On Graph Crossing Number and Edge Planarization
Anastasios Sidiropoulos2011, Proceedings of the Twenty-Second Annual ACM-SIAM Symposium on Discrete Algorithms
Sign up for access to the world's latest research
checkGet notified about relevant papers
checkSave papers to use in your research
checkJoin the discussion with peers
checkTrack your impact
Abstract
Given an n-vertex graph G, a drawing of G in the plane is a mapping of its vertices into points of the plane, and its edges into continuous curves, connecting the images of their endpoints. A crossing in such a drawing is a point where two such curves intersect. In the Minimum Crossing Number problem, the goal is to find a drawing of G with minimum number of crossings. The value of the optimal solution, denoted by OPT, is called the graph's crossing number. This is a very basic problem in topological graph theory, that has received a significant amount of attention, but is still poorly understood algorithmically. The best currently known efficient algorithm produces drawings with O(log 2 n)• (n + OPT) crossings on bounded-degree graphs, while only a constant factor hardness of approximation is known. A closely related problem is Minimum Planarization, in which the goal is to remove a minimum-cardinality subset of edges from G, such that the remaining graph is planar. Our main technical result establishes the following connection between the two problems: if we are given a solution of cost k to the Minimum Planarization problem on graph G, then we can efficiently find a drawing of G with at most poly(d) • k • (k + OPT) crossings, where d is the maximum degree in G. This result implies an O(n • poly(d) • log 3/2 n)approximation for Minimum Crossing Number, as well as improved algorithms for special cases of the problem, such as, for example, k-apex and bounded-genus graphs.
Related papers
Adding One Edge to Planar Graphs Makes Crossing Number and 1-Planarity Hard
SIAM Journal on Computing, 2013
A graph is near-planar if it can be obtained from a planar graph by adding an edge. We show the surprising fact that it is NP-hard to compute the crossing number of near-planar graphs. A graph is 1-planar if it has a drawing where every edge is crossed by at most one other edge. We show that it is NP-hard to decide whether a given near-planar graph is 1-planar. The main idea in both reductions is to consider the problem of simultaneously drawing two planar graphs inside a disk, with some of its vertices fixed at the boundary of the disk. This leads to the concept of anchored embedding, which is of independent interest. As an interesting consequence we obtain a new, geometric proof of NP-completeness of the crossing number problem, even when restricted to cubic graphs. This resolves a question of Hliněný.
On k-planar crossing numbers
Discrete Applied Mathematics, 2007
The k-planar crossing number of a graph is the minimum number of crossings of its edges over all possible drawings of the graph in k planes. We propose algorithms and methods for k-planar drawings of general graphs together with lower bound techniques. We give exact results for the k-planar crossing number of K 2k+1,q , for k 2. We prove tight bounds for complete graphs. We also study the rectilinear k-planar crossing number.
On the Minimum Cut of Planarizations
Electronic Notes in Discrete Mathematics, 2007
Every drawing of a non-planar graph G in the plane induces a planarization, i.e., a planar graph obtained by replacing edge crossings with dummy vertices. In this paper, we consider the relationship between the capacity of a minimum st-cut in a graph G and its planarizations. We show that these capacities need not be equal. On the other hand, we prove that every crossing minimal planarization can be efficiently transformed into another crossing minimal planarization that preserves the capacity of a minimum st-cut in G. Furthermore, we extend the result to general (reasonable) planarizations. This property turns out to be a powerful tool for reducing the computational efforts in crossing minimization algorithms. Another application is the correction of a proof given byŠiráň , that shows an additivity property of the crossing number with respect to certain decompositions.
Algorithms and bounds for drawing non-planar graphs with crossing-free subgraphs
Computational Geometry, 2015
We initiate the study of the following problem: Given a non-planar graph G and a planar subgraph S of G, does there exist a straight-line drawing Γ of G in the plane such that the edges of S are not crossed in Γ by any edge of G? We give positive and negative results for different kinds of connected spanning subgraphs S of G. Moreover, in order to enlarge the subset of instances that admit a solution, we consider the possibility of bending the edges of G not in S; in this setting we discuss different trade-offs between the number of bends and the required drawing area.
