Utrecht University, the [email protected]://orcid.org/0000-0002-8684-0611Supported by the European Research Council (ERC) under the European Unionโs Horizon 2020 research and innovation programme (project CRACKNP under grant agreement No. 853234).National University of Singapore, [email protected]://orcid.org/0000-0003-4869-0031Hasso Plattner Institute, University of Potsdam, [email protected]://orcid.org/0000-0001-9436-7310 \CopyrightTomohiro Koana, Nidhi Purohit and Kirill Simonov \ccsdesc[500]Theory of computationย Computational geometry
Subexponential Algorithms for Clique Cover on Unit Disk and Unit Ball Graphs
Abstract
In Clique Cover, given a graph and an integer , the task is to partition the vertices of into cliques. Clique Cover on unit ball graphs has a natural interpretation as a clustering problem, where the objective function is the maximum diameter of a cluster.
Many classical -hard problems are known to admit -time algorithms on unit ball graphs in [de Berg et al., SIAM J. Comp 2018]. A notable exception is the Maximum Clique problem, which admits a polynomial-time algorithm on unit disk graphs and a subexponential algorithm on unit ball graphs in , but no subexponential algorithm on unit ball graphs in dimensions or larger, assuming the ETH [Bonamy et al., JACM 2021].
In this work, we show that Clique Cover also suffers from a โcurse of dimensionalityโ, albeit in a significantly different way compared to Maximum Clique. We present a -time algorithm for unit disk graphs and argue that it is tight under the ETH. On the other hand, we show that Clique Cover does not admit a -time algorithm on unit ball graphs in dimension , unless the ETH fails.
keywords:
Clique cover, diameter clustering, subexponential algorithms, unit disk graphscategory:
\relatedversion1 Introduction
Clustering is a general method of partitioning data entries, normally represented by points in the Euclidean space, into clusters with the goal of minimizing a certain similarity function for the points in the same cluster. Many popular similarity objectives such as -means and -center are center-based, i.e., the objective function of the cluster is defined in terms of distance to the additionally selected center of the cluster. On the other hand, arguably the most natural similarity measure that is defined solely in terms of distances between the given datapoints, is the maximum diameter of a cluster. That is, the objective function of the clustering is the maximum distance between any pair of points in the same cluster. Formally, we consider the following -Diameter problem: Given a set of points in the Euclidean space , and parameters , , is there a partitioning of into disjoint , โฆ, , such that for each , and each , ?111Since one can binary search over the value of , and there are at most different distances between the pairs of points, this decision version of the problem is equivalent to the optimization version, up to logarithmic factors in the running time.
The -Diameter problem admits a natural geometric interpretation. Consider a set of disks with centers in and of the same radius . The problem asks to partition the disks into sets so that disks in each set pairwise intersect. Given a graph and an integer , let Clique Cover be the problem of partitioning the vertex set of into vertex-disjoint cliques. -Diameter in is thus equivalent to Clique Cover on unit ball graphs inย . Note that Clique Cover is equivalent to -Coloring on general graphs by taking the complement of the graph; however, unit ball graphs are not closed under complements, therefore Clique Cover on unit ball graphs does not necessarily have the same complexity as -Coloring on unit ball graphs.
The main question we ask in this work is the following: Does -Diameter in , or equivalently Clique Cover on -dimensional unit ball graphs, admit subexponential-time algorithms? Given that Clique Cover is a natural graph problem akin to Maximum Clique and -Coloring, our question fits into the recent line of advances for algorithms on geometric intersection graphs.
In a seminal work, de Berg et al.ย [6] gave a framework for -time algorithms on, in particular, -dimensional unit ball graphs, which covers problems such as Maximum Independent Set, Dominating Set, and Steiner Tree. At the heart of the framework lies a special kind of tree decomposition, that essentially guarantees that each bag is covered by cliques. The target problem is then solved via dynamic programming over the decomposition, given that the interaction of the solution with the cliques in the bag could be succinctly represented. For example, in the Maximum Independent Set problem the solution can have at most one element per clique, and storing the intersection between the solution and the bag is therefore sufficient for the running time above.
However, Clique Cover stands aside from the problems covered by the framework of de Berg et al., as the interaction between the smallest clique cover and the given clique cover of the bag does not immediately seem to admit a succinct representation. Moreover, one can easily observe that finding the smallest clique cover is still -hard even if a clique cover of the graph of constant size is given. Indeed, it is famously -hard to determine whether a 4-colorable graph admits a 3-coloringย [12, 8], and colorings turn into clique covers under taking the complement of the graph.
