# A lower bound for treewidth and its consequences

• Siddharthan Ramachandramurthi
Conference paper
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 903)

## Abstract

We present a new lower bound for the treewidth (and hence the pathwidth) of a graph and give a linear-time algorithm to compute the bound. With the growing interest in treewidth based methods, this bound has many potential applications.

Our bound helps shed new light on the structure of obstructions for width ω. As a result, we are able to characterize completely those treewidth obstructions of order ω+3. Unexpectedly, we find that these graphs are exactly the pathwidth obstructions of order ω+3. Further, we are also able to enumerate these obstructions.

Surprisingly, while there is only one obstruction of order ω+2 for width ω, we find that the number of obstructions of order ω+3 alone is an asymptotically exponential function of ω. Our proof of this is based on the theory of partitions of integers and is the first non-trivial lower bound on the number of obstructions for treewidth.

## References

1. [ACP]
S. Arnborg, D. Corneil, and A. Proskurowski, “Complexity of finding embeddings in a k-tree,” SIAM J. Alg. Disc. Meth. 8 (1987), 277–284.Google Scholar
2. [ALS]
S. Arnborg, J. Lagergren, and D. Seese, “Problems easy for tree-decomposable graphs,” Journal of Algorithms 12 (1991), 308–340.Google Scholar
3. [An]
G. E. Andrews, “The Theory of Partitions,” in Gian-Carlo Rota, Editor, Encyclopedia of Mathematics and its Applications, Vol. 2, Addison-Wesley, 1976.Google Scholar
4. [AP]
S. Arnborg and A. Proskurowski, “Linear time algorithms for NP-hard problems restricted to partial k-trees,” Discrete Applied Math. 23 (1989), 11–24.Google Scholar
5. [APC]
S. Arnborg, A. Proskurowski, and D. Corneil, “Forbidden minors characterization of partial 3-Trees,” Discrete Mathematics 80 (1990), 1–19.Google Scholar
6. [B1]
H. L. Bodlaender, “A linear time algorithm for finding tree-decompositions of small treewidth,” Proceedings, 25th ACM Symposium on Theory of Computing (1993), 226–234.Google Scholar
7. [B2]
H. L. Bodlaender, “A tourist guide through treewidth,” Acta Cybernetica 11 (1993), 1–23.Google Scholar
8. [BK]
H. L. Bodlaender and T. Kloks, “Better algorithms for the pathwidth and treewidth of graphs,” Proceedings, 18th ICALP, Lecture Notes in Computer Science 510 (1991), 544–555.Google Scholar
9. [DS]
W. W-M. Dai and M. Sato, “Minimal forbidden minor characterization of planar 3-trees and application to circuit layout,” Proceedings, IEEE International Symposium on Circuits and Systems (1990), 2677–2681.Google Scholar
10. [FL1]
M. R. Fellows and M. A. Langston, “Nonconstructive tools for proving polynomial time decidability,” Journal of the ACM, 35:3 (1988), 727–739.Google Scholar
11. [FL2]
M. R. Fellows and M. A. Langston, “An analogue of the Myhill-Nerode theorem and its use in computing finite-basis characterizations,” Proceedings, 30th Symposium on Foundations of Computer Science (1989), 520–525.Google Scholar
12. [GLR]
R. Govindan, M. Langston, and S. Ramachandramurthi, “A practical approach to layout optimization,” Proceedings, 6th International Conference on VLSI Design (1993), 222–225.Google Scholar
13. [KL]
N. G. Kinnersley and M. A. Langston, “Obstruction set isolation for the Gate Matrix Layout problem,” Annals of Discrete Mathematics, to appear.Google Scholar
14. [KT]
A. Kornai and Z. Tuza, “Narrowness, pathwidth, and their application in natural language processing,” Discrete Applied Mathematics 36 (1992), 87–92.Google Scholar
15. [La]
J. Lagergren, “An upper bound on the size of an obstruction,” in Graph Structure Theory, N. Robertson and P. Seymour (editors), Contemporary Mathematics 147 (1993), 601–621.Google Scholar
16. [LA]
J. Lagergren and S. Arnborg, “Finding minimal forbidden minors using a finite congruence,” Proceedings, 18th ICALP, Lecture Notes in Computer Science 510 (1991), 533–543.Google Scholar
17. [Re]
B. Reed, “Finding approximate separators and computing treewidth quickly,” Proceedings, 24th ACM Symposium on Theory of Computing (1992), 221–228.Google Scholar
18. [RS1]
N. Robertson and P. D. Seymour, “Graph Minors II. Algorithmic aspects of treewidth,” Journal of Algorithms 7 (1986), 309–322.Google Scholar
19. [RS2]
N. Robertson and P. D. Seymour, “Graph Minors IV. Tree-Width and Well-Quasi-Ordering,” J. of Combinatorial Theory, Series B 48 (1990), 227–254.Google Scholar
20. [RS3]
N. Robertson and P. D. Seymour, “Graph Minors XIII. The Disjoint Paths Problem,” manuscript (1986).Google Scholar
21. [Sa]
D. P. Sanders, “On linear recognition of treewidth at most four,” manuscript (1992).Google Scholar
22. [ST]
A. Satyanarayana and L. Tung, “A characterization of partial 3-trees,” Networks 20 (1990), 299–322.Google Scholar
23. [Ya]
X. Yan, “A relative approximation algorithm for computing the pathwidth,” Master's Thesis, Department of Computer Science, Washington State University, Pullman (1989).Google Scholar