C. Giannopoulou, MichaΕ Pilipczuk, Dimitrios M. Thilikos, Jean-Florent Raymond, Marcin Wrochna
arXiv ID
1609.07780
Category
cs.DS: Data Structures & Algorithms
Cross-listed
cs.DM
Citations
31
Venue
International Colloquium on Automata, Languages and Programming
Last Checked
3 months ago
Abstract
Suppose $\mathcal{F}$ is a finite family of graphs. We consider the following meta-problem, called $\mathcal{F}$-Immersion Deletion: given a graph $G$ and integer $k$, decide whether the deletion of at most $k$ edges of $G$ can result in a graph that does not contain any graph from $\mathcal{F}$ as an immersion. This problem is a close relative of the $\mathcal{F}$-Minor Deletion problem studied by Fomin et al. [FOCS 2012], where one deletes vertices in order to remove all minor models of graphs from $\mathcal{F}$. We prove that whenever all graphs from $\mathcal{F}$ are connected and at least one graph of $\mathcal{F}$ is planar and subcubic, then the $\mathcal{F}$-Immersion Deletion problem admits: a constant-factor approximation algorithm running in time $O(m^3 \cdot n^3 \cdot \log m)$; a linear kernel that can be computed in time $O(m^4 \cdot n^3 \cdot \log m)$; and a $O(2^{O(k)} + m^4 \cdot n^3 \cdot \log m)$-time fixed-parameter algorithm, where $n,m$ count the vertices and edges of the input graph. These results mirror the findings of Fomin et al. [FOCS 2012], who obtained a similar set of algorithmic results for $\mathcal{F}$-Minor Deletion, under the assumption that at least one graph from $\mathcal{F}$ is planar. An important difference is that we are able to obtain a linear kernel for $\mathcal{F}$-Immersion Deletion, while the exponent of the kernel of Fomin et al. for $\mathcal{F}$-Minor Deletion depends heavily on the family $\mathcal{F}$. In fact, this dependence is unavoidable under plausible complexity assumptions, as proven by Giannopoulou et al. [ICALP 2015]. This reveals that the kernelization complexity of $\mathcal{F}$-Immersion Deletion is quite different than that of $\mathcal{F}$-Minor Deletion.
Community Contributions
Found the code? Know the venue? Think something is wrong? Let us know!
π Similar Papers
In the same crypt β Data Structures & Algorithms
π
π
The Cartographer
R.I.P.
π»
Ghosted
Route Planning in Transportation Networks
R.I.P.
π»
Ghosted
Near-linear time approximation algorithms for optimal transport via Sinkhorn iteration
R.I.P.
π»
Ghosted
Hierarchical Clustering: Objective Functions and Algorithms
R.I.P.
π»
Ghosted
Graph Isomorphism in Quasipolynomial Time
π
π
The Cartographer
Simulation optimization: A review of algorithms and applications
Died the same way β π» Ghosted
R.I.P.
π»
Ghosted
Federated Learning: Strategies for Improving Communication Efficiency
R.I.P.
π»
Ghosted
In-Datacenter Performance Analysis of a Tensor Processing Unit
R.I.P.
π»
Ghosted
Deep Convolutional Neural Networks for Computer-Aided Detection: CNN Architectures, Dataset Characteristics and Transfer Learning
R.I.P.
π»
Ghosted