sandwich problems on orientations
play

Sandwich problems on orientations Zolt an Szigeti Laboratoire - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

Jan 25, 2024 •344 likes •1.55k views

Sandwich problems on orientations Zolt an Szigeti Laboratoire G-SCOP INP Grenoble, France 27 janvier 2011 Joint work with Olivier de Gevigney, Sulamita Klein, Viet Hang Nguyen Z. Szigeti (G-SCOP, Grenoble) Sandwich problems on

  1. Matroids Definition A set system M = ( V , M ) is called a matroid if M satisfies : 1 ∅ ∈ M , 2 if F ∈ M and F ′ ⊆ F , then F ′ ∈ M , 3 if F , F ′ ∈ M and | F | > | F ′ | , then ∃ f ∈ F \ F ′ : F ′ ∪ f ∈ M . The rank of M is the maximum size of a set in M . Examples 1 Forests of a graph, 2 Linearly independent vectors of a vector space. Z. Szigeti (G-SCOP, Grenoble) Sandwich problems on orientations 27 janvier 2011 5 / 21

  2. Matroids Definition A set system M = ( V , M ) is called a matroid if M satisfies : 1 ∅ ∈ M , 2 if F ∈ M and F ′ ⊆ F , then F ′ ∈ M , 3 if F , F ′ ∈ M and | F | > | F ′ | , then ∃ f ∈ F \ F ′ : F ′ ∪ f ∈ M . The rank of M is the maximum size of a set in M . Algorithmic aspects 1 Matroid is given by an oracle that answers if F ∈ M . 2 Greedy algorithm finds a set of M of maximum size, 3 more generally, given a matroid M , F 1 ∈ M and | F 1 | ≤ k ≤ rank of M , it finds F ∈ M that contains F 1 and that has size k . Z. Szigeti (G-SCOP, Grenoble) Sandwich problems on orientations 27 janvier 2011 5 / 21

  3. Generalized Polymatroids Definition 1 A pair ( p , b ) of set functions on V is a strong pair if p is supermodular, b is submodular, they are compliant : for all X , Y ⊂ V , p ( X ) − p ( X \ Y ) ≤ b ( Y ) − b ( Y \ X ) . 2 If ( p , b ) is a strong pair then the polyhedron Q ( p , b ) = { z ∈ R V : p ( X ) ≤ z ( X ) ≤ b ( X ) ∀ X ⊆ V } is called a generalized polymatroid. Z. Szigeti (G-SCOP, Grenoble) Sandwich problems on orientations 27 janvier 2011 6 / 21

  4. Generalized Polymatroids Definition 1 A pair ( p , b ) of set functions on V is a strong pair if p is supermodular, b is submodular, they are compliant : for all X , Y ⊂ V , p ( X ) − p ( X \ Y ) ≤ b ( Y ) − b ( Y \ X ) . 2 If ( p , b ) is a strong pair then the polyhedron Q ( p , b ) = { z ∈ R V : p ( X ) ≤ z ( X ) ≤ b ( X ) ∀ X ⊆ V } is called a generalized polymatroid. Z. Szigeti (G-SCOP, Grenoble) Sandwich problems on orientations 27 janvier 2011 6 / 21

  5. Generalized Polymatroids Definition 1 A pair ( p , b ) of set functions on V is a strong pair if p is supermodular, b is submodular, they are compliant : for all X , Y ⊂ V , p ( X ) − p ( X \ Y ) ≤ b ( Y ) − b ( Y \ X ) . 2 If ( p , b ) is a strong pair then the polyhedron Q ( p , b ) = { z ∈ R V : p ( X ) ≤ z ( X ) ≤ b ( X ) ∀ X ⊆ V } is called a generalized polymatroid. Remarks 1 A pair ( m 1 , m 2 ) of modular functions is a strong pair if and only if m 1 ( v ) ≤ m 2 ( v ) ∀ v ∈ V . 2 The pair ( i G , e G ) is a strong pair. Z. Szigeti (G-SCOP, Grenoble) Sandwich problems on orientations 27 janvier 2011 6 / 21

  6. Generalized Polymatroids Definition 1 A pair ( p , b ) of set functions on V is a strong pair if p is supermodular, b is submodular, they are compliant : for all X , Y ⊂ V , p ( X ) − p ( X \ Y ) ≤ b ( Y ) − b ( Y \ X ) . 2 If ( p , b ) is a strong pair then the polyhedron Q ( p , b ) = { z ∈ R V : p ( X ) ≤ z ( X ) ≤ b ( X ) ∀ X ⊆ V } is called a generalized polymatroid. Remarks 1 A pair ( m 1 , m 2 ) of modular functions is a strong pair if and only if m 1 ( v ) ≤ m 2 ( v ) ∀ v ∈ V . 2 The pair ( i G , e G ) is a strong pair. Z. Szigeti (G-SCOP, Grenoble) Sandwich problems on orientations 27 janvier 2011 6 / 21

