Skip to main content

A Tight Lower Bound for Steiner Orientation

  • Conference paper
  • First Online:
Computer Science – Theory and Applications (CSR 2018)

Part of the book series: Lecture Notes in Computer Science ((LNTCS,volume 10846))

Included in the following conference series:

Abstract

In the Steiner Orientation problem, the input is a mixed graph G (it has both directed and undirected edges) and a set of k terminal pairs \(\mathscr {T}\). The question is whether we can orient the undirected edges in a way such that there is a directed \(s\leadsto t\) path for each terminal pair \((s,t)\in \mathscr {T}\). Arkin and Hassin [DAM’02] showed that the Steiner Orientation problem is NP-complete. They also gave a polynomial time algorithm for the special case when \(k=2\).

From the viewpoint of exact algorithms, Cygan, Kortsarz and Nutov [ESA’12, SIDMA’13] designed an XP algorithm running in \(n^{O(k)}\) time for all \(k\ge 1\). Pilipczuk and Wahlström [SODA ’16] showed that the Steiner Orientation problem is W[1]-hard parameterized by k. As a byproduct of their reduction, they were able to show that under the Exponential Time Hypothesis (ETH) of Impagliazzo, Paturi and Zane [JCSS’01] the Steiner Orientation problem does not admit an \(f(k)\cdot n^{o(k/\log k)}\) algorithm for any computable function f. That is, the \(n^{O(k)}\) algorithm of Cygan et al. is almost optimal.

In this paper, we give a short and easy proof that the \(n^{O(k)}\) algorithm of Cygan et al. is asymptotically optimal, even if the input graph has genus 1. Formally, we show that the Steiner Orientation problem is W[1]-hard parameterized by the number k of terminal pairs, and, under ETH, cannot be solved in \(f(k)\cdot n^{o(k)}\) time for any function f even if the underlying undirected graph has genus 1. We give a reduction from the Grid Tiling problem which has turned out to be very useful in proving W[1]-hardness of several problems on planar graphs. As a result of our work, the main remaining open question is whether Steiner Orientation admits the “square-root phenomenon” on planar graphs (graphs with genus 0): can one obtain an algorithm running in time \(f(k)\cdot n^{O(\sqrt{k})}\) for Planar Steiner Orientation, or does the lower bound of \(f(k)\cdot n^{o(k)}\) also translate to planar graphs?

R. Chitnis—Supported by ERC grant CoG 647557 “Small Summaries for Big Data”. Part of this work was done when the author was at the Weizmann Institute of Science (and supported by Israel Science Foundation grant #897/13), and visiting Charles University in Prague, Czechia.

A. E. Feldmann—Supported by project CE-ITI (GAČR no. P202/12/G061) of the Czech Science Foundation.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 84.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 109.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Notes

  1. 1.

    Or even an FPT algorithm.

  2. 2.

    The k-Clique problem asks whether there is a clique of size \(\ge k\).

  3. 3.

    This is the unique vertex which has incoming edge from \(b_{1}^{1}\) and an outgoing edge to \(g_{1}^{1}\).

  4. 4.

    Sometimes we also abuse notation slightly and use \(A_i\) to denote this set of vertices.

References

  1. Arkin, E.M., Hassin, R.: A note on orientations of mixed graphs. Discret. Appl. Math. 116(3), 271–278 (2002)

    Article  MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  2. Chen, J., Huang, X., Kanj, I.A., Xia, G.: Strong computational lower bounds via parameterized complexity. J. Comput. Syst. Sci. 72(8), 1346–1367 (2006)

    Article  MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  3. Chitnis, R., Esfandiari, H., Hajiaghayi, M.T., Khandekar, R., Kortsarz, G., Seddighin, S.: A tight algorithm for strongly connected steiner subgraph on two terminals with demands. Algorithmica 77(4), 1216–1239 (2017)

    Article  MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  4. Chitnis, R., Feldmann, A.E., Manurangsi, P.: Parameterized approximation algorithms for directed Steiner network problems. CoRR, abs/1707.06499 (2017)

    Google Scholar 

  5. Chitnis, R.H., Hajiaghayi, M., Marx, D.: Tight bounds for planar strongly connected Steiner subgraph with fixed number of terminals (and extensions). In: SODA, pp. 1782–1801 (2014)

    Google Scholar 

  6. Cygan, M., Fomin, F.V., Kowalik, Ł., Lokshtanov, D., Marx, D., Pilipczuk, M., Pilipczuk, M., Saurabh, S.: Parameterized Algorithms. Springer, Cham (2015). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-21275-3

    Book  MATH  Google Scholar 

  7. Cygan, M., Kortsarz, G., Nutov, Z.: Steiner forest orientation problems. SIAM J. Discret. Math. 27(3), 1503–1513 (2013)

    Article  MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  8. Hassin, R., Megiddo, N.: On orientations and shortest paths. Linear Algebra Appl. 114, 589–602 (1989). Special Issue Dedicated to Alan J. Hoffman

    Article  MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  9. Impagliazzo, R., Paturi, R.: On the complexity of k-SAT. J. Comput. Syst. Sci. 62(2), 367–375 (2001)

    Article  MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  10. Impagliazzo, R., Paturi, R., Zane, F.: Which problems have strongly exponential complexity? J. Comput. Syst. Sci. 63(4), 512–530 (2001)

    Article  MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  11. Marx, D.: On the optimality of planar and geometric approximation schemes. In: FOCS, pp. 338–348 (2007)

    Google Scholar 

  12. Marx, D.: Can you beat treewidth? Theory Comput. 6(1), 85–112 (2010)

    Article  MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  13. Marx, D.: A tight lower bound for planar multiway cut with fixed number of terminals. In: Czumaj, A., Mehlhorn, K., Pitts, A., Wattenhofer, R. (eds.) ICALP 2012. LNCS, vol. 7391, pp. 677–688. Springer, Heidelberg (2012). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-31594-7_57

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  14. Marx, D., Pilipczuk, M.: Everything you always wanted to know about the parameterized complexity of Subgraph Isomorphism (but were afraid to ask). In: STACS, pp. 542–553 (2014)

    Google Scholar 

  15. Marx, D., Pilipczuk, M.: Optimal parameterized algorithms for planar facility location problems using voronoi diagrams. In: Bansal, N., Finocchi, I. (eds.) ESA 2015. LNCS, vol. 9294, pp. 865–877. Springer, Heidelberg (2015). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-662-48350-3_72

    Chapter  MATH  Google Scholar 

  16. Pilipczuk, M., Wahlström, M.: Directed multicut is W[1]-hard, even for four terminal pairs. CoRR, abs/1507.02178 (2015)

    Google Scholar 

  17. Pilipczuk, M., Wahlström, M.: Directed multicut is W[1]-hard, even for four terminal pairs. In: SODA, pp. 1167–1178 (2016)

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Rajesh Chitnis .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2018 Springer International Publishing AG, part of Springer Nature

About this paper

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this paper

Chitnis, R., Feldmann, A.E. (2018). A Tight Lower Bound for Steiner Orientation. In: Fomin, F., Podolskii, V. (eds) Computer Science – Theory and Applications. CSR 2018. Lecture Notes in Computer Science(), vol 10846. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-90530-3_7

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-90530-3_7

  • Published:

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Cham

  • Print ISBN: 978-3-319-90529-7

  • Online ISBN: 978-3-319-90530-3

  • eBook Packages: Computer ScienceComputer Science (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics