07281 Abstracts Collection -- Structure Theory and FPT Algorithmics for Graphs, Digraphs and Hypergraphs

From 8th to 13th July 2007, the Dagstuhl Seminar ``Structure Theory and FPT Algorithmics for Graphs, Digraphs and Hypergraphs\u27\u27 was held in the International Conference and Research Center (IBFI), Schloss Dagstuhl. During the seminar, several participants presented their current research, and ongoing work and open problems were discussed. Abstracts of the presentations given during the seminar as well as abstracts of seminar results and ideas are put together in this paper. The first section describes the seminar topics and goals in general. Links to extended abstracts or full papers are provided, if available

Integer Programming in Parameterized Complexity: Three Miniatures

Powerful results from the theory of integer programming have recently led to substantial advances in parameterized complexity. However, our perception is that, except for Lenstra\u27s algorithm for solving integer linear programming in fixed dimension, there is still little understanding in the parameterized complexity community of the strengths and limitations of the available tools. This is understandable: it is often difficult to infer exact runtimes or even the distinction between FPT and XP algorithms, and some knowledge is simply unwritten folklore in a different community. We wish to make a step in remedying this situation. To that end, we first provide an easy to navigate quick reference guide of integer programming algorithms from the perspective of parameterized complexity. Then, we show their applications in three case studies, obtaining FPT algorithms with runtime f(k) poly(n). We focus on: - Modeling: since the algorithmic results follow by applying existing algorithms to new models, we shift the focus from the complexity result to the modeling result, highlighting common patterns and tricks which are used. - Optimality program: after giving an FPT algorithm, we are interested in reducing the dependence on the parameter; we show which algorithms and tricks are often useful for speed-ups. - Minding the poly(n): reducing f(k) often has the unintended consequence of increasing poly(n); so we highlight the common trade-offs and show how to get the best of both worlds. Specifically, we consider graphs of bounded neighborhood diversity which are in a sense the simplest of dense graphs, and we show several FPT algorithms for Capacitated Dominating Set, Sum Coloring, and Max-q-Cut by modeling them as convex programs in fixed dimension, n-fold integer programs, bounded dual treewidth programs, and indefinite quadratic programs in fixed dimension

LIPIcs, Volume 248, ISAAC 2022, Complete Volume

LIPIcs, Volume 248, ISAAC 2022, Complete Volum

On Reconfiguration Problems: Structure and Tractability

Given an n-vertex graph G and two vertices s and t in G, determining whether there exists a path and computing the length of the shortest path between s and t are two of the most fundamental graph problems. In the classical battle of P versus NP or ``easy'' versus ``hard'', both of these problems are on the easy side. That is, they can be solved in poly(n) time, where poly is any polynomial function. But what if our input consisted of a 2^n-vertex graph? Of course, we can no longer assume G to be part of the input, as reading the input alone requires more than poly(n) time. Instead, we are given an oracle encoded using poly(n) bits and that can, in constant or poly(n) time, answer queries of the form ``is u a vertex in G'' or ``is there an edge between u and v?''. Given such an oracle and two vertices of the 2^n-vertex graph, can we still determine if there is a path or compute the length of the shortest path between s and t in poly(n) time? A slightly different, but equally insightful, formulation of the question above is as follows. Given a set S of n objects, consider the graph R(S) which contains one vertex for each set in the power set of S, 2^S, and two vertices are adjacent in R(S) whenever the size of their symmetric difference is equal to one. Clearly, this graph contains 2^n vertices and can be easily encoded in poly(n) bits using the oracle described above. It is not hard to see that there exists a path between any two vertices of R(S). Moreover, computing the length of a shortest path can be accomplished in constant time; it is equal to the size of the symmetric difference of the two underlying sets. If the vertex set of R(S) were instead restricted to a subset of 2^S, both of our problems can become NP-complete or even PSPACE-complete. Therefore, another interesting question is whether we can determine what types of ``restriction'' on the vertex set of R(S) induce such variations in the complexity of the two problems. These two seemingly artificial questions are in fact quite natural and appear in many practical and theoretical problems. In particular, these are exactly the types of questions asked under the reconfiguration framework, the main subject of this thesis. Under the reconfiguration framework, instead of finding a feasible solution to some instance I of a search problem Q, we are interested in structural and algorithmic questions related to the solution space of Q. Naturally, given some adjacency relation A defined over feasible solutions of Q, size of the symmetric difference being one such relation, the solution space can be represented using a graph R_Q(I). R_Q(I) contains one vertex for each feasible solution of Q on instance I and two vertices share an edge whenever their corresponding solutions are adjacent under A. An edge in R_Q(I) corresponds to a reconfiguration step, a walk in R_Q(I) is a sequence of such steps, a reconfiguration sequence, and R_Q(I) is a reconfiguration graph. Studying problems related to reconfiguration graphs has received considerable attention in recent literature, the most popular problem being to determine whether there exists a reconfiguration sequence between two given feasible solutions; for most NP-complete problems, this problem has been shown to be PSPACE-complete. The purpose of our work is to embark on a systematic investigation of the tractability and structural properties of such problems under both classical and parameterized complexity assumptions. Parameterized complexity is another framework which has become an essential tool for researchers in computational complexity during the last two decades or so and one of its main goals is to provide a better explanation of why some hard problems (in a classical sense) can be in fact much easier than others. Hence, we are interested in what separates the tractable instances from the intractable ones and the fixed-parameter tractable instances from the fixed-parameter intractable ones. It is clear from the generic definition of reconfiguration problems that several factors affect their complexity status. Our work aims at providing a finer classification of the complexity of reconfiguration problems with respect to some of these factors, including the definition of the adjacency relation A, structural properties of the input instance I, structural properties of the reconfiguration graph, and the length of a reconfiguration sequence. As most of these factors can be numerically quantified, we believe that the investigation of reconfiguration problems under both parameterized and classical complexity assumptions will help us further understand the boundaries between tractability and intractability. We consider reconfiguration problems related to Satisfiability, Coloring, Dominating Set, Vertex Cover, Independent Set, Feedback Vertex Set, and Odd Cycle Transversal, and provide lower bounds, polynomial-time algorithms, and fixed-parameter tractable algorithms. In doing so, we answer some of the questions left open in recent work and push the known boundaries between tractable and intractable even closer. As a byproduct of our initiating work on parameterized reconfiguration problems, we present a generic adaptation of parameterized complexity techniques which we believe can be used as a starting point for studying almost any such problem

LIPIcs, Volume 244, ESA 2022, Complete Volume

LIPIcs, Volume 244, ESA 2022, Complete Volum

LIPIcs, Volume 258, SoCG 2023, Complete Volume

LIPIcs, Volume 258, SoCG 2023, Complete Volum