In graph theory, the tree-depth of a connected undirected graph is a numerical invariant of , the minimum height of a Trémaux tree for a supergraph of . This invariant and its close relatives have gone under many different names in the literature, including vertex ranking number, ordered chromatic number, and minimum elimination tree height; it is also closely related to the cycle rank of directed graphs and the star height of regular languages. [1] Intuitively, where the treewidth of a graph measures how far it is from being a tree, this parameter measures how far a graph is from being a star.
The tree-depth of a graph may be defined as the minimum height of a forest with the property that every edge of connects a pair of nodes that have an ancestor-descendant relationship to each other in . [2] If is connected, this forest must be a single tree; it need not be a subgraph of , but if it is, it is a Trémaux tree for .
The set of ancestor-descendant pairs in forms a trivially perfect graph, and the height of is the size of the largest clique in this graph. Thus, the tree-depth may alternatively be defined as the size of the largest clique in a trivially perfect supergraph of , mirroring the definition of treewidth as one less than the size of the largest clique in a chordal supergraph of . [3]
Another definition is the following:
where is the set of vertices of and the are the connected components of . [4] This definition mirrors the definition of cycle rank of directed graphs, which uses strong connectivity and strongly connected components in place of undirected connectivity and connected components.
Tree-depth may also be defined using a form of graph coloring. A centered coloring of a graph is a coloring of its vertices with the property that every connected induced subgraph has a color that appears exactly once. Then, the tree-depth is the minimum number of colors in a centered coloring of the given graph. If is a forest of height with the property that every edge of connects an ancestor and a descendant in , then a centered coloring of using colors may be obtained by coloring each vertex by its distance from the root of its tree in . [5]
Finally, one can define this in terms of a pebble game, or more precisely as a cops and robber game. Consider the following game, played on an undirected graph. There are two players, a robber and a cop. The robber has one pebble he can move along the edges of the given graph. The cop has an unlimited number of pebbles, but she wants to minimize the amount of pebbles she uses. The cop cannot move a pebble after it has been placed on the graph. The game proceeds as follows. The robber places his pebble. The cop then announces where she wants to place a new cop pebble. The robber can then move his pebble along edges, but not through occupied vertices. The game is over when the cop player places a pebble on top of the robber pebble. The tree-depth of the given graph is the minimum number of pebbles needed by the cop to guarantee a win. [6] For a star graph, two pebbles suffice: the strategy is to place a pebble at the center vertex, forcing the robber to one arm, and then to place the remaining pebble on the robber. For a path with vertices, the cop uses a binary search strategy, which guarantees that at most pebbles are needed.
The tree-depth of a complete graph equals its number of vertices. For, in this case, the only possible forest for which every pair of vertices are in an ancestor-descendant relationship is a single path. Similarly, the tree-depth of a complete bipartite graph is . For, the nodes that are placed at the leaves of the forest must have at least ancestors in . A forest achieving this bound may be constructed by forming a path for the smaller side of the bipartition, with each vertex on the larger side of the bipartition forming a leaf in connected to the bottom vertex of this path.
The tree-depth of a path with vertices is exactly . A forest representing this path with this depth may be formed by placing the midpoint of the path as the root of and recursing within the two smaller paths on either side of it. [7]
Any -vertex forest has tree-depth . For, in a forest, one can always find a constant number of vertices the removal of which leaves a forest that can be partitioned into two smaller subforests with at most vertices each. By recursively partitioning each of these two subforests, one can easily derive a logarithmic upper bound on the tree-depth. The same technique, applied to a tree decomposition of a graph, shows that, if the treewidth of an -vertex graph is , then the tree-depth of is . [8] Since outerplanar graphs, series–parallel graphs, and Halin graphs all have bounded treewidth, they all also have at most logarithmic tree-depth. The typical graphs with large treedepth and small treewidth are the perfect binary trees and the paths. Precisely, there is a constant with the following property: if a graph has treedepth at least and treewidth less than then it contains a perfect binary tree with height or a path of length as a minor. [9]
In the other direction, the treewidth of a graph is at most equal to its tree-depth. More precisely, the treewidth is at most the pathwidth, which is at most one less than the tree-depth. [10]
A minor of a graph is another graph formed from a subgraph of by contracting some of its edges. Tree-depth is monotonic under minors: every minor of a graph has tree-depth at most equal to the tree-depth of itself. [11] Thus, by the Robertson–Seymour theorem, for every fixed the set of graphs with tree-depth at most has a finite set of forbidden minors.
