Noncrossing Longest Paths and Cycles††thanks: This work has been presented at the 32nd International Symposium on Graph Drawing and Network Visualization (Vienna, 2024), GD 2024. The main results and ideas have also been reported at https://11011110.github.io/blog/2024/09/25/long-non-crossing.html.
Abstract
Edge crossings in geometric graphs are sometimes undesirable as they could lead to unwanted situations such as collisions in motion planning and inconsistency in VLSI layout. Short geometric structures such as shortest perfect matchings, shortest spanning trees, shortest spanning paths, and shortest spanning cycles on a given point set are inherently noncrossing. However, the longest such structures need not be noncrossing. In fact, it is intuitive to expect many edge crossings in various geometric graphs that are longest.
Recently, Álvarez-Rebollar, Cravioto-Lagos, Marín, Solé-Pi, and Urrutia (Graphs and Combinatorics, 2024) constructed a set of points for which the longest perfect matching is noncrossing. They raised several challenging questions in this direction. In particular, they asked whether the longest spanning path, on any finite set of points in the plane, must have a pair of crossing edges. They also conjectured that the longest spanning cycle must have a pair of crossing edges.
In this paper, we give a negative answer to the question and also refute the conjecture. We present a framework for constructing arbitrarily large point sets for which the longest perfect matchings, the longest spanning paths, and the longest spanning cycles are noncrossing.
1 Introduction
Traversing points in the plane by a polygonal path or cycle possessing a desired property has a rich background. For instance, the celebrated travelling salesperson problem asks for a polygonal path or cycle with minimum total edge length [9, 25, 27]. In recent years, there has been increased interest in paths and cycles with properties such as being noncrossing [2, 17], minimizing the longest edge length [6, 12, 24], maximizing the shortest edge length [7], minimizing the total or largest turning angle [1, 14, 19, 22], and minimizing the number of turns [13, 18, 28] to name a few. The longest cycle—the MaxTSP—is NP-hard in Euclidean spaces of dimension , but the complexity of the planar MaxTSP is unknown [10, 11, 21].111It is interesting that the MaxTSP under the -norm for points in the plane can be solved in linear time [11, 21], in contrast to the fact that MinTSP in this case is NP-hard [23]. Paths and cycles that have combinations of these properties have also attracted attention. For example, simultaneously being noncrossing and having maximum total edge length [3, 20] is difficult to satisfy: to achieve a larger length we typically introduce more crossings.
Edge crossings in geometric graphs are usually undesirable as they have the potential of creating unwanted situations such as collisions in motion planning and inconsistency in VLSI layout. They are also undesirable in the context of graph drawing and network visualization as they make drawings more difficult to read and use. Short geometric structures such as shortest perfect matchings, shortest spanning trees, shortest spanning paths, and shortest spanning cycles are inherently noncrossing. This property, however, does not necessarily hold if the structure is not shortest. For long structures such as longest perfect matchings, longest spanning trees, longest spanning paths, and longest spanning cycles—the other end of the spectrum—it seems natural to expect many crossings. Counting crossings in geometric graphs and finding geometric structures with a minimum or maximum number of crossings are active research areas in discrete geometry. The study of this type of problem attracted more attention after the work of Aronov et al. [8] in 1994, who showed that any set of points in the plane in general position admits a crossing family (a set of pairwise intersecting segments) of size . They also conjectured that the true lower bound is linear in . The current best lower bound, , was established by Pach et al. [26] in 2019.
The noncrossing property of shortest structures is mainly ensured by the triangle inequality. The triangle inequality, as noted by Alon et al. [3], also implies that the longest structures often have crossings because a structure usually gets longer by creating more crossings. Alon et al. [3] studied the problem of finding longest noncrossing structures (such as matchings, paths, or trees). Some of their initial results have been improved and extended by Dumitrescu and Tóth [20] (for matchings, paths, and cycles), by Biniaz et al. [15] and by Cabello et al. [16] (for trees). Along this direction, one might wonder whether a longest structure (defined on an arbitrarily large point set) is necessarily crossing. This was explicitly asked by Álvarez-Rebollar et al. [4]. Among other interesting results, they presented arbitrarily large planar point sets for which the longest perfect matching is noncrossing. They asked the following question and proposed the following conjecture:
Question 1 (Álvarez-Rebollar et al. [4]).
For every sufficiently large planar point set, must the longest spanning path have two edges that cross each other?
Conjecture 1 (Álvarez-Rebollar et al. [4]).
The longest spanning cycle on every sufficiently large set of points in the plane has a pair of crossing edges.
The “sufficiently large” condition in the question and conjecture makes sense, as otherwise one can take any 3 points in general position, or any points that are not in a convex position—for such point sets, all spanning paths and cycles are noncrossing.
