Intersection number (graph theory)

Last updated

In the mathematical field of graph theory, the intersection number of a graph is the smallest number of elements in a representation of as an intersection graph of finite sets. In such a representation, each vertex is represented as a set, and two vertices are connected by an edge whenever their sets have a common element. Equivalently, the intersection number is the smallest number of cliques needed to cover all of the edges of . [1] [2]

Contents

A set of cliques that cover all edges of a graph is called a clique edge cover [3] or edge clique cover, [4] or even just a clique cover, although the last term is ambiguous: a clique cover can also be a set of cliques that cover all vertices of a graph. [5] Sometimes "covering" is used in place of "cover". [6] As well as being called the intersection number, the minimum number of these cliques has been called the R-content, [7] edge clique cover number, [4] or clique cover number. [8] The problem of computing the intersection number has been called the intersection number problem, [9] the intersection graph basis problem, [10] covering by cliques, [10] the edge clique cover problem, [9] and the keyword conflict problem. [2]

Every graph with vertices and edges has intersection number at most . The intersection number is NP-hard to compute or approximate, but fixed-parameter tractable.

Definitions

Intersection graphs

Let be any family of sets, allowing sets in to be repeated. Then the intersection graph of is an undirected graph that has a vertex for each set in and an edge between each two sets that have a nonempty intersection. Every graph can be represented as an intersection graph in this way. [11] The intersection number of the graph is the smallest number such that there exists a representation of this type for which the union of the sets in has elements. [1] The problem of finding an intersection representation of a graph with a given number of elements is known as the intersection graph basis problem. [10]

Clique edge covers

A graph with intersection number four. The four shaded regions indicate cliques that cover all the edges of the graph. Erdos-Faber-Lovasz conjecture.svg
A graph with intersection number four. The four shaded regions indicate cliques that cover all the edges of the graph.

An alternative definition of the intersection number of a graph is that it is the smallest number of cliques in (complete subgraphs of ) that together cover all of the edges of . [1] [12] A set of cliques with this property is known as a clique edge cover or edge clique cover, and for this reason the intersection number is also sometimes called the edge clique cover number. [4]

Equivalence

The equality of the intersection number and the edge clique cover number is straightforward to prove. In one direction, suppose that is the intersection graph of a family of sets whose union has elements. Then for any element , the subset of vertices of corresponding to sets that contain forms a clique: any two vertices in this subset are adjacent, because their sets have a nonempty intersection containing . Further, every edge in is contained in one of these cliques: if an edge comes from a non-empty intersection of sets containing an element , then that edge is contained in the clique for . Therefore, the edges of can be covered by cliques, one per element of . [12]

In the other direction, if a graph can be covered by cliques, then each vertex of may be represented by a subset of the cliques, the ones that contain vertex . Two of these subsets, for two vertices and , have a nonempty intersection if and only if there is a clique in the intersection that contains both of them, if and only if there is an edge included in one of the covering cliques. [12]

Applications

The representation of a graph as an abstract intersection graph of sets can be used to construct more concrete geometric intersection representations of the same graph. In particular, if a graph has intersection number , it can be represented as an intersection graph of -dimensional unit hypercubes (implying that its boxicity is at most ), or as an intersection graph of -dimensional unit hyperspheres (its sphericity is at most ). [4]

A clique cover can be used as a kind of adjacency labelling scheme for a graph, in which one labels each vertex by a binary value with a bit for each clique, zero if it does not belong to the clique and one if it belongs. Then two vertices are adjacent if and only if the bitwise and of their labels is nonzero. The length of the labels is the intersection number of the graph. This method was used in an early application of intersection numbers, for labeling a set of keywords so that conflicting keywords could be quickly detected, by E. Kellerman of IBM. For this reason, another name for the problem of computing intersection numbers is the keyword conflict problem. [13] [14] Similarly, in computational geometry, representations based on the intersection number have been considered as a compact representation for visibility graphs, but there exist geometric inputs for which this representation requires a near-quadratic number of cliques. [15]

