980 research outputs found

    Complexity of Token Swapping and its Variants

    Full text link
    In the Token Swapping problem we are given a graph with a token placed on each vertex. Each token has exactly one destination vertex, and we try to move all the tokens to their destinations, using the minimum number of swaps, i.e., operations of exchanging the tokens on two adjacent vertices. As the main result of this paper, we show that Token Swapping is W[1]W[1]-hard parameterized by the length kk of a shortest sequence of swaps. In fact, we prove that, for any computable function ff, it cannot be solved in time f(k)no(k/logk)f(k)n^{o(k / \log k)} where nn is the number of vertices of the input graph, unless the ETH fails. This lower bound almost matches the trivial nO(k)n^{O(k)}-time algorithm. We also consider two generalizations of the Token Swapping, namely Colored Token Swapping (where the tokens have different colors and tokens of the same color are indistinguishable), and Subset Token Swapping (where each token has a set of possible destinations). To complement the hardness result, we prove that even the most general variant, Subset Token Swapping, is FPT in nowhere-dense graph classes. Finally, we consider the complexities of all three problems in very restricted classes of graphs: graphs of bounded treewidth and diameter, stars, cliques, and paths, trying to identify the borderlines between polynomial and NP-hard cases.Comment: 23 pages, 7 Figure

    The Parameterized Complexity of Finding a 2-Sphere in a Simplicial Complex

    Get PDF
    We consider the problem of finding a subcomplex K\u27 of a simplicial complex K such that K\u27 is homeomorphic to the 2-dimensional sphere, S^2. We study two variants of this problem. The first asks if there exists such a K\u27 with at most k triangles, and we show that this variant is W[1]-hard and, assuming ETH, admits no O(n^(o(sqrt(k)))) time algorithm. We also give an algorithm that is tight with regards to this lower bound. The second problem is the dual of the first, and asks if K\u27 can be found by removing at most k triangles from K. This variant has an immediate O(3^k poly(|K|)) time algorithm, and we show that it admits a polynomial kernelization to O(k^2) triangles, as well as a polynomial compression to a weighted version with bit-size O(k log k)

    Everything you always wanted to know about the parameterized complexity of Subgraph Isomorphism (but were afraid to ask)

    Get PDF
    Given two graphs H and G, the Subgraph Isomorphism problem asks if H is isomorphic to a subgraph of G. While NP-hard in general, algorithms exist for various parameterized versions of the problem. However, the literature contains very little guidance on which combinations of parameters can or cannot be exploited algorithmically. Our goal is to systematically investigate the possible parameterized algorithms that can exist for Subgraph Isomorphism. We develop a framework involving 10 relevant parameters for each of H and G (such as treewidth, pathwidth, genus, maximum degree, number of vertices, number of components, etc.), and ask if an algorithm with running time f1_(p_1,p_2,...,p_l).n^f_2(p_(l+1),...,p_k) exists, where each of p_1,...,p_k is one of the 10 parameters depending only on H or G. We show that all the questions arising in this framework are answered by a set of 11 maximal positive results (algorithms) and a set of 17 maximal negative results (hardness proofs); some of these results already appear in the literature, while others are new in this paper. On the algorithmic side, our study reveals for example that an unexpected combination of bounded degree, genus, and feedback vertex set number of G gives rise to a highly nontrivial algorithm for Subgraph Isomorphism. On the hardness side, we present W[1]-hardness proofs under extremely restricted conditions, such as when H is a bounded-degree tree of constant pathwidth and G is a planar graph of bounded pathwidth
    corecore