In the other direction, one might wonder about maximizing the number of crossings in cycles. Here, we would like to highlight another result of Álvarez-Rebollar et al. [4, 5]. Let be the largest number such that any set of points in the plane admits a spanning cycle with at least pairs of crossing edges. Álvarez-Rebollar et al. [4, 5] established the following lower and upper bounds: . In other words, any set of points in the plane admits a spanning cycle with at least crossings, and there is a family of point sets that does not admit any cycle with more than crossings.
1.1 Our contributions
In this paper, we provide negative answers to both Question 1 and Conjecture 1. For any integer we present a set of points in the plane for which the longest spanning path is unique and noncrossing. Similarly, for any integer , we present a set of points in the plane for which the longest spanning cycle is unique and noncrossing. To build such point sets, we use the following framework: First, we choose a set of points on the -axis for which the longest structure may not be unique. Then, we assign new -coordinates to points in to obtain a new point set for which the longest structure corresponds to one in and is also unique and noncrossing. In Section 6, we present some structural properties of longest paths and cycles, which may be of independent interest.
1.2 Preliminaries
All point sets considered in this paper are in the Euclidean plane. A geometric graph is a graph with vertices represented by points and edges represented by line segments between the points. Let be a finite point set. A spanning path for is a path drawn with straight-line edges such that every point in lies at a vertex of the path and every vertex of the path lies at a point in . A spanning cycle is defined analogously. In other words, a spanning path is a Hamiltonian path in the complete geometric graph on , and a spanning cycle is a Hamiltonian cycle in this graph.
Consider two line segments, each connecting a pair of points in . If the interiors of the segments intersect, then we say that they cross; this configuration is called a crossing. A path or a cycle is called noncrossing if its edges do not cross each other. We denote the undirected edge between two points and by , the directed edge from towards by , and the Euclidean distance between and by . The length of a geometric graph is the sum of the lengths of its edges, and we denote it by .
2 Longest Paths and Cycles on the Real Line
In this section we characterize longest paths and cycles in dimension one. These observations play a pivotal role in our constructions in the plane (Sections 3 and 4). We say that an edge intersects a point if the intersection of and is not empty (the intersection could be an endpoint of ). For a sorted set of numbers, the median is the number with rank , and for a sorted set of numbers, the median is the mean of the two numbers with ranks and .
Lemma 1.
Let be a set with an even number of points in , i.e., in dimension one. The endpoints of any longest spanning path on lie on different sides of the median of .
Proof.
Let and assume w.l.o.g. that 0 is the median of (in particular, ). Let be a longest spanning path on . Orient the edges of to make it a directed path. Let and be the starting and ending points of , respectively. For the sake of contradiction, assume that and have the same sign, which we may assume, due to symmetry, to be positive. Thus . Then, the sum of degrees of vertices in to the left of the origin is 2 more than the sum of degrees of vertices to the right. Therefore, must have a directed edge where . If , then by replacing with the undirected edge we obtain a longer undirected path; and if by replacing with we obtain a longer undirected path. Both cases lead to a contradiction. ∎
Lemma 2.
Let be a set with an even number of points in , i.e., in dimension one. Let be a spanning path on . Then is a longest spanning path if and only if
-
every edge of intersects the median of , and
-
the two endpoints of are the two points closest to the median of .
Proof.
Let so that for all , and assume w.l.o.g. that 0 is the median of . Note that since is even. First, we prove by contradiction that if is a longest spanning path, then (i) and (ii) hold.
Suppose that (i) does not hold. Orient the edges of to make it a directed path. Let be an edge of that does not intersect the median. Due to symmetry, assume that . By Lemma 1, the endpoints of lie on different sides of the median. This implies that both sides have the same sum of vertex degrees. Thus must have an edge such that . By replacing these edges with and we obtain an (undirected) spanning path that is longer than because . This contradicts being a longest path.
Now suppose that (ii) does not hold: without loss of generality is not an endpoint of . (The case for can be handled symmetrically). Then has an endpoint with . Orient the edges of so that the path is directed from towards the other endpoint. Let be the outgoing edge from . By part (i), we have . By removing we obtain two paths, and is an endpoint on one of those paths. Next, join the paths with a new edge . Thus we obtain an (undirected) spanning path that is longer than because . This contradicts being longest.
Finally, we prove that any spanning path that satisfies (i) and (ii) is longest, using a direct proof. Consider a longest spanning path on . By the sufficiency proof, (i) and (ii) hold for . This implies that the positive interval is contained in each of the edges, hence it contributes to the length of with multiplicity . Similarly, for any the positive interval contributes to the length of by multiplicity . A similar argument holds for negative intervals. See Figure 1. On the other hand, any spanning path (including ) that satisfies (i) and (ii) receives the exact same multiplicities from the corresponding intervals. Therefore and have the same length, and hence is also a longest path. ∎
A statement similar to that of Lemma 2 can be proved for paths with an odd number of points (in this case one endpoint is the median itself and the other endpoint is the closest point to the median). However, we will not use this in our construction.
