Paper detail

Complexity of the path avoiding forbidden pairs problem revisited

Let G = (V, E) be a directed acyclic graph with two distinguished vertices s, t and let F be a set of forbidden pairs of vertices. We say that a path in G is safe, if it contains at most one vertex from each pair {u, v} in F. Given G and F, the path avoiding forbidden pairs (PAFP) problem is to find a safe s-t path in G. We systematically study the complexity of different special cases of the PAFP problem defined according to the mutual positions of forbidden pairs. Fix one topological ordering of vertices; we say that pairs {u, v} and {x, y} are disjoint, if u, v < x, y, nested, if u < x, y < v, and halving, if u < x < v < y. The PAFP problem is known to be NP-hard in general or if no two pairs are disjoint; we prove that it remains NP-hard even when no two forbidden pairs are nested. On the other hand, if no two pairs are halving, the problem is known to be solvable in cubic time. We simplify and improve this result by showing an O(M(n)) time algorithm, where M(n) is the time to multiply two n \times n boolean matrices.

preprint2013arXivOpen access

Signal facts

What is known right now

Open access1 author1 topic

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 map preview

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.