  7. Generalized Polymatroids Definition 1 A pair ( p , b ) of set functions on V is a strong pair if p is supermodular, b is submodular, they are compliant : for all X , Y ⊂ V , p ( X ) − p ( X \ Y ) ≤ b ( Y ) − b ( Y \ X ) . 2 If ( p , b ) is a strong pair then the polyhedron Q ( p , b ) = { z ∈ R V : p ( X ) ≤ z ( X ) ≤ b ( X ) ∀ X ⊆ V } is called a generalized polymatroid. Remarks 1 A pair ( m 1 , m 2 ) of modular functions is a strong pair if and only if m 1 ( v ) ≤ m 2 ( v ) ∀ v ∈ V . 2 The pair ( i G , e G ) is a strong pair. Z. Szigeti (G-SCOP, Grenoble) Sandwich problems on orientations 27 janvier 2011 6 / 21

  8. Generalized Polymatroid Intersection Theorem Q ( p , b ) = { z ∈ R V : p ( X ) ≤ z ( X ) ≤ b ( X ) ∀ X ⊆ V } Theorem (Frank, Tardos ’88) 1 The g-polymatroid Q ( p , b ) is 2 The intersection of two g-polymatroids Q ( p 1 , b 1 ) and Q ( p 2 , b 2 ) is Z. Szigeti (G-SCOP, Grenoble) Sandwich problems on orientations 27 janvier 2011 7 / 21

  9. Generalized Polymatroid Intersection Theorem Q ( p , b ) = { z ∈ R V : p ( X ) ≤ z ( X ) ≤ b ( X ) ∀ X ⊆ V } Theorem (Frank, Tardos ’88) 1 The g-polymatroid Q ( p , b ) is non-empty, 1 an integral polyhedron if p and b are integral functions. 2 2 The intersection of two g-polymatroids Q ( p 1 , b 1 ) and Q ( p 2 , b 2 ) is Z. Szigeti (G-SCOP, Grenoble) Sandwich problems on orientations 27 janvier 2011 7 / 21

  10. Generalized Polymatroid Intersection Theorem Q ( p , b ) = { z ∈ R V : p ( X ) ≤ z ( X ) ≤ b ( X ) ∀ X ⊆ V } Theorem (Frank, Tardos ’88) 1 The g-polymatroid Q ( p , b ) is non-empty, 1 an integral polyhedron if p and b are integral functions. 2 2 The intersection of two g-polymatroids Q ( p 1 , b 1 ) and Q ( p 2 , b 2 ) is Z. Szigeti (G-SCOP, Grenoble) Sandwich problems on orientations 27 janvier 2011 7 / 21

  11. Generalized Polymatroid Intersection Theorem Q ( p , b ) = { z ∈ R V : p ( X ) ≤ z ( X ) ≤ b ( X ) ∀ X ⊆ V } Theorem (Frank, Tardos ’88) 1 The g-polymatroid Q ( p , b ) is non-empty, 1 an integral polyhedron if p and b are integral functions. 2 2 The intersection of two g-polymatroids Q ( p 1 , b 1 ) and Q ( p 2 , b 2 ) is Z. Szigeti (G-SCOP, Grenoble) Sandwich problems on orientations 27 janvier 2011 7 / 21

  12. Generalized Polymatroid Intersection Theorem Q ( p , b ) = { z ∈ R V : p ( X ) ≤ z ( X ) ≤ b ( X ) ∀ X ⊆ V } Theorem (Frank, Tardos ’88) 1 The g-polymatroid Q ( p , b ) is non-empty, 1 an integral polyhedron if p and b are integral functions. 2 2 The intersection of two g-polymatroids Q ( p 1 , b 1 ) and Q ( p 2 , b 2 ) is non-empty if and only if p 1 ≤ b 2 and p 2 ≤ b 1 , 1 an integral polyhedron if p 1 , p 2 and b 1 , b 2 are integral functions. 2 Z. Szigeti (G-SCOP, Grenoble) Sandwich problems on orientations 27 janvier 2011 7 / 21

  13. Generalized Polymatroid Intersection Theorem Q ( p , b ) = { z ∈ R V : p ( X ) ≤ z ( X ) ≤ b ( X ) ∀ X ⊆ V } Theorem (Frank, Tardos ’88) 1 The g-polymatroid Q ( p , b ) is non-empty, 1 an integral polyhedron if p and b are integral functions. 2 2 The intersection of two g-polymatroids Q ( p 1 , b 1 ) and Q ( p 2 , b 2 ) is non-empty if and only if p 1 ≤ b 2 and p 2 ≤ b 1 , 1 an integral polyhedron if p 1 , p 2 and b 1 , b 2 are integral functions. 2 Z. Szigeti (G-SCOP, Grenoble) Sandwich problems on orientations 27 janvier 2011 7 / 21

  14. In-degree constrained orientation : Characterization m -orientation Problem Instance : Given a graph G = ( V , E ) and m : V → Z + . 2 1 0 1 2 Z. Szigeti (G-SCOP, Grenoble) Sandwich problems on orientations 27 janvier 2011 8 / 21

  15. In-degree constrained orientation : Characterization m -orientation Problem Instance : Given a graph G = ( V , E ) and m : V → Z + . Question : Does there exist an orientation � G whose in-degree vector is m that is d − G ( v ) = m ( v ) ∀ v ∈ V ? � 2 1 0 1 2 Z. Szigeti (G-SCOP, Grenoble) Sandwich problems on orientations 27 janvier 2011 8 / 21

