-
The Peculiarities of Extending Queue Layouts
Authors:
Thomas Depian,
Simon D. Fink,
Robert Ganian,
Martin Nöllenburg
Abstract:
We consider the problem of computing $\ell$-page queue layouts, which are linear arrangements of vertices accompanied with an assignment of the edges to pages from one to $\ell$ that avoid the nesting of edges on any of the pages. Inspired by previous work in the extension of stack layouts, here we consider the setting of extending a partial $\ell$-page queue layout into a complete one and primari…
▽ More
We consider the problem of computing $\ell$-page queue layouts, which are linear arrangements of vertices accompanied with an assignment of the edges to pages from one to $\ell$ that avoid the nesting of edges on any of the pages. Inspired by previous work in the extension of stack layouts, here we consider the setting of extending a partial $\ell$-page queue layout into a complete one and primarily analyze the problem through the refined lens of parameterized complexity. We obtain novel algorithms and lower bounds which provide a detailed picture of the problem's complexity under various measures of incompleteness, and identify surprising distinctions between queue and stack layouts in the extension setting.
△ Less
Submitted 5 June, 2025;
originally announced June 2025.
-
Segment Intersection Representations, Level Planarity and Constrained Ordering Problems
Authors:
Simon D. Fink,
Matthias Pfretzschner,
Peter Stumpf
Abstract:
In the Segment Intersection Graph Representation Problem, we want to represent the vertices of a graph as straight line segments in the plane such that two segments cross if and only if there is an edge between the corresponding vertices. This problem is NP-hard (even $\exists\mathbb{R}$-complete [Schaefer, 2010]) in the general case [Kratochvíl & Neŝetril, 1992] and remains so if we restrict the…
▽ More
In the Segment Intersection Graph Representation Problem, we want to represent the vertices of a graph as straight line segments in the plane such that two segments cross if and only if there is an edge between the corresponding vertices. This problem is NP-hard (even $\exists\mathbb{R}$-complete [Schaefer, 2010]) in the general case [Kratochvíl & Neŝetril, 1992] and remains so if we restrict the segments to be axis-aligned, i.e., horizontal and vertical [Kratochvíl, 1994]. A long standing open question for the latter variant is its complexity when the order of segments along one axis (say the vertical order of horizontal segments) is already given [Kratochvíl & Neŝetril, 1992; Kratochvíl, 1994].
We resolve this question by giving efficient solutions using two very different approaches that are interesting on their own. First, using a graph-drawing perspective, we relate the problem to a variant of the well-known Level Planarity problem, where vertices have to lie on pre-assigned horizontal levels. In our case, each level also carries consecutivity constraints on its vertices; this Level Planarity variant is known to have a quadratic solution.
Second, we use an entirely combinatorial approach, and show that both problems can equivalently be formulated as a linear ordering problem subject to certain consecutivity constraints. While the complexity of such problems varies greatly, we show that in this case the constraints are well-structured in a way that allows a direct quadratic solution. Thus, we obtain three different-but-equivalent perspectives on this problem: the initial geometric one, one from planar graph drawing and a purely combinatorial one.
△ Less
Submitted 23 February, 2025;
originally announced February 2025.
-
Pathways to Tractability for Geometric Thickness
Authors:
Thomas Depian,
Simon Dominik Fink,
Alexander Firbas,
Robert Ganian,
Martin Nöllenburg
Abstract:
We study the classical problem of computing geometric thickness, i.e., finding a straight-line drawing of an input graph and a partition of its edges into as few parts as possible so that each part is crossing-free. Since the problem is NP-hard, we investigate its tractability through the lens of parameterized complexity. As our first set of contributions, we provide two fixed-parameter algorithms…
▽ More
We study the classical problem of computing geometric thickness, i.e., finding a straight-line drawing of an input graph and a partition of its edges into as few parts as possible so that each part is crossing-free. Since the problem is NP-hard, we investigate its tractability through the lens of parameterized complexity. As our first set of contributions, we provide two fixed-parameter algorithms which utilize well-studied parameters of the input graph, notably the vertex cover and feedback edge numbers. Since parameterizing by the thickness itself does not yield tractability and the use of other structural parameters remains open due to general challenges identified in previous works, as our second set of contributions, we propose a different pathway to tractability for the problem: extension of partial solutions. In particular, we establish a full characterization of the problem's parameterized complexity in the extension setting depending on whether we parameterize by the number of missing vertices, edges, or both.
△ Less
Submitted 24 November, 2024;
originally announced November 2024.