Previously in the literature, another problem shown to not exhibit such a โgradually subexponentialโ behavior was the Maximum Clique problem. Already since the 1990s, a polynomial-time algorithm for Maximum Clique on unit disk graphs was knownย [5]. Recently, Bonamy et al.ย [2] have shown that Maximum Clique only admits a subexponential-time algorithm on -dimensional unit ball graphs, while no -time algorithm is possible in dimension 4, assuming the .
Our results.
As the first step, we show a subexponential algorithm for Clique Cover on unit disk graphs. Our starting point is the weighted treewidth approach of de Berg et al.ย [6]; however, as per the discussion above, on its own this characterization does not seem to be sufficient. Intuitively, the geometric structure of unit disk graphs has to play a role not only in the decomposition itself, but also in representing the solution with respect to the decomposition. In order to accommodate this, we build upon the classical lemma due to Capoyleas, Rote and Woegingerย [4], that was rediscovered several times in the literatureย [7, 13]. Simply put, there always exists an optimal clique cover where all cliques are well-separated, i.e., the convex hulls of the respective disk centers do not intersect. As only constantly many cliques may lie in direct vicinity of another clique in an optimal solution, we can show that there are at most polynomially many possible configurations for each clique in the optimal solution. This characterization, coupled with the dynamic programming approach, results in the following theorem.
Theorem 1.1.
Clique Cover can be solved in time on -vertex unit disk graphs, when a geometric representation of the graph is given in the input, with bit-length of the vectors bounded by .
Note that recognizing unit disk graphs is, in general, -hardย [3] and even -completeย [11], which means that one cannot expect to be able to compute a geometric representation of a given unit disk graph efficiently.
Using the lower bound machinery of de Berg et al.ย [6], we also observe that the running time above is tight. Moreover, the lower bound holds for higher dimensions as well.
Theorem 1.2.
Assuming the , Clique Cover on -vertex unit ball graphs in does not admit a -time algorithm, for any , even if the geometric representation of polynomial bit-length is given in the input.
The next natural question is whether the algorithmic result of Theoremย 1.1 could also be extended to higher dimensions. Unfortunately, the separation property that plays the key role in Theoremย 1.1 only holds in the two-dimensional case: the original work of Capoyleas, Rote and Woeginger already observes that the analogous statement in three dimensions admits a counterexampleย [4]. This, however does not exclude other potential ways for a succinct representation of the solution, or another completely unrelated approach. We show that the separation property is indeed crucial, that is, Clique Cover does not admit subexponential algorithms on unit ball graphs in constant dimension.
Theorem 1.3.
Assuming the , Clique Cover on -vertex unit ball graphs in does not admit a -time algorithm, even if the geometric representation of polynomial bit-length is given in the input.
To put Theoremย 1.3 into context, recall the result of Bonamy et al.ย [2], showing that Maximum Clique does not admit a subexponential algorithm on unit ball graphs inย . Their approach is to first argue that Maximum Independent Set is as hard on 2-subdivisions (graphs obtained by replacing each edge with a path of length 3) as it is on general graphs, which holds simply because a maximum independent set of a graph can be extracted from a maximum independent set of its 2-subdivision. Then their key structural observation is that a complement of any 2-subdivision admits a unit ball representation in , therefore showing hardness of Maximum Clique on unit ball graphs in . Note that Maximum Independent Set turns into Maximum Clique by taking the complement.
Since we target the Clique Cover problem on unit ball graphs, a natural idea is to conduct the reduction in a similar spirit, but starting from -Coloring. However, the obstacle is that 2-subdivisions do not in general preserve the existence of a -coloring โ only for , which is not suitable for a hardness reduction. Therefore, instead of replacing each edge by its 2-subdivision, we need to use a more complicated edge gadget, and the 4-dimensional representation of Bonamy et al. is no longer applicable. The straightforward triangle-like edge gadget that preserves -colorings could be used in place of the 2-subdivision, see Figureย 1 for an illustration. However, it is not clear whether the resulting graph would admit a sufficiently low-dimensional representation, namely below dimension . Instead, the gadget that we use is based on two parallel 2-subdivisions, plus special vertices that impose a list-coloring-like condition on the internal vertices of the subdivisions; this choice of the gadget allows us to decrease the dimension to (see Figureย 1 for the illustration of the gadget).
2 Preliminaries
Sets, vectors and coordinates.
For an integer , we use to denote the set . We use the tuple notation for points in , i.e., a point is defined by the tuple , where is the respective coordinate for each . The variables , , โฆ, are used to denote the respective axes. We denote the origin by , and by , we denote the plane spanned on the respective axes; the same notation is used for higher-dimensional subspaces too. For two points , denotes the vector pointing from to , its coordinates are expressed as . We use to denote the standard Euclidean norm in , therefore, is the Euclidean distance between the points and , and also the length of the vector .
