Advertisement

Algorithmica

, Volume 50, Issue 2, pp 223–235 | Cite as

Max-Stretch Reduction for Tree Spanners

  • Kazuo Iwama
  • Andrzej Lingas
  • Masaki Okita
Article
  • 82 Downloads

Abstract

A tree t-spanner T of a graph G is a spanning tree of G whose max-stretch is t, i.e., the distance between any two vertices in T is at most t times their distance in G. If G has a tree t-spanner but not a tree (t−1)-spanner, then G is said to have max-stretch of t. In this paper, we study the Max-Stretch Reduction Problem: for an unweighted graph G=(V,E), find a set of edges not in E originally whose insertion into G can decrease the max-stretch of G. Our results are as follows: (i) For a ring graph, we give a linear-time algorithm which inserts k edges improving the max-stretch optimally. (ii) For a grid graph, we give a nearly optimal max-stretch reduction algorithm which preserves the structure of the grid. (iii) In the general case, we show that it is \(\mathcal{NP}\) -hard to decide, for a given graph G and its spanning tree of max-stretch t, whether or not one-edge insertion can decrease the max-stretch to t−1. (iv) Finally, we show that the max-stretch of an arbitrary graph on n vertices can be reduced to s′≥2 by inserting O(n/s′) edges, which can be determined in linear time, and observe that this number of edges is optimal up to a constant.

Keywords

Tree spanner Maximum stretch Graph augmentation Time complexity 

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. 1.
    Abraham, I., Gavoille, C., Malkhi, D.: Routing with improved communication-space trade-off. In: Proceedings of the 18th International Symposium on Distributed Computing (DISC), pp. 305–319, Amsterdam, October 2004 Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Althöffer, I., Das, G., Dobkin, D., Josepth, D., Soares, J.: On sparse spanners of weighted graphs. Discrete Comput. Geom. 9, 81–100 (1993) CrossRefMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Awerbuch, B., Baratz, A., Peleg, D.: Efficient broadcast and light-weight spanners. Technical Report CS92-22, 1992, The Weizmann Institute of Science, Rehovot, Israel Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Bose, P., Czyzowicz, J., Gasieniec, L., Kranakis, E., Krizanc, D., Pelc, A., Martin, M.V.: Strategies for hotlink assignments. In: Proceedings of the Eleventh Annual International Symposium on Algorithms and Computation (ISAAC 2000). Lecture Notes in Computer Science, pp. 23–34. Springer, Berlin (2000) Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Cai, L.: Np-completeness of minimum spanner problems. Discrete Appl. Math. 48, 187–194 (1994) MATHCrossRefMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Cai, L., Corneil, D.: Tree spanners. SIAM J. Discrete Math. 8(3), 359–387 (1995) MATHCrossRefMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Emek, Y., Peleg, D.: Approximating minimum max-stretch spanning trees on unweighted graphs. In: Proceedings of the 15th Symposium on Discrete Algorithms (SODA), January 2004 Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Fekete, S.P., Kremer, J.: Tree spanners in planar graphs. Discrete Appl. Math. 108, 85–103 (2001). Extended abstract version appears in the Proceedings of the 24th International Annual Workshop on Graph-Theoretic Concepts in Computer Science (WG98) MATHCrossRefMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Fraigniaud, P., Gavoille, C.: Routing in trees. In: Proceedings of the 28th International Colloquium on Automata, Languages and Programming (ICALP). Lecture Notes in Computer Science, vol. 2076, pp. 757–772. Springer, Berlin (2001) CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Giannopoulos, P., Farshi, M., Gudmundsson, J.: Finding the best shortcut in a geometric network. In: Proceedings of 21st annual ACM Symposium on Computational Geometry, June 2005 Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Nagamochi, H., Shiraki, T., Ibaraki, T.: Computing edge-connectivity augmentation function. In: Proceedings of the 8th Annual ACM-SIAM Symposium on Discrete Algorithms (SODA), pp. 649–658, 1997 Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Peleg, D.: Proximity-preserving labeling schemes and their applications. In: Proceedings of the 25th International Workshop on Graph-Theoretic Concepts in Computer Science, pp. 30–41, Ascona, Switzerland, June 1999 Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Peleg, D.: Distributed Computing: A Locality-Sensitive Approach. SIAM Monographs on Discrete Mathematics and Applications (2000) Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Peleg, D., Ullman, J.: An optimal synchronizer for the hypercube. In: Proceedings of the 6th Annual ACM Symposium on Principles of Distributed Computing (PODC), pp. 77–85, Vancouver, 1987 Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Peleg, D., Upfal, E.: A tradeoff between space and efficiency for routing tables. In: Proceedings of the 20th ACM Symposium on Theory of Computing (STOC), pp. 43–52, May 1988 Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Thorup, M., Zwick, U.: Compact routing schemes. In: Proceedings of the 13th Annual ACM Symposium on Parallel Algorithms and Architectures (SPAA), pp. 1–10, May 2001 Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    van Leeuwen, J., Tan, R.B.: Interval routing. Comput. J. 30, 298–307 (1987) MATHCrossRefMathSciNetGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media, LLC 2007

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.School of InformaticsKyoto UniversityKyotoJapan
  2. 2.Department of Computer ScienceLund UniversityLundSweden

Personalised recommendations