Another class of applications comes from scheduling problems in which multiple users of a shared resource should be scheduled for time slots, in such a way that incompatible requests are never scheduled for the same time slot but all pairs of compatible requests are given at least one time slot together. The intersection number of a graph of compatibilities gives the minimum number of time slots needed for such a schedule. [2] In the design of compilers for very long instruction word computers, a small clique cover of a graph of incompatible operations can be used to represent their incompatibilities by a small number of artificial resources, allowing resource-based scheduling techniques to be used to assign operations to instruction slots. [16]

Shephard and Vetta observe that the intersection number of any network equals the minimum number of constraints needed in an integer programming formulation of the problem of computing maximum independent sets, in which one has a 0-1 variable per vertex and a constraint that in each clique of a clique cover the variables sum to at most one. They argue that, for the intersection graphs of paths in certain fiber optic communications networks, these intersection numbers are small, explaining the relative ease of solving certain optimization problems in allocating bandwidth on the networks. [3]

In statistics and data visualization, edge clique covers of a graph representing statistically indistinguishable pairs of variables are used to produce compact letter displays that assist in visualizing multiple pairwise comparisons, by assigning a letter or other visual marker for each clique and using these to provide a graphical representation of which variables are indistinguishable. [17] [18]

In the analysis of food webs describing predator-prey relationships among animal species, a competition graph or niche overlap graph is an undirected graph in which the vertices represent species, and edges represent pairs of species that both compete for the same prey. These can be derived from a directed acyclic graph representing predator-prey relations by drawing an edge in the competition graph whenever there exists a prey species such that the predator-prey relation graph has edges and . Every competition graph must have at least one isolated vertex, and the competition number of an arbitrary graph represents the smallest number of isolated vertices that could be added to make it into a competition graph. Biologically, if part of a competition graph is observed, then the competition number represents the smallest possible number of unobserved prey species needed to explain it. The competition number is at most equal to the intersection number: one can transform any undirected graph into a competition graph by adding a prey species for each clique in an edge clique cover. However, this relation is not exact, because it is also possible for the predator species to be prey of other species. In a graph with vertices, at most of them can be the prey of more than one other species, so the competition number is at least the intersection number minus . [19]

Edge clique covers have also been used to infer the existence of protein complexes, systems of mutually interacting proteins, from protein–protein interaction networks describing only the pairwise interactions between proteins. [20] More generally, Guillaume and Latapy have argued that, for complex networks of all types, replacing the network by a bipartite graph connecting its vertices to the cliques in a clique cover highlights the structure in the network. [21]

Upper bounds

Trivially, a graph with edges has intersection number at most . Each edge is itself a two-vertex clique. There are of these cliques and together they cover all the edges. [22] It is also true that every graph with vertices has intersection number at most . More strongly, the edges of every -vertex graph can be covered by at most cliques, all of which are either single edges or triangles. An algorithm for finding this cover is simple: remove any two adjacent vertices and inductively cover the remaining graph. Restoring the two removed vertices, cover edges to their shared neighbors by triangles, leaving edges to unshared neighbors as two-vertex cliques. The inductive cover has at most cliques, and the two removed vertices contribute at most cliques, maximized when all other vertices are unshared neighbors and the edge between the two vertices must be used as a clique. Adding these two quantities gives cliques total. [2] [12] This generalizes Mantel's theorem that a triangle-free graph has at most edges, for in a triangle-free graph the only optimal clique edge cover has one clique per edge and therefore the intersection number equals the number of edges. [2]

An even tighter bound is possible when the number of edges is strictly greater than . Let be the number of pairs of vertices that are not connected by an edge in the given graph , and let be the unique integer for which . Then the intersection number of is at most . [2] [23] Graphs that are the complement of a sparse graph have small intersection numbers: the intersection number of any -vertex graph is at most , where is the base of the natural logarithm and is the maximum degree of the complement graph of . [6]