  16. In-degree constrained orientation : Characterization m -orientation Problem Instance : Given a graph G = ( V , E ) and m : V → Z + . Question : Does there exist an orientation � G whose in-degree vector is m that is d − G ( v ) = m ( v ) ∀ v ∈ V ? � Theorem (Hakimi’65) The answer is Yes if and only if m ( X ) ≥ i G ( X ) ∀ X ⊆ V , m ( V ) = | E | . 2 1 0 X 1 2 Z. Szigeti (G-SCOP, Grenoble) Sandwich problems on orientations 27 janvier 2011 8 / 21

  17. In-degree constrained orientation : Applications Applications Eulerian orientation of an undirected graph (Euler), Eulerian orientation of a mixed graph (Ford-Fulkerson), Perfect matching in a bipartite graph (Hall, Frobenius), f -factor in a bipartite graph (Ore, Tutte). G Z. Szigeti (G-SCOP, Grenoble) Sandwich problems on orientations 27 janvier 2011 9 / 21

  18. In-degree constrained orientation : Applications Applications Eulerian orientation of an undirected graph (Euler), Eulerian orientation of a mixed graph (Ford-Fulkerson), Perfect matching in a bipartite graph (Hall, Frobenius), f -factor in a bipartite graph (Ore, Tutte). G m ( v ) = dG ( v ) ∀ v ∈ V 2 Z. Szigeti (G-SCOP, Grenoble) Sandwich problems on orientations 27 janvier 2011 9 / 21

  19. In-degree constrained orientation : Applications Applications Eulerian orientation of an undirected graph (Euler), Eulerian orientation of a mixed graph (Ford-Fulkerson), Perfect matching in a bipartite graph (Hall, Frobenius), f -factor in a bipartite graph (Ore, Tutte). G = ( V , E ∪ A ) Z. Szigeti (G-SCOP, Grenoble) Sandwich problems on orientations 27 janvier 2011 9 / 21

  20. In-degree constrained orientation : Applications Applications Eulerian orientation of an undirected graph (Euler), Eulerian orientation of a mixed graph (Ford-Fulkerson), Perfect matching in a bipartite graph (Hall, Frobenius), f -factor in a bipartite graph (Ore, Tutte). � G = ( V , � E ∪ A ) dE ( v )+ d + A ( v )+ d − A ( v ) m ( v ) = − d − A ( v ) ∀ v ∈ V 2 Z. Szigeti (G-SCOP, Grenoble) Sandwich problems on orientations 27 janvier 2011 9 / 21

  21. In-degree constrained orientation : Applications Applications Eulerian orientation of an undirected graph (Euler), Eulerian orientation of a mixed graph (Ford-Fulkerson), Perfect matching in a bipartite graph (Hall, Frobenius), f -factor in a bipartite graph (Ore, Tutte). V U G = ( U ∪ V ; E ) Z. Szigeti (G-SCOP, Grenoble) Sandwich problems on orientations 27 janvier 2011 9 / 21

  22. In-degree constrained orientation : Applications Applications Eulerian orientation of an undirected graph (Euler), Eulerian orientation of a mixed graph (Ford-Fulkerson), Perfect matching in a bipartite graph (Hall, Frobenius), f -factor in a bipartite graph (Ore, Tutte). V U G = ( U ∪ V ; E ) Z. Szigeti (G-SCOP, Grenoble) Sandwich problems on orientations 27 janvier 2011 9 / 21

  23. In-degree constrained orientation : Applications Applications Eulerian orientation of an undirected graph (Euler), Eulerian orientation of a mixed graph (Ford-Fulkerson), Perfect matching in a bipartite graph (Hall, Frobenius), f -factor in a bipartite graph (Ore, Tutte). V U G = ( U ∪ V ; E ) m ( u ) = 1 ∀ u ∈ U m ( v ) = d ( v ) − 1 ∀ v ∈ V Z. Szigeti (G-SCOP, Grenoble) Sandwich problems on orientations 27 janvier 2011 9 / 21

  24. In-degree constrained orientation : Applications Applications Eulerian orientation of an undirected graph (Euler), Eulerian orientation of a mixed graph (Ford-Fulkerson), Perfect matching in a bipartite graph (Hall, Frobenius), f -factor in a bipartite graph (Ore, Tutte). 1 3 2 1 V U 2 1 3 1 G = ( U ∪ V ; E ) , f : U ∪ V → Z + Z. Szigeti (G-SCOP, Grenoble) Sandwich problems on orientations 27 janvier 2011 9 / 21

  25. In-degree constrained orientation : Applications Applications Eulerian orientation of an undirected graph (Euler), Eulerian orientation of a mixed graph (Ford-Fulkerson), Perfect matching in a bipartite graph (Hall, Frobenius), f -factor in a bipartite graph (Ore, Tutte). 1 3 2 1 V U 2 1 3 1 G = ( U ∪ V ; E ), f -factor Z. Szigeti (G-SCOP, Grenoble) Sandwich problems on orientations 27 janvier 2011 9 / 21

