Algorithmic graph structure theory

(1)

Algorithmic graph structure theory

Dániel Marx¹

1Computer and Automation Research Institute, Hungarian Academy of Sciences (MTA SZTAKI)

Budapest, Hungary

STACS 2013 Tutorial February 27, 2013

(2)

Classes of graphs

Classes of graphs can be described by

1 what they do not have, (excluded structures)

2 how they look like

(constructions and decompositions).

In general, the second description is more useful for algorithmic purposes.

(3)

Classes of graphs

Example: Trees

1 Do not contain cycles (and connected)

2 Have a tree structure.

Example: Bipartite graphs

1 Do not contain odd cycles,

2 Edges going only between two classes.

Example: Chordal graphs

1 Do not contain induced cycles,

(4)

Graph Structure Theory

“Graph structure theory” usually refers to the theory developed by Robertson and Seymour on graphs excluding minors.

Definition

GraphH is a minor ofG (H ≤G) ifH can be obtained fromG by deleting edges, deleting vertices, and contracting edges.

deletinguv

u v

contracting uv

(5)

Excluding minors

Theorem [Wagner 1937]

A graph is a planar if and only if it excludesK₅ andK_3,3 as a minor.

K₅ K_3,3

How do graphs excluding H (orH₁,. . .,H_k) look like? What other classes can be defined this way?

The work of Robertson and Seymour gives some kind of combinatorial answer to that and provides tools for the related algorithmic questions.

(6)

Excluding minors

Theorem [Wagner 1937]

A graph is a planar if and only if it excludesK₅ andK_3,3 as a minor.

K₅ K_3,3

How do graphs excluding H (orH₁,. . .,H_k) look like?

(7)

Minor closed properties

Definition

A setG of graphs isminor closed ifG ∈ G andH ≤G implies H ∈ G. .

Examples of minor closed properties:

planar graphs

graphs that can be drawn on the torus acyclic graphs (forests)

graphs having no cycle longer than k empty graphs

Examples ofnot minor closed properties:

(8)

Wagner’s conjecture

LetG be a minor closed class of graphs. Then G can be characterized by the minimalobstructions:

LetH ∈ F if H 6∈ G, but every proper minor ofH is inG.

G ∈ G ⇐⇒ ∀H ∈ F,H 6≤G

Theorem [Robertson and Seymour]

Every classG closed under taking minors has a finite setF of minimal obstructions.

(9)

Wagner’s conjecture

LetG be a minor closed class of graphs. Then G can be characterized by the minimalobstructions:

LetH ∈ F if H 6∈ G, but every proper minor ofH is inG.

G ∈ G ⇐⇒ ∀H ∈ F,H 6≤G

(10)

Graph Minors Theorem

Well-quasi-ordering:

Minor testing:

For every fixed graphH, there is anO(n³) time algorithm for testing whetherH is a minor of the given graphG.

(11)

Graph Minors results

The proof spans around 400 pages in the paper series “Graph Minors I–XXIII”.

The size of the obstruction sets and the constants in the algorithms can be astronomical even for simple properties.

Why should you know about this theory?

The theory introduces simpler concepts and techniques that are useful on their own in many contexts.

Some of the more complicated results can be formulated as self-contained powerful statements that can be used as a black box.

(12)

Graph Minors results

The proof spans around 400 pages in the paper series “Graph Minors I–XXIII”.

The size of the obstruction sets and the constants in the algorithms can be astronomical even for simple properties.

Why should you know about this theory?

The theory introduces simpler concepts and techniques that are useful on their own in many contexts.

Some of the more complicated results can be formulated as self-contained powerful statements that can be used as a black

(13)

Graph Minors Theorem

Treewidth Grid theorems Planar graphs

Structure theorem

(14)

Fixed-parameter tractability

Main definition

A parameterized problem isfixed-parameter tractable (FPT)if there is anf(k)n^c time algorithm for some constant c.

Main goal of parameterized complexity: to find FPT problems.

Examples of NP-hard problems that are FPT: Finding a vertex cover of size k.

Finding a path of length k. Finding k disjoint triangles.

Drawing the graph in the plane with k edge crossings. Finding disjoint paths that connectk pairs of points. . . .

(15)

Fixed-parameter tractability

Main definition

A parameterized problem isfixed-parameter tractable (FPT)if there is anf(k)n^c time algorithm for some constant c.