It follows from deep results on the structure of claw-free graphs that, when a connected -vertex claw-free graph has at least three independent vertices, it has intersection number at most . It remains an unsolved problem whether this is true of all claw-free graphs without requiring them to have large independent sets. [8] An important subclass of the claw-free graphs are the line graphs, graphs representing edges and touching pairs of edges of some other graph . An optimal clique cover of the line graph may be formed with one clique for each triangle in that has two or three degree-2 vertices, and one clique for each vertex that has degree at least two and is not a degree-two vertex of one of these triangles. The intersection number is the number of cliques of these two types. [7]

In the Erdős–Rényi–Gilbert model of random graphs, in which all graphs on labeled vertices are equally likely (or equivalently, each edge is present or absent, independently of other edges, with probability ) the intersection number of an -vertex random graph is with high probability

smaller by a factor of than the number of edges. In these graphs, the maximum cliques have (with high probability) only a logarithmic number of vertices, implying that this many of them are needed to cover all edges. The tricker part of the bound is proving that it is possible to find enough logarithmically-sized cliques to cover many edges, allowing the remaining leftover edges to be covered by two-vertex cliques. [24] [25]

Much of the early research on intersection numbers involved calculating these numbers on various specific graphs, such as the graphs formed by removing a complete subgraph or a perfect matching from a larger complete graph. [26]

Computational complexity

Testing whether a given graph has intersection number at most a given number is NP-complete. [10] [7] [14] Therefore, it is also NP-hard to compute the intersection number of a given graph. In turn, the hardness of the intersection number has been used to prove that it is NP-complete to recognize the squares of split graphs. [27]

The problem of computing the intersection number is, however, fixed-parameter tractable: that is, it can be solved in an amount of time bounded by a polynomial in multiplied by a larger but computable function of the intersection number . [5] [28] This may be shown by observing that there are at most distinct closed neighborhoods in the graph – two vertices that belong to the same set of cliques have the same neighborhood – and that the graph formed by selecting one vertex per closed neighbood has the same intersection number as the original graph. [5] [29] Therefore, in polynomial time the input can be reduced to a smaller kernel with at most vertices and edges. Applying an exponential time dynamic programming search procedure over subsets of edges of this kernel gives time , double exponential in . [5] [28] The double-exponential dependence on cannot be reduced to single exponential by a kernelization of polynomial size, unless the polynomial hierarchy collapses, [30] and if the exponential time hypothesis is true then double-exponential dependence is necessary regardless of whether kernelization is used. [28] On graphs of bounded treewidth, dynamic programming on a tree decomposition of the graph can find the intersection number in linear time, [31] [20] but simpler algorithms based on finite sets of reduction rules do not work. [31]

The problem cannot be approximated in polynomial time with an approximation ratio better than , for some constant , [32] and the best approximation ratio is known is better than the trivial by only a polylogarithmic factor. [5] Researchers in this area have also investigated the computational efficiency of heuristics, without guarantees on the solution quality they produce, and their behavior on real-world networks. [5] [33]

More efficient algorithms are known for certain special classes of graphs. The intersection number of an interval graph is always equal to its number of maximal cliques, which may be computed in polynomial time. [34] [35] More generally, in chordal graphs, the intersection number may be computed by an algorithm that considers the vertices in an elimination ordering of the graph (an ordering in which each vertex and its later neighbors form a clique) and that, for each vertex , forms a clique for and its later neighbors whenever at least one of the edges incident to is not covered by any earlier clique. [35] It is also possible to find the intersection number in linear time in circular-arc graphs. [36] However, although these graphs have only a polynomial number of cliques to choose among for the cover, having few cliques alone is not enough to make the problem easy: there exist families of graphs with polynomially many cliques for which the intersection number remains NP-hard. [9] The intersection number can also be found in polynomial time for graphs whose maximum degree is five, but is NP-hard for graphs of maximum degree six. [37] [38] On planar graphs, computing the intersection number exactly remains NP-hard, but it has a polynomial-time approximation scheme based on Baker's technique. [20]

See also

Related Research Articles

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Clique problem</span> Task of computing complete subgraphs

In computer science, the clique problem is the computational problem of finding cliques in a graph. It has several different formulations depending on which cliques, and what information about the cliques, should be found. Common formulations of the clique problem include finding a maximum clique, finding a maximum weight clique in a weighted graph, listing all maximal cliques, and solving the decision problem of testing whether a graph contains a clique larger than a given size.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Graph coloring</span> Methodic assignment of colors to elements of a graph

In graph theory, graph coloring is a special case of graph labeling; it is an assignment of labels traditionally called "colors" to elements of a graph subject to certain constraints. In its simplest form, it is a way of coloring the vertices of a graph such that no two adjacent vertices are of the same color; this is called a vertex coloring. Similarly, an edge coloring assigns a color to each edge so that no two adjacent edges are of the same color, and a face coloring of a planar graph assigns a color to each face or region so that no two faces that share a boundary have the same color.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Steiner tree problem</span> On short connecting networks with added vertices

In combinatorial mathematics, the Steiner tree problem, or minimum Steiner tree problem, named after Jakob Steiner, is an umbrella term for a class of problems in combinatorial optimization. While Steiner tree problems may be formulated in a number of settings, they all require an optimal interconnect for a given set of objects and a predefined objective function. One well-known variant, which is often used synonymously with the term Steiner tree problem, is the Steiner tree problem in graphs. Given an undirected graph with non-negative edge weights and a subset of vertices, usually referred to as terminals, the Steiner tree problem in graphs requires a tree of minimum weight that contains all terminals and minimizes the total weight of its edges. Further well-known variants are the Euclidean Steiner tree problem and the rectilinear minimum Steiner tree problem.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Clique (graph theory)</span> Subset of the vertices of a node-link graph that are all adjacent to each other

In the mathematical area of graph theory, a clique is a subset of vertices of an undirected graph such that every two distinct vertices in the clique are adjacent. That is, a clique of a graph is an induced subgraph of that is complete. Cliques are one of the basic concepts of graph theory and are used in many other mathematical problems and constructions on graphs. Cliques have also been studied in computer science: the task of finding whether there is a clique of a given size in a graph is NP-complete, but despite this hardness result, many algorithms for finding cliques have been studied.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Independent set (graph theory)</span> Unrelated vertices in graphs

In graph theory, an independent set, stable set, coclique or anticlique is a set of vertices in a graph, no two of which are adjacent. That is, it is a set of vertices such that for every two vertices in , there is no edge connecting the two. Equivalently, each edge in the graph has at most one endpoint in . A set is independent if and only if it is a clique in the graph's complement. The size of an independent set is the number of vertices it contains. Independent sets have also been called "internally stable sets", of which "stable set" is a shortening.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Vertex cover</span> Subset of a graphs vertices, including at least one endpoint of every edge

In graph theory, a vertex cover of a graph is a set of vertices that includes at least one endpoint of every edge of the graph.

In the mathematical discipline of graph theory, a matching or independent edge set in an undirected graph is a set of edges without common vertices. In other words, a subset of the edges is a matching if each vertex appears in at most one edge of that matching. Finding a matching in a bipartite graph can be treated as a network flow problem.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Chordal graph</span> Graph where all long cycles have a chord

In the mathematical area of graph theory, a chordal graph is one in which all cycles of four or more vertices have a chord, which is an edge that is not part of the cycle but connects two vertices of the cycle. Equivalently, every induced cycle in the graph should have exactly three vertices. The chordal graphs may also be characterized as the graphs that have perfect elimination orderings, as the graphs in which each minimal separator is a clique, and as the intersection graphs of subtrees of a tree. They are sometimes also called rigid circuit graphs or triangulated graphs.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Dominating set</span> Subset of a graphs nodes such that all other nodes link to at least one

In graph theory, a dominating set for a graph G is a subset D of its vertices, such that any vertex of G is either in D, or has a neighbor in D. The domination numberγ(G) is the number of vertices in a smallest dominating set for G.