  26. In-degree constrained orientation : Applications Applications Eulerian orientation of an undirected graph (Euler), Eulerian orientation of a mixed graph (Ford-Fulkerson), Perfect matching in a bipartite graph (Hall, Frobenius), f -factor in a bipartite graph (Ore, Tutte). 1 3 2 1 V U 2 1 3 1 G = ( U ∪ V ; E ), f -factor m ( u ) = f ( u ) ∀ u ∈ U m ( v ) = d ( v ) − f ( v ) ∀ v ∈ V Z. Szigeti (G-SCOP, Grenoble) Sandwich problems on orientations 27 janvier 2011 9 / 21

  27. In-degree constrained orientation : Algorithm Algorithm 1 The in-degree constrained orientation problem is in P because it is equivalent to the f -factor problem in a bipartite graph. Z. Szigeti (G-SCOP, Grenoble) Sandwich problems on orientations 27 janvier 2011 10 / 21

  28. In-degree constrained orientation : Algorithm Algorithm 1 The in-degree constrained orientation problem is in P because it is equivalent to the f -factor problem in a bipartite graph. 3 1 0 2 G , m Z. Szigeti (G-SCOP, Grenoble) Sandwich problems on orientations 27 janvier 2011 10 / 21

  29. In-degree constrained orientation : Algorithm Algorithm 1 The in-degree constrained orientation problem is in P because it is equivalent to the f -factor problem in a bipartite graph. 3 3 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 0 2 0 2 G , m H , f Z. Szigeti (G-SCOP, Grenoble) Sandwich problems on orientations 27 janvier 2011 10 / 21

  30. In-degree constrained orientation : Algorithm Algorithm 1 The in-degree constrained orientation problem is in P because it is equivalent to the f -factor problem in a bipartite graph. 3 3 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 0 2 0 2 G , m H , f , F Z. Szigeti (G-SCOP, Grenoble) Sandwich problems on orientations 27 janvier 2011 10 / 21

  31. In-degree constrained orientation : Algorithm Algorithm 1 The in-degree constrained orientation problem is in P because it is equivalent to the f -factor problem in a bipartite graph. 3 3 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 0 2 0 2 � G , m = d − H , f , F � G Z. Szigeti (G-SCOP, Grenoble) Sandwich problems on orientations 27 janvier 2011 10 / 21

  32. In-degree constrained orientation : Algorithm Algorithm 2 1 Take an arbitrary orientation � G of G . 2 If d − G ( v ) ≤ m ( v ) ∀ v , then it is an m -orientation, Stop. � 3 Otherwise, take a big vertex v : d − G ( v ) > m ( v ). � 4 Let X be the set of vertices u from which there exists a path P u to v . 5 Take a small vertex u ∈ X : d − G ( u ) < m ( u ). � G ′ be obtained from � 6 Let � G by reorienting P u . Go to Step 2. 7 This algorithm finds an m -orientation in polynomial time. Z. Szigeti (G-SCOP, Grenoble) Sandwich problems on orientations 27 janvier 2011 10 / 21

  33. In-degree constrained orientation : Algorithm Algorithm 2 1 Take an arbitrary orientation � G of G . 2 If d − G ( v ) ≤ m ( v ) ∀ v , then it is an m -orientation, Stop. � 3 Otherwise, take a big vertex v : d − G ( v ) > m ( v ). � 4 Let X be the set of vertices u from which there exists a path P u to v . 5 Take a small vertex u ∈ X : d − G ( u ) < m ( u ). � G ′ be obtained from � 6 Let � G by reorienting P u . Go to Step 2. 7 This algorithm finds an m -orientation in polynomial time. Z. Szigeti (G-SCOP, Grenoble) Sandwich problems on orientations 27 janvier 2011 10 / 21

  34. In-degree constrained orientation : Algorithm Algorithm 2 1 Take an arbitrary orientation � G of G . 2 If d − G ( v ) ≤ m ( v ) ∀ v , then it is an m -orientation, Stop. � v ∈ V d − (Indeed, | A | = � G ( v ) ≤ � v ∈ V m ( v ) = m ( V ) = | E | = | A | . ) � 3 Otherwise, take a big vertex v : d − G ( v ) > m ( v ). � 4 Let X be the set of vertices u from which there exists a path P u to v . 5 Take a small vertex u ∈ X : d − G ( u ) < m ( u ). � G ′ be obtained from � 6 Let � G by reorienting P u . Go to Step 2. 7 This algorithm finds an m -orientation in polynomial time. Z. Szigeti (G-SCOP, Grenoble) Sandwich problems on orientations 27 janvier 2011 10 / 21

  35. In-degree constrained orientation : Algorithm Algorithm 2 1 Take an arbitrary orientation � G of G . 2 If d − G ( v ) ≤ m ( v ) ∀ v , then it is an m -orientation, Stop. � 3 Otherwise, take a big vertex v : d − G ( v ) > m ( v ). � 4 Let X be the set of vertices u from which there exists a path P u to v . 5 Take a small vertex u ∈ X : d − G ( u ) < m ( u ). � G ′ be obtained from � 6 Let � G by reorienting P u . Go to Step 2. 7 This algorithm finds an m -orientation in polynomial time. Z. Szigeti (G-SCOP, Grenoble) Sandwich problems on orientations 27 janvier 2011 10 / 21

