Naive definition of treewidthHow large a treewidth can a tree plus half the edges have?What is the correct definition of $k$-tree?Tree width of a particular graphA graph parameter possibly related to treewidthGeneralization of locally bounded treewidth graphsChordal Graphs and maximum independent setsSomething-Treewidth PropertyShortest cycle separator for biconnected planar graphsTreewidth of two complete binary trees joined at their leavesFinding subgraphs with high treewidth and constant degree

Is it necessary to use pronouns with the verb "essere"?

Can you use Vicious Mockery to win an argument or gain favours?

What fields between the rationals and the reals allow a good notion of 2D distance?

PTIJ: Why is Haman obsessed with Bose?

What kind of floor tile is this?

Are Captain Marvel's powers affected by Thanos breaking the Tesseract and claiming the stone?

Is it ethical to recieve stipend after publishing enough papers?

Why does AES have exactly 10 rounds for a 128-bit key, 12 for 192 bits and 14 for a 256-bit key size?

"It doesn't matter" or "it won't matter"?

Make a Bowl of Alphabet Soup

How to get directions in deep space?

Why does Carol not get rid of the Kree symbol on her suit when she changes its colours?

Why should universal income be universal?

How do I fix the group tension caused by my character stealing and possibly killing without provocation?

Is it allowed to activate the ability of multiple planeswalkers in a single turn?

What are some good ways to treat frozen vegetables such that they behave like fresh vegetables when stir frying them?

How can ping know if my host is down

Microchip documentation does not label CAN buss pins on micro controller pinout diagram

Pre-mixing cryogenic fuels and using only one fuel tank

Does the reader need to like the PoV character?

Multiplicative persistence

Does Doodling or Improvising on the Piano Have Any Benefits?

Why is it that I can sometimes guess the next note?

Giving feedback to someone without sounding prejudiced



Naive definition of treewidth


How large a treewidth can a tree plus half the edges have?What is the correct definition of $k$-tree?Tree width of a particular graphA graph parameter possibly related to treewidthGeneralization of locally bounded treewidth graphsChordal Graphs and maximum independent setsSomething-Treewidth PropertyShortest cycle separator for biconnected planar graphsTreewidth of two complete binary trees joined at their leavesFinding subgraphs with high treewidth and constant degree













6












$begingroup$


Treewidth has arguably pretty involved definition. Recently I was thinking about a problem and turns out it easy to solve it for graphs with small ``naive treewidth''.



Naive treewidth is defined as follows. Let $G=(V,E)$ be a graph. We say that $G$ has naive treewidth $k$ if there exists a partition $V_1 sqcup V_2 sqcup ldots sqcup V_m = V$ such that $|V_i| le k$ and a tree $T = ([m], E_T)$ such that for every $(u,v) in E$ either $u,v in V_i$ for some $i in [m]$ or $(u,v) in V_i times V_j$ such that $(i,j) in E_T$.



If $T$ is a path than we say that $G$ has naive pathwidth $k$.



For naive pathwidth it is easy to see that it can be much larger than pathwidth. Consider a full binary tree with $2^k$ leaves. It has pathwidth $k-1$. On the other hand notice that if naive pathwidth of a graph is $le t$ than the partition contains at least $V$ blocks. Thus there exists a path in $G$ of length at least $V - 1$. Since the longer path in the full binary tree of height $k$ is $2k$, naive pathwidth of the full binary tree is at least $2^k over 2k$.



Notice that instead of the full binary tree it was possible to use a tree with one vertex connected to the remaining $|V|-1$ vertices which gives even better separation. The reason I've used the binary tree is that for my purposes all graphs have constant degree.



My questions are:



  1. For a graph with small pathwidth (and constant degree if it is needed) can it be shown that it has small naive treewidth? If it is not true, how the counterexample looks like?

  2. The same question for a graph with small treewidth.

Update: for arbitrary degrees there is a separation between treewidth and naive treewidth. The example is a path of length $n$ and a vertex connected to all vertices of the path. Treewidth of such graph is $2$ and naive treewidth is $Omega(sqrtn)$. The proof goes like this: consider the block $B$ containing the vertex of degree $n$. Assume that this block contains at most $sqrtn / 2$ vertices. Then there exists a path in $G - B$ containing at least $2 sqrtn$. Notice that in $T$ all the blocks should be connected to $B$. Thus this path of length $2 sqrtn$ must be contained in a single block.










share|cite|improve this question











$endgroup$
















    6












    $begingroup$


    Treewidth has arguably pretty involved definition. Recently I was thinking about a problem and turns out it easy to solve it for graphs with small ``naive treewidth''.



