, Volume 13, Issue 4, pp 441–454 | Cite as

Low diameter graph decompositions

  • Nathan Linial
  • Michael Saks


Adecomposition of a graphG=(V,E) is a partition of the vertex set into subsets (calledblocks). Thediameter of a decomposition is the leastd such that any two vertices belonging to the same connected component of a block are at distance ≤d. In this paper we prove (nearly best possible) statements, of the form: Anyn-vertex graph has a decomposition into a small number of blocks each having small diameter. Such decompositions provide a tool for efficiently decentralizing distributed computations. In [4] it was shown that every graph has a decomposition into at mosts(n) blocks of diameter at mosts(n) for\(s(n) = n^{O(\sqrt {\log \log n/\log n)} }\). Using a technique of Awerbuch [3] and Awerbuch and Peleg [5], we improve this result by showing that every graph has a decomposition of diameterO (logn) intoO(logn) blocks. In addition, we give a randomized distributed algorithm that produces such a decomposition and runs in timeO(log2n). The construction can be parameterized to provide decompositions that trade-off between the number of blocks and the diameter. We show that this trade-off is nearly best possible, for two families of graphs: the first consists of skeletons of certain triangulations of a simplex and the second consists of grid graphs with added diagonals. The proofs in both cases rely on basic results in combinatorial topology, Sperner's lemma for the first class and Tucker's lemma for the second.

AMS subject classification codes (1991)

05 C 12 05 C 15 05 C 35 05 C 70 05 C 85 68 Q 22, 68 R 10 


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. [1]
    Y. Afek andM. Ricklin: Sparser: A paradigm for running distributed algorithms, 6th International Workshop, on Distributed Algorithms, Haifa, Israel November 1992, Springer-Verlag. (J. of Algorithms, in press).Google Scholar
  2. [2]
    N. Alon, L. Babai, andA. Itai: A fast and simple randomized parallel algorithm for the maximal independent set problem,J. of Algorithms 7 (1986), 567–583.Google Scholar
  3. [3]
    B. Awerbuch: Complexity of network synchronization,J. ACM 32 (1985), 804–823.Google Scholar
  4. [4]
    B. Awerbuch, A. Goldberg. M. Luby, andS. Plotkin: Network decomposition and locality in distributed computation,Proc. 30th IEEE Symp. on Foundations of Comp. Sci. (1989) 364–369.Google Scholar
  5. [5]
    B. Awerbuch andD. Peleg: Sparse partitions,FOCS 31 (1990), 503–513.Google Scholar
  6. [6]
    I. F. Blake andR. C. Mullin:An Introduction to Algebraic and Combinatorial Coding Theory, Academic Press, New York, 1976.Google Scholar
  7. [7]
    B. Bollobás:Extremal graph theory, Academic Press, New York, 1987.Google Scholar
  8. [8]
    R. Cole andU. Vishkin: Deterministic coin tossing and accelerating cascades: micro and macro techniques for designing parallel algorithms,Proc. 18th ACM Sump. on Theory of Computing (1986) 206–219.Google Scholar
  9. [9]
    R. M. Freund andM. J. Todd: A constructive proof of Tucker's combinatorial lemma.J. Comb. Theory A 30 (1981) 321–325.Google Scholar
  10. [10]
    D. Gale: The game of hex and the Brouwer, fixed-point theorem,Amer. Math. Month. 86 (1979) 818–827.Google Scholar
  11. [11]
    A. V. Goldberg., S. V. Plotkin andG. E. Shannon: Parallel symmetry-breaking in sparsed graphs,SIAM J. Disc. Math. 1 (1989) 434–446.Google Scholar
  12. [12]
    C. Kaklamanis, A. R. Karlin, F. T. Leighton, V. Milenkovic, P. Raghavan, S. Rao, C., Thomborson, A. Tsantilas: Asymptotically tight bounds for computing with faulty arrays of processors,FOCS 31 (1990), 285–296.Google Scholar
  13. [13]
    N. Linial: Locality in distributed graph alorithms,SIAM Journal on Computing,21 (1992) 193–201., Preliminary version: N. Linial, Distributive algorithmsglobal solutions from local data,FOCS 28 (1987), 331–335.Google Scholar
  14. [14]
    M. Luby: A simple parallel algorithm for the maximal independent set problem,SIAM J. on Computing,15 (1986) 1036–1053.Google Scholar
  15. [15]
    E. H. Spanier:Algebraic Topology, McGraw-Hill, New York, 1966.Google Scholar
  16. [16]
    M. Todd:The computation of fixed points and applications, Lecture Notes in Econnomics and Mathematical Systems, 124, Springer-Verlag, 1976.Google Scholar
  17. [17]
    B. Weiss: A combinatorial proof of the Borsuk-Ulam antipodal point theorem,Israel J. Math. 66 (1989) 364–368.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Akadémiai Kiadó 1993

Authors and Affiliations

  • Nathan Linial
    • 1
  • Michael Saks
    • 2
    • 3
  1. 1.Department of Computer ScienceThe Hebrew UniversityJerusalemIsrael
  2. 2.Department of MathematicsRutgers UniversityNew Brunswick
  3. 3.Department of Computer Science and EngineeringUCSDLa Jolla

Personalised recommendations