  36. In-degree constrained orientation : Algorithm Algorithm 2 1 Take an arbitrary orientation � G of G . 2 If d − G ( v ) ≤ m ( v ) ∀ v , then it is an m -orientation, Stop. � 3 Otherwise, take a big vertex v : d − G ( v ) > m ( v ). � 4 Let X be the set of vertices u from which there exists a path P u to v . 5 Take a small vertex u ∈ X : d − G ( u ) < m ( u ). � G ′ be obtained from � 6 Let � G by reorienting P u . Go to Step 2. 7 This algorithm finds an m -orientation in polynomial time. Z. Szigeti (G-SCOP, Grenoble) Sandwich problems on orientations 27 janvier 2011 10 / 21

  37. In-degree constrained orientation : Algorithm Algorithm 2 1 Take an arbitrary orientation � G of G . 2 If d − G ( v ) ≤ m ( v ) ∀ v , then it is an m -orientation, Stop. � 3 Otherwise, take a big vertex v : d − G ( v ) > m ( v ). � 4 Let X be the set of vertices u from which there exists a path P u to v . 5 Take a small vertex u ∈ X : d − G ( u ) < m ( u ). � G ′ be obtained from � 6 Let � G by reorienting P u . Go to Step 2. 7 This algorithm finds an m -orientation in polynomial time. Z. Szigeti (G-SCOP, Grenoble) Sandwich problems on orientations 27 janvier 2011 10 / 21

  38. In-degree constrained orientation : Algorithm Algorithm 2 1 Take an arbitrary orientation � G of G . 2 If d − G ( v ) ≤ m ( v ) ∀ v , then it is an m -orientation, Stop. � 3 Otherwise, take a big vertex v : d − G ( v ) > m ( v ). � 4 Let X be the set of vertices u from which there exists a path P u to v . 5 Take a small vertex u ∈ X : d − G ( u ) < m ( u ). (It exists because � x ∈ X m ( x ) = m ( X ) ≥ i G ( X ) = i G ( X ) + d − x ∈ X d − � G ( X ) = � G ( x ) . ) � � G ′ be obtained from � 6 Let � G by reorienting P u . Go to Step 2. 7 This algorithm finds an m -orientation in polynomial time. Z. Szigeti (G-SCOP, Grenoble) Sandwich problems on orientations 27 janvier 2011 10 / 21

  39. In-degree constrained orientation : Algorithm Algorithm 2 1 Take an arbitrary orientation � G of G . 2 If d − G ( v ) ≤ m ( v ) ∀ v , then it is an m -orientation, Stop. � 3 Otherwise, take a big vertex v : d − G ( v ) > m ( v ). � 4 Let X be the set of vertices u from which there exists a path P u to v . 5 Take a small vertex u ∈ X : d − G ( u ) < m ( u ). � G ′ be obtained from � 6 Let � G by reorienting P u . Go to Step 2. 7 This algorithm finds an m -orientation in polynomial time. Z. Szigeti (G-SCOP, Grenoble) Sandwich problems on orientations 27 janvier 2011 10 / 21

  40. In-degree constrained orientation : Algorithm Algorithm 2 1 Take an arbitrary orientation � G of G . 2 If d − G ( v ) ≤ m ( v ) ∀ v , then it is an m -orientation, Stop. � 3 Otherwise, take a big vertex v : d − G ( v ) > m ( v ). � 4 Let X be the set of vertices u from which there exists a path P u to v . 5 Take a small vertex u ∈ X : d − G ( u ) < m ( u ). � G ′ be obtained from � 6 Let � G by reorienting P u . Go to Step 2. w ∈ V | d − w ∈ V | d − (It is better : � G ′ ( w ) − m ( w ) | = � G ( w ) − m ( w ) | − 2.) � � 7 This algorithm finds an m -orientation in polynomial time. Z. Szigeti (G-SCOP, Grenoble) Sandwich problems on orientations 27 janvier 2011 10 / 21

  41. In-degree constrained orientation : Algorithm Algorithm 2 1 Take an arbitrary orientation � G of G . 2 If d − G ( v ) ≤ m ( v ) ∀ v , then it is an m -orientation, Stop. � 3 Otherwise, take a big vertex v : d − G ( v ) > m ( v ). � 4 Let X be the set of vertices u from which there exists a path P u to v . 5 Take a small vertex u ∈ X : d − G ( u ) < m ( u ). � G ′ be obtained from � 6 Let � G by reorienting P u . Go to Step 2. 7 This algorithm finds an m -orientation in polynomial time. Z. Szigeti (G-SCOP, Grenoble) Sandwich problems on orientations 27 janvier 2011 10 / 21

  42. In-degree constrained orientation : Algorithm Algorithm 2 1 Take an arbitrary orientation � G of G . 2 If d − G ( v ) ≤ m ( v ) ∀ v , then it is an m -orientation, Stop. � 3 Otherwise, take a big vertex v : d − G ( v ) > m ( v ). � 4 Let X be the set of vertices u from which there exists a path P u to v . 5 Take a small vertex u ∈ X : d − G ( u ) < m ( u ). � G ′ be obtained from � 6 Let � G by reorienting P u . Go to Step 2. 7 This algorithm finds an m -orientation in polynomial time. (0 ≤ � w ∈ V | d − G ( w ) − m ( w ) | ≤ 2 | E | . ) � Z. Szigeti (G-SCOP, Grenoble) Sandwich problems on orientations 27 janvier 2011 10 / 21