In graph theory, a domatic partition of a graph is a partition of into disjoint sets , ,..., such that each Vi is a dominating set for G. The figure on the right shows a domatic partition of a graph; here the dominating set consists of the yellow vertices, consists of the green vertices, and consists of the blue vertices.

In the mathematical discipline of graph theory, a feedback vertex set (FVS) of a graph is a set of vertices whose removal leaves a graph without cycles. Equivalently, each FVS contains at least one vertex of any cycle in the graph. The feedback vertex set number of a graph is the size of a smallest feedback vertex set. The minimum feedback vertex set problem is an NP-complete problem; it was among the first problems shown to be NP-complete. It has wide applications in operating systems, database systems, and VLSI chip design.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Feedback arc set</span> Edges that hit all cycles in a graph

In graph theory and graph algorithms, a feedback arc set or feedback edge set in a directed graph is a subset of the edges of the graph that contains at least one edge out of every cycle in the graph. Removing these edges from the graph breaks all of the cycles, producing a directed acyclic graph, an acyclic subgraph of the given graph. The feedback arc set with the fewest possible edges is the minimum feedback arc set and its removal leaves the maximum acyclic subgraph; weighted versions of these optimization problems are also used. If a feedback arc set is minimal, meaning that removing any edge from it produces a subset that is not a feedback arc set, then it has an additional property: reversing all of its edges, rather than removing them, produces a directed acyclic graph.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Boxicity</span> Smallest dimension where a graph can be represented as an intersection graph of boxes

In graph theory, boxicity is a graph invariant, introduced by Fred S. Roberts in 1969.

In computer science, a kernelization is a technique for designing efficient algorithms that achieve their efficiency by a preprocessing stage in which inputs to the algorithm are replaced by a smaller input, called a "kernel". The result of solving the problem on the kernel should either be the same as on the original input, or it should be easy to transform the output on the kernel to the desired output for the original problem.

In graph theory, a clique cover or partition into cliques of a given undirected graph is a partition of the vertices into cliques, subsets of vertices within which every two vertices are adjacent. A minimum clique cover is a clique cover that uses as few cliques as possible. The minimum k for which a clique cover exists is called the clique cover number of the given graph.

In graph theory and theoretical computer science, the longest path problem is the problem of finding a simple path of maximum length in a given graph. A path is called simple if it does not have any repeated vertices; the length of a path may either be measured by its number of edges, or by the sum of the weights of its edges. In contrast to the shortest path problem, which can be solved in polynomial time in graphs without negative-weight cycles, the longest path problem is NP-hard and the decision version of the problem, which asks whether a path exists of at least some given length, is NP-complete. This means that the decision problem cannot be solved in polynomial time for arbitrary graphs unless P = NP. Stronger hardness results are also known showing that it is difficult to approximate. However, it has a linear time solution for directed acyclic graphs, which has important applications in finding the critical path in scheduling problems.

In the mathematical fields of graph theory and combinatorial optimization, the bipartite dimension or biclique cover number of a graph G = (VE) is the minimum number of bicliques (that is complete bipartite subgraphs), needed to cover all edges in E. A collection of bicliques covering all edges in G is called a biclique edge cover, or sometimes biclique cover. The bipartite dimension of G is often denoted by the symbol d(G).