Crossing and Weighted Crossing Number of Near-Planar Graphs
Lecture Notes in Computer Science, 2009
A nonplanar graph G is near-planar if it contains an edge e such that G − e is planar. The problem of determining the crossing number of a near-planar graph is exhibited from different combinatorial viewpoints. On the one hand, we develop min-max formulas involving efficiently computable lower and upper bounds. These min-max results are the first of their kind in the study of crossing numbers and improve the approximation factor for the approximation algorithm given by Hliněný and Salazar (Graph Drawing GD 2006). On the other hand, we show that it is NP-hard to compute a weighted version of the crossing number for near-planar graphs.
Simultaneous Drawing of Planar Graphs with Right-Angle Crossings and Few Bends
Lecture Notes in Computer Science, 2015
Given two planar graphs that are defined on the same set of vertices, a RAC simultaneous drawing is one in which each graph is drawn planar, there are no edge overlaps and the crossings between the two graphs form right angles. The geometric version restricts the problem to straight-line drawings. It is known, however, that there exists a wheel and a matching which do not admit a geometric RAC simultaneous drawing. In order to enlarge the class of graphs that admit RAC simultaneous drawings, we allow bends in the resulting drawings. We prove that two planar graphs always admit a RAC simultaneous drawing with six bends per edge each, in quadratic area. For more restricted classes of planar graphs (i.e., matchings, paths, cycles, outerplanar graphs and subhamiltonian graphs), we manage to significantly reduce the required number of bends per edge, while keeping the area quadratic.
On the Complexity of Covering Vertices by Faces in a Planar Graph
SIAM Journal on Computing, 1988
The pair (G, D) consisting of a planar graph G V, E) with n vertices together with a subset of d special vertices D V is called k-planar if there is an embedding of G in the plane so that at most k faces of G are required to cover all of the vertices in D. Checking 1-planarity can be done in linear-time since it reduces to a problem of checking planarity of a related graph. We present an algorithm which given a graph G and a value k either determines that G is not k-planar or generates an appropriate embedding and associated minimum cover in O(ckn) time, where c is a constant. Hence, the algorithm runs in linear time for any fixed k. The fact that the time required by the algorithm grows exponentially in k is to be expected since we also show that for arbitrary k, the associated decision problem is strongly NP-complete, even when the planar graph has essentially a unique planar embedding, d 0(n), and all facial cycles have bounded length. These results provide a polynomial-time recognition algorithm for special cases of Steiner tree problems in graphs which are solvable in polynomial time. Key words, complexity, planar graphs, Steiner trees AMS(MOS) subject classifications. 05, 68 1. Introduction. Recently, there has been a great deal of interest in solving the Steiner tree problem in graphs. This problem is NP-complete even for planar grid graphs [GJ1]. (See [GJ2] for an excellent introduction to the area of computational complexity.) So recent work has centered on efficiently-solvable special cases and heuristic methods; see [Wi] for a survey of work on this problem. Throughout this paper we deal with undirected graphs of the form G (V, E), where V is a set of n vertices and E is a set of edges connecting pairs of vertices. A graph is called planar if it can be embedded in the plane. A graph G V, E) together with d special vertices D V is called k-planar if there is a 131anar embedding of G so that at most k faces of G are required to cover all of the vertices in D. Clearly, a planar graph is the same as an n-planar graph. The planarity number of G is the minimum k such that G is k-planar. A recent paper by [EMV] presents an algorithm which solves the Steiner problem in an arbitrary graph; their algorithm runs in polynomial time for k-planar graphs, for any fixed k, with D being the vertices required to be in the Steiner tree. It is easy to see that checking 1-planarity of G V, E) with special vertices D V is equivalent to testing the planarity of the associated graph G*= (V*, E*), where V*= Vt.J {r} and E* E [_J {(r, v)" v D}, and so can be done in linear time [HT2]. They leave as an open question the complexity of testing k-planarity for fixed k->-2. In 2, we present an algorithm which checks to see if a given (G, D) pair is k-planar given a fixed embedding of G and if so, determines the planarity number of G in O(ckn) time, when c is a constant. This is used in 3 to generate an appropriate embedding of G and a cover of D by k or fewer faces, if possible, in O(ckn) time. Hence, the algorithm runs in linear time for any fixed k. The fact that the time required grows exponentially in k is to be expected as we show in 4 that for arbitrary k, the associated decision problem is strongly NP-complete, even when the planar graph has essentially a unique planar embedding, d O(n), and all facial cycles have bounded length.