  43. In-degree constrained orientation : Algorithm Algorithm 2 1 Take an arbitrary orientation � G of G . 2 If d − G ( v ) ≤ m ( v ) ∀ v , then it is an m -orientation, Stop. � 3 Otherwise, take a big vertex v : d − G ( v ) > m ( v ). � 4 Let X be the set of vertices u from which there exists a path P u to v . 5 Take a small vertex u ∈ X : d − G ( u ) < m ( u ). � G ′ be obtained from � 6 Let � G by reorienting P u . Go to Step 2. 7 This algorithm finds an m -orientation in polynomial time. Z. Szigeti (G-SCOP, Grenoble) Sandwich problems on orientations 27 janvier 2011 10 / 21

  44. Sandwich problems Graph Sandwich Problem for Property Π Instance : Given graphs G 1 = ( V , E 1 ) and G 2 = ( V , E 2 ) with E 1 ⊂ E 2 . Question : Does there exist E 1 ⊆ E ⊆ E 2 such that the graph G = ( V , E ) satisfies property Π ? Z. Szigeti (G-SCOP, Grenoble) Sandwich problems on orientations 27 janvier 2011 11 / 21

  45. Sandwich problems Graph Sandwich Problem for Property Π Instance : Given graphs G 1 = ( V , E 1 ) and G 2 = ( V , E 2 ) with E 1 ⊂ E 2 . Question : Does there exist E 1 ⊆ E ⊆ E 2 such that the graph G = ( V , E ) satisfies property Π ? Golumbic, Kaplan, Shamir ’95 Split graphs (in P), [V=C+I] Cographs (in P), [no induced P 4 ] Eulerian graphs, Comparability graphs (NP-complete), [has a transitive orientation] Permutation graphs (NP-complete), [intersection graph of the chords of a permutation diagram] Interval graphs (NP-complete). [intersection graph of a family of intervals on the real line] Z. Szigeti (G-SCOP, Grenoble) Sandwich problems on orientations 27 janvier 2011 11 / 21

  46. Degree Constrained Sandwich Problems Undirected case G 1 , G 2 undirected graphs, Π = { d G ( v ) = m ( v ) ∀ v ∈ V } ( m : V → Z + ). Z. Szigeti (G-SCOP, Grenoble) Sandwich problems on orientations 27 janvier 2011 12 / 21

  47. Degree Constrained Sandwich Problems Undirected case G 1 , G 2 undirected graphs, Π = { d G ( v ) = m ( v ) ∀ v ∈ V } ( m : V → Z + ). Remark It is equivalent to the f -factor problem. The answer is Yes if and only if there exists an ( m ( v ) − d G 1 ( v ))-factor in the graph G 0 = ( V , E 2 \ E 1 ) . Z. Szigeti (G-SCOP, Grenoble) Sandwich problems on orientations 27 janvier 2011 12 / 21

  48. Degree Constrained Sandwich Problems Undirected case G 1 , G 2 undirected graphs, Π = { d G ( v ) = m ( v ) ∀ v ∈ V } ( m : V → Z + ). Remark It is equivalent to the f -factor problem. The answer is Yes if and only if there exists an ( m ( v ) − d G 1 ( v ))-factor in the graph G 0 = ( V , E 2 \ E 1 ) . Directed case D 1 , D 2 directed graphs and Π = { d − D ( v ) = m ( v ) ∀ v ∈ V } ( m : V → Z + ). Z. Szigeti (G-SCOP, Grenoble) Sandwich problems on orientations 27 janvier 2011 12 / 21

  49. Degree Constrained Sandwich Problems Undirected case G 1 , G 2 undirected graphs, Π = { d G ( v ) = m ( v ) ∀ v ∈ V } ( m : V → Z + ). Remark It is equivalent to the f -factor problem. The answer is Yes if and only if there exists an ( m ( v ) − d G 1 ( v ))-factor in the graph G 0 = ( V , E 2 \ E 1 ) . Directed case D 1 , D 2 directed graphs and Π = { d − D ( v ) = m ( v ) ∀ v ∈ V } ( m : V → Z + ). Exercise The answer is Yes if and only if d − D 2 ( v ) ≥ m ( v ) ≥ d − D 1 ( v ) ∀ v ∈ V . Z. Szigeti (G-SCOP, Grenoble) Sandwich problems on orientations 27 janvier 2011 12 / 21

  50. m -orientation Sandwich Problem 1 Undirected Graphs : G 1 , G 2 undirected graphs, Π = G has an m -orientation ( m : V → Z + ) . Z. Szigeti (G-SCOP, Grenoble) Sandwich problems on orientations 27 janvier 2011 13 / 21

