, Volume 73, Issue 2, pp 411–440 | Cite as

Facets for Art Gallery Problems

  • Sándor P. Fekete
  • Stephan Friedrichs
  • Alexander Kröller
  • Christiane Schmidt


The Art Gallery Problem (AGP) asks for placing a minimum number of stationary guards in a polygonal region \(P\), such that all points in \(P\) are guarded. The problem is known to be NP-hard, and its inherent continuous structure (with both the set of points that need to be guarded and the set of points that can be used for guarding being uncountably infinite) makes it difficult to apply a straightforward formulation as an integer linear program. We use an iterative primal-dual relaxation approach for solving AGP instances to optimality. At each stage, a pair of LP relaxations for a finite candidate subset of primal covering and dual packing constraints and variables is considered; these correspond to possible guard positions and points that are to be guarded. Particularly useful are cutting planes for eliminating fractional solutions. We identify two classes of facets, based on Edge Cover and Set Cover (SC) inequalities. Solving the separation problem for the latter is NP-complete, but exploiting the underlying geometric structure, we show that large subclasses of fractional SC solutions cannot occur for the AGP. This allows us to separate the relevant subset of facets in polynomial time. We also characterize all facets for finite AGP relaxations with coefficients in \(\{0, 1, 2\}\). Finally, we demonstrate the practical usefulness of our approach. Our cutting plane technique yields a significant improvement in terms of speed and solution quality due to considerably reduced integrality gaps as compared to the approach by Kröller et al. (ACM J Exp Algorithm 17(1): 2.3:2.1–2.3:2.23, 2012).


Art gallery problem Geometric optimization Algorithm engineering Solving NP-hard problem instances to optimality Art gallery polytope Set cover polytope Facets Cutting planes 


  1. 1.
    Aigner, M., Ziegler, G.M.: Proofs from THE BOOK, 3rd edn. Springer, Berlin (2004)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Amit, Y., Mitchell, J.S.B., Packer, E.: Locating guards for visibility coverage of polygons. Int. J. Comput. Geom. Appl. 20(5), 601–630 (2010)MathSciNetCrossRefMATHGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Balas, E., Ng, M.: On the set covering polytope: I. All the facets with coefficients in 0, 1, 2. Math. Program. 43(1), 57–69 (1989)MathSciNetCrossRefMATHGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Borrmann, D., de Rezende, P.J., de Souza, C.C., Fekete, S.P., Friedrichs, S., Kröller, A., Nüchter, A., Schmidt, C., Tozoni, D.C.: Point guards and point clouds: Solving general art gallery problems. In: Proceedings of 29th ACM Symposium on Computational Geometry (SoCG’13), pp. 347–348 (2013). Video available at
  5. 5.
    Chvátal, V.: A combinatorial theorem in plane geometry. J. Comb. Theory B 18, 39–41 (1975)CrossRefMATHGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Couto, M.C., de Rezende, P.J., de Souza, C.C.: An exact algorithm for minimizing vertex guards on art galleries. Int. Trans. Oper. Res. 18, 425–448 (2011)MathSciNetCrossRefMATHGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Couto, M.C., de Souza, C.C., de Rezende, P.J.: An exact and efficient algorithm for the orthogonal art gallery problem. In: SIBGRAPI ’07: Proceedings of the XX Brazilian Symposium on Computer Graphics and Image Processing, pp. 87–94. IEEE Computer Society, Washington, DC, USA (2007)Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Couto, M.C., de Souza, C.C., de Rezende, P.J.: Experimental evaluation of an exact algorithm for the orthogonal art gallery problem. In: WEA’08: 7th International Workshop on Experimental Algorithms, pp. 101–113 (2008)Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Eidenbenz, S., Stamm, C., Widmayer, P.: Inapproximability results for guarding polygons and terrains. Algorithmica 31(1), 79–113 (2001)MathSciNetCrossRefMATHGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Fisk, S.: A short proof of Chvátal’s watchman theorem. J. Comb. Theory Series B 24(3), 374 (1978)MathSciNetCrossRefMATHGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Ghosh, S.K.: Approximation algorithms for art gallery problems in polygons and terrains. In: WALCOM, LNCS, vol. 5942, pp. 21–34. Springer (2010)Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Kröller, A., Baumgartner, T., Fekete, S.P., Schmidt, C.: Exact solutions and bounds for general art gallery problems. ACM J. Exp. Algorithm. 17(1), 2.3:2.1–2.3:2.23 (2012)Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Lee, D.T., Lin, A.K.: Computational complexity of art gallery problems. IEEE Trans. Inf. Theory 32(2), 276–282 (1986)MathSciNetCrossRefMATHGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    O’Rourke, J.: Art gallery theorems and algorithms. International series of monographs on computer science. Oxford University Press, New York (1987)Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Schrijver, A.: Combinatorial optimization—polyhedra and efficiency. Springer, Berlin (2003)MATHGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Tozoni, D.C., de Rezende, P.J., de Souza, C.C.: The quest for optimal solutions for the art gallery problem: a practical iterative algorithm. Optimization Online (2013).
  17. 17.
    Urrutia, J.: Art gallery and illumination problems. In: Sack, J.R., Urrutia, J. (eds.) Handbook on computational geometry, pp. 973–1026. Elsevier, Amsterdam (2000)CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media New York 2014

Authors and Affiliations

  • Sándor P. Fekete
    • 1
  • Stephan Friedrichs
    • 1
  • Alexander Kröller
    • 1
  • Christiane Schmidt
    • 1
  1. 1.Institut für Betriebssysteme und RechnerverbundTechnische Universität BraunschweigBraunschweigGermany

Personalised recommendations