Paper detail

Progress on Partial Edge Drawings

Recently, a new way of avoiding crossings in straight-line drawings of non-planar graphs has been investigated. The idea of partial edge drawings (PED) is to drop the middle part of edges and rely on the remaining edge parts called stubs. We focus on a symmetric model (SPED) that requires the two stubs of an edge to be of equal length. In this way, the stub at the other endpoint of an edge assures the viewer of the edge's existence. We also consider an additional homogeneity constraint that forces the stub lengths to be a given fraction $δ$ of the edge lengths ($δ$-SHPED). Given length and direction of a stub, this model helps to infer the position of the opposite stub. We show that, for a fixed stub--edge length ratio $δ$, not all graphs have a $δ$-SHPED. Specifically, we show that $K_{241}$ does not have a 1/4-SHPED, while bandwidth-$k$ graphs always have a $Θ(1/\sqrt{k})$-SHPED. We also give bounds for complete bipartite graphs. Further, we consider the problem \textsc{MaxSPED} where the task is to compute the SPED of maximum total stub length that a given straight-line drawing contains. We present an efficient solution for 2-planar drawings and a 2-approximation algorithm for the dual problem.

preprint2012arXivOpen 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.