  51. m -orientation Sandwich Problem 1 m -orientation Sandwich Problem for Undirected Graphs : Instance : Given undirected graphs G 1 = ( V , E 1 ) and G 2 = ( V , E 2 ) with E 1 ⊆ E 2 and a non-negative integer vector m on V . Question : Does there exist a sandwich graph G = ( V , E ) ( E 1 ⊆ E ⊆ E 2 ) that has an orientation � G whose in-degree vector is m that is d − G ( v ) = m ( v ) ∀ v ∈ V ? � Z. Szigeti (G-SCOP, Grenoble) Sandwich problems on orientations 27 janvier 2011 13 / 21

  52. m -orientation Sandwich Problem 1 m -orientation Sandwich Problem for Undirected Graphs : Instance : Given undirected graphs G 1 = ( V , E 1 ) and G 2 = ( V , E 2 ) with E 1 ⊆ E 2 and a non-negative integer vector m on V . Question : Does there exist a sandwich graph G = ( V , E ) ( E 1 ⊆ E ⊆ E 2 ) that has an orientation � G whose in-degree vector is m that is d − G ( v ) = m ( v ) ∀ v ∈ V ? � Theorem (de Gevigney, Klein, Nguyen, Szigeti 2010) The answer is Yes if and only if i E 1 ( X ) ≤ m ( X ) ≤ e E 2 ( X ) ∀ X ⊆ V . Z. Szigeti (G-SCOP, Grenoble) Sandwich problems on orientations 27 janvier 2011 13 / 21

  53. m -orientation Sandwich Problem 1 m -orientation Sandwich Problem for Undirected Graphs : Instance : Given undirected graphs G 1 = ( V , E 1 ) and G 2 = ( V , E 2 ) with E 1 ⊆ E 2 and a non-negative integer vector m on V . Question : Does there exist a sandwich graph G = ( V , E ) ( E 1 ⊆ E ⊆ E 2 ) that has an orientation � G whose in-degree vector is m that is d − G ( v ) = m ( v ) ∀ v ∈ V ? � Theorem (de Gevigney, Klein, Nguyen, Szigeti 2010) The answer is Yes if and only if i E 1 ( X ) ≤ m ( X ) ≤ e E 2 ( X ) ∀ X ⊆ V . Remark E 1 = E 2 : equivalent to Hakimi’s Theorem. Z. Szigeti (G-SCOP, Grenoble) Sandwich problems on orientations 27 janvier 2011 13 / 21

  54. Proof Theorem (de Gevigney, Klein, Nguyen, Szigeti 2010) The answer is Yes if and only if i E 1 ( X ) ≤ m ( X ) ≤ e E 2 ( X ) ∀ X ⊆ V . 1 Necessity : if sandwich graph G that has an m -orientation exists Each edge that contributes to i E 1 ( X ) must contribute to m ( X ) and 1 only the edges that contributes to e E 2 ( X ) may contribute to m ( X ). 2 2 Sufficiency : Let M = { F ⊆ E 2 : m ( X ) ≥ i F ( X ) ∀ X ⊆ V } . 1 M is a matroid of rank min { m ( V ( F )) + | E 2 \ F | : F ⊆ E 2 } . 2 By i E 1 ( X ) ≤ m ( X ) ∀ X ⊆ V , E 1 ∈ M . 3 For all F ⊆ E 2 , by m ( X ) ≤ e E 2 ( X ) ∀ X ⊆ V , applied for V \ V ( F ), and 4 by 2, rank of M is ≥ m ( V ). By 3 and 4, there exists E ∈ M that contains E 1 , of size m ( V ). 5 By 5, G = ( V , E ) is a sandwich graph that has, by Hakimi’s Theorem, 6 an m -orientation. Z. Szigeti (G-SCOP, Grenoble) Sandwich problems on orientations 27 janvier 2011 14 / 21

  55. Proof Theorem (de Gevigney, Klein, Nguyen, Szigeti 2010) The answer is Yes if and only if i E 1 ( X ) ≤ m ( X ) ≤ e E 2 ( X ) ∀ X ⊆ V . 1 Necessity : if sandwich graph G that has an m -orientation exists Each edge that contributes to i E 1 ( X ) must contribute to m ( X ) and 1 only the edges that contributes to e E 2 ( X ) may contribute to m ( X ). 2 2 Sufficiency : Let M = { F ⊆ E 2 : m ( X ) ≥ i F ( X ) ∀ X ⊆ V } . 1 M is a matroid of rank min { m ( V ( F )) + | E 2 \ F | : F ⊆ E 2 } . 2 By i E 1 ( X ) ≤ m ( X ) ∀ X ⊆ V , E 1 ∈ M . 3 For all F ⊆ E 2 , by m ( X ) ≤ e E 2 ( X ) ∀ X ⊆ V , applied for V \ V ( F ), and 4 by 2, rank of M is ≥ m ( V ). By 3 and 4, there exists E ∈ M that contains E 1 , of size m ( V ). 5 By 5, G = ( V , E ) is a sandwich graph that has, by Hakimi’s Theorem, 6 an m -orientation. Z. Szigeti (G-SCOP, Grenoble) Sandwich problems on orientations 27 janvier 2011 14 / 21

