Paper detail

Pebbling Meets Coloring: Reversible Pebble Game On Trees

The reversible pebble game is a combinatorial game played on rooted DAGs. This game was introduced by Bennett (1989) motivated by applications in designing space efficient reversible algorithms. Recently, Chan (2013) showed that the reversible pebble game number of any DAG is the same as its Dymond-Tompa pebble number and Raz-Mckenzie pebble number. We show, as our main result, that for any rooted directed tree T, its reversible pebble game number is always just one more than the edge rank coloring number of the underlying undirected tree U of T. It is known that given a DAG G as input, determining its reversible pebble game number is PSPACE-hard. Our result implies that the reversible pebble game number of trees can be computed in polynomial time. We also address the question of finding the number of steps required to optimally pebble various families of trees. It is known that trees can be pebbled in $n^{O(\log(n))}$ steps where $n$ is the number of nodes in the tree. Using the equivalence between reversible pebble game and the Dymond-Tompa pebble game (Chan, 2013), we show that complete binary trees can be pebbled in $n^{O(\log\log(n))}$ steps, a substantial improvement over the naive upper bound of $n^{O(\log(n))}$. It remains open whether complete binary trees can be pebbled in polynomial (in $n$) number of steps. Towards this end, we show that almost optimal (i.e., within a factor of $(1 + ε)$ for any constant $ε> 0$) pebblings of complete binary trees can be done in polynomial number of steps. We also show a time-space trade-off for reversible pebbling for families of bounded degree trees by a divide-and-conquer approach: for any constant $ε> 0$, such families can be pebbled using $O(n^ε)$ pebbles in $O(n)$ steps. This generalizes an analogous result of Kralovic (2001) for chains.

preprint2016arXivOpen access

Signal facts

What is known right now

Open access3 authors3 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.