If is a class of graphs closed under taking graph minors, then the graphs in have tree-depth if and only if does not include all the path graphs. [12] More precisely, there is a constant such that every graph of treedepth at least contains one of the following minors (each of treedepth at least ): [9]
As well as behaving well under graph minors, tree-depth has close connections to the theory of induced subgraphs of a graph. Within the class of graphs that have tree-depth at most (for any fixed integer ), the relation of being an induced subgraph forms a well-quasi-ordering. [13] The basic idea of the proof that this relation is a well-quasi-ordering is to use induction on ; the forests of height may be interpreted as sequences of forests of height (formed by deleting the roots of the trees in the height- forest) and Higman's lemma can be used together with the induction hypothesis to show that these sequences are well-quasi-ordered.
Well-quasi-ordering implies that any property of graphs that is monotonic with respect to induced subgraphs has finitely many forbidden induced subgraphs, and therefore may be tested in polynomial time on graphs of bounded tree-depth. The graphs with tree-depth at most themselves also have a finite set of forbidden induced subgraphs. [14]
If is a class of graphs with bounded degeneracy, the graphs in have bounded tree-depth if and only if there is a path graph that cannot occur as an induced subgraph of a graph in . [12]
Computing tree-depth is computationally hard: the corresponding decision problem is NP-complete. [15] The problem remains NP-complete for bipartite graphs ( Bodlaender et al. 1998 ), as well as for chordal graphs. [16]
On the positive side, tree-depth can be computed in polynomial time on interval graphs, [17] as well as on permutation, trapezoid, circular-arc, circular permutation graphs, and cocomparability graphs of bounded dimension. [18] For undirected trees, tree-depth can be computed in linear time. [19]
Bodlaender et al. (1995) give an approximation algorithm for tree-depth with an approximation ratio of , based on the fact that tree-depth is always within a logarithmic factor of the treewidth of a graph.
Because tree-depth is monotonic under graph minors, it is fixed-parameter tractable: there is an algorithm for computing tree-depth running in time , where is the depth of the given graph and is its number of vertices. Thus, for every fixed value of , the problem of testing whether the tree-depth is at most can be solved in polynomial time. More specifically, the dependence on in this algorithm can be made linear, by the following method: compute a depth first search tree, and test whether this tree's depth is greater than . If so, the tree-depth of the graph is greater than and the problem is solved. If not, the shallow depth first search tree can be used to construct a tree decomposition with bounded width, and standard dynamic programming techniques for graphs of bounded treewidth can be used to compute the depth in linear time. [20]
It is also possible to compute the tree-depth exactly, for graphs whose tree-depth may be large, in time for a constant slightly smaller than 2. [21]
In graph theory, a tree decomposition is a mapping of a graph into a tree that can be used to define the treewidth of the graph and speed up solving certain computational problems on the graph.
In graph theory, an undirected graph H is called a minor of the graph G if H can be formed from G by deleting edges, vertices and by contracting edges.
In the mathematical field of graph theory, a graph homomorphism is a mapping between two graphs that respects their structure. More concretely, it is a function between the vertex sets of two graphs that maps adjacent vertices to adjacent vertices.
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: a chordal completion of a graph is typically called a triangulation of that graph.
In mathematics, a dense graph is a graph in which the number of edges is close to the maximal number of edges. The opposite, a graph with only a few edges, is a sparse graph. The distinction of what constitutes a dense or sparse graph is ill-defined, and is often represented by 'roughly equal to' statements. Due to this, the way that density is defined often depends on the context of the problem.
In graph theory, the treewidth of an undirected graph is an integer number which specifies, informally, how far the graph is from being a tree. The smallest treewidth is 1; the graphs with treewidth 1 are exactly the trees and the forests. The graphs with treewidth at most 2 are the series–parallel graphs. The maximal graphs with treewidth exactly k are called k-trees, and the graphs with treewidth at most k are called partial k-trees. Many other well-studied graph families also have bounded treewidth.
In graph theory, a path decomposition of a graph G is, informally, a representation of G as a "thickened" path graph, and the pathwidth of G is a number that measures how much the path was thickened to form G. More formally, a path-decomposition is a sequence of subsets of vertices of G such that the endpoints of each edge appear in one of the subsets and such that each vertex appears in a contiguous subsequence of the subsets, and the pathwidth is one less than the size of the largest set in such a decomposition. Pathwidth is also known as interval thickness, vertex separation number, or node searching number.
