Results 1 
8 of
8
I.: Collective tree spanners of graphs
 SIAM J. Discrete Math
, 2006
"... Abstract. In this paper we introduce a new notion of collective tree spanners. We say that a graph G =(V,E) admits a system of µ collective additive tree rspanners if there is a system T (G) of at most µ spanning trees of G such that for any two vertices x, y of G a spanning tree T ∈T(G) exists suc ..."
Abstract

Cited by 13 (11 self)
 Add to MetaCart
Abstract. In this paper we introduce a new notion of collective tree spanners. We say that a graph G =(V,E) admits a system of µ collective additive tree rspanners if there is a system T (G) of at most µ spanning trees of G such that for any two vertices x, y of G a spanning tree T ∈T(G) exists such that dT (x, y) ≤ dG(x, y) +r. Among other results, we show that any chordal graph, chordal bipartite graph or cocomparability graph admits a system of at most log 2 n collective additive tree 2–spanners and any cchordal graph admits a system of at most log 2 n collective additive tree (2⌊c/2⌋)–spanners. Towards establishing these results, we present a general property for graphs, called (α, r)– decomposition, and show that any (α, r)–decomposable graph G with n vertices admits a system of at most log 1/α n collective additive tree 2r– spanners. We discuss also an application of the collective tree spanners to the problem of designing compact and efficient routing schemes in graphs. 1
Collective Tree Spanners in Graphs with Bounded Parameters
 ALGORITHMICA
, 2006
"... In this paper we study collective additive tree spanners for special families of graphs including planar graphs, graphs with bounded genus, graphs with bounded treewidth, graphs with bounded cliquewidth, and graphs with bounded chordality. We say that a graph G = (V, E) admits a system of μ colle ..."
Abstract

Cited by 4 (4 self)
 Add to MetaCart
In this paper we study collective additive tree spanners for special families of graphs including planar graphs, graphs with bounded genus, graphs with bounded treewidth, graphs with bounded cliquewidth, and graphs with bounded chordality. We say that a graph G = (V, E) admits a system of μ collective additive tree rspanners if there is a system T (G) of at most μ spanning trees of G such that for any two vertices x,y of G a spanning tree T ∈ T (G) exists such that dT (x, y) ≤ dG(x, y) + r. We describe a general method for constructing a “small” system of collective additive tree rspanners with small values of r for “well ” decomposable graphs, and as a byproduct show (among other results) that any weighted planar graph admits a system of O ( √ n) collective additive tree 0spanners, any weighted graph with treewidth at most k − 1 admits a system of k log 2 n collective additive tree 0spanners, any weighted graph with cliquewidth at most k admits a system of k log 3/2 n collective additive tree (2w)spanners, and any weighted graph with size of largest induced cycle at most c admits a system of log 2 n collective additive tree (2⌊c/2⌋w)spanners and a system of 4 log 2 n collective additive tree (2(⌊c/3⌋+1)w)spanners (here, w is the maximum edge weight in G). The latter result is refined for weighted weakly chordal graphs: any such graph admits a system of 4 log 2 n collective additive tree (2w)spanners. Furthermore, based on this collection of trees, we derive a compact and efficient routing scheme for those families of graphs. Results of this paper were partially presented at the ISAAC’05 conference [14].
Collective tree 1spanners for interval graphs
 in GraphTheoretic Concepts in Computer Science, Lecture Notes in Comput. Sci. 3787
, 2005
"... Abstract. In this paper we study the existence of a small set T of spanning trees that collectively “1span ” an interval graph G. Inparticular, for any pair of vertices u, v we require a tree T ∈T such that the distance between u and v in T is at most one more than their distance in G. We show that ..."
Abstract

