Papers
Topics
Authors
Recent
Detailed Answer
Quick Answer
Concise responses based on abstracts only
Detailed Answer
Well-researched responses based on abstracts and relevant paper content.
Custom Instructions Pro
Preferences or requirements that you'd like Emergent Mind to consider when generating responses
Gemini 2.5 Flash
Gemini 2.5 Flash 28 tok/s
Gemini 2.5 Pro 40 tok/s Pro
GPT-5 Medium 16 tok/s Pro
GPT-5 High 13 tok/s Pro
GPT-4o 103 tok/s Pro
Kimi K2 197 tok/s Pro
GPT OSS 120B 471 tok/s Pro
Claude Sonnet 4 38 tok/s Pro
2000 character limit reached

Dynamic programming on bipartite tree decompositions (2309.07754v1)

Published 14 Sep 2023 in cs.DS

Abstract: We revisit a graph width parameter that we dub bipartite treewidth, along with its associated graph decomposition that we call bipartite tree decomposition. Bipartite treewidth can be seen as a common generalization of treewidth and the odd cycle transversal number. Intuitively, a bipartite tree decomposition is a tree decomposition whose bags induce almost bipartite graphs and whose adhesions contain at most one vertex from the bipartite part of any other bag, while the width of such decomposition measures how far the bags are from being bipartite. Adapted from a tree decomposition originally defined by Demaine, Hajiaghayi, and Kawarabayashi [SODA 2010] and explicitly defined by Tazari [Th. Comp. Sci. 2012], bipartite treewidth appears to play a crucial role for solving problems related to odd-minors, which have recently attracted considerable attention. As a first step toward a theory for solving these problems efficiently, the main goal of this paper is to develop dynamic programming techniques to solve problems on graphs of small bipartite treewidth. For such graphs, we provide a number of para-NP-completeness results, FPT-algorithms, and XP-algorithms, as well as several open problems. In particular, we show that $K_t$-Subgraph-Cover, Weighted Vertex Cover/Independent Set, Odd Cycle Transversal, and Maximum Weighted Cut are $FPT$ parameterized by bipartite treewidth. We provide the following complexity dichotomy when $H$ is a 2-connected graph, for each of $H$-Subgraph-Packing, $H$-Induced-Packing, $H$-Scattered-Packing, and $H$-Odd-Minor-Packing problem: if $H$ is bipartite, then the problem is para-NP-complete parameterized by bipartite treewidth while, if $H$ is non-bipartite, then it is solvable in XP-time. We define 1-${\cal H}$-treewidth by replacing the bipartite graph class by any class ${\cal H}$. Most of the technology developed here works for this more general parameter.

Citations (1)
List To Do Tasks Checklist Streamline Icon: https://streamlinehq.com

Collections

Sign up for free to add this paper to one or more collections.

Summary

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

Dice Question Streamline Icon: https://streamlinehq.com

Follow-Up Questions

We haven't generated follow-up questions for this paper yet.