Unit ball graphs.
Let be a set of points in and be a set of balls of radius , centered at . A unit ball graph on is a graph over the vertex set , in which two vertices and are adjacent if and only if the balls and intersect.
Exponential-time hypothesis.
The exponential-time hypothesis (), due to Impagliazzo, Paturi and Zaneย [9, 10], implies that there is no algorithm that solves 3-SAT in time, where is the number of variables in the formula. Since by the Sparsification Lemmaย [10] this holds even for linearly-many clauses in the formula, also excludes -time algorithms for 3-SAT, where is the number of clauses. By the standard linear-size reduction from 3-SAT to 3-Coloring, implies that 3-Coloring does not admit a -time algorithm, where is the number of vertices and is the number of edges in the graph.
Tree decomposition.
For a graph , a tree decomposition is a pair , where is a tree and such that
-
โข
for each , there exists with , and
-
โข
for each , the set of nodes with forms a connected subtree in .
The width of is . The tree-width of is the minimum width of all tree decompositions of .
A nice tree decomposition is a tree decomposition more amenable to the design of dynamic programming algorithms. Formally, a tree decomposition rooted at is called nice if and each node is one of the following types:
- Leaf node.
-
is leaf in and .
- Introduce node.
-
has exactly one child , and for a vertex in .
- Forget node.
-
has exactly one child , and for a vertex in .
- Join node.
-
has exactly two children , and .
It is known that given a tree decomposition, a nice tree decomposition of the same width can be computed in polynomial time [1].
3 Subexponential algorithm for unit disks
In this section, we design a subexponential-time algorithm for Clique Cover on unit disk graphs.
See 1.1
To design a subexponential-time algorithm, let us introduce two known techniques. We start with the โseparation theoremโ of Capoyleas, Rote and Woegingerย [4]. Recall that we aim to partition the vertex set of a given unit disk graph into a collection of cliques. Each clique is defined by the convex hull of the centers of disks in the clique. In principle, these convex hulls may arbitrarily intersect each other. The following states that we may assume that they are disjoint in an optimal solution.
Theorem 3.1 (Capoyleas, Rote and Woegingerย [4]).
For Clique Cover on unit disk graphs, there exists an optimal solution such that the convex hulls of the centers in are pairwise disjoint.
This was first proven by Capoyleas, Rote and Woegingerย [4] but also by Dumitrescu and Pachย [7] and Pirwani and Salavatipourย [13] later. Theoremย 3.1 relies crucially on the fact that for two intersecting convex polygons of diameter at most , there exists two disjoint convex polygons of diameter at most such that the vertices of and are contained in . In view of Theoremย 3.1, we will show that there are polynomially many โrelevantโ cliques in Lemmaย 3.3. To prove this, we will also use the following simple fact.
Lemma 3.2 (Dumitresku and Pach, Lemma 2ย [7]).
Let be an instance of Clique Cover on unit disk graphs, and be an optimal solution satisfying the condition of Theoremย 3.1. For a set of vertices contained in a square of constant side length, there are cliques that intersect .
See Dumitrescu and Pachย [7] for a concrete bound in the above lemma. Now we prove a polynomial bound on the number of relevant cliques.
Lemma 3.3.
Let be an instance of Clique Cover on unit disk graphs. Given , we can find in polynomial time a collection of cliques in such that , and for each optimal solution satisfying the condition of Theoremย 3.1, for all .
Proof 3.4.
Let be a clique with . We will say that a clique is close to if their closest vertices have distance at most two and far from otherwise.
We first show how to separate from far cliques, i.e., we find a collection of closed regions such that lies within and any far clique lies outside . Suppose that are two vertices with the largest distance in . Then, is contained in the intersection of two disks of radius centered at and , and every vertex of every far clique from is outside of these disks. For each , let be the intersection of such two disks, and let be the vertices of that lie in . Let be the collection of vertex sets containing for each . We then have , and for every there exists that does not intersect any clique far from .
