Solving Connected Dominating Set Faster Than 2n

  • Fedor V. Fomin
  • Fabrizio Grandoni
  • Dieter Kratsch
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 4337)


In the connected dominating set problem we are given an n-node undirected graph, and we are asked to find a minimum cardinality connected subset S of nodes such that each node not in S is adjacent to some node in S. This problem is also equivalent to finding a spanning tree with maximum number of leaves.

Despite its relevance in applications, the best known exact algorithm for the problem is the trivial Ω(2 n ) algorithm which enumerates all the subsets of nodes. This is not the case for the general (unconnected) version of the problem, for which much faster algorithms are available. Such difference is not surprising, since connectivity is a global property, and non-local problems are typically much harder to solve exactly.

In this paper we break the 2 n barrier, by presenting a simple O(1.9407 n ) algorithm for the connected dominating set problem. The algorithm makes use of new domination rules, and its analysis is based on the Measure and Conquer technique.


Exact Algorithm Reduction Rule Free Node Exponential Time Algorithm Algorithm Halt 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. 1.
    Beigel, R., Eppstein, D.: 3-coloring in time O(1.3289n). Journal of Algorithms 54, 168–204 (2005)MATHCrossRefMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Blum, J., Ding, M., Thaeler, A., Cheng, X.: Connected dominating set in sensor networks and MANETs. In: Handbook of combinatorial optimization. Supplement, vol. B, pp. 329–369. Springer, New York (2005)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Brueggemann, T., Kern, W.: An improved deterministic local search algorithm for 3-SAT. Theoretical Computer Science 329, 303–313 (2004)MATHCrossRefMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Byskov, J.M.: Enumerating maximal independent sets with applications to graph colouring. Operations Research Letters 32, 547–556 (2004)MATHCrossRefMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Dantsin, E., Goerdt, A., Hirsch, E.A., Kannan, R., Kleinberg, J., Papadimitriou, C., Raghavan, P., Schöning, U.: A deterministic \((2-2/(k+1))\sp n\) algorithm for k-SAT based on local search. Theoretical Computer Science 289, 69–83 (2002)MATHCrossRefMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Eppstein, D.: The traveling salesman problem for cubic graphs. In: Dehne, F., Sack, J.-R., Smid, M. (eds.) WADS 2003. LNCS, vol. 2748, pp. 307–318. Springer, Heidelberg (2003)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Eppstein, D.: Quasiconvex analysis of backtracking algorithms. In: Proceedings of the ACM-SIAM Symposium on Discrete Algorithms (SODA), pp. 781–790 (2004)Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Fomin, F.V., Grandoni, F., Kratsch, D.: Measure and Conquer: Domination – A Case Study. In: Caires, L., Italiano, G.F., Monteiro, L., Palamidessi, C., Yung, M. (eds.) ICALP 2005. LNCS, vol. 3580, pp. 191–203. Springer, Heidelberg (2005)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Fomin, F.V., Grandoni, F., Kratsch, D.: Some new techniques in design and analysis of exact (exponential) algorithms. Bulletin of the EATCS 87, 47–77 (2005)MATHMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Fomin, F.V., Grandoni, F., Kratsch, D.: Measure and Conquer: A simple O(20.288 n) independent set algorithm. In: Proceedings of the17th ACM-SIAM Symposium on Discrete Algorithms (SODA), pp. 18–25 (2006)Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Fomin, F.V., Kratsch, D., Todinca, I.: Exact (Exponential) algorithms for treewidth and minimum fill-in. In: Díaz, J., Karhumäki, J., Lepistö, A., Sannella, D. (eds.) ICALP 2004. LNCS, vol. 3142, pp. 568–580. Springer, Heidelberg (2004)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Fomin, F.V., Kratsch, D., Woeginger, G.J.: Exact (Exponential) algorithms for the dominating set problem. In: Hromkovič, J., Nagl, M., Westfechtel, B. (eds.) WG 2004. LNCS, vol. 3353, pp. 245–256. Springer, Heidelberg (2004)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Garey, M.R., Johnson, D.S.: Computers and Intractability. A Guide to the Theory of NP-Completeness. Freemann (1979)Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Grandoni, F.: A note on the complexity of minimum dominating set. Journal of Discrete Algorithms 4(2), 209–214 (2006)MATHCrossRefMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Guha, S., Khuller, S.: Approximation algorithms for connected dominating sets. Algorithmica 20(4), 374–387 (1998)MATHCrossRefMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Gupta, A., Kumar, A., Roughgarden, T.: Simpler and better approximation algorithms for network design. In: Proceedings of the 35th Annual ACM Symposium on Theory of Computing (STOC 2003), pp. 365–372. ACM, New York (2003)Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Håstad, J.: Clique is hard to approximate within n 1 − ε. Acta Math. 182(1), 105–142 (1999)MATHCrossRefMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Held, M., Karp, R.M.: A dynamic programming approach to sequencing problems. Journal of SIAM, 196–210 (1962)Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    Impagliazzo, R., Paturi, R., Zane, F.: Which problems have strongly exponential complexity. Journal of Computer and System Sciences 63, 512–530 (2001)MATHCrossRefMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Iwama, K.: Worst-case upper bounds for k-SAT. Bulletin of the EATCS 82, 61–71 (2004)MATHMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Mölle, D., Richter, S., Rossmanith, P.: A faster algorithm for the steiner tree problem. In: Durand, B., Thomas, W. (eds.) STACS 2006. LNCS, vol. 3884, pp. 561–570. Springer, Heidelberg (2006)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Randerath, B., Schiermeyer, I.: Exact algorithms for MINIMUM DOMINATING SET. Technical Report, zaik-469, Zentrum für Angewandte Informatik Köln (April 2004)Google Scholar
  23. 23.
    Razgon, I.: Exact computation of maximum induced forest. In: Arge, L., Freivalds, R. (eds.) SWAT 2006. LNCS, vol. 4059, pp. 160–171. Springer, Heidelberg (2006)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Robson, J.M.: Algorithms for maximum independent sets. Journal of Algorithms 7(3), 425–440 (1986)MATHCrossRefMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Schöning, U.: Algorithmics in exponential time. In: Diekert, V., Durand, B. (eds.) STACS 2005. LNCS, vol. 3404, pp. 36–43. Springer, Heidelberg (2005)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Swamy, C., Kumar, A.: Primal-dual algorithms for connected facility location problems. Algorithmica 40(4), 245–269 (2004)MATHCrossRefMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Williams, R.: A new algorithm for optimal constraint satisfaction and its implications. In: Díaz, J., Karhumäki, J., Lepistö, A., Sannella, D. (eds.) ICALP 2004. LNCS, vol. 3142, pp. 1227–1237. Springer, Heidelberg (2004)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Woeginger, G.J.: Exact algorithms for NP-hard problems: A survey. In: Jünger, M., Reinelt, G., Rinaldi, G. (eds.) Combinatorial Optimization - Eureka, You Shrink! LNCS, vol. 2570, pp. 185–207. Springer, Heidelberg (2003)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    Woeginger, G.J.: Space and time complexity of exact algorithms: Some open problems. In: Downey, R.G., Fellows, M.R., Dehne, F. (eds.) IWPEC 2004. LNCS, vol. 3162, pp. 281–290. Springer, Heidelberg (2004)CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2006

Authors and Affiliations

  • Fedor V. Fomin
    • 1
  • Fabrizio Grandoni
    • 2
  • Dieter Kratsch
    • 3
  1. 1.Department of InformaticsUniversity of BergenBergenNorway
  2. 2.Dipartimento di InformaticaUniversità di Roma “La Sapienza”RomaItaly
  3. 3.LITAUniversité Paul Verlaine – MetzMetz Cedex 01France

Personalised recommendations