Lemma 3.
Let be a finite set in , i.e., in dimension one.
-
A spanning cycle on is longest iff each of its edges intersects the median of .
-
If contains an odd number of points, then for any longest spanning cycle the two edges incident to the median lie on opposite sides of it.
-
Assume that contains points and there is an interval of length between the leftmost and the rightmost points. Then in any longest spanning cycle, edges contain the interval ; and if a spanning cycle has fewer than edges that contain , then it is at least shorter than a longest cycle.
Proof.
Let so that for all , and assume w.l.o.g. that 0 is the median of . Note that if is even, and if is odd.
First we prove the sufficiency of (i) by contradiction. Let be a longest cycle on , and orient its edges to obtain a directed cycle. Suppose, for the sake of contradiction, that the edge of does not intersect the median. We may assume w.l.o.g. that . The sum of vertex degrees strictly on the left and right side of the median are the same, and the edges that contain in their interior contribute 1 to both sums. Consequently, contains an edge with ; or (when is odd) there are two edges incident to the median, say and with . In the first case, we can replace edges and with and . In the second case, replace and with and . In both cases, we obtain a longer (undirected) spanning cycle, contradicting the maximality of .
The necessity of (i) can be proved by a counting argument similar to that of Lemma 2-(i).
Now, we prove (ii) by contradiction. Without loss of generality, let be the median of . Suppose that the median is incident to two edges and with . Then, there is a point in to the right of 0 incident to an edge of that does not contain 0 in its interior. Denote this edge by , where . We can replace edges and with and to obtain a longer spanning cycle, contradicting the maximality of .
To prove the first part of (iii), note that if , then the median is the -st point of , that we denote by . Let be a longest cycle on . It is implied from (i) and (ii) that exactly one edge of (which is incident to ) does not contain . The remaining edges contain .
For the second claim in (iii), let be a spanning cycle on in which fewer than edges contain . Orient the edges of to obtain a directed cycle. The sum of degrees of the leftmost (resp., rightmost ) vertices is (resp., ), and the edges containing have fewer than left (resp., right) endpoints. Consequently, the leftmost (resp., rightmost ) points in induce at least two edges (resp., one edge) of . Therefore, contains two edges, and , such that are to the left of and are to the right of . We can replace these two edges with and , to obtain a spanning cycle that traverses two more times than . In particular, we have , hence , where is a longest cycle on . ∎
3 Noncrossing Longest Paths
Let be an integer. In this section, we construct points for which the longest spanning path is unique and noncrossing. This can be easily observed for : For example, for , any spanning path of the vertices of a triangle and a point in the interior is noncrossing. Thus, we will now assume that . In Section 2, we uncovered some structural properties of longest paths for points on a line. Here we show how to construct a 2-dimensional point set starting with points on the -axis and then assigning -coordinates to the points. We show that the longest path is unique and noncrossing. We describe our construction for the case where is even; the construction for the case where is odd follows with some minor changes. The following theorem summarizes our result in this section.
Theorem 1.
For every integer there exists a set of points in the plane for which the longest spanning path is unique and noncrossing.
In Section 3.1 we give an overview of our construction for an even number of points. The details and proofs are given in Section 3.2. The case of odd paths is considered in Section 3.3.
3.1 A path with an even number of points: An overview
For , consider a set of points on the -axis such that and for , as illustrated in Figure 2(a). Our construction would work even if we set ; however, for a reason that will become clear in Section 3.3, we set differently. The longest spanning path for this point set is not unique. In fact, Lemma 2 implies that any spanning path with endpoints and and with all edges crossing the -axis is a longest path. Conversely, any longest path must have endpoints and , and its edges must cross the -axis. Let be the set of these paths. Let be the point set obtained by assigning to each point a -coordinate such that, as illustrated in Figure 2(b), the following holds:
The value is much larger than , which is in turn much larger than and so on. Notice that the largest -coordinate is which is much smaller than . Due to the small -coordinates, a longest path on corresponds to a path . The length of is roughly the length of plus a very small value , which depends on the new -coordinates. Let be the only edge of incident to . Since has a very large -coordinate compared to other points, the contribution of to is larger than the contribution of other edges. The contribution of is maximized if it connects to the nearest plausible neighbor, which is ; this can be observed from Figure 2(b). Therefore . By a similar argument, gets connected to , and so on. It follows that the path is unique and it is This path is -monotone, and hence noncrossing; see Figure 2(b).