Area, Curve Complexity, and Crossing Resolution of Non-Planar Graph Drawings
Theory of Computing Systems, 2011
In this paper we study non-planar drawings of graphs, and study tradeoffs between the crossing resolution (i.e., the minimum angle formed by two crossing segments), the curve complexity (i.e., maximum number of bends per edge), the total number of bends, and the area.
C O ] 1 0 Ju l 2 01 8 USING BLOCK DESIGNS IN CROSSING NUMBER BOUNDS
The crossing number cr(G) of a graph G = (V, E) is the smallest number of edge crossings over all drawings of G in the plane. For any k ≥ 1, the k-planar crossing number of G, cr k (G), is defined as the minimum of cr(G 1) + cr(G 2) +. .. + cr(G k) over all graphs G 1 , G 2 ,. .. , G k with ∪ k i=1 G i = G. Pach et al. [Computational Geometry: Theory and Applications 68 2-6, (2018)] showed that for every k ≥ 1, we have cr k (G) ≤ 2 k 2 − 1 k 3 cr(G) and that this bound does not remain true if we replace the constant 2 k 2 − 1 k 3 by any number smaller than 1 k 2. We improve the upper bound to 1 k 2 (1 + o(1)) as k → ∞. For the class of bipartite graphs, we show that the best constant is exactly 1 k 2 for every k. The results extend to the rectilinear variant of the k-planar crossing number.
Crossing numbers of graphs, lower bound techniques and algorithms: A survey
Lecture Notes in Computer Science, 1995
We give a survey of recent techniques for deriving lower bounds and algorithms for constructing upper bounds for several variations of the crossing number problem. Our aim is to emphasize the more general resuits or those results which have an algorithmic flavor, including the recent results of the authors.
Related papers
Crossing Number and Weighted Crossing Number of Near-Planar Graphs
Algorithmica, 2009
A nonplanar graph G is near-planar if it contains an edge e such that G − e is planar. The problem of determining the crossing number of a near-planar graph is exhibited from different combinatorial viewpoints. On the one hand, we develop minmax formulas involving efficiently computable lower and upper bounds. These minmax results are the first of their kind in the study of crossing numbers and improve the approximation factor for the approximation algorithm given by Hliněný and Salazar (Graph Drawing GD'06). On the other hand, we show that it is NP-hard to compute a weighted version of the crossing number for near-planar graphs.
Optimal k-Level Planarization and Crossing Minimization
Lecture Notes in Computer Science, 2011
An important step in laying out hierarchical network diagrams is to order the nodes on each level. The usual approach is to minimize the number of edge crossings. This problem is NP-hard even for two layers when the first layer is fixed. Hence, in practice crossing minimization is performed using heuristics. Another suggested approach is to maximize the planar subgraph, i.e. find the least number of edges to delete to make the graph planar. Again this is performed using heuristics since minimal edge deletion for planarity is NP-hard. We show that using modern SAT and MIP solving approaches we can find optimal orderings for minimal crossing or minimal edge deletion for planarization on reasonably sized graphs. These exact approaches provide a benchmark for measuring quality of heuristic crossing minimization and planarization algorithms. Furthermore, we can straightforwardly extend our approach to minimize crossings followed by maximizing planar subgraph or vice versa; these hybrid approaches produce noticeably better layout then either crossing minimization or planarization alone.
A branch-and-cut approach to the crossing number problem
Discrete Optimization, 2008
The crossing number of a graph is the minimum number of edge crossings in any drawing of the graph in the plane. Extensive research has produced bounds on the crossing number and exact formulae for special graph classes, yet the crossing numbers of graphs such as K 11 or K 9,11 are still unknown. Finding the crossing number is NP-hard for general graphs and no practical algorithm for its computation has been published so far. We present an integer linear programming formulation that is based on a reduction of the general problem to a restricted version of the crossing number problem in which each edge may be crossed at most once. We also present cutting plane generation heuristics and a column generation scheme. As we demonstrate in a computational study, a branch-and-cut algorithm based on these techniques as well as recently published preprocessing algorithms can be used to successfully compute the crossing number for small-to medium-sized general graphs for the first time.
