Rule-Based Graph Programs Matching the Time Complexity of Imperative Algorithms

January 15, 2025 Β· Declared Dead Β· πŸ› arXiv.org

πŸ‘» CAUSE OF DEATH: Ghosted
No code link whatsoever

"No code URL or promise found in abstract"

Evidence collected by the PWNC Scanner

Authors Ziad Ismaili Alaoui, Detlef Plump arXiv ID 2501.09144 Category cs.PL: Programming Languages Cross-listed cs.PF Citations 1 Venue arXiv.org Last Checked 4 months ago
Abstract
We report on recent advances in rule-based graph programming, which allow us to match the time complexity of some fundamental imperative graph algorithms. In general, achieving the time complexity of graph algorithms implemented in conventional languages using a rule-based graph-transformation language is challenging due to the cost of graph matching. Previous work demonstrated that with rooted rules, certain algorithms can be implemented in the graph programming language GP 2 such that their runtime matches the time complexity of imperative implementations. However, this required input graphs to have a bounded node degree and (for some algorithms) to be connected. In this paper, we overcome these limitations by enhancing the graph data structure generated by the GP 2 compiler and exploiting the new structure in programs. We present three case studies: the first program checks whether input graphs are connected, the second program checks whether input graphs are acyclic, and the third program solves the single-source shortest-paths problem for graphs with integer edge-weights. The first two programs run in linear time on (possibly disconnected) input graphs with arbitrary node degrees. The third program runs in time $O(nm)$ on arbitrary input graphs, matching the time complexity of imperative implementations of the Bellman-Ford algorithm. For each program, we formally prove its correctness and time complexity, and provide runtime experiments on various graph classes.
Community shame:
Not yet rated
Community Contributions

Found the code? Know the venue? Think something is wrong? Let us know!

πŸ“œ Similar Papers

In the same crypt β€” Programming Languages

Died the same way β€” πŸ‘» Ghosted