Main goal of parameterized complexity: to find FPT problems.

Examples of NP-hard problems that are FPT:

Finding a vertex cover of sizek. Finding a path of length k.

Finding k disjoint triangles.

Drawing the graph in the plane with k edge crossings.

(16)

Fixed-parameter tractability

Downey and Fellows started the systematic investigation of fixed-parameter tractability and its hardness theory in the 80s.

n^f^(k⁾ vs.f(k)·n^c.

Many of the algorithmic results from graph structure theory can be formulated and appreciated using the language of fixed-parameter tractability.

The original motivation of Downey and Fellows comes from graph structure theory!

(17)

Outline

Treewidth

Definition, algorithms, properties.

Applications Graphs on surfaces

The Graph Structure Theorem Minor Testing

Well-quasi-ordering

(18)

The Party Problem

Party Problem

Problem: Invite some colleagues for a party.

Maximize: The total fun factor of the invited people.

Constraint: Everyone should be having fun.

5 6

2

Input: A tree with weights on the vertices. Task: Find an

independent set of maximum weight.

(19)

The Party Problem

Party Problem

Do not invite a colleague and his direct boss at the same time!

5 6

2

Input: A tree with weights on the vertices. Task: Find an

independent set of maximum weight.

(20)

The Party Problem

Party Problem

5 6

2

Input: A tree with weights on the vertices.

Task: Find an independent set of

(21)

The Party Problem

Party Problem

2

5 6

Input: A tree with weights on the vertices.

Task: Find an independent set of

(22)

Solving the Party Problem

Dynamic programming paradigm:

We solve a large number of subproblems that depend on each other. The answer is a single subproblem.

Subproblems:

T_v: the subtree rooted atv.

A[v]: max. weight of an independent set inT_v B[v]: max. weight of an independent set inT_v

that does not contain v Goal: determineA[r] for the rootr.

(23)

Solving the Party Problem

Subproblems:

T_v: the subtree rooted atv.

A[v]: max. weight of an independent set inT_v B[v]: max. weight of an independent set inT_v

that does not contain v Recurrence:

Assumev1, . . . ,v_k are the children ofv. Use the recurrence relations

B[v] =Pk

i=1A[v_i]

A[v] =max{B[v], w(v) +Pk

i=1B[v_i]}

(24)

(25)

Treewidth — a measure of “tree-likeness”

Tree decomposition: Vertices are arranged in a tree structure satisfying the following properties:

1 If u andv are neighbors, then there is a bag containing both of them.

2 For every v, the bags containingv form a connected subtree.

Width of the decomposition: largest bag size−1. treewidth: width of the best decomposition.

d c b

a

d,f,g b,c,f

c,d,f

(26)

Treewidth — a measure of “tree-likeness”

d c b

a

b,c,f c,d,f

d,f,g

(27)

Treewidth — a measure of “tree-likeness”

d c b

a

b,c,f c,d,f

d,f,g

(28)

Treewidth — a measure of “tree-likeness”

Width of the decomposition: largest bag size−1.

treewidth: width of the best decomposition.

d c b

a

b,c,f c,d,f

d,f,g

(29)

Treewidth — a measure of “tree-likeness”

d c b

a

d,f,g b,c,f

c,d,f

(30)

Treewidth — a measure of “tree-likeness”

a

b c d

d,f,g b,c,f

c,d,f

(31)

Treewidth

Fact: treewidth= 1 ⇐⇒graph is a forest

a a

b

d

c

f g

e

a a

b

d

c

f g

e a,b a,c

b,d b,e c,g

e,h

⇒

c,f

(32)

Treewidth — outline

1 Basic algorithms

2 Combinatorial properties

3 Applications

(33)

Finding tree decompositions

Hardness:

Theorem [Arnborg, Corneil, Proskurowski 1987]

It is NP-hard to determine the treewidth of a graph (given a graph G and an integerw, decide if the treewidth ofG is at mostw).

Fixed-parameter tractability:

Theorem [Bodlaender 1996]

There is a2^O(w³⁾·n time algorithm that finds a tree decomposition of widthw (if exists).

Consequence:

(34)

Finding tree decompositions — approximately

Sometimes we can get better dependence on treewidth using approximation.

FPT approximation:

There is aO(3^3w ·w·n²) time algorithm that finds a tree

decomposition of width4w+1, if the treewidth of the graph is at mostw.

