Paper detail

Bounded Diameter Arboricity

We introduce the notion of \emph{bounded diameter arboricity}. Specifically, the \emph{diameter-$d$ arboricity} of a graph is the minimum number $k$ such that the edges of the graph can be partitioned into $k$ forests each of whose components has diameter at most $d$. A class of graphs has bounded diameter arboricity $k$ if there exists a natural number $d$ such that every graph in the class has diameter-$d$ arboricity at most $k$. We conjecture that the class of graphs with arboricity at most $k$ has bounded diameter arboricity at most $k+1$. We prove this conjecture for $k\in \{2,3\}$ by proving the stronger assertion that the union of a forest and a star forest can be partitioned into two forests of diameter at most 18. We use these results to characterize the bounded diameter arboricity for planar graphs of girth at least $g$ for all $g\ne 5$. As an application we show that every 6-edge-connected planar (multi)graph contains two edge-disjoint $\frac{18}{19}$-thin spanning trees.

preprint2016arXivOpen access
0citations
0reviews
0saves
Nocode
Nodataset
0institutions

Next steps

Decide what to do with this paper

Use like or dislike for the fast social read. The more specific scholarly feedback stays available below when needed.

Log in to curate

Reading frame

Keep the important context close to the paper

Keep the important signals around this paper in one place: votes, save state, collection context, reviews and the metadata you need before deciding what to do next.

Institutions

Add specific reaction

Move through the context

Research map

Open full explorer

Move through nearby people, institutions, topics and adjacent work without leaving the paper page.

Building this graph slice

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

Structured reviews

0 review(s)

ContributeLeave structured feedbackUse the review template when you have a concrete strength, concern or method question.Open review form

No structured reviews yet. High-signal critique starts here.

Work discussion

0 comment(s)

DiscussAdd a high-signal commentKeep quick notes, caveats and replication pointers separate from formal reviews.Open comment form

No discussion yet. The first strong comment sets the tone.