Table of Contents
Fetching ...

A Faster Algorithm for Independent Cut

Vsevolod Chernyshev, Johannes Rauch, Dieter Rautenbach, Liliia Redina

TL;DR

This work tackles the Independent Cut problem by introducing solid subgraphs and quasi-coverings as a structural framework. The authors reduce IC to a partition problem on a quasi-covering set and a corresponding 2-SAT instance, enabling an exact algorithm with runtime $\\mathcal{O}^*(2^{(\\frac{1}{2}-α_Δ)n})$ for graphs of maximum degree $\\Delta$, where $α_Δ=\\frac{1}{2+4\\lfloor \\frac{Δ}{2} \\rfloor}$. Consequently, IC on general graphs achieves $\\mathcal{O}^*(\\sqrt{2}^n)$ time, and IC is fixed-parameter tractable for graphs with minimum degree $δ \\ge βn$ for some $β>\\frac{1}{2}$, with runtime $2^{\\frac{1}{(2β-1)^2}n}\\cdot n^{O(1)}$. The key technical contributions include a windmill-based construction that bounds the size of the quasi-covering, and a polynomial-time reduction to 2-SAT that certifies the existence of an independent cut when a satisfying assignment exists. These results yield improved exact algorithms and provide ETH-based lower bounds, sharpening the landscape for IC in dense and high-degree graphs.

Abstract

The previously fastest algorithm for deciding the existence of an independent cut had a runtime of $\mathcal{O}^*(1.4423^n)$, where $n$ is the order of the input graph. We improve this to $\mathcal{O}^*(1.4143^n)$. In fact, we prove a runtime of $\mathcal{O}^*\left( 2^{(\frac{1}{2}-α_Δ)n} \right)$ on graphs of order $n$ and maximum degree at most $Δ$, where $α_Δ=\frac{1}{2+4\lfloor \fracΔ{2} \rfloor}$. Furthermore, we show that the problem is fixed-parameter tractable on graphs of order $n$ and minimum degree at least $βn$ for some $β> \frac{1}{2}$, where $β$ is the parameter.

A Faster Algorithm for Independent Cut

TL;DR

This work tackles the Independent Cut problem by introducing solid subgraphs and quasi-coverings as a structural framework. The authors reduce IC to a partition problem on a quasi-covering set and a corresponding 2-SAT instance, enabling an exact algorithm with runtime for graphs of maximum degree , where . Consequently, IC on general graphs achieves time, and IC is fixed-parameter tractable for graphs with minimum degree for some , with runtime . The key technical contributions include a windmill-based construction that bounds the size of the quasi-covering, and a polynomial-time reduction to 2-SAT that certifies the existence of an independent cut when a satisfying assignment exists. These results yield improved exact algorithms and provide ETH-based lower bounds, sharpening the landscape for IC in dense and high-degree graphs.

Abstract

The previously fastest algorithm for deciding the existence of an independent cut had a runtime of , where is the order of the input graph. We improve this to . In fact, we prove a runtime of on graphs of order and maximum degree at most , where . Furthermore, we show that the problem is fixed-parameter tractable on graphs of order and minimum degree at least for some , where is the parameter.

Paper Structure

This paper contains 3 sections, 7 theorems, 8 equations, 3 figures.

Table of Contents

  1. Introduction
  2. Results
  3. Proofs

Key Result

Theorem 1

Given a non-trivial instance $G$ of order $n$ of IC, and a quasi-covering set $\mathcal{H}$ of solid subgraphs of $G$, we can decide in $2^{|\mathcal{H}|}n^{\mathcal{O}(1)}$ time whether $G$ has an independent cut or not.

Figures (3)

  • Figure 1: A triangle of $G$ having exactly one vertex in $V(G) \setminus V(\mathcal{H})$ of each type.
  • Figure 2: A schematic example of $G'$. The corresponding 2-SAT formula is $\mathcal{F} = (x_1) \wedge (\bar{x}_1 \vee \bar{x}_2) \wedge (\bar{x}_2 \vee x_3) \wedge (x_3 \vee x_4) \wedge (\bar{x}_3) \wedge (\bar{x}_4 \vee x_5)$.
  • Figure 3: The graph $G(C_i)$; cf. the proof of Proposition \ref{['prop:lb']} and brandstadt2000onstablecutsets.

Theorems & Definitions (17)

  • Theorem 1: restate=TheoremQuasicoverAlgorithm
  • Lemma 2: restate=LemmaQuasicoverSparse
  • Corollary 3: restate=CorollaryAlgorithm
  • Proposition 4: restate=propLB
  • Lemma 5: restate=LemmaQuasicoverDense
  • Corollary 6: restate=CorollaryAlgorithmDense
  • proof
  • Claim 1
  • proof
  • Claim 2
  • ...and 7 more