    Naive treewidth is defined as follows. Let $G=(V,E)$ be a graph. We say that $G$ has naive treewidth $k$ if there exists a partition $V_1 sqcup V_2 sqcup ldots sqcup V_m = V$ such that $|V_i| le k$ and a tree $T = ([m], E_T)$ such that for every $(u,v) in E$ either $u,v in V_i$ for some $i in [m]$ or $(u,v) in V_i times V_j$ such that $(i,j) in E_T$.



    If $T$ is a path than we say that $G$ has naive pathwidth $k$.



    For naive pathwidth it is easy to see that it can be much larger than pathwidth. Consider a full binary tree with $2^k$ leaves. It has pathwidth $k-1$. On the other hand notice that if naive pathwidth of a graph is $le t$ than the partition contains at least $V$ blocks. Thus there exists a path in $G$ of length at least $V - 1$. Since the longer path in the full binary tree of height $k$ is $2k$, naive pathwidth of the full binary tree is at least $2^k over 2k$.



    Notice that instead of the full binary tree it was possible to use a tree with one vertex connected to the remaining $|V|-1$ vertices which gives even better separation. The reason I've used the binary tree is that for my purposes all graphs have constant degree.



    My questions are:



    1. For a graph with small pathwidth (and constant degree if it is needed) can it be shown that it has small naive treewidth? If it is not true, how the counterexample looks like?

    2. The same question for a graph with small treewidth.

    Update: for arbitrary degrees there is a separation between treewidth and naive treewidth. The example is a path of length $n$ and a vertex connected to all vertices of the path. Treewidth of such graph is $2$ and naive treewidth is $Omega(sqrtn)$. The proof goes like this: consider the block $B$ containing the vertex of degree $n$. Assume that this block contains at most $sqrtn / 2$ vertices. Then there exists a path in $G - B$ containing at least $2 sqrtn$. Notice that in $T$ all the blocks should be connected to $B$. Thus this path of length $2 sqrtn$ must be contained in a single block.










    share|cite|improve this question











    $endgroup$














      6












      6








      6


      2



      $begingroup$


      Treewidth has arguably pretty involved definition. Recently I was thinking about a problem and turns out it easy to solve it for graphs with small ``naive treewidth''.



      Naive treewidth is defined as follows. Let $G=(V,E)$ be a graph. We say that $G$ has naive treewidth $k$ if there exists a partition $V_1 sqcup V_2 sqcup ldots sqcup V_m = V$ such that $|V_i| le k$ and a tree $T = ([m], E_T)$ such that for every $(u,v) in E$ either $u,v in V_i$ for some $i in [m]$ or $(u,v) in V_i times V_j$ such that $(i,j) in E_T$.



      If $T$ is a path than we say that $G$ has naive pathwidth $k$.



      For naive pathwidth it is easy to see that it can be much larger than pathwidth. Consider a full binary tree with $2^k$ leaves. It has pathwidth $k-1$. On the other hand notice that if naive pathwidth of a graph is $le t$ than the partition contains at least $V$ blocks. Thus there exists a path in $G$ of length at least $V - 1$. Since the longer path in the full binary tree of height $k$ is $2k$, naive pathwidth of the full binary tree is at least $2^k over 2k$.



      Notice that instead of the full binary tree it was possible to use a tree with one vertex connected to the remaining $|V|-1$ vertices which gives even better separation. The reason I've used the binary tree is that for my purposes all graphs have constant degree.



      My questions are:



      1. For a graph with small pathwidth (and constant degree if it is needed) can it be shown that it has small naive treewidth? If it is not true, how the counterexample looks like?