Next, we discuss how to separate from close cliques. By the above characterization, is contained in a -rectangle (not necessarily axis-aligned). For each close clique of , there exists a vertex in with distance at most to a vertex in , and every vertex in has distance at most to , so every vertex of is at most at distance from some vertex of . Therefore by extending the rectangle containing by in every direction, we obtain a rectangle that contains every close clique of . Thus, by Lemmaย 3.2, there are close cliques with . For a clique , , since the convex hulls of and do not overlap by Theoremย 3.1, there is a line that separates and , this line also separates the convex hulls of and . Moving this line, we find two vertices on the boundary of the convex hull of or two vertices on on the boundary of the convex hull of , such that the line through them separates and in the plane. Let be the collection of regions obtained as the intersection of constantly222The constant depends on Lemmaย 3.2. many open or closed semi-planes whose boundaries go through two points of . Let be the collection of vertex sets such that for each region in , there is a vertex set in containing exactly the vertices of lying in this region.
Finally, let be the collection of intersections of and for and . Clearly, . By the above, we have that for , there exists that is disjoint from for every clique that is far from , and there exists that is disjoint from for every clique close to ; on the other hand, and contain . Therefore, is disjoint from for every , and contains . Since and , contains no vertices outside of , and . Moreover, every is a clique since every is a clique. This completes the proof of the lemma.
We will also use the framework of de Berg et al.ย [6] for the design of subexponential-time algorithms for geometric intersection graphs. First, let us introduce some terminology. For a graph and , a -partition of is a partition of such that every induces a connected subgraph which is a union of at most cliques. For a -partition of , the -contraction of , denoted by , is the graph obtained by contracting every into a single vertex, that is, and . Let be a weight function. For a tree decomposition of , its weighted width with respect to is defined by , where the maximum is over the nodes of .
The main technical step of the algorithmic framework of de Berg et al.ย is the following theorem, restricted to the case of unit disk graphs.
Theorem 3.5 ([6], Theorem 2.11 applied to unit disk graphs).
For a weight function such that for , there exists a -partition for such that has weighted treewidth that can be computed in time.
As in Berg et al.ย [6], we will apply Theoremย 3.5 with . To design a -time algorithm, one essentially needs to show that there are possibilities for each partition class . We obtain this polynomial bound from Lemmaย 3.3. Specifically, let be an optimal solution satisfying the condition of Theoremย 3.1. For , let be the collection of cliques returned by Lemmaย 3.3, applied to the subset . By the lemma, for every , . On the other hand, every clique is contained in a rectangle, therefore by Lemmaย 3.2 only constantly many cliqes from , โฆ, intersect this clique. Since is covered by at most cliques, it also holds that only constantly many cliqes from , โฆ, intersect , where the constant depends on and Lemmaย 3.2; denote this constant by . Later in the algorithm, we will characterize the solution on by listing the cliques from that result from intersecting with . We now proceed to the proof of the theorem.
Proof 3.6 (Proof of Theoremย 1.1).
We first apply Theoremย 3.5 with for a sufficiently small constant , obtaining a -partition of , and a tree decomposition of of weight at most . For , let be a collection of relevant cliques in as per Lemmaย 3.3. We define a configuration of by a pair as follows. The first element, , is a collection of at most cliques such that . The second element, , is a mapping, which we will use to indicate whether a clique has been covered. We denote the set of configurations of by . Since by Lemmaย 3.3, there are at most many configurations. Thus, for a bag , the number of all combinations of configurations of nodes in is at most
Here, is a constant, and the second equality is due to the fact that the weighted treewidth is . The running time will be dominated by this factor.
Our dynamic programming constructs a table for a bag indexed by a configuration for each and an integer . We describe the configuration by a mapping that maps to one of its configurations in . We use the notation . The table stores Boolean values, where the entry is true if and only if there is a collection of cliques such that
-
โข
covers all vertices appearing strictly below (i.e., every vertex in such that appears in the subtree rooted at is covered by )
-
โข
covers all cliques with and , and
-
โข
every clique , , contains a vertex appearing strictly below .
Our dynamic programming will maintain this invariant.
Now we describe our dynamic programming procedure over a nice tree decomposition (see Sectionย 2 for the definition). It follows from our invariants that the input graph admits a clique cover of size if and only if for the root . For a non-leaf node , we will denote its children by ( if has one child).
Leaf node. Suppose that is a leaf node, i.e., . Then, is true if and only if .
Introduce node. Suppose that is an introduce node, i.e., .
Here, denotes the restriction of to . As we only consider cliques that intersect a node strictly below , we set the table entry to false if is not uniformly zero.
Forget node. Suppose that is a forget node, i.e., . We have the following recurrence:
where ranges over all and that satisfy the following condition. Let be an auxiliary graph as follows. For every with , we add a vertex . Moreover, for every and , we add a vertex to if (i) has not been covered at , i.e., and (ii) is covered at , i.e., . Two vertices and are adjacent in if and only if is a clique in the graph . This concludes the construction of . Note that has size . Then ranges over and such that has a clique cover of size such that every clique contains a vertex for . Whether and fulfills this condition can be checked in time via dynamic programming.
