Paper detail

Specializations and Generalizations of the Stackelberg Minimum Spanning Tree Game

Let be given a graph $G=(V,E)$ whose edge set is partitioned into a set $R$ of \emph{red} edges and a set $B$ of \emph{blue} edges, and assume that red edges are weighted and form a spanning tree of $G$. Then, the \emph{Stackelberg Minimum Spanning Tree} (\stack) problem is that of pricing (i.e., weighting) the blue edges in such a way that the total weight of the blue edges selected in a minimum spanning tree of the resulting graph is maximized. \stack \ is known to be \apx-hard already when the number of distinct red weights is 2. In this paper we analyze some meaningful specializations and generalizations of \stack, which shed some more light on the computational complexity of the problem. More precisely, we first show that if $G$ is restricted to be \emph{complete}, then the following holds: (i) if there are only 2 distinct red weights, then the problem can be solved optimally (this contrasts with the corresponding \apx-hardness of the general problem); (ii) otherwise, the problem can be approximated within $7/4 + ε$, for any $ε> 0$. Afterwards, we define a natural extension of \stack, namely that in which blue edges have a non-negative \emph{activation cost} associated, and it is given a global \emph{activation budget} that must not be exceeded when pricing blue edges. Here, after showing that the very same approximation ratio as that of the original problem can be achieved, we prove that if the spanning tree of red edges can be rooted so as that any root-leaf path contains at most $h$ edges, then the problem admits a $(2h+ε)$-approximation algorithm, for any $ε> 0$.

preprint2014arXivOpen 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.