Polynomial-time approximation:

Theorem [Feige, Hajiaghayi, Lee 2008]

(35)

Weighted Max Independent Set and treewidth

Theorem

Given a tree decomposition of widthw,Weighted Max Independent Setcan be solved in time O(2^w·w^O(1)·n).

Bx: vertices appearing in nodex.

V_x: vertices appearing in the subtree rooted atx. Generalizing our solution for trees:

Instead of computing 2 values A[v], B[v] for each vertex of the graph, we compute 2^|B^x^|≤2^w+1 values for each bagB_x.

M[x,S]:

c,d,f b,c,f d,f,g a,b,c b,e,f g,h

How to determineM[x,S] if all the values are known for the children ofx?

(36)

Weighted Max Independent Set and treewidth

Theorem

Given a tree decomposition of widthw,Weighted Max Independent Setcan be solved in time O(2^w·w^O(1)·n).

V_x: vertices appearing in the subtree rooted atx. Generalizing our solution for trees:

Instead of computing 2 values A[v], B[v] for each vertex of the graph, we compute 2^|B^x^|≤2^w+1 values for each bagB_x.

M[x,S]:

(37)

Nice tree decompositions

Definition

A rooted tree decomposition isniceif every node x is one of the following 4 types:

Leaf: no children,|B_x|=1

Introduce: 1 childy withB_x =B_y∪ {v} for some vertexv Forget: 1 childy withB_x =B_y \ {v} for some vertexv Join: 2 children y₁,y₂ withB_x =B_y₁ =B_y₂

Forget Join

Introduce Leaf

(38)

Nice tree decompositions

Definition

A rooted tree decomposition isniceif every node x is one of the following 4 types:

Leaf: no children,|B_x|=1

Introduce: 1 childy withB_x =B_y∪ {v} for some vertexv Forget: 1 childy withB_x =B_y \ {v} for some vertexv Join: 2 children y₁,y₂ withB_x =B_y₁ =B_y₂

Theorem

(39)

Weighted Max Independent Set and nice tree decompositions

Leaf: no children,|B_x|=1 Trivial!

Introduce: 1 childy withB_x =B_y∪ {v} for some vertexv

m[x,S] =











m[y,S] ifv 6∈S,

m[y,S\ {v}] +w(v) ifv ∈S butv has no neighbor inS,

−∞ ifS containsv and its neighbor.

Forget Join

Introduce Leaf

(40)

Weighted Max Independent Set and nice tree decompositions

Forget: 1 childy withB_x =B_y \ {v} for some vertexv m[x,S] =max{m[y,S],m[y,S ∪ {v}]}

Join: 2 children y₁,y₂ withB_x =B_y₁ =B_y₂ m[x,S] =m[y₁,S] +m[y₂,S]−w(S)

Forget Join

Introduce Leaf

(41)

Weighted Max Independent Set and nice tree decompositions

Forget: 1 childy withB_x =B_y \ {v} for some vertexv m[x,S] =max{m[y,S],m[y,S ∪ {v}]}

Join: 2 children y₁,y₂ withB_x =B_y₁ =B_y₂ m[x,S] =m[y₁,S] +m[y₂,S]−w(S)

There are at most2^w+1·n subproblemsm[x,S]and each

(42)

3-Coloring and tree decompositions

Theorem

Given a tree decomposition of widthw,3-Coloringcan be solved inO(3^w·w^O(1)·n).

V_x: vertices appearing in the subtree rooted atx. For every node x and coloring c : B_x → {1,2,3}, we compute the Boolean value E[x,c], which is true if and only if c can be extended to a proper 3-coloring ofV_x.

How to determineE[x,c] if all the values are known for the children ofx?

(43)

3-Coloring and tree decompositions

Theorem

Given a tree decomposition of widthw,3-Coloringcan be solved inO(3^w·w^O(1)·n).

V_x: vertices appearing in the subtree rooted atx. For every node x and coloring c : B_x → {1,2,3}, we compute the Boolean value E[x,c], which is true if and only if c can be extended to a proper 3-coloring ofV_x.

(44)

3-Coloring and nice tree decompositions

Introduce: 1 childy withB_x =B_y∪ {v} for some vertexv If c(v)6=c(u) for every neighbor u of v, then

E[x,c] =E[y,c⁰], where c⁰ is c restricted to B_y. Forget: 1 childy withB_x =B_y \ {v} for some vertexv E[x,c]is true if E[y,c⁰]is true for one of the 3 extensions ofc to B_y.

Join: 2 children y₁,y₂ withB_x =B_y₁ =B_y₂ E[x,c] =E[y₁,c]∧E[y₂,c]

Forget Join

Introduce Leaf

u,v,w u,w

v u,v,w

(45)

3-Coloring and nice tree decompositions

Introduce: 1 childy withB_x =B_y∪ {v} for some vertexv If c(v)6=c(u) for every neighbor u of v, then

E[x,c] =E[y,c⁰], where c⁰ is c restricted to B_y. Forget: 1 childy withB_x =B_y \ {v} for some vertexv E[x,c]is true if E[y,c⁰]is true for one of the 3 extensions ofc to B_y.

Join: 2 children y₁,y₂ withB_x =B_y₁ =B_y₂ E[x,c] =E[y₁,c]∧E[y₂,c]

There are at most 3^w+1·n subproblems E[x,c]and each subproblem can be solved in w^O⁽¹⁾ time (assuming the children are already

(46)

Hamiltonian cycle and treewidth

Theorem

Given a tree decomposition of widthw,Hamiltonian cyclecan be solved in timew^O^(w)·n.

V_x: vertices appearing in the subtree rooted atx. If H is a Hamiltonian cycle, then the subgraph H[V_x] is a set of paths with endpoints inB_x.

B_x⁰ B_x¹ B_x² x

Vx

What are the important properties ofH[V ]“seen from outside”?

(47)

Hamiltonian cycle and nice tree decompositions

For each subproblem(B_x⁰,B_x¹,B_x²,M), we have to determine if there is a set of paths with this pattern.

How to do this for the different types of nodes?

(Assuming that all the subproblems are solved for the children.) Leaf: no children,|B_x|=1

Trivial!

(48)

Hamiltonian cycle and nice tree decompositions

Solving subproblem(B_x⁰,B_x¹,B_x²,M) of node x.

Forget: 1 childy with B_x =B_y\ {v}for some vertex v

In a solutionH of (B_x⁰,B_x¹,B_x²,M), vertexv has degree 2. Thus subproblem(B_x⁰,B_x¹,B_x²,M) ofx is equivalent to subproblem (B_x⁰,B_x¹,B_x²∪ {v},M)of y.

B_x⁰ B_x¹ B_x²

(49)

Hamiltonian cycle and nice tree decompositions

B_x² B_x¹ B_x⁰

v

(50)

Hamiltonian cycle and nice tree decompositions

B_x² B_x¹ B_x⁰

v

(51)

Hamiltonian cycle and nice tree decompositions

Introduce: 1 childy with B_x =B_y∪ {v} for some vertex v Case 1: v ∈B_x⁰. Subproblem is equivalent with(B_x⁰\{v},B_x¹,B_x²,M) for nodey.

v x

B_x⁰ B_x¹ B_x²

⇐

(52)

Hamiltonian cycle and nice tree decompositions

v x

B_x⁰ B_x¹ B_x²

⇐

y B_y² B_y¹ B_y⁰

(53)

Hamiltonian cycle and nice tree decompositions

v x

B_x⁰ B_x¹ B_x²

⇐

y B_y² B_y¹ B_y⁰

(54)

Hamiltonian cycle and nice tree decompositions

v x

B_x² B_x¹ B_x⁰

⇐

^y

B_y² B_y¹ B_y⁰

(55)

Hamiltonian cycle and nice tree decompositions

Introduce: 1 childy with B_x =B_y∪ {v} for some vertex v

Case 2: v ∈B_x¹. Every neighbor of v in V_x is inB_x. Thusv has to be adjacent with one other vertex ofB_x.

Is there a subproblem(B_y⁰,B_y¹,B_y²,M⁰) of node y such that making a vertex of By adjacent to v makes it a solution for subproblem (B_x⁰,B_x¹,B_x²,M) of nodex?

x B_x² B_x¹ B_x⁰

v

⇐

(56)

Hamiltonian cycle and nice tree decompositions

x B_x⁰ B_x¹ B_x²

v

⇐

(57)

Hamiltonian cycle and nice tree decompositions

v

⇐

y B_y⁰ B_y¹ B_y²

(58)

Hamiltonian cycle and nice tree decompositions

v

⇐

y B_y⁰ B_y¹ B_y²

(59)

