6,249 research outputs found

    The complexity of dominating set reconfiguration

    Full text link
    Suppose that we are given two dominating sets DsD_s and DtD_t of a graph GG whose cardinalities are at most a given threshold kk. Then, we are asked whether there exists a sequence of dominating sets of GG between DsD_s and DtD_t such that each dominating set in the sequence is of cardinality at most kk and can be obtained from the previous one by either adding or deleting exactly one vertex. This problem is known to be PSPACE-complete in general. In this paper, we study the complexity of this decision problem from the viewpoint of graph classes. We first prove that the problem remains PSPACE-complete even for planar graphs, bounded bandwidth graphs, split graphs, and bipartite graphs. We then give a general scheme to construct linear-time algorithms and show that the problem can be solved in linear time for cographs, trees, and interval graphs. Furthermore, for these tractable cases, we can obtain a desired sequence such that the number of additions and deletions is bounded by O(n)O(n), where nn is the number of vertices in the input graph

    On the Complexity of Reconfiguration of Clique, Cluster Vertex Deletion, and Dominating Set

    Get PDF
    A graph problem P is a vertex-subset problem if feasible solutions for P consist of subsets of the vertices of a graph G. The st-connectivity problem for a vertex-subset problem P takes as input two feasible solutions S_s and S_t, and determines if there is a sequence of recon figuration steps that can be applied to transform S_s into S_t, such that each step results in a feasible solution of P of size bounded by k and each step is a vertex addition or deletion. For most NP-complete problems, this problem has been shown to be PSPACE-complete, while for some problems in P, this problem could be either in P or PSPACE-complete. However, knowing the complexity of a decision problem does not directly imply the complexity of its st-connectivity problem. Therefore, it is natural to ask whether we can fi nd a connection between the complexity of a decision problem and its st-connectivity problem when restricted to graph classes. This question motivated us to study the st-connectivity problems Clique Reconfiguration and Dominating Set Reconfiguration, whose decision problems' complexity for restricted graph classes is extensively studied, to get a better understanding of the boundary between polynomial-time solvable and intractable instances of these reconfi guration problems. Furthermore, we study the Cluster Vertex Deletion Reconfiguration problem, a problem whose decision problem is related to the Clique problem, to fi nd whether there is a connection between the complexity of this problem and the Clique Reconfiguration problem. Following are the main contributions of this thesis. First, we show that the Clique Re- configuration problem is linear-time solvable for paths, trees, bipartite graphs, chordal graphs, and cographs. Then, we prove that the Cluster Vertex Deletion Reconfiguration problem is linear-time solvable for paths and trees, and that it is NP-hard on bipartite graphs, and PSPACE-complete in general. Finally, we determine that the Dominating Set Reconfiguration problem is linear-time solvable for paths, cographs, trees, and interval graphs. Furthermore, we show that the problem is PSPACE-complete for general graphs, bipartite graphs, and split graphs

    TS-Reconfiguration of Dominating Sets in circle and circular-arc graphs

    Full text link
    We study the dominating set reconfiguration problem with the token sliding rule. It consists, given a graph G=(V,E) and two dominating sets D_s and D_t of G, in determining if there exists a sequence S= of dominating sets of G such that for any two consecutive dominating sets D_r and D_{r+1} with r<t, D_{r+1}=(D_r\ u) U v, where uv is an edge of G. In a recent paper, Bonamy et al studied this problem and raised the following questions: what is the complexity of this problem on circular arc graphs? On circle graphs? In this paper, we answer both questions by proving that the problem is polynomial on circular-arc graphs and PSPACE-complete on circle graphs.Comment: This work was supported by ANR project GrR (ANR-18-CE40-0032) and submitted to the conference WADS 202

    Distributed Reconfiguration of Maximal Independent Sets

    Get PDF
    In this paper, we investigate a distributed maximal independent set (MIS) reconfiguration problem, in which there are two maximal independent sets for which every node is given its membership status, and the nodes need to communicate with their neighbors in order to find a reconfiguration schedule that switches from the first MIS to the second. Such a schedule is a list of independent sets that is restricted by forbidding two neighbors to change their membership status at the same step. In addition, these independent sets should provide some covering guarantee. We show that obtaining an actual MIS (and even a 3-dominating set) in each intermediate step is impossible. However, we provide efficient solutions when the intermediate sets are only required to be independent and 4-dominating, which is almost always possible, as we fully characterize. Consequently, our goal is to pin down the tradeoff between the possible length of the schedule and the number of communication rounds. We prove that a constant length schedule can be found in O(MIS+R32) rounds, where MIS is the complexity of finding an MIS in a worst-case graph and R32 is the complexity of finding a (3,2)-ruling set. For bounded degree graphs, this is O(log^*n) rounds and we show that it is necessary. On the other extreme, we show that with a constant number of rounds we can find a linear length schedule

    Reconfiguring Independent Sets in Claw-Free Graphs

    Get PDF
    We present a polynomial-time algorithm that, given two independent sets in a claw-free graph GG, decides whether one can be transformed into the other by a sequence of elementary steps. Each elementary step is to remove a vertex vv from the current independent set SS and to add a new vertex ww (not in SS) such that the result is again an independent set. We also consider the more restricted model where vv and ww have to be adjacent
    • …
    corecore