Cited by 4 (4 self)
 Add to MetaCart
Abstract. In this paper we study the existence of a small set T of spanning trees that collectively “1span ” an interval graph G. Inparticular, for any pair of vertices u, v we require a tree T ∈T such that the distance between u and v in T is at most one more than their distance in G. We show that: – there is no constant size set of collective tree 1spanners for interval graphs (even unit interval graphs), – interval graph G has a set of collective tree 1spanners of size O(log D), where D is the diameter of G, – interval graphs have a 1spanner with fewer than 2n − 2edges. Furthermore, at the end of the paper we state other results on collective tree cspanners for c>1 and other more general graph classes. 1
Exact distance labelings yield additivestretch compact routing schemes
 in DISC
, 2006
"... Abstract. Distance labelings and compact routing schemes have both been active areas of recent research. It was already known that graphs with constantsized recursive separators, such as trees, outerplanar graphs, seriesparallel graphs and graphs of bounded treewidth, support both exact distance l ..."
Abstract

Cited by 3 (0 self)
 Add to MetaCart
Abstract. Distance labelings and compact routing schemes have both been active areas of recent research. It was already known that graphs with constantsized recursive separators, such as trees, outerplanar graphs, seriesparallel graphs and graphs of bounded treewidth, support both exact distance labelings and optimal (additive stretch 0, multiplicative stretch 1) compact routing schemes, but there are many classes of graphs known to admit exact distance labelings that do not have constantsized separators. Our main result is to demonstrate that every unweighted, undirected nvertex graph which supports an exact distance labeling with l(n)sized labels also supports a compact routing scheme with O(l(n) + log 2 n / log log n)sized headers, O ( √ n(l(n)+log 2 n / log log n))sized routing tables, and an additive stretch of 6. We then investigate two classes of graphs which support exact distance labelings (but do not guarantee constantsized separators), where we can improve substantially on our general result. In the case of interval graphs, we present a compact routing scheme with O(log n)sized headers, O(log n)sized routing tables and additive stretch 1, improving headers and table sizes from a result of [1], which uses O(log 3 n / log log n)bit headers and tables. We also present a compact routing scheme for the related family of circular arc graphs which guarantees O(log 2 n)sized headers, O(log n)sized routing tables and an additive stretch of 1. 1
M.: Navigating in a graph by aid of its spanning tree
 in Graphs 293
"... Abstract. Let G =(V,E) be a graph and T be a spanning tree of G. We consider the following strategy in advancing in G from a vertex x towards a target vertex y: from a current vertex z (initially, z = x), unless z = y, gotoaneighborofz in G that is closest to y in T (breaking ties arbitrarily). In t ..."
Abstract