Specifically, we proceed in a standard fashion for a -Coloring/Clique Cover subset-based dynamic programming. For each subset and each integer , , we compute the Boolean value that is equal to true if and only if the subgraph admits a clique cover of size , where additionally every clique contains a vertex for some . We initialize by setting true, false for each , and for each , , compute . Clearly, the dynamic programming table above is computed in time . As there are many choices for the configuration , we can compute in overall time .
Let us verify that the invariant is maintained by the computation above. If is set to true, then there exist and satisfying the aforementioned condition, for which is also true. Since is true, there exists a collection of cliques. Also, admits clique cover of size , which is also a collection of cliques in . Combining these cliques indeed satisfies the conditions.
Join node. Suppose that is a join node, i.e., . We have the recurrence:
where ranges over functions that map to one of its configurations such that for every ,
-
โข
is partitioned in cliques in the same way, i.e., , and
-
โข
for every , if and only if is covered in one of the children, i.e., or .
To see why the invariant is maintained, note that if is set to true, then there are cliques certifying being true and cliques certifying being true. Putting them together, we obtain a collection of cliques satisfying the conditions.
Observe that each entry can be computed in time. Since there are entries, the running time is bounded by . Note that all arithmetic operations can be performed in polynomial time: we only require comparing distances between the given points and orientations between triples of given points; see the proof of Lemmaย 3.3. Theoremย 3.5 is representation-agnostic, meaning that no additional arithmetic operations are required, except for constructing the graph from the given geometric representation.
This concludes the proof of Theoremย 1.1.
4 Subexponential lower bound for
In this section, we establish the impossibility of solving the Clique Cover problem on -dimensional unit ball graphs in time better than . For this, we use the result of de Berg et al.ย [6], which states that, assuming , Grid Embedded SAT cannot be solved in time time, where is the number of variables of the given formula.
Grid Embedded SAT is defined as follows. Let denote the -grid graph, where there is a vertex for every and an edge between and are adjacent if and only if . We say that a graph is embedded in if a subdivision of is isomorphic to a subgraph of . For a CNF formula , the incidence graph of is the bipartite graph, where there is a vertex for each variable and each clause, and there is an edge between a variable vertex and a clause vertex if and only if the variable appears in the clause. A -CNF formula is a CNF formula where each variable appears at most 3 times and each clause has size at most 3.
Proposition 4.1 ([6], Theorem 3.2).
Grid Embedded SAT can not be solved in time unless fails.
To show -hardness for , , we use the cube wiring theorem due to de Berg et al.ย [6]. Let denote and denote the -dimensional hypercube over . Also, for and , let . For , a set is said to be -spaced if there is an integer such that for every and , .
Theorem 4.2 (Cube wiring theorem [6]).
For , let and be two 2-spaced subsets of and let be a perfect matching in the bipartite graph . Then, for , contains vertex-disjoint paths that connect and for every .
Now we prove our theorem.
See 1.2
Proof 4.3.
We first present a reduction from Grid Embedded SAT to Clique Cover on unit disk graphs. Let be a -CNF formula. We may assume that each variable in appears twice positively and once negatively: For every variable where its occurrences are all positive or negative, delete the clauses containingย . Also, for every variable appears twice negatively and once positively, flip its sign. We first describe how to construct a Grid Embedded SAT instance from , and specify the embedding later.
-
โข
For each variable , we create a variable gadget, which is obtained by gluing and over one vertex, i.e., it is a paw, consisting of four vertices and edges . We will call connection vertices.
-
โข
For each clause, we introduce a single vertex . We call it a clause gadget.
-
โข
We construct a wire gadget, which will be used to connect a variable gadget to a clause gadget in the embedding. A wire corresponding to a positive literal is a path with an even number of edges, starting at or from the variable gadget of , and ending at the corresponding clause vertex. For a negative literal, the path starts at instead. We call a wire activated if the value of the corresponding literal of the connection vertex is true. We call a wire if the corresponding literal is set to true.
This completes the construction of . Let be the total edge length of all wires. We show that the formula has a satisfying assignment if and only if has a clique cover of size , where is the number of variables.
Correctness.
Suppose that formula has a satisfying assignment. We construct a clique cover of as follows. For each variable , we pick a clique if is assigned true and otherwise. For each wire with edges, pick edges as โs so that all inner vertices and the connection vertex is covered if the wire is activated, and all inner vertices and the clause vertex is covered otherwise. Since the assignment satisfies all the clauses, every clause gadget has at least one activated wire. If more than one wire ends with containing a clause, then arbitrarily pick one wire and reduce the internal vertices of the remaining wires into a and pick it into the solution. Hence, all vertices in the variable, wire and clause gadget are covered. We obtain a clique partition of with cliques.
