Parameterized complexity of isometric path partition: treewidth and diameter
August 07, 2025 Β· Declared Dead Β· π arXiv.org
"No code URL or promise found in abstract"
Evidence collected by the PWNC Scanner
Authors
Dibyayan Chakraborty, Oscar Defrain, Florent Foucaud, Mathieu Mari, Prafullkumar Tale
arXiv ID
2508.05448
Category
cs.DS: Data Structures & Algorithms
Cross-listed
cs.DM,
math.CO
Citations
3
Venue
arXiv.org
Last Checked
4 months ago
Abstract
We investigate the parameterized complexity of the Isometric Path Partition problem when parameterized by the treewidth ($\mathrm{tw}$) of the input graph, arguably one of the most widely studied parameters. Courcelle's theorem shows that graph problems that are expressible as MSO formulas of constant size admit FPT algorithms parameterized by the treewidth of the input graph. This encompasses many natural graph problems. However, many metric-based graph problems, where the solution is defined using some metric-based property of the graph (often the distance) are not expressible as MSO formulas of constant size. These types of problems, Isometric Path Partition being one of them, require individual attention and often draw the boundary for the success story of parameterization by treewidth. We prove that Isometric Path Partition is $W[1]$-hard when parameterized by treewidth (in fact, even pathwidth), answering the question by Dumas et al. [SIDMA, 2024], Fernau et al. [CIAC, 2023], and confirming the aforementioned tendency. We complement this hardness result by designing a tailored dynamic programming algorithm running in $n^{O(\mathrm{tw})}$ time. This dynamic programming approach also results in an algorithm running in time $\textrm{diam}^{O(\mathrm{tw}^2)} \cdot n^{O(1)}$, where $\textrm{diam}$ is the diameter of the graph. Note that the dependency on treewidth is unusually high, as most problems admit algorithms running in time $2^{O(\mathrm{tw})}\cdot n^{O(1)}$ or $2^{O(\mathrm{tw} \log (\mathrm{tw}))}\cdot n^{O(1)}$. However, we rule out the possibility of a significantly faster algorithm by proving that Isometric Path Partition does not admit an algorithm running in time $\textrm{diam}^{o(\mathrm{tw}^2/(\log^3(\mathrm{tw})))} \cdot n^{O(1)}$, unless the Randomized-ETH fails.
Community Contributions
Found the code? Know the venue? Think something is wrong? Let us know!
π Similar Papers
In the same crypt β Data Structures & Algorithms
π
π
The Cartographer
R.I.P.
π»
Ghosted
Route Planning in Transportation Networks
R.I.P.
π»
Ghosted
Near-linear time approximation algorithms for optimal transport via Sinkhorn iteration
R.I.P.
π»
Ghosted
Hierarchical Clustering: Objective Functions and Algorithms
R.I.P.
π»
Ghosted
Graph Isomorphism in Quasipolynomial Time
π
π
The Cartographer
Simulation optimization: A review of algorithms and applications
Died the same way β π» Ghosted
R.I.P.
π»
Ghosted
Federated Learning: Strategies for Improving Communication Efficiency
R.I.P.
π»
Ghosted
In-Datacenter Performance Analysis of a Tensor Processing Unit
R.I.P.
π»
Ghosted
Deep Convolutional Neural Networks for Computer-Aided Detection: CNN Architectures, Dataset Characteristics and Transfer Learning
R.I.P.
π»
Ghosted