A Note on Minimum-Segment Drawings of Planar Graphs
Journal of Graph Algorithms and Applications, 2013
A straight-line drawing of a planar graph G is a planar drawing of G, where each vertex is mapped to a point on the Euclidean plane and each edge is drawn as a straight line segment. A segment in a straight-line drawing is a maximal set of edges that form a straight line segment. A minimum-segment drawing of G is a straightline drawing of G, where the number of segments is the minimum among all possible straight-line drawings of G. In this paper we prove that it is NP-complete to determine whether a plane graph G has a straight-line drawing with at most k segments, where k ≥ 3. We also prove that the problem of deciding whether a given partial drawing of G can be extended to a straight-line drawing with at most k segments is NP-complete, even when G is an outerplanar graph. Finally, we investigate a worst-case lower bound on the number of segments required by straight-line drawings of arbitrary spanning trees of a given planar graph.
Graphs drawn with few crossings per edge
Combinatorica, 1997
We show that if a graph of v vertices can be drawn in the plane so that every edge crosses at most k>0 others, then its number of edges cannot exceed 4.108V"kv. For k<4, we establish a better bound, (kq-3)(v-2), which is tight for k-= 1 and 2. We apply these estimates to improve a result of Ajtai et al. and Leighton, providing a general lower bound for the crossing number of a graph in terms of its number of vertices and edges.
One-and two-page crossing numbers for some types of graphs
The simplest graph drawing method is that of putting the vertices of a graph on a line (spine) and drawing the edges as half-circles on k half planes (pages). Such drawings are called kpage book drawings and the minimal number of edge crossings in such a drawing is called the k-page crossing number. In a one-page book drawing, all edges are placed on one side of the spine, and in a two-page book drawing all edges are placed either above or below the spine. The one-page and two-page crossing numbers of a graph provide upper bounds for the standard planar crossing. In this paper, we derive the exact one-page crossing numbers for four-row meshes, present a new proof for the one-page crossing numbers of Halin graphs, and derive the exact two-page crossing numbers for circulant graphs Cn(1, n 2). We also give explicit constructions of the optimal drawings for each kind of graphs.
Various heuristic algorithms to minimise the two-page crossing numbers of graphs
Open Computer Science, 2015
We propose several new heuristics for the twopage book crossing problem, which are based on recent algorithms for the corresponding one-page problem. Especially, the neural network model for edge allocation is combined for the first time with various one-page algorithms. We investigate the performance of the new heuristics by testing them on various benchmark test suites. It is found out that the new heuristics outperform the previously known heuristics and produce good approximations of the planar crossing number for severalwell-known graph families. We conjecture that the optimal two-page drawing of a graph represents the planar drawing of the graph.
On the k-planar local crossing number
Discrete Mathematics
Given a fixed positive integer k, the k-planar local crossing number of a graph G, denoted by lcr k (G), is the minimum positive integer L such that G can be decomposed into k subgraphs, each of which can be drawn in a plane such that no edge is crossed more than L times. In this note, we show that under certain natural restrictions, the ratio lcr k (G)/lcr1(G) is of order 1/k 2 , which is analogous to the result of Pach et al. [15] for the k-planar crossing number cr k (G) (defined as the minimum positive integer C for which there is a k-planar drawing of G with C total edge crossings). As a corollary of our proof we show that, under similar restrictions, one may obtain a k-planar drawing of G with both the total number of edge crossings as well as the maximum number of times any edge is crossed essentially matching the best known bounds. Our proof relies on the crossing number inequality and several probabilistic tools such as concentration of measure and the Lovász local lemma.
Drawing non-planar graphs with crossing-free subgraphs
2013
We initiate the study of the following problem: Given a non-planar graph G and a planar subgraph S of G, does there exist a straight-line drawing Γ of G in the plane such that the edges of S are not crossed in Γ by any edge of G? We give positive and negative results for different kinds of connected spanning subgraphs S of G. Moreover, in order to enlarge the subset of instances that admit a solution, we consider the possibility of bending the edges of G not in S; in this setting we discuss different trade-offs between the number of bends and the required drawing area.
Algorithms for Graphs Embeddable with Few Crossings Per Edge
Springer eBooks, 2005
We consider graphs that can be embedded on a surface of bounded genus such that each edge has a bounded number of crossings. We prove that many optimization problems, including maximum independent set, minimum vertex cover, minimum dominating set and many others, admit polynomial time approximation schemes when restricted to such graphs. This extends previous results by Baker and Eppstein [7] to a much broader class of graphs. We also show that testing if a graph can be drawn in the plane with at most one crossing per edge is NP-complete.
Loading Preview
Sorry, preview is currently unavailable. You can download the paper by clicking the button above.