Paper detail

On Complexity of Isoperimetric Problems on Trees

This paper is aimed to investigate some computational aspects of different isoperimetric problems on weighted trees. In this regard, we consider different connectivity parameters called {\it minimum normalized cuts}/{\it isoperimteric numbers} defined through taking minimum of the maximum or the mean of the normalized outgoing flows from a set of subdomains of vertices, where these subdomains constitute a {\it partition}/{\it subpartition}. Following the main result of [A. Daneshgar, {\it et. al.}, {\it On the isoperimetric spectrum of graphs and its approximations}, JCTB, (2010)], it is known that the isoperimetric number and the minimum normalized cut both can be described as $\{0,1\}$-optimization programs, where the latter one does {\it not} admit a relaxation to the reals. We show that the decision problem for the case of taking $k$-partitions and the maximum (called the max normalized cut problem {\rm NCP}$^M$) as well as the other two decision problems for the mean version (referred to as {\rm IPP}$^m$ and {\rm NCP}$^m$) are $NP$-complete problems. On the other hand, we show that the decision problem for the case of taking $k$-subpartitions and the maximum (called the max isoperimetric problem {\rm IPP}$^M$) can be solved in {\it linear time} for any weighted tree and any $k \geq 2$. Based on this fact, we provide polynomial time $O(k)$-approximation algorithms for all different versions of $k$th isoperimetric numbers considered. Moreover, when the number of partitions/subpartitions, $k$, is a fixed constant, as an extension of a result of B. Mohar (1989) for the case $k=2$ (usually referred to as the Cheeger constant), we prove that max and mean isoperimetric numbers of weighted trees as well as their max normalized cut can be computed in polynomial time. We also prove some hardness results for the case of simple unweighted graphs and trees.

preprint2010arXivOpen 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.