Note. Figures 2(a) and 2(b) are not to scale. The -coordinates should be small enough so that all points lie almost on the -axis (We exaggerated the -coordinates to facilitate readability). Moreover, if we orient the path from towards , then the extension of every directed edge intersects all edges that follow.
3.2 A path with an even number of points: Details
Recall the set of points, , on the -axis, described in the previous section and illustrated in Figure 2(a). We say that an edge intersects the -axis if the intersection of and the -axis is not empty (the intersection could be an endpoint of ). The longest paths for points on a line were characterized in Lemma 2. Denote by the set of all longest spanning paths on .
Lemma 4.
Let be a real number. Suppose that every point in is perturbed by a distance of at most . Let be the new point set after perturbation. Then, the order of the points along any longest path for is the same as the order of the points along some path in .
Proof.
The length of any path on is an integer. Therefore, any path in is at least 1 unit longer than any path not in .
Let be any longest path on . The difference between its length and the length of any path in is at most because has edges, each edge has endpoints, and each endpoint is at distance at most from its corresponding point in . Since the difference is less than . Therefore, cannot correspond to a path that is not in , so corresponds to a path in with the same order of points. ∎
Our plan is to assign new -coordinates to the points of to obtain a point set for which the longest path is -monotone and unique. The new -coordinates will be at most , and thus, by Lemma 4, the longest path of will correspond to a path in . We will make correspond to the path , which is in (by Lemma 2) and depicted in Figure 2(b). We assign to each point the -coordinate such that the following holds:
We set , , and use the following lemma to identify the remaining -coordinates.
Lemma 5.
There exists a real number , with , such that if for each then the longest path on connects to .
Proof.
Since each is at most , Lemma 4 implies that any longest path on corresponds to a path in . Due to small -coordinates, we have for some small value which depends on the new -coordinates. Specifically, we have
where .
Recall from Lemma 2 that is an endpoint of any longest path in . Moreover, is connected to a point (different from ) to the left of the -axis. For let be the Euclidean distance between and the point , and let be the difference of their -coordinates as in Figure 2(a). The contribution of to would be at least (when has -coordinate ) and at most (when has -coordinate ). The contribution of the corresponding edge to would be . Hence the contribution of to would be at least and at most . An easy calculation shows that
this is also implied by the fact that while . If we set , then the contribution of to is at least
which is larger than the contribution of any other plausible edge . Since the -coordinates of all other points are less than , any other edge of contributes less than to . By setting
the contribution of exceeds the sum of the contributions of the remaining edges of . Thus, for this choice of the longest path connects to . ∎
By Lemma 5, we have a specific value such that the longest path includes edge . Now we set and repeat the arguments of Lemma 5, with and (instead of and ). This implies that the next edge of the longest path will connect to . Repeating this more times, we obtain the unique longest path , as in Figure 2(b); in each of the last two steps, there is only one remaining plausible edge (namely, from , and from ). This path is -monotone and hence is noncrossing.
3.3 A path with an odd number of points
In this section, we obtain a noncrossing longest path with an odd number of points. Here is the place where we use the coordinate of the point . We show that our construction for even paths leads to a construction for odd paths by simply removing . Thus we do not need to repeat the lemmas of Section 3.2 for the odd case.
We claim that if we remove the point from the path constructed on in the previous section, the remaining path, i.e., , is the longest path for the remaining points. By construction, . Assume, for the sake of proof by contradiction, that the longest path for the remaining points is longer than . Among the two endpoints of , let be an endpoint that is not . Due to our choices of the - and -coordinates we have . Therefore the concatenation of and would give a path on of length which is larger than . This contradicts being the longest path on .
4 Noncrossing Longest Cycles
Let be an integer. In this section, we construct a set of points for which the longest spanning cycle is unique and noncrossing. For , every spanning cycle is noncrossng. For , we take three vertices of a triangle and a point in the interior. Thus, we assume that .
Theorem 2.
For every integer there exists a set of points in the plane for which the longest spanning cycle is unique and noncrossing.
In Section 4.1 we give an overview of our construction for an even number of points. The details and proofs are given in Section 4.2. For an odd number of points we sketch a construction in Section 4.3.
4.1 A cycle with an even number of points: An overview
Let be an even number. Then either or for some integer . To simplify the indexing (of points and -coordinates) in our construction, from now on we assume that . Let be a set of points, consisting of points for and points for , where is a small value to be determined; see Figure 3. (The construction for is similar; it consists of and two additional points and .) Our construction for cycles is somewhat similar to that of paths in the sense that our cycle consists of two -monotone interior-disjoint paths between and (or between and when is a multiple of ). Although the main idea sounds simple, the noncrossing property of the longest cycle is not straightforward and involves a more detailed analysis.
