Paper detail

Towards Sub-Quadratic Diameter Computation in Geometric Intersection Graphs

We initiate the study of diameter computation in geometric intersection graphs from the fine-grained complexity perspective. A geometric intersection graph is a graph whose vertices correspond to some shapes in $d$-dimensional Euclidean space, such as balls, segments, or hypercubes, and whose edges correspond to pairs of intersecting shapes. The diameter of a graph is the largest distance realized by a pair of vertices in the graph. Computing the diameter in near-quadratic time is possible in several classes of intersection graphs [Chan and Skrepetos 2019], but it is not at all clear if these algorithms are optimal, especially since in the related class of planar graphs the diameter can be computed in $\widetilde{\mathcal{O}}(n^{5/3})$ time [Cabello 2019, Gawrychowski et al. 2021]. In this work we (conditionally) rule out sub-quadratic algorithms in several classes of intersection graphs, i.e., algorithms of running time $\mathcal{O}(n^{2-δ})$ for some $δ>0$. In particular, there are no sub-quadratic algorithms already for fat objects in small dimensions: unit balls in $\mathbb{R}^3$ or congruent equilateral triangles in $\mathbb{R}^2$. For unit segments and congruent equilateral triangles, we can even rule out strong sub-quadratic approximations already in $\mathbb{R}^2$. It seems that the hardness of approximation may also depend on dimensionality: for axis-parallel unit hypercubes in~$\mathbb{R}^{12}$, distinguishing between diameter 2 and 3 needs quadratic time (ruling out $(3/2-\varepsilon)$- approximations), whereas for axis-parallel unit squares, we give an algorithm that distinguishes between diameter $2$ and $3$ in near-linear time. Note that many of our lower bounds match the best known algorithms up to sub-polynomial factors.

preprint2022arXivOpen 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.