SWAT 1992: Algorithm Theory — SWAT '92 pp 292-303

# Testing superperfection of k-trees

• T. Kloks
• H. Bodlaender
Conference paper
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 621)

## Abstract

An interval coloring of a weighted graph with non-negative weights, maps each vertex onto an open interval on the real line with width equal to the weight of the vertex, such that adjacent vertices are mapped to disjoint intervals. The total width of an interval coloring is defined as the width of the union of the intervals. The interval chromatic number of a weighted graph is the least total width of an interval coloring. The weight of a subset of vertices is the sum of the weights of the vertices in the subset. The clique number of a weighted graph is the weight of the heaviest clique in the graph. A graph is called superperfect if, for every non-negative weight function, the clique number is equal to the interval chromatic number.

A k-tree is a graph which can be recursively defined as follows. A clique with k+1 vertices is a k-tree. Given a k-tree with n vertices, a k-tree with n + 1 vertices can be obtained by making a new vertex adjacent to all vertices of a k-clique in the k-tree.

In this paper we present, for each constant k, a linear time algorithm to test if a k-tree is superperfect. We also give, for each constant k, a constant time algorithm to produce a complete characterization of superperfect k-trees. Finally we present a complete list of critical non-superperfect 2-trees. Answering a question of Golumbic ([11]), this shows the existence of triangulated graphs which are superperfect but not comparability graphs.

## References

1. [1]
S. Arnborg, J. Lagergren and D. Seese, Easy problems for tree-decomposable graphs, J. Algorithms, 12, 308–340, 1991.Google Scholar
2. [2]
S. Arnborg and A. Proskurowski, Linear time algorithms for NP-hard problems restricted to partial k-trees. Disc. Appl. Math., 23, 11–24, 1989.Google Scholar
3. [3]
H.L. Bodlaender and T. Kloks, Better algorithms for the pathwidth and treewidth of graphs, Proceedings of the 18th International colloquium on Automata, Languages and Programming, 544–555, Springer Verlag, Lecture Notes in Computer Science, vol. 510, 1991.Google Scholar
4. [4]
C. Berge and C. Chvatal, Topics on perfect graphs, Annals of Discrete Mathematics 21 1984.Google Scholar
5. [5]
K.S. Booth and G.S. Lueker, Testing for the consecutive ones property, interval graphs, and graph planarity using PQ-tree algorithms, Journal of Computer and System Sciences 13, 335–379, 1976.Google Scholar
6. [6]
J.E. Cohen, J. Komlós and T. Mueller, The probability of an interval graph, and why it matters, Proc. of Symposia in Pure Math. 34, 97–115, 1979.Google Scholar
7. [7]
P.C. Fishburn, An interval graph is not a comparability graph, J. Combin. Theory 8, 442–443, 1970.Google Scholar
8. [8]
D.R. Fulkerson and O.A. Gross, Incidence matrices and interval graphs, Pacific J. Math. 15, 835–855, 1965.Google Scholar
9. [9]
T. Gallai, Transitiv orientierbaren Graphen, Acta Math. Sci. Hung. 18, 25–66, 1967.Google Scholar
10. [10]
P.C. Gilmore and A.J. Hoffman, A characterization of comparability graphs and of interval graphs, Canad. J. Math. 16, 539–548, 1964.Google Scholar
11. [11]
M.C. Golumbic, Algorithmic Graph Theory and Perfect Graphs, Academic Press, New York, 1980.Google Scholar
12. [12]
J. Lagergren and S. Arnborg, Finding minimal forbidden minors using a finite congruence, Proceedings of the 18th International colloquium on Automata, Languages and Programming, 532–543, Springer Verlag, Lecture Notes in Computer Science, vol. 510, 1991.Google Scholar
13. [13]
L. Lovász, Normal hypergraphs and the perfect graph conjecture, Discrete Math., 2, 253–267, 1972.Google Scholar
14. [14]
J. Matoušek and R. Thomas, Algorithms finding tree-decompositions of graphs, Journal of Algorithms 12, 1–22, 1991.Google Scholar
15. [15]
M. Jean, An interval graph is a comparability graph, J. Combin. Theory 7, 189–190, 1969.Google Scholar
16. [16]
A. Pnuelli, A. Lempel, and S. Even, Transitive orientation of graphs and identification of permutation graphs, Canad. J. Math. 23, 160–175, 1971.Google Scholar
17. [17]
B.A. Reed, Finding approximate separators and computing treewidth quickly, To appear in STOC'92.Google Scholar
18. [18]
N. Robertson and P.D. Seymour, Graph minors — a survey. In I. Anderson, editor, Surveys in Combinatorics 153–171. Cambridge Univ. Press 1985.Google Scholar
19. [19]
J. Spinrad, On comparability and permutation graphs, SIAM J. Comp. 14, No. 3, August 1985.Google Scholar