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
$begingroup$
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:
- 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?
- 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
$endgroup$
add a comment |
$begingroup$
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:
- 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?
- 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
$endgroup$
add a comment |
$begingroup$
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:
- 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?
- 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
$endgroup$
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:
- 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?
- 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
graph-theory treewidth
edited yesterday
Artur Riazanov
asked yesterday
Artur RiazanovArtur Riazanov
1957
1957
add a comment |
add a comment |
1 Answer
1
active
oldest
votes
$begingroup$
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)
$endgroup$
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
add a comment |
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
);
);
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
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
$begingroup$
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)
$endgroup$
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
add a comment |
$begingroup$
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)
$endgroup$
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
add a comment |
$begingroup$
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)
$endgroup$
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)
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
add a comment |
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
add a comment |
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.
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
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
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
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