      2. The same question for a graph with small treewidth.

      Update: for arbitrary degrees there is a separation between treewidth and naive treewidth. The example is a path of length $n$ and a vertex connected to all vertices of the path. Treewidth of such graph is $2$ and naive treewidth is $Omega(sqrtn)$. The proof goes like this: consider the block $B$ containing the vertex of degree $n$. Assume that this block contains at most $sqrtn / 2$ vertices. Then there exists a path in $G - B$ containing at least $2 sqrtn$. Notice that in $T$ all the blocks should be connected to $B$. Thus this path of length $2 sqrtn$ must be contained in a single block.










      share|cite|improve this question











      $endgroup$




      Treewidth has arguably pretty involved definition. Recently I was thinking about a problem and turns out it easy to solve it for graphs with small ``naive treewidth''.



      Naive treewidth is defined as follows. Let $G=(V,E)$ be a graph. We say that $G$ has naive treewidth $k$ if there exists a partition $V_1 sqcup V_2 sqcup ldots sqcup V_m = V$ such that $|V_i| le k$ and a tree $T = ([m], E_T)$ such that for every $(u,v) in E$ either $u,v in V_i$ for some $i in [m]$ or $(u,v) in V_i times V_j$ such that $(i,j) in E_T$.



      If $T$ is a path than we say that $G$ has naive pathwidth $k$.



      For naive pathwidth it is easy to see that it can be much larger than pathwidth. Consider a full binary tree with $2^k$ leaves. It has pathwidth $k-1$. On the other hand notice that if naive pathwidth of a graph is $le t$ than the partition contains at least $V$ blocks. Thus there exists a path in $G$ of length at least $V - 1$. Since the longer path in the full binary tree of height $k$ is $2k$, naive pathwidth of the full binary tree is at least $2^k over 2k$.



      Notice that instead of the full binary tree it was possible to use a tree with one vertex connected to the remaining $|V|-1$ vertices which gives even better separation. The reason I've used the binary tree is that for my purposes all graphs have constant degree.



      My questions are:



      1. For a graph with small pathwidth (and constant degree if it is needed) can it be shown that it has small naive treewidth? If it is not true, how the counterexample looks like?

      2. The same question for a graph with small treewidth.

      Update: for arbitrary degrees there is a separation between treewidth and naive treewidth. The example is a path of length $n$ and a vertex connected to all vertices of the path. Treewidth of such graph is $2$ and naive treewidth is $Omega(sqrtn)$. The proof goes like this: consider the block $B$ containing the vertex of degree $n$. Assume that this block contains at most $sqrtn / 2$ vertices. Then there exists a path in $G - B$ containing at least $2 sqrtn$. Notice that in $T$ all the blocks should be connected to $B$. Thus this path of length $2 sqrtn$ must be contained in a single block.







      graph-theory treewidth






      share|cite|improve this question















      share|cite|improve this question













      share|cite|improve this question




      share|cite|improve this question








      edited yesterday







      Artur Riazanov

















      asked yesterday









      Artur RiazanovArtur Riazanov

      1957




      1957




















          1 Answer
          1






          active

          oldest

          votes


















          8












          $begingroup$

          Your parameter "naive treewidth" is known as tree-partition-width in the literature.
          It is known that if a graph has constant treewidth and constant maximum degree, then it has constant tree-partition-width. See [Wood 2009].



          Note that your example in the update actually has pathwidth 2.



          [Wood 2009] David R. Wood. On tree-partition-width. European Journal of Combinatorics 30 (2009) 1245-1253. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ejc.2008.11.010
          (also on arXiv https://arxiv.org/abs/math/0602507)






          share|cite|improve this answer









          $endgroup$








          • 1




            $begingroup$
            Thanks a lot! I thought that full binary tree with the path going through all leaves might provide a separation, but apparently that is not the case. Is there a simple tree-partition-width decomposition?
            $endgroup$
            – Artur Riazanov
            yesterday










          • $begingroup$
            That's a good example.... I don't have a quick answer for it. We may read the proof in [Wood 2009] (or the references therein).
            $endgroup$
            – Yota Otachi
            20 hours ago










          Your Answer





          StackExchange.ifUsing("editor", function ()
          return StackExchange.using("mathjaxEditing", function ()
          StackExchange.MarkdownEditor.creationCallbacks.add(function (editor, postfix)
          StackExchange.mathjaxEditing.prepareWmdForMathJax(editor, postfix, [["$", "$"], ["\\(","\\)"]]);
          );
          );
          , "mathjax-editing");

