Papers
Topics
Authors
Recent
Gemini 2.5 Flash
Gemini 2.5 Flash
194 tokens/sec
GPT-4o
7 tokens/sec
Gemini 2.5 Pro Pro
46 tokens/sec
o3 Pro
4 tokens/sec
GPT-4.1 Pro
38 tokens/sec
DeepSeek R1 via Azure Pro
28 tokens/sec
2000 character limit reached

The Complexity of Geodesic Spanners (2303.02997v2)

Published 6 Mar 2023 in cs.CG and cs.DS

Abstract: A geometric $t$-spanner for a set $S$ of $n$ point sites is an edge-weighted graph for which the (weighted) distance between any two sites $p,q \in S$ is at most $t$ times the original distance between $p$ and~$q$. We study geometric $t$-spanners for point sets in a constrained two-dimensional environment $P$. In such cases, the edges of the spanner may have non-constant complexity. Hence, we introduce a novel spanner property: the spanner complexity, that is, the total complexity of all edges in the spanner. Let $S$ be a set of $n$ point sites in a simple polygon $P$ with $m$ vertices. We present an algorithm to construct, for any fixed integer $k \geq 1$, a $2\sqrt{2}k$-spanner with complexity $O(mn{1/k} + n\log2 n)$ in $O(n\log2n + m\log n + K)$ time, where $K$ denotes the output complexity. When we relax the restriction that the edges in the spanner are shortest paths, such that an edge in the spanner can be any path between two sites, we obtain for any constant $\varepsilon \in (0,2k)$ a relaxed geodesic $(2k + \varepsilon)$-spanner of the same complexity, where the constant is dependent on $\varepsilon$. When we consider sites in a polygonal domain $P$ with holes, we can construct a relaxed geodesic $6k$-spanner of complexity $O(mn{1/k} + n\log2 n)$ in $O((n+m)\log2n\log m+ K)$ time. Additionally, for any constant $\varepsilon \in (0,1)$ and integer constant $t \geq 2$, we show a lower bound for the complexity of any $(t-\varepsilon)$-spanner of $\Omega(mn{1/(t-1)} + n)$.