Conversely, assume has a clique cover of size . Each variable gadget contains at least one clique that covers the common vertices of the gadget. Since in a wire of length , there are internal vertices, and only two vertices of a wire can be covered by a clique. Thus, wire gadgets contain at least cliques. Since , the solution contains exactly one clique for every variable gadget and each wire of length will have exactly cliques. Since every clause vertex belongs to a clique in the solution, a literal exists such that the corresponding wire is activated. Then, the respective connection vertex is not a part of the wire clusters and thus is a part of the vertex cluster. We assign the variableโs value based on which side the clique in each variable gadget picks. If the clique picks connection vertices corresponding to , we set the variable to be true. If the clique contains connection vertices corresponding to , then we set the variable to be false. Otherwise, we set variable values arbitrarily.
Embedding.
Suppose that . Let be a grid embedding of . We start by taking a 2-refinement of . This will ensure that each wire gadget has even length. For every vertex in , we introduce a disk (of diameter 1) centered at its coordinate, unless it is a variable vertex. For a variable , let be its coordinate in . Without loss generality, assume that three vertices adjacent to in are at , , and . There are three cases depending on which edge in incident with connects to a negative literal.
First, suppose that the edge between and leads to a negative literal. Then, introduce four disks centered at (corresponding to and ), (corresponding to ), and (corresponding to ). Otherwise, suppose that the between and leads to a negative literal. Then, introduce four disks centered at (corresponding to and ), (corresponding to ), and (corresponding to ). See Figureย 2 for an illustration.
Note that only polynomial precision in coordinates is required to construct the instance, therefore the hardness also holds if the representation is given.
For , for every variable, we place three vertices adjacent to its variable gadget in a -hypercube of side length 3. We then place all these hypercubes into a -hypercube of side length . Placing the clause gadgets on , we apply the cube wiring theorem (Theoremย 4.2) to obtain an embedding into for . We then embed the variable gadgets similarly to the case .
5 Exponential lower bound for
In this section, we present a hardness reduction excluding better-than-exponential running time for Clique Cover on unit ball graphs in dimension at least . We restate the result next.
See 1.3
Proof 5.1.
We show a reduction from -Coloring to Clique Cover, where the target instance is a unit ball graph in . Let be the graph in the instance of -Coloring. We first construct an enhanced graph from and argue that this makes an equivalent instance of -Coloring. Then, we show that the complement of the enhanced graph admits a unit ball representation in . Since solving -Coloring on is equivalent to solving -Clique Cover on , and -Clique Cover on unit ball graphs in is the special case of Clique Cover with on the same class of graphs, this completes the reduction.
We now move to the details. First, we define the enhanced graph . The vertex set of contains one vertex for each vertex of , four vertices for each edge of , and two additional special vertices. Formally, , where , , , . The edges are as follows: for every edge , we construct , , , and , , Additionally, is adjacent to all vertices of , is adjacent to all vertices of , and and are adjacent. Formally, the edge set of is
Intuitively, is obtained from by replacing each edge with two copies of its 2-subdivision: the vertices and are internal vertices of the first copy, and the vertices and are internal vertices of the first copy. Moreover, there are two special vertices and that are adjacent to each other, and is adjacent to the internal vertices of the first 2-subdivision, while is adjacent to internal vertices of the second 2-subdivision. See Figureย 3 for an illustration of the edge gadget.
We now argue that is equivalent to in terms of -colorings.
Claim 1.
admits a -coloring if and only if admits a -coloring.
Proof 5.2.
Let be the -coloring of , we construct a -coloring of . Let coincide with on the vertices of ; let and . We now assign colors to vertices and for .
Consider an edge , so that is adjacent to and in . The vertex has an available color since only and have assigned colors among its neighbors; assign this color to . Now, assume there is no available color for , therefore all three colors appear among , , . Since , either and , or the other way around. In the former case, since is a proper -coloring of . Assign and ; all edges between the considered vertices are properly colored. In the alternative case, the argument is symmetric: and ; assign and . The argument for the vertices and is analogous.
In the other direction, consider a -coloring of ; we claim that the restriction of to is a proper -coloring of . Assume this is not the case, therefore there exists an edge with . Since and are adjacent in , they receive different colors under and so either or ; w.l.o.g. assume the former case. The vertex has only one available color since it cannot coincide with and , which are two distinct colors. Then the neighborhood of contains all three colors, since . This contradicts the fact that is properly colored by .