          StackExchange.ready(function()
          var channelOptions =
          tags: "".split(" "),
          id: "114"
          ;
          initTagRenderer("".split(" "), "".split(" "), channelOptions);

          StackExchange.using("externalEditor", function()
          // Have to fire editor after snippets, if snippets enabled
          if (StackExchange.settings.snippets.snippetsEnabled)
          StackExchange.using("snippets", function()
          createEditor();
          );

          else
          createEditor();

          );

          function createEditor()
          StackExchange.prepareEditor(
          heartbeatType: 'answer',
          autoActivateHeartbeat: false,
          convertImagesToLinks: false,
          noModals: true,
          showLowRepImageUploadWarning: true,
          reputationToPostImages: null,
          bindNavPrevention: true,
          postfix: "",
          imageUploader:
          brandingHtml: "Powered by u003ca class="icon-imgur-white" href="https://imgur.com/"u003eu003c/au003e",
          contentPolicyHtml: "User contributions licensed under u003ca href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"u003ecc by-sa 3.0 with attribution requiredu003c/au003e u003ca href="https://stackoverflow.com/legal/content-policy"u003e(content policy)u003c/au003e",
          allowUrls: true
          ,
          noCode: true, onDemand: true,
          discardSelector: ".discard-answer"
          ,immediatelyShowMarkdownHelp:true
          );



          );













          draft saved

          draft discarded


















          StackExchange.ready(
          function ()
          StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fcstheory.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f42555%2fnaive-definition-of-treewidth%23new-answer', 'question_page');

          );

          Post as a guest















          Required, but never shown

























          1 Answer
          1






          active

          oldest

          votes








          1 Answer
          1






          active

          oldest

          votes









          active

          oldest

          votes






          active

          oldest

          votes









          8












          $begingroup$

          Your parameter "naive treewidth" is known as tree-partition-width in the literature.
          It is known that if a graph has constant treewidth and constant maximum degree, then it has constant tree-partition-width. See [Wood 2009].



          Note that your example in the update actually has pathwidth 2.



          [Wood 2009] David R. Wood. On tree-partition-width. European Journal of Combinatorics 30 (2009) 1245-1253. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ejc.2008.11.010
          (also on arXiv https://arxiv.org/abs/math/0602507)






          share|cite|improve this answer









          $endgroup$








          • 1




            $begingroup$
            Thanks a lot! I thought that full binary tree with the path going through all leaves might provide a separation, but apparently that is not the case. Is there a simple tree-partition-width decomposition?
            $endgroup$
            – Artur Riazanov
            yesterday










          • $begingroup$
            That's a good example.... I don't have a quick answer for it. We may read the proof in [Wood 2009] (or the references therein).
            $endgroup$
            – Yota Otachi
            20 hours ago















          8












          $begingroup$

          Your parameter "naive treewidth" is known as tree-partition-width in the literature.
          It is known that if a graph has constant treewidth and constant maximum degree, then it has constant tree-partition-width. See [Wood 2009].



          Note that your example in the update actually has pathwidth 2.



          [Wood 2009] David R. Wood. On tree-partition-width. European Journal of Combinatorics 30 (2009) 1245-1253. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ejc.2008.11.010
          (also on arXiv https://arxiv.org/abs/math/0602507)






          share|cite|improve this answer









          $endgroup$








          • 1




            $begingroup$
            Thanks a lot! I thought that full binary tree with the path going through all leaves might provide a separation, but apparently that is not the case. Is there a simple tree-partition-width decomposition?
            $endgroup$
            – Artur Riazanov
            yesterday










          • $begingroup$
            That's a good example.... I don't have a quick answer for it. We may read the proof in [Wood 2009] (or the references therein).
            $endgroup$
            – Yota Otachi
            20 hours ago













          8












          8








          8





          $begingroup$

          Your parameter "naive treewidth" is known as tree-partition-width in the literature.
          It is known that if a graph has constant treewidth and constant maximum degree, then it has constant tree-partition-width. See [Wood 2009].



          Note that your example in the update actually has pathwidth 2.



          [Wood 2009] David R. Wood. On tree-partition-width. European Journal of Combinatorics 30 (2009) 1245-1253. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ejc.2008.11.010
          (also on arXiv https://arxiv.org/abs/math/0602507)






          share|cite|improve this answer









          $endgroup$



          Your parameter "naive treewidth" is known as tree-partition-width in the literature.
          It is known that if a graph has constant treewidth and constant maximum degree, then it has constant tree-partition-width. See [Wood 2009].



          Note that your example in the update actually has pathwidth 2.



          [Wood 2009] David R. Wood. On tree-partition-width. European Journal of Combinatorics 30 (2009) 1245-1253. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ejc.2008.11.010
          (also on arXiv https://arxiv.org/abs/math/0602507)







          share|cite|improve this answer












          share|cite|improve this answer



          share|cite|improve this answer










          answered yesterday









          Yota OtachiYota Otachi

          1,3101322




          1,3101322







          • 1




            $begingroup$
            Thanks a lot! I thought that full binary tree with the path going through all leaves might provide a separation, but apparently that is not the case. Is there a simple tree-partition-width decomposition?
            $endgroup$
            – Artur Riazanov
            yesterday










          • $begingroup$
            That's a good example.... I don't have a quick answer for it. We may read the proof in [Wood 2009] (or the references therein).
            $endgroup$
            – Yota Otachi
            20 hours ago












          • 1




            $begingroup$
            Thanks a lot! I thought that full binary tree with the path going through all leaves might provide a separation, but apparently that is not the case. Is there a simple tree-partition-width decomposition?
            $endgroup$
            – Artur Riazanov
            yesterday










          • $begingroup$
            That's a good example.... I don't have a quick answer for it. We may read the proof in [Wood 2009] (or the references therein).
            $endgroup$
            – Yota Otachi
            20 hours ago







          1




          1




          $begingroup$
          Thanks a lot! I thought that full binary tree with the path going through all leaves might provide a separation, but apparently that is not the case. Is there a simple tree-partition-width decomposition?
          $endgroup$
          – Artur Riazanov
          yesterday




          $begingroup$
          Thanks a lot! I thought that full binary tree with the path going through all leaves might provide a separation, but apparently that is not the case. Is there a simple tree-partition-width decomposition?
          $endgroup$
          – Artur Riazanov
          yesterday












          $begingroup$
          That's a good example.... I don't have a quick answer for it. We may read the proof in [Wood 2009] (or the references therein).
          $endgroup$
          – Yota Otachi
          20 hours ago




          $begingroup$
          That's a good example.... I don't have a quick answer for it. We may read the proof in [Wood 2009] (or the references therein).
          $endgroup$
          – Yota Otachi
          20 hours ago

















          draft saved

          draft discarded
















































          Thanks for contributing an answer to Theoretical Computer Science Stack Exchange!


          • Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!

          But avoid


          • Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.

          • Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.

          Use MathJax to format equations. MathJax reference.


          To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.




          draft saved


          draft discarded














          StackExchange.ready(
          function ()
          StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fcstheory.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f42555%2fnaive-definition-of-treewidth%23new-answer', 'question_page');

          );

          Post as a guest















          Required, but never shown





















































          Required, but never shown














          Required, but never shown












          Required, but never shown







          Required, but never shown

































          Required, but never shown














          Required, but never shown












          Required, but never shown







          Required, but never shown







          Popular posts from this blog

          Bulk add to cart function issuecart vs. mini cart issue … rwd themeRedirect Add to cart button to cart pageAdd to cart issue - Magento 2.1The requested Payment Method is not available When creating an orderM2: reason add-to-cart might not function in production modeAdd to cart issue in some android devicesMagento 2 - custom price can not add to subtotal and grand total after add to cartAdd to cart codeIssue with my cart module on pdp and cart pages, just keeps spinningBulk price and quantity update using rest api

          Magento2 - How to hide price filter only in specific categories?Multiselect price filter attribute in layered navigationhide only some categories from layered navigation in magentoRemove Price Filter on certain categoriescustomize layered price filter?Hide Price for a particular customer groupPrice filter in layered navigation not working correctly with price including tax in magento 2.2.3Magento 2 how to hide attribute at Layered navigation?Magento 2. how to hide price only for specific categoriesMagento 2 How can I hide the price and total from cart and checkout summary?Magento2: Can we add navigation layered filter like price filter for other attribute?