Defective and Clustered Graph Colouring

Consider the following two ways to colour the vertices of a graph where the requirement that adjacent vertices get distinct colours is relaxed. A colouring has "defect" $d$ if each monochromatic component has maximum degree at most $d$. A colouring has "clustering" $c$ if each monochromatic component has at most $c$ vertices. This paper surveys research on these types of colourings, where the first priority is to minimise the number of colours, with small defect or small clustering as a secondary goal. List colouring variants are also considered. The following graph classes are studied: outerplanar graphs, planar graphs, graphs embeddable in surfaces, graphs with given maximum degree, graphs with given maximum average degree, graphs excluding a given subgraph, graphs with linear crossing number, linklessly or knotlessly embeddable graphs, graphs with given Colin de Verdi\`ere parameter, graphs with given circumference, graphs excluding a fixed graph as an immersion, graphs with given thickness, graphs with given stack- or queue-number, graphs excluding $K_t$ as a minor, graphs excluding $K_{s,t}$ as a minor, and graphs excluding an arbitrary graph $H$ as a minor. Several open problems are discussed.Comment: This is a preliminary version of a dynamic survey to be published in the Electronic Journal of Combinatoric

Graph Treewidth and Geometric Thickness Parameters

Consider a drawing of a graph $G$ in the plane such that crossing edges are coloured differently. The minimum number of colours, taken over all drawings of $G$, is the classical graph parameter "thickness". By restricting the edges to be straight, we obtain the "geometric thickness". By further restricting the vertices to be in convex position, we obtain the "book thickness". This paper studies the relationship between these parameters and treewidth. Our first main result states that for graphs of treewidth $k$, the maximum thickness and the maximum geometric thickness both equal $\lceil{k/2}\rceil$. This says that the lower bound for thickness can be matched by an upper bound, even in the more restrictive geometric setting. Our second main result states that for graphs of treewidth $k$, the maximum book thickness equals $k$ if $k \leq 2$ and equals $k+1$ if $k \geq 3$. This refutes a conjecture of Ganley and Heath [Discrete Appl. Math. 109(3):215-221, 2001]. Analogous results are proved for outerthickness, arboricity, and star-arboricity.Comment: A preliminary version of this paper appeared in the "Proceedings of the 13th International Symposium on Graph Drawing" (GD '05), Lecture Notes in Computer Science 3843:129-140, Springer, 2006. The full version was published in Discrete & Computational Geometry 37(4):641-670, 2007. That version contained a false conjecture, which is corrected on page 26 of this versio

Experimental Evaluation of Book Drawing Algorithms

A $k$-page book drawing of a graph $G=(V,E)$ consists of a linear ordering of its vertices along a spine and an assignment of each edge to one of the $k$ pages, which are half-planes bounded by the spine. In a book drawing, two edges cross if and only if they are assigned to the same page and their vertices alternate along the spine. Crossing minimization in a $k$-page book drawing is NP-hard, yet book drawings have multiple applications in visualization and beyond. Therefore several heuristic book drawing algorithms exist, but there is no broader comparative study on their relative performance. In this paper, we propose a comprehensive benchmark set of challenging graph classes for book drawing algorithms and provide an extensive experimental study of the performance of existing book drawing algorithms.Comment: Appears in the Proceedings of the 25th International Symposium on Graph Drawing and Network Visualization (GD 2017

Quantification of a distributive fluvial system; the Salt Wash DFS of the Morrison Formation, SW USA

Peer reviewedPostprin