-
A Simple Partially Embedded Planarity Test Based on Vertex-Addition
Authors:
Simon D. Fink,
Ignaz Rutter,
Sandhya T. P
Abstract:
In the Partially Embedded Planarity problem, we are given a graph $G$ together with a topological drawing of a subgraph $H$ of $G$. The task is to decide whether the drawing can be extended to a drawing of the whole graph such that no two edges cross. Angelini et al. gave a linear-time algorithm for solving this problem in 2010 (SODA '10). While their paper constitutes a significant result, the al…
▽ More
In the Partially Embedded Planarity problem, we are given a graph $G$ together with a topological drawing of a subgraph $H$ of $G$. The task is to decide whether the drawing can be extended to a drawing of the whole graph such that no two edges cross. Angelini et al. gave a linear-time algorithm for solving this problem in 2010 (SODA '10). While their paper constitutes a significant result, the algorithm described therein is highly complex: it uses several layers of decompositions according to connectivity of both $G$ and $H$, its description spans more than 30 pages, and can hardly be considered implementable. We give an independent linear-time algorithm that works along the well-known vertex-addition planarity test by Booth and Lueker. We modify the PC-tree as underlying data structure used for representing all planar drawing possibilities in a natural way to also respect the restrictions given by the prescribed drawing of the subgraph $H$. The testing algorithm and its proof of correctness only require small adaptations from the comparatively much simpler generic planarity test, of which several implementations exist. If the test succeeds, an embedding can be constructed using the same approaches that are used for the generic planarity test.
△ Less
Submitted 17 October, 2024;
originally announced October 2024.
-
The Parameterized Complexity of Extending Stack Layouts
Authors:
Thomas Depian,
Simon D. Fink,
Robert Ganian,
Martin Nöllenburg
Abstract:
An $\ell$-page stack layout (also known as an $\ell$-page book embedding) of a graph is a linear order of the vertex set together with a partition of the edge set into $\ell$ stacks (or pages), such that the endpoints of no two edges on the same stack alternate. We study the problem of extending a given partial $\ell$-page stack layout into a complete one, which can be seen as a natural generaliza…
▽ More
An $\ell$-page stack layout (also known as an $\ell$-page book embedding) of a graph is a linear order of the vertex set together with a partition of the edge set into $\ell$ stacks (or pages), such that the endpoints of no two edges on the same stack alternate. We study the problem of extending a given partial $\ell$-page stack layout into a complete one, which can be seen as a natural generalization of the classical NP-hard problem of computing a stack layout of an input graph from scratch. Given the inherent intractability of the problem, we focus on identifying tractable fragments through the refined lens of parameterized complexity analysis. Our results paint a detailed and surprisingly rich complexity-theoretic landscape of the problem which includes the identification of paraNP-hard, W[1]-hard and XP-tractable, as well as fixed-parameter tractable fragments of stack layout extension via a natural sequence of parameterizations.
△ Less
Submitted 4 September, 2024;
originally announced September 2024.
-
Level Planarity Is More Difficult Than We Thought
Authors:
Simon D. Fink,
Matthias Pfretzschner,
Ignaz Rutter,
Peter Stumpf
Abstract:
We consider three simple quadratic time algorithms for the problem Level Planarity and give a level-planar instance that they either falsely report as negative or for which they output a drawing that is not level planar.
We consider three simple quadratic time algorithms for the problem Level Planarity and give a level-planar instance that they either falsely report as negative or for which they output a drawing that is not level planar.
△ Less
Submitted 3 September, 2024;
originally announced September 2024.
-
Clustered Planarity Variants for Level Graphs
Authors:
Simon D. Fink,
Matthias Pfretzschner,
Ignaz Rutter,
Marie Diana Sieper
Abstract:
We consider variants of the clustered planarity problem for level-planar drawings. So far, only convex clusters have been studied in this setting. We introduce two new variants that both insist on a level-planar drawing of the input graph but relax the requirements on the shape of the clusters. In unrestricted Clustered Level Planarity (uCLP) we only require that they are bounded by simple closed…
▽ More
We consider variants of the clustered planarity problem for level-planar drawings. So far, only convex clusters have been studied in this setting. We introduce two new variants that both insist on a level-planar drawing of the input graph but relax the requirements on the shape of the clusters. In unrestricted Clustered Level Planarity (uCLP) we only require that they are bounded by simple closed curves that enclose exactly the vertices of the cluster and cross each edge of the graph at most once. The problem y-monotone Clustered Level Planarity (y-CLP) requires that additionally it must be possible to augment each cluster with edges that do not cross the cluster boundaries so that it becomes connected while the graph remains level-planar, thereby mimicking a classic characterization of clustered planarity in the level-planar setting.