Hamiltonian cycle and nice tree decompositions

x B_x² B_x¹ B_x⁰

v

⇐

^y

B_y⁰ B_y¹ B_y²

(60)

Hamiltonian cycle and nice tree decompositions

Case 3: v ∈B_x¹. Similar to Case 2, but 2 vertices ofB_y are adjacent withv.

v x B_x² B_x¹ B_x⁰

⇐

(61)

Hamiltonian cycle and nice tree decompositions

v x

B_x⁰ B_x¹ B_x²

⇐

(62)

Hamiltonian cycle and nice tree decompositions

v x

B_x⁰ B_x¹ B_x²

⇐

y B_y⁰ B_y¹

(63)

Hamiltonian cycle and nice tree decompositions

v x

B_x⁰ B_x¹ B_x²

⇐

y B_y⁰ B_y¹

(64)

Hamiltonian cycle and nice tree decompositions

v x

B_x⁰ B_x¹ B_x²

⇐

^y

B_y⁰ B_y¹

(65)

Hamiltonian cycle and nice tree decompositions

Solving subproblem(B_x⁰,B_x¹,B_x²,M) of node x. Join: 2 childreny₁,y₂ withB_x =B_y₁ =B_y₂

A solutionH is the union of a subgraphH₁⊆G[V_y₁] and a subgraphH₂ ⊆G[V_y₂].

IfH₁ is a solution for (B_y⁰₁,B_y¹₁,B_y²₁,M₁) of node y₁ andH₂ is a solution for(B_y⁰₂,B_y¹₂,B_y²₂,M2) of nodey2, then we can check if H₁∪H₂ is a solution for (B_x⁰,B_x¹,B_x²,M) of nodex.

For any two subproblems ofy₁ andy₂, we check if they have solutions and if their union is a solution for(B⁰,B¹,B²,M) of node

(66)

Monadic Second Order Logic

Extended Monadic Second Order Logic (EMSO) A logical language on graphs consisting of the following:

Logical connectives ∧,∨,→,¬,=,6=

quantifiers ∀,∃over vertex/edge variables predicate adj(u,v): vertices u andv are adjacent predicate inc(e,v): edgee is incident to vertex v quantifiers ∀,∃over vertex/edge set variables

∈,⊆for vertex/edge sets Example:

The formula

(67)

Monadic Second Order Logic

Extended Monadic Second Order Logic (EMSO) A logical language on graphs consisting of the following:

Logical connectives ∧,∨,→,¬,=,6=

quantifiers ∀,∃over vertex/edge variables predicate adj(u,v): vertices u andv are adjacent predicate inc(e,v): edgee is incident to vertex v quantifiers ∀,∃over vertex/edge set variables

∈,⊆for vertex/edge sets Example:

The formula

(68)

Courcelle’s Theorem

If a graph property can be expressed in EMSO, then for every fixed w ≥1, there is a linear-time algorithm for testing this property on graphs having treewidth at mostw.

Note: The constant depending on w can be very large (double, triple exponential etc.), therefore a direct dynamic programming algorithm can be more efficient.

If we can express a property in EMSO, then we immediately get that testing this property is FPT parameterized by the treewidthw of the input graph.

Can we express3-ColoringandHamiltonian Cycle in EMSO?

(69)

Courcelle’s Theorem

If a graph property can be expressed in EMSO, then for every fixed w ≥1, there is a linear-time algorithm for testing this property on graphs having treewidth at mostw.

Note: The constant depending on w can be very large (double, triple exponential etc.), therefore a direct dynamic programming algorithm can be more efficient.

If we can express a property in EMSO, then we immediately get that testing this property is FPT parameterized by the treewidthw of the input graph.

(70)

Using Courcelle’s Theorem

3-Coloring

∃C1,C2,C3⊆V ∀v ∈V(v∈C1∨v ∈C2∨v∈C3)

∧ ∀u,v ∈ Vadj(u,v)→(¬(u∈C1∧v∈C1)∧ ¬(u∈C2∧v ∈C2)∧ ¬(u∈ C3∧v ∈C3))

Hamiltonian Cycle

∃H⊆E spanning(H)∧(∀v ∈Vdegree2(H,v)) degree0(H,v) :=¬∃e∈Hinc(e,v)

degree1(H,v) :=¬degree0(H,v)∧ ¬∃e1,e2∈H(e16= e2∧inc(e1,v)∧inc(e2,v))

degree2(H,v) :=¬degree0(H,v)∧ ¬degree1(H,v)∧ ¬∃e1,e2,e3∈ H(e16=e2∧e26=e3∧e16=e3∧inc(e1,v)∧inc(e2,v)∧inc(e3,v))) spanning(H) :=∀u,v ∈V∃P⊆H∀x ∈V ((x =u∨x =

v)∧degree1(P,x))∨(x6=u∧x 6=v∧(degree0(P,x)∨degree2(P,x)))

(71)

Using Courcelle’s Theorem

3-Coloring

∃C1,C2,C3⊆V ∀v ∈V(v∈C1∨v ∈C2∨v∈C3)

∧ ∀u,v ∈ Vadj(u,v)→(¬(u∈C1∧v∈C1)∧ ¬(u∈C2∧v ∈C2)∧ ¬(u∈ C3∧v ∈C3))

Hamiltonian Cycle

∃H⊆E spanning(H)∧(∀v ∈Vdegree2(H,v)) degree0(H,v) :=¬∃e∈Hinc(e,v)

degree1(H,v) :=¬degree0(H,v)∧ ¬∃e1,e2∈H(e16=

e2∧inc(e1,v)∧inc(e2,v))

(72)

Using Courcelle’s Theorem

Two ways of using Courcelle’s Theorem:

1 The problem can be described by a single formula (e.g, 3-Coloring,Hamiltonian Cycle).

⇒ Problem can be solved in time f(w)·n for graphs of treewidth at most w, i.e., FPT parameterized by treewidth.

2 The problem can be described by a formula for each value of the parameterk.

Example: For each k, having a cycle of length exactly k can be expressed as

∃v1, . . . ,vk ∈V((v16=v2)∧(v16=v3)∧. . .(vk−16=vk))

∧(adj(v1,v2)∧adj(v2,v3)∧ · · · ∧adj(vk−1,vk)∧adj(vk,v1)).

⇒ Problem can be solved in time f(k,w)·n for graphs of treewidth w, i.e., FPT parameterized withcombined parameterk and treewidth w.

(73)

Using Courcelle’s Theorem

Two ways of using Courcelle’s Theorem:

1 The problem can be described by a single formula (e.g, 3-Coloring,Hamiltonian Cycle).

⇒ Problem can be solved in time f(w)·n for graphs of treewidth at most w, i.e., FPT parameterized by treewidth.

2 The problem can be described by a formula for each value of the parameterk.

Example: For eachk, having a cycle of length exactly k can be expressed as

∃v1, . . . ,vk ∈V((v16=v2)∧(v16=v3)∧. . .(vk−16=vk))

(74)

Subgraph Isomorphism

Subgraph Isomorphism Input: graphs H andG

Find: a copy of H in G as subgraph.

(75)

Subgraph Isomorphism

For eachH, we can construct a formula φH that expresses “G has a subgraph isomorphic toH” (similarly to the k-cycle on the previous slide).

⇒ By Courcelle’s Theorem, Subgraph Isomorphism can be solved in timef(H,w)·n ifG has treewidth at mostw.

(76)

Subgraph Isomorphism

Since there is only a finite number of simple graphs on k vertices, Subgraph Isomorphism can be solved in time f(k,w)·n if H hask vertices andG has treewidth at mostw.

Theorem

is FPT parameterized by combined

(77)

MSO on words

Theorem [Büchi, Elgot, Trakhtenbrot 1960]

If a languageL⊆Σ^∗ can be defined by an MSO formulaφusing the relation<, thenL is regular.

Example: a^∗bc^∗ is defined by

∃x :P_b(x)∧(∀y : (y <x)→P_a(y))∧(∀y : (x <y)→P_c(y)).

(78)

MSO on words

Example: a^∗bc^∗ is defined by

∃x :P_b(x)∧(∀y : (y <x)→P_a(y))∧(∀y : (x <y)→P_c(y)).

We prove a more general statement for formulas φ(w,X₁, . . . ,X_k) and words overΣ∪ {0,1}^k.

Induction over the structure ofφ:

FSM for ¬φ(w), given FSM for φ(w).

(79)

MSO on words

Proving Courcelle’s Theorem:

Generalize from words to trees.

A width-k tree decomposition can be interpreted as a tree over an alphabet of size f(k).

Formula ⇒tree automata.