In the mathematical fields of graph theory and finite model theory, the logic of graphs deals with formal specifications of graph properties using sentences of mathematical logic. There are several variations in the types of logical operation that can be used in these sentences. The first-order logic of graphs concerns sentences in which the variables and predicates concern individual vertices and edges of a graph, while monadic second-order graph logic allows quantification over sets of vertices or edges. Logics based on least fixed point operators allow more general predicates over tuples of vertices, but these predicates can only be constructed through fixed-point operators, restricting their power.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Planted clique</span> Complete subgraph added to a random graph

In computational complexity theory, a planted clique or hidden clique in an undirected graph is a clique formed from another graph by selecting a subset of vertices and adding edges between each pair of vertices in the subset. The planted clique problem is the algorithmic problem of distinguishing random graphs from graphs that have a planted clique. This is a variation of the clique problem; it may be solved in quasi-polynomial time but is conjectured not to be solvable in polynomial time for intermediate values of the clique size. The conjecture that no polynomial time solution exists is called the planted clique conjecture; it has been used as a computational hardness assumption.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Matroid parity problem</span> Largest independent set of paired elements

In combinatorial optimization, the matroid parity problem is a problem of finding the largest independent set of paired elements in a matroid. The problem was formulated by Lawler (1976) as a common generalization of graph matching and matroid intersection. It is also known as polymatroid matching, or the matchoid problem.