Cited by 1 (1 self)
 Add to MetaCart
Abstract. Let G =(V,E) be a graph and T be a spanning tree of G. We consider the following strategy in advancing in G from a vertex x towards a target vertex y: from a current vertex z (initially, z = x), unless z = y, gotoaneighborofz in G that is closest to y in T (breaking ties arbitrarily). In this strategy, each vertex has full knowledge of its neighborhood in G and can use the distances in T to navigate in G. Thus, additionally to standard local information (the neighborhood NG(v)), the only global information that is available to each vertex v is the topology of the spanning tree T (in fact, v can know only a very small piece of information about T and still be able to infer from it the necessary treedistances). For each source vertex x and target vertex y, this way, a path, called a greedy routing path, is produced. Denote by gG,T (x, y) the length of a longest greedy routing path that can be produced for x and y using this strategy and T. We say that a spanning tree T of a graph G is an additive rcarcass for G if gG,T (x, y) ≤ dG(x, y)+r for each ordered pair x, y ∈ V. In this paper, we investigate the problem, given a graph family F, whether a small integer r exists such that any graph G ∈Fadmits an additive rcarcass. We show that rectilinear p × q grids, hypercubes, distancehereditary graphs, dually chordal graphs (and, therefore, strongly chordal graphs and interval graphs), all admit additive 0carcasses. Furthermore, every chordal graph G admits an additive (ω(G) + 1)carcass (where ω(G) is the size of a maximum clique of G), each 3sunfree chordal graph admits an additive 2carcass, each chordal bipartite graph admits an additive 4carcass. In particular, any ktree admits an additive (k+2)carcass. All those carcasses are easy to construct. 1
Collective Additive Tree Spanners of Homogeneously Orderable Graphs [Extended Abstract]
"... Abstract. In this paper we investigate the (collective) tree spanners problem in homogeneously orderable graphs. This class of graphs was introduced by A. Brandstädt et al. to generalize the dually chordal graphs and the distancehereditary graphs and to show that the Steiner tree problem can still ..."
Abstract
 Add to MetaCart
Abstract. In this paper we investigate the (collective) tree spanners problem in homogeneously orderable graphs. This class of graphs was introduced by A. Brandstädt et al. to generalize the dually chordal graphs and the distancehereditary graphs and to show that the Steiner tree problem can still be solved in polynomial time on this more general class of graphs. In this paper, we demonstrate that every nvertex homogeneously orderable graph G admits – a spanning tree T such that, for any two vertices x, y of G, dT (x, y) ≤ dG(x, y) + 3 (i.e., an additive tree 3spanner) and – asystemT (G) ofatmostO(log n) spanning trees such that, for any two vertices x, y of G, a spanning tree T ∈T(G) existswith dT (x, y) ≤ dG(x, y) + 2 (i.e, a system of at most O(log n) collective additive tree 2spanners). These results generalize known results on tree spanners of dually chordal graphs and of distancehereditary graphs. The results above are also complemented with some lower bounds which say that on some nvertex homogeneously orderable graphs any system of collective additive tree 1spanners must have at least Ω(n) spanning trees and there is no system of collective additive tree 2spanners with constant number of trees. 1
Additive Spanners for Circle Graphs and Polygonal Graphs ⋆
"... Abstract. AgraphG =(V, E) issaidtoadmitasystemofμ collective additive tree rspanners if there is a system T (G) ofatmostμspanning trees of G such that for any two vertices u, v of G a spanning tree T ∈ T (G) exists such that the distance in T between u and v is at most r plus their distance in G. I ..."
Abstract
 Add to MetaCart
Abstract. AgraphG =(V, E) issaidtoadmitasystemofμ collective additive tree rspanners if there is a system T (G) ofatmostμspanning trees of G such that for any two vertices u, v of G a spanning tree T ∈ T (G) exists such that the distance in T between u and v is at most r plus their distance in G. In this paper, we examine the problem of finding “small ” systems of collective additive tree rspanners for small values of r on circle graphs and on polygonal graphs. Among other results, we show n that every nvertex circle graph admits a system of at most 2 log 3 2 collective additive tree 2spanners and every nvertex kpolygonal graph admits a system of at most 2 log 3 k+7 collective additive tree 2spanners. 2 Moreover, we show that every nvertex kpolygonal graph admits an additive (k + 6)spanner with at most 6n − 6edgesandeverynvertex 3polygonal graph admits a system of at most 3 collective additive tree 2spanners and an additive tree 6spanner. All our collective tree spanners as well as all sparse spanners are constructible in polynomial time. 1
Compact and Low Delay Routing Labeling Scheme for Unit Disk Graphs
"... Abstract. In this paper, we propose a new compact and low delay routing labeling scheme for Unit Disk Graphs (UDGs) which often model wireless ad hoc networks. We show that one can assign each vertex of an nvertex UDG G acompactO(log 2 n)bit label such that, given the label of a source vertex and ..."
Abstract
 Add to MetaCart
Abstract. In this paper, we propose a new compact and low delay routing labeling scheme for Unit Disk Graphs (UDGs) which often model wireless ad hoc networks. We show that one can assign each vertex of an nvertex UDG G acompactO(log 2 n)bit label such that, given the label of a source vertex and the label of a destination, it is possible to compute efficiently, based solely on these two labels, a neighbor of the source vertex that heads in the direction of the destination. We prove that this routing labeling scheme has a constant hop routestretch ( = hop delay), i.e., for each two vertices x and y of G, it produces a routing path with h(x, y) hops (edges) such that h(x, y) ≤ 3·dG(x, y)+12, where dG(x, y) is the hop distance between x and y in G. To the best of our knowledge, this is the first compact routing scheme for UDGs which not only guaranties delivery but has a low hop delay and polylog label size. Furthermore, our routing labeling scheme has a constant length routestretch. 1