Paper detail

Parameterized Complexity Dichotomy for Steiner Multicut

The Steiner Multicut problem asks, given an undirected graph G, terminals sets T1,...,Tt $\subseteq$ V(G) of size at most p, and an integer k, whether there is a set S of at most k edges or nodes s.t. of each set Ti at least one pair of terminals is in different connected components of G \ S. This problem generalizes several graph cut problems, in particular the Multicut problem (the case p = 2), which is fixed-parameter tractable for the parameter k [Marx and Razgon, Bousquet et al., STOC 2011]. We provide a dichotomy of the parameterized complexity of Steiner Multicut. That is, for any combination of k, t, p, and the treewidth tw(G) as constant, parameter, or unbounded, and for all versions of the problem (edge deletion and node deletion with and without deletable terminals), we prove either that the problem is fixed-parameter tractable or that the problem is hard (W[1]-hard or even (para-)NP-complete). We highlight that: - The edge deletion version of Steiner Multicut is fixed-parameter tractable for the parameter k+t on general graphs (but has no polynomial kernel, even on trees). We present two proofs: one using the randomized contractions technique of Chitnis et al, and one relying on new structural lemmas that decompose the Steiner cut into important separators and minimal s-t cuts. - In contrast, both node deletion versions of Steiner Multicut are W[1]-hard for the parameter k+t on general graphs. - All versions of Steiner Multicut are W[1]-hard for the parameter k, even when p=3 and the graph is a tree plus one node. Hence, the results of Marx and Razgon, and Bousquet et al. do not generalize to Steiner Multicut. Since we allow k, t, p, and tw(G) to be any constants, our characterization includes a dichotomy for Steiner Multicut on trees (for tw(G) = 1), and a polynomial time versus NP-hardness dichotomy (by restricting k,t,p,tw(G) to constant or unbounded).

preprint2015arXivOpen access

Signal facts

What is known right now

Open access4 authors2 topics

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.