Paper detail

Digraph Coloring and Distance to Acyclicity

In $k$-Digraph Coloring we are given a digraph and are asked to partition its vertices into at most $k$ sets, so that each set induces a DAG. This well-known problem is NP-hard, as it generalizes (undirected) $k$-Coloring, but becomes trivial if the input digraph is acyclic. This poses the natural parameterized complexity question what happens when the input is "almost" acyclic. In this paper we study this question using parameters that measure the input's distance to acyclicity in either the directed or the undirected sense. It is already known that, for all $k\ge 2$, $k$-Digraph Coloring is NP-hard on digraphs of DFVS at most $k+4$. We strengthen this result to show that, for all $k\ge 2$, $k$-Digraph Coloring is NP-hard for DFVS $k$. Refining our reduction we obtain two further consequences: (i) for all $k\ge 2$, $k$-Digraph Coloring is NP-hard for graphs of feedback arc set (FAS) at most $k^2$; interestingly, this leads to a dichotomy, as we show that the problem is FPT by $k$ if FAS is at most $k^2-1$; (ii) $k$-Digraph Coloring is NP-hard for graphs of DFVS $k$, even if the maximum degree $Δ$ is at most $4k-1$; we show that this is also almost tight, as the problem becomes FPT for DFVS $k$ and $Δ\le 4k-3$. We then consider parameters that measure the distance from acyclicity of the underlying graph. We show that $k$-Digraph Coloring admits an FPT algorithm parameterized by treewidth, whose parameter dependence is $(tw!)k^{tw}$. Then, we pose the question of whether the $tw!$ factor can be eliminated. Our main contribution in this part is to settle this question in the negative and show that our algorithm is essentially optimal, even for the much more restricted parameter treedepth and for $k=2$. Specifically, we show that an FPT algorithm solving $2$-Digraph Coloring with dependence $td^{o(td)}$ would contradict the ETH.

preprint2022arXivOpen 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.