Papers
Topics
Authors
Recent
Search
2000 character limit reached

Spanners in Planar Domains via Steiner Spanners and non-Steiner Tree Covers

Published 7 Apr 2024 in cs.CG and cs.DS | (2404.05045v1)

Abstract: We study spanners in planar domains, including polygonal domains, polyhedral terrain, and planar metrics. Previous work showed that for any constant ϵ(0,1)\epsilon\in (0,1), one could construct a (2+ϵ)(2+\epsilon)-spanner with O(nlog(n))O(n\log(n)) edges (SICOMP 2019), and there is a lower bound of Ω(n<sup>2)\Omega(n<sup>2) edges for any (2ϵ)(2-\epsilon)-spanner (SoCG 2015). The main open question is whether a linear number of edges suffices and the stretch can be reduced to $2$. We resolve this problem by showing that for stretch $2$, one needs Ω(nlogn)\Omega(n\log n) edges, and for stretch 2+ϵ2+\epsilon for any fixed ϵ(0,1)\epsilon \in (0,1), O(n)O(n) edges are sufficient. Our lower bound is the first super-linear lower bound for stretch $2$. En route to achieve our result, we introduce the problem of constructing non-Steiner tree covers for metrics, which is a natural variant of the well-known Steiner point removal problem for trees (SODA 2001). Given a tree and a set of terminals in the tree, our goal is to construct a collection of a small number of dominating trees such that for every two points, at least one tree in the collection preserves their distance within a small stretch factor. Here, we identify an unexpected threshold phenomenon around $2$ where a sharp transition from nn trees to Θ(logn)\Theta(\log n) trees and then to O(1)O(1) trees happens. Specifically, (i) for stretch 2ϵ 2-\epsilon, one needs Ω(n)\Omega(n) trees; (ii) for stretch $2$, Θ(logn)\Theta(\log n) tree is necessary and sufficient; and (iii) for stretch 2+ϵ2+\epsilon, a constant number of trees suffice. Furthermore, our lower bound technique for the non-Steiner tree covers of stretch $2$ has further applications in proving lower bounds for two related constructions in tree metrics: reliable spanners and locality-sensitive orderings. Our lower bound for locality-sensitive orderings matches the best upper bound (STOC 2022).

Citations (1)

Summary

No one has generated a summary of this paper yet.

Paper to Video (Beta)

No one has generated a video about this paper yet.

Whiteboard

No one has generated a whiteboard explanation for this paper yet.

Open Problems

We haven't generated a list of open problems mentioned in this paper yet.

Continue Learning

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