(80)

Algorithms — overview

Algorithms exploit the fact that a subtree communicates with the rest of the graph via a single bag.

Key point: defining the subproblems.

Courcelle’s Theorem makes this process automatic for many problems.

There are notable problems that are easy for trees, but hard for bounded-treewidth graphs.

(81)

Treewidth — outline

1 Basic algorithms

2 Combinatorial properties

3 Applications

(82)

Properties of treewidth

Fact: Treewidth does not increase if we delete edges, delete vertices, or contract edges.

⇒If F is a minor ofG, then the treewidth ofF is at most the treewidth ofG.

Fact: For every cliqueK, there is a bagB with K ⊆B. Fact: The treewidth of thek-clique isk−1.

Fact: For everyk ≥2, the treewidth of thek×k grid is exactlyk.

(83)

Properties of treewidth

Fact: For every cliqueK, there is a bagB with K ⊆B.

Fact: The treewidth of thek-clique isk−1.

(84)

Properties of treewidth

Fact: For every cliqueK, there is a bagB with K ⊆B.

Fact: The treewidth of thek-clique isk−1.

(85)

The Cops and Robber game

Game: k cops try to capture a robber in the graph.

In each step, the cops can move from vertex to vertex arbitrarily with helicopters.

The robber moves infinitely fast on the edges, and sees where the cops will land.

Theorem [Seymour and Thomas 1993]

k+1cops can win the game ⇐⇒ the treewidth of the graph is at mostk.

(86)

The Cops and Robber game

Consequence 1: Algorithms

The winner of the game can be determined in timen^O(k)using stan-

(87)

The Cops and Robber game

Consequence 2: Lower bounds Exercise 1:

(88)

The Cops and Robber game

Example: 2 cops have a winning strategy in a tree.

(89)

The Cops and Robber game

(90)

The Cops and Robber game

(91)

The Cops and Robber game

(92)

The Cops and Robber game

(93)

The Cops and Robber game

(94)

The Cops and Robber game

(95)

The Cops and Robber game

(96)

The Cops and Robber game

(97)

A perfect structure theorem

Theorem

The following are equivalent:

G does not have a K₄ minor.

G has treewidth ≤2.

G is subgraph of a series-parallel graph.

(98)

A perfect structure theorem

Theorem

The following are equivalent:

G does not have a K₄ minor.

G has treewidth ≤2.

G is subgraph of a series-parallel graph.

A perfect structure theorem:

K₄6∈G =⇒ G has a width-2 tree decomposition

(99)

Excluded Grid Theorem

Excluded Grid Theorem [Diestel et al. 1999]

If the treewidth ofG is at leastk^4k²^(k⁺²⁾, thenG has ak×k grid minor.

(100)

Excluded Grid Theorem

Observation: Every planar graph is the minor of a sufficiently large grid.

Consequence

IfH is planar, then everyH-minor free graph has treewidth at most f(H).

(101)

Excluded Grid Theorem

A large grid minor is a “witness” that treewidth is large, but the relation is approximate:

Nok×k grid minor =⇒ tree decomposition of width <f(k)

(102)

Excluding trees

As every forest (tree) is planar we have have for every forestF

no F-minor =⇒ tree decomposition of width <f(F)

tree decomposition

of width<f(F) =⇒ Does not exclude any tree as minor!

(103)

Excluding trees

Path decomposition: the tree of bags is a path.

Pathwidth: defined analogously to treewidth.

Example: A complete binary tree onk levels has pathwidthk−1.

Theorem [Diestel 1995]

IfF is a forest, then every F-minor free graph has pathwidth at most|V(F)| −2.

a

b c

d e j

f g

(104)

Excluding trees

Path decomposition: the tree of bags is a path.

Pathwidth: defined analogously to treewidth.

Example: A complete binary tree onk levels has pathwidthk−1.

Theorem [Diestel 1995]

IfF is a forest, then every F-minor free graph has pathwidth at most|V(F)| −2.

no F-minor =⇒ path decomposition of width <f(F)

(105)

Planar Excluded Grid Theorem

For planar graphs, we get linear instead of exponential dependence:

Theorem [Robertson, Seymour, Thomas 1994]

Every planar graphwith treewidth at least 4k has ak×k grid minor.

(106)

Outerplanar graphs

Definition

A planar graph isouterplanar if it has a planar embedding where every vertex is on the infinite face.

Fact