Kernel Bounds for Structural Parameterizations of Pathwidth

Assuming the AND-distillation conjecture, the Pathwidth problem of determining whether a given graph G has pathwidth at most k admits no polynomial kernelization with respect to k. The present work studies the existence of polynomial kernels for Pathwidth with respect to other, structural, parameters. Our main result is that, unless NP is in coNP/poly, Pathwidth admits no polynomial kernelization even when parameterized by the vertex deletion distance to a clique, by giving a cross-composition from Cutwidth. The cross-composition works also for Treewidth, improving over previous lower bounds by the present authors. For Pathwidth, our result rules out polynomial kernels with respect to the distance to various classes of polynomial-time solvable inputs, like interval or cluster graphs. This leads to the question whether there are nontrivial structural parameters for which Pathwidth does admit a polynomial kernelization. To answer this, we give a collection of graph reduction rules that are safe for Pathwidth. We analyze the success of these results and obtain polynomial kernelizations with respect to the following parameters: the size of a vertex cover of the graph, the vertex deletion distance to a graph where each connected component is a star, and the vertex deletion distance to a graph where each connected component has at most c vertices.Comment: This paper contains the proofs omitted from the extended abstract published in the proceedings of Algorithm Theory - SWAT 2012 - 13th Scandinavian Symposium and Workshops, Helsinki, Finland, July 4-6, 201

On Sparsification for Computing Treewidth

We investigate whether an n-vertex instance (G,k) of Treewidth, asking whether the graph G has treewidth at most k, can efficiently be made sparse without changing its answer. By giving a special form of OR-cross-composition, we prove that this is unlikely: if there is an e > 0 and a polynomial-time algorithm that reduces n-vertex Treewidth instances to equivalent instances, of an arbitrary problem, with O(n^{2-e}) bits, then NP is in coNP/poly and the polynomial hierarchy collapses to its third level. Our sparsification lower bound has implications for structural parameterizations of Treewidth: parameterizations by measures that do not exceed the vertex count, cannot have kernels with O(k^{2-e}) bits for any e > 0, unless NP is in coNP/poly. Motivated by the question of determining the optimal kernel size for Treewidth parameterized by vertex cover, we improve the O(k^3)-vertex kernel from Bodlaender et al. (STACS 2011) to a kernel with O(k^2) vertices. Our improved kernel is based on a novel form of treewidth-invariant set. We use the q-expansion lemma of Fomin et al. (STACS 2011) to find such sets efficiently in graphs whose vertex count is superquadratic in their vertex cover number.Comment: 21 pages. Full version of the extended abstract presented at IPEC 201

Complexity Framework for Forbidden Subgraphs

For any finite set H={H1,…,Hp} of graphs, a graph is H-subgraph-free if it does not contain any of H1,…,Hp as a subgraph. Similar to known meta-classifications for the minor and topological minor relations, we give a meta-classification for the subgraph relation. Our framework classifies if problems are "efficiently solvable" or "computationally hard" for H-subgraph-free graphs. The conditions are that the problem should be efficiently solvable on graphs of bounded treewidth, computationally hard on subcubic graphs, and computational hardness is preserved under edge subdivision. We show that all problems satisfying these conditions are efficiently solvable if H contains a disjoint union of one or more paths and subdivided claws, and are computationally hard otherwise. To illustrate the broad applicability of our framework, we study partitioning, covering and packing problems, network design problems and width parameter problems. We apply the framework to obtain a dichotomy between polynomial-time solvability and NP-completeness. For other problems we obtain a dichotomy between almost-linear-time solvability and having no subquadratic-time algorithm (conditioned on some hardness hypotheses). Along the way we unify and strengthen known results from the literature