In graph theory, the Grundy number or Grundy chromatic number of an undirected graph is the maximum number of colors that can be used by a greedy coloring strategy that considers the vertices of the graph in sequence and assigns each vertex its first available color, using a vertex ordering chosen to use as many colors as possible. Grundy numbers are named after P. M. Grundy, who studied an analogous concept for directed graphs in 1939. The undirected version was introduced by Christen & Selkow (1979).
In the mathematical area of graph theory, an induced path in an undirected graph G is a path that is an induced subgraph of G. That is, it is a sequence of vertices in G such that each two adjacent vertices in the sequence are connected by an edge in G, and each two nonadjacent vertices in the sequence are not connected by any edge in G. An induced path is sometimes called a snake, and the problem of finding long induced paths in hypercube graphs is known as the snake-in-the-box problem.
In graph theory, the planar separator theorem is a form of isoperimetric inequality for planar graphs, that states that any planar graph can be split into smaller pieces by removing a small number of vertices. Specifically, the removal of vertices from an n-vertex graph can partition the graph into disjoint subgraphs each of which has at most vertices.
In the mathematical field of graph theory, a star coloring of a graph G is a (proper) vertex coloring in which every path on four vertices uses at least three distinct colors. Equivalently, in a star coloring, the induced subgraphs formed by the vertices of any two colors has connected components that are star graphs. Star coloring has been introduced by Grünbaum (1973). The star chromatic number of G is the fewest colors needed to star color G.
In mathematics, in the areas of order theory and combinatorics, Mirsky's theorem characterizes the height of any finite partially ordered set in terms of a partition of the order into a minimum number of antichains. It is named for Leon Mirsky and is closely related to Dilworth's theorem on the widths of partial orders, to the perfection of comparability graphs, to the Gallai–Hasse–Roy–Vitaver theorem relating longest paths and colorings in graphs, and to the Erdős–Szekeres theorem on monotonic subsequences.
In graph theory, a Trémaux tree of an undirected graph is a type of spanning tree, generalizing depth-first search trees. They are defined by the property that every edge of connects an ancestor–descendant pair in the tree. Trémaux trees are named after Charles Pierre Trémaux, a 19th-century French author who used a form of depth-first search as a strategy for solving mazes. They have also been called normal spanning trees, especially in the context of infinite graphs.
In graph theory, a shallow minor or limited-depth minor is a restricted form of a graph minor in which the subgraphs that are contracted to form the minor have small diameter. Shallow minors were introduced by Plotkin, Rao & Smith (1994), who attributed their invention to Charles E. Leiserson and Sivan Toledo.
In the mathematical field of graph theory, the queue number of a graph is a graph invariant defined analogously to stack number using first-in first-out (queue) orderings in place of last-in first-out (stack) orderings.
In graph theory, a family of graphs is said to have bounded expansion if all of its shallow minors are sparse graphs. Many natural families of sparse graphs have bounded expansion. A closely related but stronger property, polynomial expansion, is equivalent to the existence of separator theorems for these families. Families with these properties have efficient algorithms for problems including the subgraph isomorphism problem and model checking for the first order theory of graphs.
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.
In graph theory, a cop-win graph is an undirected graph on which the pursuer (cop) can always win a pursuit–evasion game against a robber, with the players taking alternating turns in which they can choose to move along an edge of a graph or stay put, until the cop lands on the robber's vertex. Finite cop-win graphs are also called dismantlable graphs or constructible graphs, because they can be dismantled by repeatedly removing a dominated vertex or constructed by repeatedly adding such a vertex. The cop-win graphs can be recognized in polynomial time by a greedy algorithm that constructs a dismantling order. They include the chordal graphs, and the graphs that contain a universal vertex.
In graph theory, a branch of mathematics, the cop number or copnumber of an undirected graph is the minimum number of cops that suffices to ensure a win in a certain pursuit–evasion game on the graph.
The twin-width of an undirected graph is a natural number associated with the graph, used to study the parameterized complexity of graph algorithms. Intuitively, it measures how similar the graph is to a cograph, a type of graph that can be reduced to a single vertex by repeatedly merging together twins, vertices that have the same neighbors. The twin-width is defined from a sequence of repeated mergers where the vertices are not required to be twins, but have nearly equal sets of neighbors.