Lemma 3 implies that a spanning cycle on is longest if and only if each of its edges intersects the -axis. Let be the set of all longest spanning cycles on . As illustrated in Figure 3, we obtain a point set by assigning to each point and the respective -coordinates and such that:
For each we choose such that lies just below (almost on) the segment , and for each we choose such that lies just below (almost on) the segment .
Due to the small -coordinates, any longest cycle on corresponds to a cycle . Moreover for some small value which depends on the new -coordinates. Since has the largest -coordinate, the contribution of the two edges of that are incident to (say and ) is maximized when they are connected to the nearest plausible neighbors which are and . We will choose the -coordinates in such a way that the contribution of and is larger than the sum of the contributions of the remaining edges of the cycle. Thus must connect to and . Similarly, by a suitable choice of -coordinates, we enforce to connect and to the nearest plausible neighbors which are and , and so on. By repeating this process, the longest cycle would be the concatenation of two paths and .
4.2 A cycle with an even number of points: Details
Recall the point set from the previous section (the -coordinates and the value of will be determined in this section). The longest cycles for points on a line were characterized in Lemma 3. Let be the set of all longest cycles on .
Lemma 6.
Any cycle in is at least 1 unit longer than any cycle not in .
Proof.
Consider any cycle that is not in . Lemma 3 implies that has an edge that does not intersect the -axis. Orient the edges of to make it a directed cycle. Since the number of points to the left of the -axis is the same as the number of points to its right, has two directed edges and such that and . By replacing these edges with and we obtain an (undirected) spanning cycle such that
Since the length of any cycle in is at least , we get . ∎
Lemma 7.
Let be a real number. Suppose that every point of is perturbed by a distance of at most . Then the order of the points along any longest cycle of the new point set is the same as the order of the points along some cycle in .
Proof Sketch.
To obtain we only need to describe the following -coordinates:
The -coordinates of the remaining points would then follow as outlined in the previous section (more details are given after Lemma 9). We set and . We use the following lemma (which can be proven similarly to Lemma 5) to assign the -coordinates.
Lemma 8.
There exists a real number , , such that if for and for , then every longest cycle of connects to and .
Proof.
Lemma 7 implies that any longest cycle on corresponds to a cycle in . Due to small -coordinates, we have for some small value which depends on the new -coordinates. Lemma 3 implies that connects to two points to the left of the -axis. Similar to Lemma 5, for define as the Euclidean distance between and the point , and define as the difference of their -coordinates. Analogously, for define and for and the point . Every edge that connects to a point to the left of the -axis has the following contributions to , and .
-
•
For the contribution of to is at least and at most . The contribution of the corresponding edge to is . Hence the contribution of to is at least and at most .
-
•
For the contribution of to is at least and at most . The contribution of the corresponding edge to is . Thus the contribution of to is at least and at most .
-
•
The contribution of to is at least because the -coordinate of is at most ; to verify this observe that and because is almost on whose slope is less than ; also see Figure 3 (recall that the figure is not to scale). The contribution of the corresponding edge to is . Therefore the contribution of to is at least and at most .
Observe that
If we set , then the contributions of and to would respectively be at least
which are larger than the contribution of any other edge and . By setting
the contribution of each of and would be even larger than the sum of the contributions of the remaining edges of . Thus, for this choice of the longest cycle connects to and . ∎
We choose as in the proof of Lemma 8, and set . Then we set so that lies just below (almost on) the segment , as in Figure 3. Notice that . Then, by Lemma 8 the longest cycle connects to and . By Lemma 3, the other edges incident to and must cross the -axis.
Lemma 9.
There exists a real , , such that if for and for , then every longest cycle of connects to and to .
Proof.
Recall the longest cycle from the proof of Lemma 8. We choose small enough such that the contribution of each of , , , and to is larger than the sum of the contributions of the remaining edges of . This would force to connect and to and .
By an argument similar to that of Lemma 8 we can find a parameter that forces to connect to or (, , , , and play the roles of , , , , and , respectively). Similarly, we can find a parameter that forces to connect to or (where , , , , and play the roles of , , , , and , respectively). Then we choose .
Our choice of ensures that connects and to and . Notice that and cannot both connect to or to because it closes the cycle. Thus must use and or and . We show that uses and . See Figure 4. Recall that is almost on the edge , and hence . By the triangle inequality we get . Adding these two yields
(1) |
which means that connects to and to . ∎
We choose our new as in the proof of Lemma 9, and set . Now that the point is fixed we can choose the -coordinate of in the triangle and very close to the segment such that (1) holds. This forces the longest cycle to use and . By repeatedly applying Lemma 9, the longest cycle will use the edges and (for ) and the edges and (for negative ). Therefore the longest cycle on is the concatenation of two paths: and . This cycle is unique and noncrossing.
