4 research outputs found

    Vertex Cover and Feedback Vertex Set Above and Below Structural Guarantees

    Get PDF
    Vertex Cover parameterized by the solution size k is the quintessential fixed-parameter tractable problem. FPT algorithms are most interesting when the parameter is small. Several lower bounds on k are well-known, such as the maximum size of a matching. This has led to a line of research on parameterizations of Vertex Cover by the difference of the solution size k and a lower bound. The most prominent cases for such lower bounds for which the problem is FPT are the matching number or the optimal fractional LP solution. We investigate parameterizations by the difference between k and other graph parameters including the feedback vertex number, the degeneracy, cluster deletion number, and treewidth with the goal of finding the border of fixed-parameter tractability for said difference parameterizations. We also consider similar parameterizations of the Feedback Vertex Set problem

    Induced Matching below Guarantees: Average Paves the Way for Fixed-Parameter Tractability

    Get PDF
    In this work, we study the Induced Matching problem: Given an undirected graph GG and an integer β„“\ell, is there an induced matching MM of size at least β„“\ell? An edge subset MM is an induced matching in GG if MM is a matching such that there is no edge between two distinct edges of MM. Our work looks into the parameterized complexity of Induced Matching with respect to "below guarantee" parameterizations. We consider the parameterization uβˆ’β„“u - \ell for an upper bound uu on the size of any induced matching. For instance, any induced matching is of size at most n/2n / 2 where nn is the number of vertices, which gives us a parameter n/2βˆ’β„“n / 2 - \ell. In fact, there is a straightforward 9n/2βˆ’β„“β‹…nO(1)9^{n/2 - \ell} \cdot n^{O(1)}-time algorithm for Induced Matching [Moser and Thilikos, J. Discrete Algorithms]. Motivated by this, we ask: Is Induced Matching FPT for a parameter smaller than n/2βˆ’β„“n / 2 - \ell? In search for such parameters, we consider MM(G)βˆ’β„“MM(G) - \ell and IS(G)βˆ’β„“IS(G) - \ell, where MM(G)MM(G) is the maximum matching size and IS(G)IS(G) is the maximum independent set size of GG. We find that Induced Matching is presumably not FPT when parameterized by MM(G)βˆ’β„“MM(G) - \ell or IS(G)βˆ’β„“IS(G) - \ell. In contrast to these intractability results, we find that taking the average of the two helps -- our main result is a branching algorithm that solves Induced Matching in 49(MM(G)+IS(G))/2βˆ’β„“β‹…nO(1)49^{(MM(G) + IS(G))/ 2 - \ell} \cdot n^{O(1)} time. Our algorithm makes use of the Gallai-Edmonds decomposition to find a structure to branch on
    corecore