Paper detail

On the Hardness of Partially Dynamic Graph Problems and Connections to Diameter

Conditional lower bounds for dynamic graph problems has received a great deal of attention in recent years. While many results are now known for the fully-dynamic case and such bounds often imply worst-case bounds for the partially dynamic setting, it seems much more difficult to prove amortized bounds for incremental and decremental algorithms. In this paper we consider partially dynamic versions of three classic problems in graph theory. Based on popular conjectures we show that: -- No algorithm with amortized update time $O(n^{1-\varepsilon})$ exists for incremental or decremental maximum cardinality bipartite matching. This significantly improves on the $O(m^{1/2-\varepsilon})$ bound for sparse graphs of Henzinger et al. [STOC'15] and $O(n^{1/3-\varepsilon})$ bound of Kopelowitz, Pettie and Porat. Our linear bound also appears more natural. In addition, the result we present separates the node-addition model from the edge insertion model, as an algorithm with total update time $O(m\sqrt{n})$ exists for the former by Bosek et al. [FOCS'14]. -- No algorithm with amortized update time $O(m^{1-\varepsilon})$ exists for incremental or decremental maximum flow in directed and weighted sparse graphs. No such lower bound was known for partially dynamic maximum flow previously. Furthermore no algorithm with amortized update time $O(n^{1-\varepsilon})$ exists for directed and unweighted graphs or undirected and weighted graphs. -- No algorithm with amortized update time $O(n^{1/2 - \varepsilon})$ exists for incremental or decremental $(4/3-\varepsilon')$-approximating the diameter of an unweighted graph. We also show a slightly stronger bound if node additions are allowed. [...]

preprint2016arXivOpen 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.