We give a polynomial-time algorithm for uCLP if the input graph is biconnected and has a single source. By contrast, we show that y-CLP is hard under the same restrictions and it remains NP-hard even if the number of levels is bounded by a constant and there is only a single non-trivial cluster.
△ Less
Submitted 20 February, 2024;
originally announced February 2024.
-
Constrained Planarity in Practice -- Engineering the Synchronized Planarity Algorithm
Authors:
Simon D. Fink,
Ignaz Rutter
Abstract:
In the constrained planarity setting, we ask whether a graph admits a planar drawing that additionally satisfies a given set of constraints. These constraints are often derived from very natural problems; prominent examples are Level Planarity, where vertices have to lie on given horizontal lines indicating a hierarchy, and Clustered Planarity, where we additionally draw the boundaries of clusters…
▽ More
In the constrained planarity setting, we ask whether a graph admits a planar drawing that additionally satisfies a given set of constraints. These constraints are often derived from very natural problems; prominent examples are Level Planarity, where vertices have to lie on given horizontal lines indicating a hierarchy, and Clustered Planarity, where we additionally draw the boundaries of clusters which recursively group the vertices in a crossing-free manner. Despite receiving significant amount of attention and substantial theoretical progress on these problems, only very few of the found solutions have been put into practice and evaluated experimentally.
In this paper, we describe our implementation of the recent quadratic-time algorithm by Bläsius et al. [TALG Vol 19, No 4] for solving the problem Synchronized Planarity, which can be seen as a common generalization of several constrained planarity problems, including the aforementioned ones. Our experimental evaluation on an existing benchmark set shows that even our baseline implementation outperforms all competitors by at least an order of magnitude. We systematically investigate the degrees of freedom in the implementation of the Synchronized Planarity algorithm for larger instances and propose several modifications that further improve the performance. Altogether, this allows us to solve instances with up to 100 vertices in milliseconds and instances with up to 100 000 vertices within a few minutes.
△ Less
Submitted 31 October, 2023;
originally announced October 2023.
-
Parameterized Complexity of Simultaneous Planarity
Authors:
Simon D. Fink,
Matthias Pfretzschner,
Ignaz Rutter
Abstract:
Given $k$ input graphs $G_1, \dots ,G_k$, where each pair $G_i$, $G_j$ with $i \neq j$ shares the same graph $G$, the problem Simultaneous Embedding With Fixed Edges (SEFE) asks whether there exists a planar drawing for each input graph such that all drawings coincide on $G$. While SEFE is still open for the case of two input graphs, the problem is NP-complete for $k \geq 3$ [Schaefer, JGAA 13]. I…
▽ More
Given $k$ input graphs $G_1, \dots ,G_k$, where each pair $G_i$, $G_j$ with $i \neq j$ shares the same graph $G$, the problem Simultaneous Embedding With Fixed Edges (SEFE) asks whether there exists a planar drawing for each input graph such that all drawings coincide on $G$. While SEFE is still open for the case of two input graphs, the problem is NP-complete for $k \geq 3$ [Schaefer, JGAA 13]. In this work, we explore the parameterized complexity of SEFE. We show that SEFE is FPT with respect to $k$ plus the vertex cover number or the feedback edge set number of the the union graph $G^\cup = G_1 \cup \dots \cup G_k$. Regarding the shared graph $G$, we show that SEFE is NP-complete, even if $G$ is a tree with maximum degree 4. Together with a known NP-hardness reduction [Angelini et al., TCS 15], this allows us to conclude that several parameters of $G$, including the maximum degree, the maximum number of degree-1 neighbors, the vertex cover number, and the number of cutvertices are intractable. We also settle the tractability of all pairs of these parameters. We give FPT algorithms for the vertex cover number plus either of the first two parameters and for the number of cutvertices plus the maximum degree, whereas we prove all remaining combinations to be intractable.
△ Less
Submitted 30 April, 2025; v1 submitted 22 August, 2023;
originally announced August 2023.