4.3 A cycle with an odd number of points: An overview
Our construction uses the longest paths of Section 3.2. First we observe that our path construction can be generalized to any set of -coordinates.
Lemma 10.
For every even integer , every set of real numbers, and every such that the -neighborhood of the median of does not contain any points in , there exists a set of points in the plane with the following properties:
-
1.
the -projection of is ;
-
2.
all -coordinates are in the interval ;
-
3.
the -projection of any longest path on is a longest path on ;
-
4.
the longest spanning path on is unique and noncrossing; and
-
5.
the -coordinates of the two endpoints of the longest path are and .
Proof sketch.
We choose the points in such that their -coordinates are the same as the numbers in and their -coordinates are in , and thus (1) and (2) follow.
By an argument similar to the proof of Lemma 2(i) one can show that the difference of lengths of a longest and a non-longest path on is at least . Therefore Lemma 4 would imply that by choosing the -coordinates in the interval , any longest path on corresponds to a longest path on , and thus (3) follows. Items (4) and (5) follow by proper choices of -coordinates similar to that of Lemma 5. ∎
We can now outline the construction; see Figure 5 for an illustration. Let , for . We choose a set of -coordinates as , where will be specified later. Note that is the median of , and the set forms a small cluster. By Lemma 3(ii), all edges of any longest cycle on intersect the -axis; and Lemma 3(iii) implies the following.
Observation 1.
The length of any cycle on that connects to two points in is at least 2 units shorter than a longest cycle on .
Below, we will specify a -coordinate for each element in . This will result in the point set for which the longest spanning cycle is unique and noncrossing. We will denote by the set of points in corresponding to .
It remains to specify the -coordinates of the points in and the parameter . Let denote the point in with -coordinate . We first choose the -coordinate for the leftmost point: Let ; this is the only negative -coordinate. We assume that for all other points. This ensures that the longest cycle on corresponds to a longest cycle on the 1-dimensional multiset where represents the entire cluster (cf. Lemma 3(iii) and Lemma 7). By Lemma 3(ii), for any longest cycle on , the two edges incident to intersect the -axis (i.e., the median). Furthermore, there is a threshold such that if for all remaining points, then must be adjacent to the two closest points on or to the right of the -axis: That is, is adjacent to a point in cluster and to (cf. Observation 1 and Lemma 7). Next, we set and find a threshold such that if for all remaining points and , then the contribution of edge exceeds the sum of contributions of all remaining edges of a spanning cycle. Consequently, the longest cycle must include the edge . Now both and are fixed, and we choose a sufficiently small such that all remaining points in the cluster are below for all possible -coordinates.
A longest cycle on comprises of , , and the longest path on (from to cf. Lemma 2). By Lemma 10, we can choose -coordinates for the remaining points such that is unique and noncrossing; and . In particular, edge lies below the -axis, hence below the entire path ; and lies below the supporting line of . Consequently, the concatenation of , and is noncrossing.
Remark.
Our construction in this section suggests an alternative construction for even cycles that can be obtained by connecting a point to both endpoints of an odd path.
5 Noncrossing Longest Matchings
Álvarez-Rebollar et al. [4] showed that there exist point sets for which the longest perfect matchings are noncrossing. Their example is attributed to Kåra P. Villanger in a paper by Tverberg [29]. As illustrated in Figure 6, it consists of a set of segments with endpoints in and . The distance between any two points and is larger than the distance between any two points in , or the distance between any two points in . The points in are roughly on a vertical line. Álvarez-Rebollar et al. [4] have provided a precise description of the construction along with a detailed proof that is a longest matching for .
Here, we exhibit an alternative point set for which the longest perfect matching is noncrossing. Our construction follows the same framework as for paths and cycles. Let be a set of points for . One can verify that a perfect matching on is longest if and only if all edges cross the -axis. One such matching is . Using ideas similar to those used for paths and cycles, one can assign to each a new -coordinate to make longest and noncrossing at the same time; see Figure 7. The new -coordinates are of the following form: .
6 Some Properties of Longest Paths and Cycles
In this section we give some structural properties of longest paths and cycles, possibly of independent interest. We state these properties only for cycles, but they hold for paths as well. Two edges are in convex position if they are edges of their convex hull. Two directed edges in convex position have the same orientation if they are both directed clockwise or counterclockwise along their convex hull.
Observation 2.
Suppose that we orient the edges of a longest cycle to make it a directed cycle. Then cannot have pair of non-adjacent edges that are in convex position and have the same orientation along their convex hull.
To verify this, note that if has two such edges, say and , then flipping them (replacing and by the two diagonals of the convex hull of and ) would produce a longer undirected cycle as in Figure 8(a). Since and have the same orientation along their convex hull, the flip does not break the cycle into two components. If every directed simple polygon contained a pair of non-adjacent edges in convex position with the same orientation along their convex hull, Observation 2 would imply Conjecture 1. However, some simple polygons do not have edges that can be flipped in this way; see e.g., Figure 8(b).