Definition Search Book Streamline Icon: https://streamlinehq.com
References (40)
  1. Geometric spanners for points inside a polygonal domain. In 31st International Symposium on Computational Geometry, SoCG, volume 34 of LIPIcs, pages 186–197, 2015.
  2. Geometric spanners for weighted point sets. Algorithmica, 61(1):207–225, 2011.
  3. Geodesic spanners for points on a polyhedral terrain. SIAM J. Comput., 48(6):1796–1810, 2019.
  4. Euclidean spanners: short, thin, and lanky. In In Twenty-Seventh Annual ACM Symposium on Theory of Computing, STOC, Proceedings, pages 489–498. ACM, 1995.
  5. The LCA problem revisited. In In Theoretical Informatics, 4th Latin American Symposium, LATIN, Proceedings, volume 1776 of Lecture Notes in Computer Science, pages 88–94. Springer, 2000.
  6. Euclidean Steiner spanners: Light and sparse. SIAM Journal on Discrete Mathematics, 36(3):2411–2444, 2022.
  7. Polygon cutting: Revisited. In Discrete and Computational Geometry, Japanese Conference, JCDCG, Revised Papers, volume 1763 of LNCS, pages 81–92, 1998.
  8. On plane constrained bounded-degree spanners. Algorithmica, 81(4):1392–1415, 2019.
  9. Constructing plane spanners of bounded degree and low weight. Algorithmica, 42(3-4):249–264, 2005.
  10. On the stretch factor of the constrained Delaunay triangulation. In In the 3rd International Symposium on Voronoi Diagrams in Science and Engineering, ISVD, pages 25–31. IEEE Computer Society, 2006.
  11. Prosenjit Bose and Michiel H. M. Smid. On plane geometric spanners: A survey and open problems. Comput. Geom., 46(7):818–830, 2013.
  12. Prosenjit Bose and André van Renssen. Spanning properties of Yao and ΘΘ\Thetaroman_Θ-graphs in the presence of constraints. Int. J. Comput. Geom. Appl., 29(2):95–120, 2019.
  13. On hierarchical routing in doubling metrics. ACM Trans. Algorithms, 12(4):55:1–55:22, 2016.
  14. New doubling spanners: Better and simpler. SIAM J. Comput., 44(1):37–53, 2015.
  15. Bernard Chazelle. Triangulating a simple polygon in linear time. Discret. Comput. Geom., 6:485–524, 1991.
  16. Kenneth L. Clarkson. Approximation algorithms for shortest path motion planning. In In the 19th Annual ACM Symposium on Theory of Computing, STOC, pages 56–65. ACM, 1987.
  17. Gautam Das. The visibility graph contains a bounded-degree spanner. In In the 9th Canadian Conference on Computational Geometry, CCCG, 1997.
  18. Computational geometry: Algorithms and applications, 3rd Edition. Springer, 2008. URL: https://www.worldcat.org/oclc/227584184.
  19. The complexity of geodesic spanners. In proc. 39th International Symposium on Computational Geometry, SoCG, volume 258 of LIPIcs, pages 16:1–16:16. Schloss Dagstuhl - Leibniz-Zentrum für Informatik, 2023.
  20. Shallow-low-light trees, and tight lower bounds for Euclidean spanners. In 49th Annual IEEE Symposium on Foundations of Computer Science, FOCS, pages 519–528, 2008.
  21. Optimal Euclidean spanners: Really short, thin, and lanky. J. ACM, 62(5):35:1–35:45, 2015.
  22. Subir Kumar Ghosh. Computing the visibility polygon from a convex set and related problems. J. Algorithms, 12(1):75–95, 1991.
  23. An optimal dynamic spanner for doubling metric spaces. In 16th Annual European Symposium on Algorithms, ESA, volume 5193 of Lecture Notes in Computer Science, pages 478–489, 2008.
  24. Optimal shortest path queries in a simple polygon. J. Comput. Syst. Sci., 39(2):126–152, 1989.
  25. Linear-time algorithms for visibility and shortest path problems inside triangulated simple polygons. Algorithmica, 2:209–233, 1987.
  26. Fast construction of nets in low-dimensional metrics and their applications. SIAM J. Comput., 35(5):1148–1184, 2006.
  27. Computing minimum length paths of a given homotopy class. Comput. Geom., 4:63–97, 1994.
  28. An optimal algorithm for Euclidean shortest paths in the plane. SIAM J. Comput., 28(6):2215–2256, 1999.
  29. David G. Kirkpatrick. Optimal search in planar subdivisions. SIAM J. Comput., 12(1):28–35, 1983.
  30. Truly optimal Euclidean spanners. In 60th IEEE Annual Symposium on Foundations of Computer Science, FOCS, pages 1078–1100. IEEE Computer Society, 2019.
  31. Efficient algorithms for constructing fault-tolerant geometric spanners. In In the 13th Annual ACM Symposium on the Theory of Computing, STOC, Proceedings, pages 186–195. ACM, 1998.
  32. A separator theorem for planar graphs. SIAM Journal on Applied Mathematics, 36(2):177–189, 1979.
  33. Joseph S. B. Mitchell and Wolfgang Mulzer. Proximity algorithms. In Handbook of Discrete and Computational Geometry (3rd Edition), chapter 32, pages 849–874. Chapman & Hall/CRC, 2017.
  34. Computing a shortest k-link path in a polygon. In 33rd Annual Symposium on Foundations of Computer Science, FOCS, pages 573–582. IEEE Computer Society, 1992.
  35. Minimum-link paths among obstacles in the plane. Algorithmica, 8(5&6):431–459, 1992.
  36. Giri Narasimhan and Michiel H. M. Smid. Geometric Spanner Networks. Cambridge University Press, 2007.
  37. Subhash Suri. A linear time algorithm for minimum link paths inside a simple polygon. Computer Vision, Graphics, and Image Processing, 35(1):99–110, 1986.
  38. Mikkel Thorup. Compact oracles for reachability and approximate distances in planar digraphs. J. ACM, 51(6):993–1024, 2004.
  39. Mikkel Thorup. Compact oracles for approximate distances around obstacles in the plane. In In the 15th Annual European Symposium, ESA, Proceedings, volume 4698 of Lecture Notes in Computer Science, pages 383–394. Springer, 2007.
  40. Haitao Wang. A new algorithm for Euclidean shortest paths in the plane. In 53rd Annual ACM SIGACT Symposium on Theory of Computing, STOC, pages 975–988. ACM, 2021.
Citations (2)

Summary

We haven't generated a summary for this paper yet.

X Twitter Logo Streamline Icon: https://streamlinehq.com