Table of Contents
Fetching ...

A Cut-Matching Game for Constant-Hop Expanders

Bernhard Haeupler, Jonas Huebotter, Mohsen Ghaffari

TL;DR

This paper extends and generalizes the well-known cut-matching game framework and provides a novel cut-strategy that produces constant-hop expanders, a significant strengthening of regular expanders with the additional guarantee that any demand can be routed along constant-hop flow-paths.

Abstract

This paper extends and generalizes the well-known cut-matching game framework and provides a novel cut-strategy that produces constant-hop expanders. Constant-hop expanders are a significant strengthening of regular expanders with the additional guarantee that any demand can be (obliviously) routed along constant-hop flow-paths - in contrast to the $Ω(\log n)$-hop paths in expanders. Cut-matching games for expanders are key tools for obtaining linear-time approximation algorithms for many hard problems, including finding (balanced or approximately-largest) sparse cuts, certifying the expansion of a graph by embedding an (explicit) expander, as well as computing expander decompositions, hierarchical cut decompositions, oblivious routings, multi-cuts, and multi-commodity flows. The cut-matching game of this paper is crucial in extending this versatile and powerful machinery to constant-hop and length-constrained expanders and has been already been extensively used. For example, as a key ingredient in several recent breakthroughs, including, computing constant-approximate $k$-commodity (min-cost) flows in $(m+k)^{1+ε}$ time as well as the optimal constant-approximate deterministic worst-case fully-dynamic APSP-distance oracle - in all applications the constant-approximation factor directly traces to and crucially relies on the expanders from a cut-matching game guaranteeing constant-hop routing paths.

A Cut-Matching Game for Constant-Hop Expanders

TL;DR

This paper extends and generalizes the well-known cut-matching game framework and provides a novel cut-strategy that produces constant-hop expanders, a significant strengthening of regular expanders with the additional guarantee that any demand can be routed along constant-hop flow-paths.

Abstract

This paper extends and generalizes the well-known cut-matching game framework and provides a novel cut-strategy that produces constant-hop expanders. Constant-hop expanders are a significant strengthening of regular expanders with the additional guarantee that any demand can be (obliviously) routed along constant-hop flow-paths - in contrast to the -hop paths in expanders. Cut-matching games for expanders are key tools for obtaining linear-time approximation algorithms for many hard problems, including finding (balanced or approximately-largest) sparse cuts, certifying the expansion of a graph by embedding an (explicit) expander, as well as computing expander decompositions, hierarchical cut decompositions, oblivious routings, multi-cuts, and multi-commodity flows. The cut-matching game of this paper is crucial in extending this versatile and powerful machinery to constant-hop and length-constrained expanders and has been already been extensively used. For example, as a key ingredient in several recent breakthroughs, including, computing constant-approximate -commodity (min-cost) flows in time as well as the optimal constant-approximate deterministic worst-case fully-dynamic APSP-distance oracle - in all applications the constant-approximation factor directly traces to and crucially relies on the expanders from a cut-matching game guaranteeing constant-hop routing paths.
Paper Structure (25 sections, 40 theorems, 17 equations, 2 algorithms)

This paper contains 25 sections, 40 theorems, 17 equations, 2 algorithms.

Key Result

Theorem 2.1

For any $h \geq 1$, $\phi < 1$, and $s \geq 1$ we have that:

Theorems & Definitions (45)

  • Theorem 2.1: Flow Characterization of Hop-Constrained Expanders (Lemma 3.16 of haeupler2022hop)
  • Definition 2.1: Hop-Constrained Expander Decomposition
  • Theorem 2.2: Existence of Hop-Constrained Expander Decompositions haeupler2022hop
  • Theorem 2.3
  • Theorem 2.4
  • Lemma 3.1
  • Lemma 3.2: Splitting lower bound
  • Lemma 3.3: Splitting upper bound
  • Lemma 3.4: Merging lower bound
  • Lemma 3.5
  • ...and 35 more