-
Maintaining Triconnected Components under Node Expansion
Authors:
Simon D. Fink,
Ignaz Rutter
Abstract:
SPQR-trees are a central component of graph drawing and are also important in many further areas of computer science. From their inception onwards, they have always had a strong relation to dynamic algorithms maintaining information, e.g., on planarity and triconnectivity, under edge insertion and, later on, also deletion. In this paper, we focus on a special kind of dynamic update, the expansion…
▽ More
SPQR-trees are a central component of graph drawing and are also important in many further areas of computer science. From their inception onwards, they have always had a strong relation to dynamic algorithms maintaining information, e.g., on planarity and triconnectivity, under edge insertion and, later on, also deletion. In this paper, we focus on a special kind of dynamic update, the expansion of vertices into arbitrary biconnected graphs, while maintaining the SPQR-tree and further information. This will also allow us to efficiently merge two SPQR-trees by identifying the edges incident to two vertices with each other. We do this working along an axiomatic definition lifting the SPQR-tree to a stand-alone data structure that can be modified independently from the graph it might have been derived from. Making changes to this structure, we can now observe how the graph represented by the SPQR-tree changes, instead of having to reason which updates to the SPQR-tree are necessary after a change to the represented graph.
Using efficient expansions and merges allows us to improve the runtime of the Synchronized Planarity algorithm by Bläsius et al. [ESA 2021] from $O(m^2)$ to $O(m\cdot Δ)$, where $Δ$ is the maximum pipe degree. This also reduces the time for solving several constrained planarity problems, e.g. for Clustered Planarity from $O((n+d)^2)$ to $O(n+d\cdot Δ)$, where $d$ is the total number of crossings between cluster borders and edges and $Δ$ is the maximum number of edge crossings on a single cluster border.
△ Less
Submitted 10 January, 2023;
originally announced January 2023.
-
Experimental Comparison of PC-Trees and PQ-Trees
Authors:
Simon D. Fink,
Matthias Pfretzschner,
Ignaz Rutter
Abstract:
PQ-trees and PC-trees are data structures that represent sets of linear and circular orders, respectively, subject to constraints that specific subsets of elements have to be consecutive. While equivalent to each other, PC-trees are conceptually much simpler than PQ-trees; updating a PC-trees so that a set of elements becomes consecutive requires only a single operation, whereas PQ-trees use an up…
▽ More
PQ-trees and PC-trees are data structures that represent sets of linear and circular orders, respectively, subject to constraints that specific subsets of elements have to be consecutive. While equivalent to each other, PC-trees are conceptually much simpler than PQ-trees; updating a PC-trees so that a set of elements becomes consecutive requires only a single operation, whereas PQ-trees use an update procedure that is described in terms of nine transformation templates that have to be recursively matched and applied.
Despite these theoretical advantages, to date no practical PC-tree implementation is available. This might be due to the original description by Hsu and McConnell in some places only sketching the details of the implementation. In this paper, we describe two alternative implementations of PC-trees. For the first one, we follow the approach by Hsu and McConnell, filling in the necessary details and also proposing improvements on the original algorithm. For the second one, we use a different technique for efficiently representing the tree using a Union-Find data structure. In an extensive experimental evaluation we compare our implementations to a variety of other implementations of PQ-trees that are available on the web as part of academic and other software libraries. Our results show that both PC-tree implementations beat their closest fully correct competitor, the PQ-tree implementation from the OGDF library, by a factor of 2 to 4, showing that PC-trees are not only conceptually simpler but also fast in practice. Moreover, we find the Union-Find-based implementation, while having a slightly worse asymptotic runtime, to be twice as fast as the one based on the description by Hsu and McConnell.
△ Less
Submitted 28 June, 2021;
originally announced June 2021.
-
Synchronized Planarity with Applications to Constrained Planarity Problems
Authors:
Thomas Bläsius,
Simon D. Fink,
Ignaz Rutter
Abstract:
We introduce the problem Synchronized Planarity. Roughly speaking, its input is a loop-free multi-graph together with synchronization constraints that, e.g., match pairs of vertices of equal degree by providing a bijection between their edges. Synchronized Planarity then asks whether the graph admits a crossing-free embedding into the plane such that the orders of edges around synchronized vertice…
▽ More
We introduce the problem Synchronized Planarity. Roughly speaking, its input is a loop-free multi-graph together with synchronization constraints that, e.g., match pairs of vertices of equal degree by providing a bijection between their edges. Synchronized Planarity then asks whether the graph admits a crossing-free embedding into the plane such that the orders of edges around synchronized vertices are consistent. We show, on the one hand, that Synchronized Planarity can be solved in quadratic time, and, on the other hand, that it serves as a powerful modeling language that lets us easily formulate several constrained planarity problems as instances of Synchronized Planarity. In particular, this lets us solve Clustered Planarity in quadratic time, where the most efficient previously known algorithm has an upper bound of $O(n^{8})$.
△ Less
Submitted 22 July, 2021; v1 submitted 30 July, 2020;
originally announced July 2020.
