skip to main content
research-article

Tight Running Time Lower Bounds for Vertex Deletion Problems

Published:14 April 2018Publication History
Skip Abstract Section

Abstract

For a graph class Π, the Π-Vertex Deletion problem has as input an undirected graph G = (V,E) and an integer k and asks whether there is a set of at most k vertices that can be deleted from G such that the resulting graph is a member of Π. By a classic result of Lewis and Yannakakis [17], Π-Vertex Deletion is NP-hard for all hereditary properties Π. We adapt the original NP-hardness construction to show that under the exponential time hypothesis (ETH), tight complexity results can be obtained. We show that Π-Vertex Deletion does not admit a 2o(n)-time algorithm where n is the number of vertices in G. We also obtain a dichotomy for running time bounds that include the number m of edges in the input graph. On the one hand, if Π contains all edgeless graphs, then there is no 2o(n+m)-time algorithm for Π-Vertex Deletion. On the other hand, if there is a fixed edgeless graph that is not contained in Π and containment in Π can be determined in 2O(n) time or 2o(m) time, then Π-Vertex Deletion can be solved in 2O(√m)+O(n) or 2o(m)+O(n) time, respectively. We also consider restrictions on the domain of the input graph G. For example, we obtain that Π-Vertex Deletion cannot be solved in 2o(√n) time if G is planar and Π is hereditary and contains and excludes infinitely many planar graphs. Finally, we provide similar results for the problem variant where the deleted vertex set has to induce a connected graph.

References

  1. N. R. Aravind, R. B. Sandeep, and N. Sivadasan. 2017. Dichotomy results on the hardness of H-free edge modification problems. SIAM Journal on Discrete Mathematics 31, 1, 542--561.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  2. Balabhaskar Balasundaram, Sergiy Butenko, and Illya V. Hicks. 2011. Clique relaxations in social network analysis: The maximum k-plex problem. Operations Research 59, 1, 133--142. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  3. Sebastian Böcker and Jan Baumbach. 2013. Cluster editing. In The Nature of Computation, Logic, Algorithms, Applications. Lecture Notes in Computer Science, Vol. 7921. Springer, 33--44.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  4. Kevin Buchin, Maike Buchin, Jaroslaw Byrka, Martin Nöllenburg, Yoshio Okamoto, Rodrigo I. Silveira, and Alexander Wolff. 2012. Drawing (complete) binary tanglegrams—hardness, approximation, fixed-parameter tractability. Algorithmica 62, 1--2, 309--332. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  5. Marek Cygan, Fedor V. Fomin, Lukasz Kowalik, Daniel Lokshtanov, Dániel Marx, Marcin Pilipczuk, Michal Pilipczuk, and Saket Saurabh. 2015. Parameterized Algorithms. Springer, Heidelberg, Germany. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  6. Pål Grønås Drange, Fedor V. Fomin, Michal Pilipczuk, and Yngve Villanger. 2015. Exploring the subexponential complexity of completion problems. ACM Transactions on Computation Theory 7, 4, 14. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  7. Michael R. Fellows, Jiong Guo, Hannes Moser, and Rolf Niedermeier. 2011. A complexity dichotomy for finding disjoint solutions of vertex deletion problems. ACM Transactions on Computation Theory 2, 2, 5. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  8. Bernold Fiedler, Atsushi Mochizuki, Gen Kurosawa, and Daisuke Saito. 2013. Dynamics and control at feedback vertex sets. I: Informative and determining nodes in regulatory networks. Journal of Dynamics and Differential Equations 25, 3, 563--604.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  9. Fedor V. Fomin and Dieter Kratsch. 2010. Exact Exponential Algorithms. Springer, Heidelberg, Germany. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  10. Michael R. Garey, David S. Johnson, and Larry J. Stockmeyer. 1976. Some simplified NP-complete graph problems. Theoretical Computer Science 1, 3, 237--267.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  11. Alexander Grigoriev and René Sitters. 2010. Connected feedback vertex set in planar graphs. In Graph-Theoretic Concepts in Computer Science. Lecture Notes in Computer Science, Vol. 5911. Springer, 143--153. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  12. Jiong Guo, Rolf Niedermeier, and Sebastian Wernicke. 2007. Parameterized complexity of vertex cover variants. Theory of Computing Systems 41, 3, 501--520. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  13. Jiong Guo and Yash Raj Shrestha. 2014. Complexity of disjoint π-vertex deletion for disconnected forbidden subgraphs. Journal of Graph Algorithms and Applications 18, 4, 603--631.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  14. Russell Impagliazzo, Ramamohan Paturi, and Francis Zane. 2001. Which problems have strongly exponential complexity?Journal of Computer and System Sciences 63, 4, 512--530. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  15. David S. Johnson and Mario Szegedy. 1999. What are the least tractable instances of max independent set? In Proceedings of the 10th Annual ACM-SIAM Symposium on Discrete Algorithms (SODA’99). 927--928. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  16. Christian Komusiewicz. 2016. Multivariate algorithmics for finding cohesive subnetworks. Algorithms 9, 1, 21.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  17. John M. Lewis and Mihalis Yannakakis. 1980. The node-deletion problem for hereditary properties is NP-complete. Journal of Computer and System Sciences 20, 2, 219--230.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  18. Kun Liu and Evimaria Terzi. 2008. Towards identity anonymization on graphs. In Proceedings of the ACM International Conference on Management of Data (SIGMOD’08). ACM, New York, NY, 93--106. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  19. Xianliang Liu, Hongliang Lu, Wei Wang, and Weili Wu. 2013. PTAS for the minimum k-path connected vertex cover problem in unit disk graphs. Journal of Global Optimization 56, 2, 449--458. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  20. Daniel Lokshtanov, Dániel Marx, and Saket Saurabh. 2011. Lower bounds based on the exponential time hypothesis. Bulletin of the EATCS 105, 41--72.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  21. Dániel Marx. 2013. The square root phenomenon in planar graphs. In Frontiers in Algorithmics and Algorithmic Aspects in Information and Management. Lecture Notes in Computer Science, Vol. 7966. Springer, 28.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  22. Neeldhara Misra, Geevarghese Philip, Venkatesh Raman, Saket Saurabh, and Somnath Sikdar. 2012. FPT algorithms for connected feedback vertex set. Journal of Combinatorial Optimization 24, 2, 131--146. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  23. André Nichterlein. 2014. Degree-Constrained Editing of Small-Degree Graphs. Ph.D. Dissertation. TU Berlin.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  24. Mihalis Yannakakis. 1981. Edge-deletion problems. SIAM Journal on Computing 10, 2 297--309.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref

Index Terms

  1. Tight Running Time Lower Bounds for Vertex Deletion Problems

        Recommendations

        Comments

        Login options

        Check if you have access through your login credentials or your institution to get full access on this article.

        Sign in

        Full Access

        • Published in

          cover image ACM Transactions on Computation Theory
          ACM Transactions on Computation Theory  Volume 10, Issue 2
          June 2018
          122 pages
          ISSN:1942-3454
          EISSN:1942-3462
          DOI:10.1145/3208321
          Issue’s Table of Contents

          Copyright © 2018 ACM

          Permission to make digital or hard copies of all or part of this work for personal or classroom use is granted without fee provided that copies are not made or distributed for profit or commercial advantage and that copies bear this notice and the full citation on the first page. Copyrights for components of this work owned by others than the author(s) must be honored. Abstracting with credit is permitted. To copy otherwise, or republish, to post on servers or to redistribute to lists, requires prior specific permission and/or a fee. Request permissions from [email protected].

          Publisher

          Association for Computing Machinery

          New York, NY, United States

          Publication History

          • Published: 14 April 2018
          • Accepted: 1 January 2018
          • Revised: 1 December 2017
          • Received: 1 August 2016
          Published in toct Volume 10, Issue 2

          Permissions

          Request permissions about this article.

          Request Permissions

          Check for updates

          Qualifiers

          • research-article
          • Research
          • Refereed

        PDF Format

        View or Download as a PDF file.

        PDF

        eReader

        View online with eReader.

        eReader