Observation 3.
The longest cycle need not contain an edge between diametric points.
To verify this observation consider an isosceles right triangle whose right angle is at . Place one point at , one point at , and two or more points very close to . Then, the longest cycle does not contain the diametric point pair . This observation implies that a longest cycle may not be achieved by greedily choosing longest edges.
The following proposition implies that if the longest cycle is noncrossing, it contains some edge whose length is among the smallest three-quarters of all distances defined by its vertices.
Proposition 1.
Let be a simple polygon (a noncrossing cycle) on points. Then has an edge whose length is among the smallest distances of the point pairs.
Proof.
Let and be two edges of such that their distance along (in terms of the number of edges) is at least 2. Since is a simple polygon, and do not cross. Thus, there is an endpoint of and an endpoint of such that is larger than the length of the shorter of and , and is not an edge of . The number of pairs of edges at distance is , and the number of pairs of edges at distance is also . Thus, the total number of pairs of edges at a distance at least is . Each such pair of edges yields a pair . Each can be counted for different pairs of edges that are obtained by combining the two edges incident to and the two edges incident to . Therefore the total number of distinct pairs is at least . Subtracting this from the total number of point pairs yields the claimed bound. ∎
Acknowledgements.
This work was initiated at the 10th Annual Workshop on Geometry and Graphs, held at Bellairs Research Institute in Barbados in February 2023. We thank the organizers and the participants.
References
- [1] Alok Aggarwal, Don Coppersmith, Sanjeev Khanna, Rajeev Motwani, and Baruch Schieber. The angular-metric traveling salesman problem. SIAM Journal on Computing, 29(3):697–711, 1999. doi:10.1137/S0097539796312721.
- [2] Oswin Aichholzer, Sergio Cabello, Ruy Fabila Monroy, David Flores-Peñaloza, Thomas Hackl, Clemens Huemer, Ferran Hurtado, and David R. Wood. Edge-removal and non-crossing configurations in geometric graphs. Discrete Mathematics & Theoretical Computer Science, 12(1):75–86, 2010. doi:10.46298/dmtcs.525.
- [3] Noga Alon, Sridhar Rajagopalan, and Subhash Suri. Long non-crossing configurations in the plane. Fundam. Inform., 22(4):385–394, 1995. doi:10.3233/FI-1995-2245.
- [4] Jose Luis Álvarez-Rebollar, Jorge Cravioto-Lagos, Nestaly Marín, Oriol Andreu Solé-Pi, and Jorge Urrutia. Crossing and intersecting families of geometric graphs on point sets. Graphs Comb., 40(1):17, 2024. doi:10.1007/S00373-023-02734-9.
- [5] José Luis Álvarez-Rebollar, Jorge Cravioto-Lagos, and Jorge Urrutia. Crossing families and self crossing Hamiltonian cycles. In Abstracts of XVI Encuentros de Geometría Computacional, page 13, 2015.
- [6] Hyung-Chan An, Robert Kleinberg, and David B. Shmoys. Approximation algorithms for the bottleneck asymmetric traveling salesman problem. ACM Trans. Algorithms, 17(4):35:1–35:12, 2021. doi:10.1145/3478537.
- [7] Esther M. Arkin, Yi-Jen Chiang, Joseph S. B. Mitchell, Steven Skiena, and Tae-Cheon Yang. On the maximum scatter traveling salesperson problem. SIAM Journal on Computing, 29(2):515–544, 1999. doi:10.1137/S0097539797320281.
- [8] Boris Aronov, Paul Erdős, Wayne Goddard, Daniel J. Kleitman, Michael Klugerman, János Pach, and Leonard J. Schulman. Crossing families. Combinatorica, 14(2):127–134, 1994. doi:10.1007/BF01215345.
- [9] Sanjeev Arora. Polynomial time approximation schemes for Euclidean traveling salesman and other geometric problems. Journal of the ACM, 45(5):753–782, 1998. doi:10.1145/290179.290180.
- [10] Alexander Barvinok, Edward Kh. Gimadi, and Anatoliy I. Serdyukov. The maximum TSP. In Gregory Gutin and Abraham P. Punnen, editors, The Traveling Salesman Problem and Its Variations, pages 585–607. Springer, Boston, MA, 2007. doi:10.1007/0-306-48213-4_12.
- [11] Alexander I. Barvinok, Sándor P. Fekete, David S. Johnson, Arie Tamir, Gerhard J. Woeginger, and Russell Woodroofe. The geometric maximum traveling salesman problem. J. ACM, 50(5):641–664, 2003. doi:10.1145/876638.876640.
