Advertisement

Parameterized Vertex Deletion Problems for Hereditary Graph Classes with a Block Property

  • Édouard Bonnet
  • Nick Brettell
  • O-joung Kwon
  • Dániel Marx
Conference paper
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 9941)

Abstract

For a class of graphs \(\mathcal {P}\), the Bounded \(\mathcal {P}\)-Block Vertex Deletion problem asks, given a graph G on n vertices and positive integers k and d, whether there is a set S of at most k vertices such that each block of \(G-S\) has at most d vertices and is in \(\mathcal {P}\). We show that when \(\mathcal {P}\) satisfies a natural hereditary property and is recognizable in polynomial time, Bounded \(\mathcal {P}\)-Block Vertex Deletion can be solved in time \(2^{\mathcal {O}(k \log d)}n^{\mathcal {O}(1)}\), and this running time cannot be improved to \(2^{o(k \log d)}n^{\mathcal {O}(1)}\), in general, unless the Exponential Time Hypothesis fails. On the other hand, if \(\mathcal {P}\) consists of only complete graphs, or only \(K_1, K_2\), and cycle graphs, then Bounded \(\mathcal {P}\)-Block Vertex Deletion admits a \(c^{k}n^{\mathcal {O}(1)}\)-time algorithm for some constant c independent of d. We also show that Bounded \(\mathcal {P}\)-Block Vertex Deletion admits a kernel with \(\mathcal {O}(k^2 d^7)\) vertices.

References

  1. 1.
    Agrawal, A., Kolay, S., Lokshtanov, D., Saurabh, S.: A faster FPT algorithm and a smaller kernel for block graph vertex deletion. In: Kranakis, E., Navarro, G., Chávez, E. (eds.) LATIN 2016. LNCS, vol. 9644, pp. 1–13. Springer, Heidelberg (2016)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Cai, L.: Fixed-parameter tractability of graph modification problems for hereditary properties. Inf. Proc. Lett. 58(4), 171–176 (1996)MathSciNetCrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Drange, P.G., Dregi, M.S., Hof, P.: On the computational complexity of vertex integrity and component order connectivity. In: Ahn, H.-K., Shin, C.-S. (eds.) ISAAC 2014. LNCS, vol. 8889, pp. 285–297. Springer, Heidelberg (2014). doi: 10.1007/978-3-319-13075-0_23 Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    El-Mallah, E.S., Colbourn, C.J.: The complexity of some edge deletion problems. IEEE Trans. Circ. Syst. 35(3), 354–362 (1988)MathSciNetCrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Even, G., Naor, J., Zosin, L.: An \(8\)-approximation algorithm for the subset feedback vertex set problem. SIAM J. Comput. 30(4), 1231–1252 (2000)MathSciNetCrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Fomin, F., Lokshtanov, D., Misra, N., Saurabh, S.: Planar \(\cal F\)-deletion: approximation and optimal FPT algorithms. In: Foundations of Computer Science (FOCS), pp. 470–479 (2012)Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Hopcroft, J., Tarjan, R.: Algorithm 447: efficient algorithms for graph manipulation. Commun. ACM 16(6), 372–378 (1973)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Impagliazzo, R., Paturi, R., Zane, F.: Which problems have strongly exponential complexity? J. Comput. Syst. Sci. 63(4), 512–530 (2001)MathSciNetCrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Joret, G., Paul, C., Sau, I., Saurabh, S., Thomassé, S.: Hitting and harvesting pumpkins. SIAM J. Discrete Math. 28(3), 1363–1390 (2014)MathSciNetCrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Kim, E.J., Kwon, O.: A polynomial kernel for block graph deletion. In: Husfeldt, T., Kanj, I. (eds.) IPEC 2015. Leibniz International Proceedings in Informatics (LIPIcs), vol. 43, pp. 270–281. Schloss dagstuhl-leibniz-zentrum fuer informatik, Dagstuhl, Germany (2015)Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Kim, E.J., Langer, A., Paul, C., Reidl, F., Rossmanith, P., Sau, I., Sikdar, S.: Linear kernels and single-exponential algorithms via protrusion decompositions. In: Fomin, F.V., Freivalds, R., Kwiatkowska, M., Peleg, D. (eds.) ICALP 2013. LNCS, vol. 7965, pp. 613–624. Springer, Heidelberg (2013). doi: 10.1007/978-3-642-39206-1_52 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Kociumaka, T., Pilipczuk, M.: Faster deterministic feedback vertex set. Inf. Proc. Lett. 114(10), 556–560 (2014)MathSciNetCrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Kolay, S., Lokshtanov, D., Panolan, F., Saurabh, S.: Quick but odd growth of cacti. In: Husfeldt, T., Kanj, I. (eds.) 10th International Symposium on Parameterized and Exact Computation (IPEC 2015), pp. 258–269, no. 43. Schloss Dagstuhl-Leibniz-Zentrum fuer Informatik, Dagstuhl (2015)Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Lewis, J.M., Yannakakis, M.: The node-deletion problem for hereditary properties is NP-complete. J. Comput. Syst. Sci. 20(2), 219–230 (1980)MathSciNetCrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Misra, P., Raman, V., Ramanujan, M.S., Saurabh, S.: Parameterized algorithms for Even Cycle Transversal. In: Golumbic, M.C., Stern, M., Levy, A., Morgenstern, G. (eds.) WG 2012. LNCS, vol. 7551, pp. 172–183. Springer, Heidelberg (2012)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Reed, B.A., Smith, K., Vetta, A.: Finding odd cycle transversals. Oper. Res. Lett. 32(4), 299–301 (2004)MathSciNetCrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Thomassé, S.: A quadratic kernel for feedback vertex set. In: Proceedings of the Twentieth Annual ACM-SIAM Symposium on Discrete Algorithms, SODA 2009, New York, NY, USA, 4–6 January 2009, pp. 115–119 (2009)Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    Thomassé, S.: A \(4k^2\) kernel for feedback vertex set. ACM Trans. Algorithms 6(2), 32 (2010)MathSciNetCrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Wahlström, M.: Half-integrality, LP-branching and FPT algorithms. In: Proceedings of the Twenty-Fifth Annual ACM-SIAM Symposium on Discrete Algorithms, pp. 1762–1781. SIAM (2014)Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag GmbH Germany 2016

Authors and Affiliations

  • Édouard Bonnet
    • 1
  • Nick Brettell
    • 1
  • O-joung Kwon
    • 1
  • Dániel Marx
    • 1
  1. 1.Institute for Computer Science and ControlHungarian Academy of Sciences (MTA SZTAKI)BudapestHungary

Personalised recommendations