Then we proceed to construct a unit ball representation of the complement of in . To this end, we describe the locations of all vertices in under the embedding, and argue that the distance between the locations exceeds a certain value if and only if the respective pair of vertices is adjacent in .
First, we embed the vertices of , in in the first three dimensions, i.e., their images are always zero in coordinates and . Then, we embed the vertices of in the other two dimensions, i.e., such the coordinates โ are zeroed out. Finally, we shift the embedding of and slightly to achieve the desired edges between and .
Let be a constant to be defined later. We place and symmetrically across the origin at distance of along the first coordinate; that is,
We then position the set on the circumference of a circle with the center on the axis lying in the plane orthogonal to the axis, with radius , and such that its center is away from the origin towards . We shall define the precise value of later. The points of occupy the โtop capโ of the circumference, i.e., a small arc close to , and the points of occupy the โbottom capโ, i.e., close to . We aim that for each , lies directly opposite to , while the remaining points are sufficiently close to each of them. Let , we position the points , โฆ, evenly along the arc starting from the โtopโ of the circle, such that the angle between the two consecutive points is always , measured from the center of the circle. We then place the points , โฆ, similarly, directly opposite to their counterparts. We define the exact positions as follows:
The points of are positioned very similarly, except that they are placed in a circle placed opposite across the origin to the circle above, i.e., its center is the point . And the points of () are placed close to (). Formally,
Note that the image of every point in is exactly away from the origin. Assume is such that , and let . We place the points of in the plane exactly at the distance of from the origin. Namely, consider the circle in centered at the origin with the radius of . We place the points of evenly along the circumference, such that the angle between consecutive points is exactly :
See Figureย 4 for the illustration of the embedding .
We now show that โnearlyโ gives the desired embedding of . That is, we show that every adjacent pair is at distance strictly more than and every non-adjacent pair is at distance strictly less than , except for the pairs of form , , , which are at distance exactly . Later we will slightly modify the embedding to make sure that exactly the required pairs of this form are sufficiently far from each other.
Claim 2.
There exists such that the following holds:
(1) | ||||
(2) | ||||
(3) | ||||
(4) | ||||
(5) | ||||
(6) |
and for any other two vertices of , the distance is at most .
Proof 5.3.
Let . Equationย (1) holds immediately by construction, since each is situated exactly away from the origin, each exactly away from the origin, is contained in the 3-dimensional subspace which is orthogonal to the plane where is contained, and by definition of .
For Equationย (2), observe that for each since these two points are situated diametrically opposite to each other on a circle of radius . Therefore, since . On the other hand, consider the points and for . Since lies on the same circle at the angle of at least away from , the distance between and is at most . Therefore, if it holds that , then all distances between the points of are as desired. Moreover, exactly the same arguments hold for Equationย (3) and the distances between the points of . We now show this bound given that is sufficiently small:
Here, we also use that is a sufficiently small constant.
Consider now Equationย (4), the distance between and is equal to for each and . It is therefore sufficient to have , which holds since , and the same argument holds for Equationย (5) because of the symmetry. Note that the distance between and for any , is equal to
for sufficiently small , and . The same holds for and for any , .
It remains to verify that pairwise distances not discussed above are bounded by . Consider first and for , the respective squared distance is
for sufficiently small and . Therefore, when is sufficiently small.
Note also that when is a sufficiently small constant, distances between all pairs of vertices in under are at most , since the images occupy an arc which is a small fraction of a constant-radius circle, and the same holds for pairs in , , , .
Finally, it remains to consider pairs of the form , . Observe that when projecting and orthogonally on the plane , these sets lie on the same circle of radius , and the radial distance between a point in and a point in is always at most , since , , , are each rotated further away from the previous set, and each of the four sets occupies an arc of radial length at most . Therefore,
by using and . The above value is greater than zero if .
To conclude the proof of the claim, we note that the parameters , , , clearly admit values that satisfy all the restrictions above. Indeed, it is only required that each of them does not exceed a certain constant independent of the other parameters, and additionally that , and .
Finally, we construct the embedding that gives the desired representation of . For that, we modify in the following way: we only change the images of vertices in . Namely, for , and for each ,
where is a small value to be defined later. We show that the embedding is indeed a unit ball representation of the complement of .
Claim 3.
For every , if and only if , for some .
Proof 5.4.
First, we consider distances between the pairs , , where , . Let and let be the unique vertex in such that . The respective squared distance is then . On the other hand, consider a vertex with . For and , the squared distance is , since the distance is independent in and , and in the latter plane the vertex is at least at angle of away from the line , which by the law of cosines gives the upper bound above.