- [12] Ahmad Biniaz. Euclidean bottleneck bounded-degree spanning tree ratios. Discrete & Computational Geometry, 67(1):311–327, 2022. doi:10.1007/s00454-021-00286-4.
- [13] Ahmad Biniaz. Improved bounds for covering paths and trees in the plane. In Proc. 39th International Symposium on Computational Geometry (SoCG), volume 258 of LIPIcs, pages 19:1–19:15. Schloss Dagstuhl, 2023. doi:10.4230/LIPICS.SOCG.2023.19.
- [14] Ahmad Biniaz. Acute tours in the plane. Discrete & Computational Geometry, 72:665–673, 2024. doi:10.1007/s00454-023-00486-0.
- [15] Ahmad Biniaz, Prosenjit Bose, Kimberly Crosbie, Jean-Lou De Carufel, David Eppstein, Anil Maheshwari, and Michiel H. M. Smid. Maximum plane trees in multipartite geometric graphs. Algorithmica, 81(4):1512–1534, 2019. doi:10.1007/S00453-018-0482-X.
- [16] Sergio Cabello, Michael Hoffmann, Katharina Klost, Wolfgang Mulzer, and Josef Tkadlec. Long plane trees. In Proc. 38th International Symposium on Computational Geometry (SoCG), volume 224 of LIPIcs, pages 23:1–23:17. Schloss Dagstuhl, 2022. doi:10.4230/LIPICS.SOCG.2022.23.
- [17] Jakub Cerný, Zdenek Dvorák, Vít Jelínek, and Jan Kára. Noncrossing Hamiltonian paths in geometric graphs. Discrete Applied Mathematics, 155(9):1096–1105, 2007. doi:10.1016/j.dam.2005.12.010.
- [18] Adrian Dumitrescu, Dániel Gerbner, Balázs Keszegh, and Csaba D. Tóth. Covering paths for planar point sets. Discrete & Computational Geometry, 51(2):462–484, 2014. doi:10.1007/s00454-013-9563-4.
- [19] Adrian Dumitrescu, János Pach, and Géza Tóth. Drawing Hamiltonian cycles with no large angles. The Electronic Journal of Combinatorics, 19(2):P31, 2012. doi:10.37236/2356.
- [20] Adrian Dumitrescu and Csaba D. Tóth. Long non-crossing configurations in the plane. Discrete & Computational Geometry, 44(4):727–752, 2010. doi:10.1007/s00454-010-9277-9.
- [21] Sándor P. Fekete. Simplicity and hardness of the maximum traveling salesman problem under geometric distances. In Proc. 10th ACM-SIAM Symposium on Discrete Algorithms (SODA), pages 337–345, 1999. URL: https://dl.acm.org/citation.cfm?id=314500.314586.
- [22] Sándor P. Fekete and Gerhard J. Woeginger. Angle-restricted tours in the plane. Computational Geometry: Theory and Applications, 8:195–218, 1997. doi:10.1016/S0925-7721(96)00012-0.
- [23] Michael R. Garey, Ronald L. Graham, and David S. Johnson. Some NP-complete geometric problems. In Proceedings of the 8th Annual ACM Symposium on Theory of Computing (STOC), pages 10–22. ACM, 1976. doi:10.1145/800113.803626.
- [24] Ming-Yang Kao and Manan Sanghi. An approximation algorithm for a bottleneck traveling salesman problem. J. Discrete Algorithms, 7(3):315–326, 2009. doi:10.1016/J.JDA.2008.11.007.
- [25] Joseph S. B. Mitchell. Guillotine subdivisions approximate polygonal subdivisions: A simple polynomial-time approximation scheme for geometric TSP, -MST, and related problems. SIAM J. Comput., 28(4):1298–1309, 1999. doi:10.1137/S0097539796309764.
- [26] János Pach, Natan Rubin, and Gábor Tardos. Planar point sets determine many pairwise crossing segments. Advances in Mathematics, 386:107779, 2021. doi:10.1016/j.aim.2021.107779.
- [27] Christos H. Papadimitriou. The Euclidean traveling salesman problem is NP-complete. Theoretical Computer Science, 4(3):237–244, 1977. doi:10.1016/0304-3975(77)90012-3.
- [28] Clifford Stein and David P. Wagner. Approximation algorithms for the minimum bends traveling salesman problem. In Proceedings of the 8th International Conference on Integer Programming and Combinatorial Optimization IPCO, volume 2081 of LNCS, pages 406–422. Springer, 2001. doi:10.1007/3-540-45535-3_32.
- [29] Helge Tverberg. A seperation property of plane convex sets. Mathematica Scandinavica, 45:255–260, 1979. doi:10.7146/math.scand.a-11840.