BZPEERReading, trust and collaboration for research
Menu

Discover

GraphFollow connections around a paper, topic or saved view.

Workspaces

HomePick up where your research flow left off.InboxHandle requests, replies and notifications from one place.CollectionsCurate reading lists, evidence sets and shareable dossiers.ResearchSee your private provenance graph, trail and imports.CollaborationMove from discovery into focused discussion rooms.PublishDraft, preview and publish full-text research articles.

Network

ExpertsFind specialists worth following or asking for help.CommunitiesJoin research circles organized around shared work.PartnersSee external organizations active around the same topics.

Opportunities

ListingsBrowse roles, calls and collaborations with clearer fit signals.

Account

Log inReturn to your reading and collaboration workspace.Create accountStart saving work, following people and joining teams.
Log inCreate account

Researcher profile

Ahmad Biniaz

Ahmad Biniaz contributes to research discovery and scholarly infrastructure.

ResearcherAffiliation not importedOpen to collaborate
Computational GeometryDiscrete MathematicsData Structures and Algorithms

Trust snapshot

Quick read

Trust 17 - UnverifiedVerification L1Unclaimed author
4works
0followers
3topics
4close collaborators

Actions

Decide how to stay connected

Follow researcher0

Identity and collaboration

How to connect with this researcher

Claiming links this public author record to a researcher profile and unlocks direct collaboration workflows.

Log in to claim

Direct collaboration

Open a focused conversation when the fit is right

Claim this author entity first to unlock direct invitations.

Research graph

See the researcher in context

Open full explorer

Inspect adjacent work, topics, institutions and collaborators without jumping out to a separate graph page.

Building this graph slice

BZPEER is loading the nearby papers, people, topics and institutions for this page.

Published work

4 published item(s)

preprint2025arXiv

Noncrossing Longest Paths and Cycles

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.

0 citations0 reviewsNo code linkedOpen access
preprint2022arXiv

Acute Tours in the Plane

We confirm the following conjecture of Fekete and Woeginger from 1997: for any sufficiently large even number $n$, every set of $n$ points in the plane can be connected by a spanning tour (Hamiltonian cycle) consisting of straight-line edges such that the angle between any two consecutive edges is at most $π/2$. Our proof is constructive and suggests a simple $O(n\log n)$-time algorithm for finding such a tour. The previous best-known upper bound on the angle is $2π/3$, and it is due to Dumitrescu, Pach and Tóth (2009).

0 citations0 reviewsNo code linkedOpen access
preprint2020arXiv

Better approximation algorithms for maximum weight internal spanning trees in cubic graphs and claw-free graphs

Given a connected vertex-weighted graph $G$, the maximum weight internal spanning tree (MaxwIST) problem asks for a spanning tree of $G$ that maximizes the total weight of internal nodes. This problem is NP-hard and APX-hard, with the currently best known approximation factor $1/2$ (Chen et al., Algorithmica 2019). For the case of claw-free graphs, Chen et al. present an involved approximation algorithm with approximation factor $7/12$. They asked whether it is possible to improve these ratios, in particular for claw-free graphs and cubic graphs. We improve the approximation factors for the MaxwIST problem in cubic graphs and claw-free graphs. For cubic graphs we present an algorithm that computes a spanning tree whose total weight of internal vertices is at least $\frac{3}{4}-\frac{3}{n}$ times the total weight of all vertices, where $n$ is the number of vertices of $G$. This ratio is almost tight for large values of $n$. For claw-free graphs of degree at least three, we present an algorithm that computes a spanning tree whose total internal weight is at least $\frac{3}{5}-\frac{1}{n}$ times the total vertex weight. The degree constraint is necessary as this ratio may not be achievable if we allow vertices of degree less than three. With the above ratios, we immediately obtain better approximation algorithms with factors $\frac{3}{4}-ε$ and $\frac{3}{5}-ε$ for the MaxwIST problem in cubic graphs and claw-free graphs of degree at least three, for any $ε>0$. In addition to improving the approximation factors, the new algorithms are relatively short compared to that of Chen et al.. The new algorithms are fairly simple, and employ a variant of the depth-first search algorithm that selects a relatively-large-weight vertex in every branching step. Moreover, the new algorithms take linear time while previous algorithms for similar problem instances are super-linear.

0 citations0 reviewsNo code linkedOpen access
preprint2020arXiv

Compatible Paths on Labelled Point Sets

Let $P$ and $Q$ be finite point sets of the same cardinality in $\mathbb{R}^2$, each labelled from $1$ to $n$. Two noncrossing geometric graphs $G_P$ and $G_Q$ spanning $P$ and $Q$, respectively, are called compatible if for every face $f$ in $G_P$, there exists a corresponding face in $G_Q$ with the same clockwise ordering of the vertices on its boundary as in $f$. In particular, $G_P$ and $G_Q$ must be straight-line embeddings of the same connected $n$-vertex graph. Deciding whether two labelled point sets admit compatible geometric paths is known to be NP-complete. We give polynomial-time algorithms to find compatible paths or report that none exist in three scenarios: $O(n)$ time for points in convex position; $O(n^2)$ time for two simple polygons, where the paths are restricted to remain inside the closed polygons; and $O(n^2 \log n)$ time for points in general position if the paths are restricted to be monotone.

0 citations0 reviewsNo code linkedOpen access