By setting we therefore achieve that for each , while since
Observe that since , and that for a sufficiently small value of ; fix so that the latter holds. We now verify the distance condition for the remaining pairs. First, the distance between vertices of and / is the same under and , so it is at most . It remains to consider distances between pairs of vertices in , where . For each ,
since the change from to shifts each vertex by at most the vector of for some ; the length of this vector is , and acts only into the subspace on . Clearly, for sufficiently small we get that
Therefore, all distances that were at most (at least , respectively) under from Claimย 2 remain at most (at least , respectively) under . Since , the proof of the claim is concluded.
By Claimย 3, we get the correctness of the presented reduction. It remains to observe that the reduction can be done in polynomial time: Only precision polynomial in input size is required for the parameters used for the computation of the coordinates. Since in the resulting instance of Clique Cover there are vertices, and -Coloring does not admit a -time algorithm under the , the statement of the theorem follows.
References
- [1] Hansย L. Bodlaender. A linear-time algorithm for finding tree-decompositions of small treewidth. SIAM J. Comput., 25(6):1305โ1317, 1996. doi:10.1137/S0097539793251219.
- [2] Marthe Bonamy, รdouard Bonnet, Nicolas Bousquet, Pierre Charbit, Panos Giannopoulos, Eunย Jung Kim, Pawel Rzazewski, Florian Sikora, and Stรฉphan Thomassรฉ. EPTAS and subexponential algorithm for maximum clique on disk and unit ball graphs. J. ACM, 68(2):9:1โ9:38, 2021. doi:10.1145/3433160.
- [3] Heinz Breu and Davidย G. Kirkpatrick. Unit disk graph recognition is np-hard. Computational Geometry, 9(1):3โ24, 1998. Special Issue on Geometric Representations of Graphs. URL: https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S092577219700014X, doi:https://doi.org/10.1016/S0925-7721(97)00014-X.
- [4] Vasilis Capoyleas, Gรผnter Rote, and Gerhardย J. Woeginger. Geometric clusterings. J. Algorithms, 12(2):341โ356, 1991. doi:10.1016/0196-6774(91)90007-L.
- [5] Brentย N. Clark, Charlesย J. Colbourn, and Davidย S. Johnson. Unit disk graphs. Discret. Math., 86(1-3):165โ177, 1990. doi:10.1016/0012-365X(90)90358-O.
- [6] Mark deย Berg, Hansย L. Bodlaender, Sรกndor Kisfaludi-Bak, Dรกniel Marx, and Tomย C. vanย der Zanden. A framework for exponential-time-hypothesis-tight algorithms and lower bounds in geometric intersection graphs. SIAM J. Comput., 49(6):1291โ1331, 2020. doi:10.1137/20M1320870.
- [7] Adrian Dumitrescu and Jรกnos Pach. Minimum clique partition in unit disk graphs. Graphs Comb., 27(3):399โ411, 2011. doi:10.1007/s00373-011-1026-1.
- [8] Venkatesan Guruswami and Sanjeev Khanna. On the hardness of 4-coloring a 3-colorable graph. SIAM J. Discret. Math., 18(1):30โ40, 2004. doi:10.1137/S0895480100376794.
- [9] Russell Impagliazzo and Ramamohan Paturi. On the complexity of -SAT. J. Comput. Syst. Sci., 62(2):367โ375, 2001. doi:10.1006/jcss.2000.1727.
- [10] Russell Impagliazzo, Ramamohan Paturi, and Francis Zane. Which problems have strongly exponential complexity? J. Comput. Syst. Sci., 63(4):512โ530, 2001. URL: https://dx.doi.org/10.1006/jcss.2001.1774, doi:10.1006/jcss.2001.1774.
- [11] Rossย J. Kang and Tobias Mรผller. Sphere and dot product representations of graphs. Discret. Comput. Geom., 47(3):548โ568, 2012. URL: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00454-012-9394-8, doi:10.1007/S00454-012-9394-8.
- [12] Sanjeev Khanna, Nathan Linial, and Shmuel Safra. On the hardness of approximating the chromatic number. Comb., 20(3):393โ415, 2000. URL: https://doi.org/10.1007/s004930070013, doi:10.1007/S004930070013.
- [13] Imranย A. Pirwani and Mohammadย R. Salavatipour. A weakly robust PTAS for minimum clique partition in unit disk graphs. Algorithmica, 62(3-4):1050โ1072, 2012. URL: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00453-011-9503-8, doi:10.1007/S00453-011-9503-8.