References

  1. 1 2 3 Gross, Jonathan L.; Yellen, Jay (2006), Graph Theory and its Applications, CRC Press, p. 440, ISBN   978-1-58488-505-4
  2. 1 2 3 4 5 6 Roberts, Fred S. (1985), "Applications of edge coverings by cliques", Discrete Applied Mathematics , 10 (1): 93–109, doi: 10.1016/0166-218X(85)90061-7 , MR   0770871
  3. 1 2 Shepherd, F.B.; Vetta, A. (November 2004), "Lighting fibers in a dark network", IEEE Journal on Selected Areas in Communications, 22 (9): 1583–1588, doi:10.1109/jsac.2004.833850, S2CID   31868129
  4. 1 2 3 4 Michael, T. S.; Quint, Thomas (2006), "Sphericity, cubicity, and edge clique covers of graphs", Discrete Applied Mathematics , 154 (8): 1309–1313, doi: 10.1016/j.dam.2006.01.004
  5. 1 2 3 4 5 6 Gramm, Jens; Guo, Jiong; Hüffner, Falk; Niedermeier, Rolf (2009), "Data reduction and exact algorithms for clique cover" (PDF), Journal of Experimental Algorithmics, 13 (2): 2–15, doi:10.1145/1412228.1412236, S2CID   15057639
  6. 1 2 Alon, Noga (1986), "Covering graphs by the minimum number of equivalence relations" (PDF), Combinatorica , 6 (3): 201–206, doi:10.1007/bf02579381, S2CID   13522339
  7. 1 2 3 Orlin, J. (1977), "Contentment in graph theory: covering graphs with cliques", Indagationes Mathematicae, 80 (5): 406–424, doi: 10.1016/1385-7258(77)90055-5
  8. 1 2 Javadi, Ramin; Hajebi, Sepehr (2019), "Edge clique cover of claw-free graphs", Journal of Graph Theory , 90 (3): 311–405, arXiv: 1608.07723 , doi:10.1002/jgt.22403, MR   3904838, S2CID   67770018
  9. 1 2 3 Rosgen, Bill; Stewart, Lorna (2007), "Complexity results on graphs with few cliques", Discrete Mathematics & Theoretical Computer Science , 9 (1): 127–135, doi: 10.46298/dmtcs.387 , MR   2335890
  10. 1 2 3 4 Garey, Michael R.; Johnson, David S. (1979). Computers and Intractability: A Guide to the Theory of NP-Completeness . Series of Books in the Mathematical Sciences (1st ed.). New York: W. H. Freeman and Company. ISBN   9780716710455. MR   0519066. OCLC   247570676., Problems GT17 (covering by cliques) and GT59 (intersection graph basis)
  11. Szpilrajn-Marczewski, Edward (1945), "Sur deux propriétés des classes d'ensembles", Fundamenta Mathematicae (in French), 33: 303–307, doi: 10.4064/fm-33-1-303-307 , MR   0015448
  12. 1 2 3 4 Erdős, Paul; Goodman, A. W.; Pósa, Louis (1966), "The representation of a graph by set intersections" (PDF), Canadian Journal of Mathematics , 18 (1): 106–112, CiteSeerX   10.1.1.210.6950 , doi:10.4153/CJM-1966-014-3, MR   0186575, S2CID   646660
  13. Kellerman, E. (1973), "Determination of keyword conflict", IBM Technical Disclosure Bulletin, 16 (2): 544–546, as cited by Kou, Stockmeyer & Wong (1978)
  14. 1 2 Kou, L. T.; Stockmeyer, L. J.; Wong, C. K. (1978), "Covering edges by cliques with regard to keyword conflicts and intersection graphs", Communications of the ACM , 21 (2): 135–139, doi: 10.1145/359340.359346 , S2CID   15059696
  15. Agarwal, P. K.; Alon, N.; Aronov, B.; Suri, S. (1994), "Can visibility graphs be represented compactly?", Discrete & Computational Geometry , 12 (3): 347–365, doi: 10.1007/BF02574385 , MR   1298916
  16. Rajagopalan, Subramanian; Vachharajani, Manish; Malik, Sharad (2000), "Handling irregular ILP within conventional VLIW schedulers using artificial resource constraints", Proceedings of the 2000 International Conference on Compilers, Architectures and Synthesis for Embedded Systems, CASES 2000, San Jose, California, USA, November 7–18, 2000, Association for Computing Machinery, pp. 157–164, doi:10.1145/354880.354902, S2CID   6498253
  17. Piepho, Hans-Peter (2004), "An algorithm for a letter-based representation of all-pairwise comparisons", Journal of Computational and Graphical Statistics, 13 (2): 456–466, doi:10.1198/1061860043515, MR   2063995, S2CID   122068627
  18. Gramm, Jens; Guo, Jiong; Hüffner, Falk; Niedermeier, Rolf; Piepho, Hans-Peter; Schmid, Ramona (2008), "Algorithms for compact letter displays: Comparison and evaluation", Computational Statistics & Data Analysis, 52 (2): 725–736, doi:10.1016/j.csda.2006.09.035, MR   2418523
  19. Opsut, Robert J. (1982), "On the computation of the competition number of a graph", SIAM Journal on Algebraic and Discrete Methods , 3 (4): 420–428, doi:10.1137/0603043, MR   0679638
  20. 1 2 3 Blanchette, Mathieu; Kim, Ethan; Vetta, Adrian (2012), "Clique cover on sparse networks", in Bader, David A.; Mutzel, Petra (eds.), Proceedings of the 14th Meeting on Algorithm Engineering & Experiments, ALENEX 2012, The Westin Miyako, Kyoto, Japan, January 16, 2012, Society for Industrial and Applied Mathematics, pp. 93–102, doi:10.1137/1.9781611972924.10
  21. Guillaume, Jean-Loup; Latapy, Matthieu (2004), "Bipartite structure of all complex networks" (PDF), Information Processing Letters, 90 (5): 215–221, doi:10.1016/j.ipl.2004.03.007, MR   2054656, S2CID   6254096
  22. Balakrishnan, V. K. (1997), Schaum's Outline of Theory and Problems of Graph Theory, McGraw-Hill Professional, p. 40, ISBN   978-0-07-005489-9
  23. Lovász, L. (1968), "On covering of graphs", in Erdős, P.; Katona, G. (eds.), Proceedings of the Colloquium held at Tihany, Hungary, 1966, Academic Press, pp. 231–236; as cited by Roberts (1985)
  24. Bollobás, Béla; Erdős, Paul; Spencer, Joel; West, Douglas B. (1993), "Clique coverings of the edges of a random graph" (PDF), Combinatorica , 13 (1): 1–5, doi:10.1007/BF01202786, MR   1221173, S2CID   26565829
  25. Frieze, Alan; Reed, Bruce (1995), "Covering the edges of a random graph by cliques", Combinatorica , 15 (4): 489–497, arXiv: 1103.4870 , doi:10.1007/BF01192522, MR   1364022, S2CID   7326662
  26. Pullman, Norman J. (1983), "Clique coverings of graphs – A survey", in Reynolds, Louis; Casse, Antoine (eds.), Combinatorial Mathematics X: Proceedings of the Conference Held in Adelaide, Australia, August 23-27, 1982, Lecture Notes in Mathematics, vol. 1036, Springer, pp. 72–85, doi:10.1007/bfb0071509, ISBN   978-3-540-12708-6, MR   0731572
  27. Lau, Lap Chi; Corneil, Derek G. (2004), "Recognizing powers of proper interval, split, and chordal graphs", SIAM Journal on Discrete Mathematics , 18 (1): 83–102, doi:10.1137/S0895480103425930, MR   2112490
  28. 1 2 3 Cygan, Marek; Pilipczuk, Marcin; Pilipczuk, Michał (2016), "Known algorithms for edge clique cover are probably optimal", SIAM Journal on Computing , 45 (1): 67–83, arXiv: 1203.1754 , doi:10.1137/130947076, MR   3448348, S2CID   11264145
  29. Gyárfás, A. (1990), "A simple lower bound on edge coverings by cliques", Discrete Mathematics , 85 (1): 103–104, doi: 10.1016/0012-365X(90)90168-H , MR   1078317
  30. Cygan, Marek; Kratsch, Stefan; Pilipczuk, Marcin; Pilipczuk, Michal; Wahlström, Magnus (2014), "Clique cover and graph separation: new incompressibility results" (PDF), ACM Transactions on Computation Theory, 6 (2): 6:1–6:19, doi:10.1145/2594439, S2CID   6887887
  31. 1 2 Bodlaender, Hans L.; van Antwerpen-de Fluiter, Babette (2001), "Reduction algorithms for graphs of small treewidth", Information and Computation , 167 (2): 86–119, doi: 10.1006/inco.2000.2958 , MR   1835592
  32. Lund, Carsten; Yannakakis, Mihalis (1994), "On the hardness of approximating minimization problems", Journal of the ACM , 41 (5): 960–981, doi: 10.1145/185675.306789 , MR   1371491
  33. Conte, Alessio; Grossi, Roberto; Marino, Andrea (2020), "Large-scale clique cover of real-world networks", Information and Computation, 270, Article 104464, 15pp, doi:10.1016/j.ic.2019.104464, hdl: 11568/1028251 , MR   4050008, S2CID   203036455
  34. Opsut, R. J.; Roberts, F. S. (1981), "On the fleet maintenance, mobile radio frequency, task assignment, and traffic phasing problems", in Chartrand, G.; Alavi, Y.; Goldsmith, D. L.; Lesniak-Foster, L.; Lick, D. R. (eds.), Proceedings of the 4th International Conference on the Theory and Applications of Graphs, Western Michigan University, Kalamazoo, Michigan, May 6-9, 1980, New York: Wiley, pp. 479–492, MR   0634549 ; as cited by Roberts (1985)
  35. 1 2 Scheinerman, Edward R.; Trenk, Ann N. (1999), "On the fractional intersection number of a graph", Graphs and Combinatorics , 15 (3): 341–351, doi:10.1007/s003730050068, MR   1723018, S2CID   33081703
  36. Hsu, Wen Lian; Tsai, Kuo-Hui (1991), "Linear time algorithms on circular-arc graphs", Information Processing Letters , 40 (3): 123–129, doi:10.1016/0020-0190(91)90165-E, MR   1143909
  37. Pullman, Norman J. (1984), "Clique covering of graphs, IV: Algorithms", SIAM Journal on Computing, 13 (1): 57–75, doi:10.1137/0213005, MR   0731027
  38. Hoover, D. N. (1992), "Complexity of graph covering problems for graphs of low degree", Journal of Combinatorial Mathematics and Combinatorial Computing, 11: 187–208, MR   1160076