  56. Proof Theorem (de Gevigney, Klein, Nguyen, Szigeti 2010) The answer is Yes if and only if i E 1 ( X ) ≤ m ( X ) ≤ e E 2 ( X ) ∀ X ⊆ V . 1 Necessity : if sandwich graph G that has an m -orientation exists Each edge that contributes to i E 1 ( X ) must contribute to m ( X ) and 1 only the edges that contributes to e E 2 ( X ) may contribute to m ( X ). 2 2 Sufficiency : Let M = { F ⊆ E 2 : m ( X ) ≥ i F ( X ) ∀ X ⊆ V } . 1 M is a matroid of rank min { m ( V ( F )) + | E 2 \ F | : F ⊆ E 2 } . 2 By i E 1 ( X ) ≤ m ( X ) ∀ X ⊆ V , E 1 ∈ M . 3 For all F ⊆ E 2 , by m ( X ) ≤ e E 2 ( X ) ∀ X ⊆ V , applied for V \ V ( F ), and 4 by 2, rank of M is ≥ m ( V ). By 3 and 4, there exists E ∈ M that contains E 1 , of size m ( V ). 5 By 5, G = ( V , E ) is a sandwich graph that has, by Hakimi’s Theorem, 6 an m -orientation. Z. Szigeti (G-SCOP, Grenoble) Sandwich problems on orientations 27 janvier 2011 14 / 21

  57. Proof Theorem (de Gevigney, Klein, Nguyen, Szigeti 2010) The answer is Yes if and only if i E 1 ( X ) ≤ m ( X ) ≤ e E 2 ( X ) ∀ X ⊆ V . 1 Necessity : if sandwich graph G that has an m -orientation exists Each edge that contributes to i E 1 ( X ) must contribute to m ( X ) and 1 only the edges that contributes to e E 2 ( X ) may contribute to m ( X ). 2 2 Sufficiency : Let M = { F ⊆ E 2 : m ( X ) ≥ i F ( X ) ∀ X ⊆ V } . 1 M is a matroid of rank min { m ( V ( F )) + | E 2 \ F | : F ⊆ E 2 } . 2 By i E 1 ( X ) ≤ m ( X ) ∀ X ⊆ V , E 1 ∈ M . 3 For all F ⊆ E 2 , by m ( X ) ≤ e E 2 ( X ) ∀ X ⊆ V , applied for V \ V ( F ), and 4 by 2, rank of M is ≥ m ( V ). By 3 and 4, there exists E ∈ M that contains E 1 , of size m ( V ). 5 By 5, G = ( V , E ) is a sandwich graph that has, by Hakimi’s Theorem, 6 an m -orientation. Z. Szigeti (G-SCOP, Grenoble) Sandwich problems on orientations 27 janvier 2011 14 / 21

  58. Proof Theorem (de Gevigney, Klein, Nguyen, Szigeti 2010) The answer is Yes if and only if i E 1 ( X ) ≤ m ( X ) ≤ e E 2 ( X ) ∀ X ⊆ V . 1 Necessity : if sandwich graph G that has an m -orientation exists Each edge that contributes to i E 1 ( X ) must contribute to m ( X ) and 1 only the edges that contributes to e E 2 ( X ) may contribute to m ( X ). 2 2 Sufficiency : Let M = { F ⊆ E 2 : m ( X ) ≥ i F ( X ) ∀ X ⊆ V } . 1 M is a matroid of rank min { m ( V ( F )) + | E 2 \ F | : F ⊆ E 2 } . 2 By i E 1 ( X ) ≤ m ( X ) ∀ X ⊆ V , E 1 ∈ M . 3 For all F ⊆ E 2 , by m ( X ) ≤ e E 2 ( X ) ∀ X ⊆ V , applied for V \ V ( F ), and 4 by 2, rank of M is ≥ m ( V ). By 3 and 4, there exists E ∈ M that contains E 1 , of size m ( V ). 5 By 5, G = ( V , E ) is a sandwich graph that has, by Hakimi’s Theorem, 6 an m -orientation. Z. Szigeti (G-SCOP, Grenoble) Sandwich problems on orientations 27 janvier 2011 14 / 21

  59. Proof Theorem (de Gevigney, Klein, Nguyen, Szigeti 2010) The answer is Yes if and only if i E 1 ( X ) ≤ m ( X ) ≤ e E 2 ( X ) ∀ X ⊆ V . 1 Necessity : if sandwich graph G that has an m -orientation exists Each edge that contributes to i E 1 ( X ) must contribute to m ( X ) and 1 only the edges that contributes to e E 2 ( X ) may contribute to m ( X ). 2 2 Sufficiency : Let M = { F ⊆ E 2 : m ( X ) ≥ i F ( X ) ∀ X ⊆ V } . 1 M is a matroid of rank min { m ( V ( F )) + | E 2 \ F | : F ⊆ E 2 } . 2 By i E 1 ( X ) ≤ m ( X ) ∀ X ⊆ V , E 1 ∈ M . 3 For all F ⊆ E 2 , by m ( X ) ≤ e E 2 ( X ) ∀ X ⊆ V , applied for V \ V ( F ), and 4 by 2, rank of M is ≥ m ( V ). By 3 and 4, there exists E ∈ M that contains E 1 , of size m ( V ). 5 By 5, G = ( V , E ) is a sandwich graph that has, by Hakimi’s Theorem, 6 an m -orientation. Z. Szigeti (G-SCOP, Grenoble) Sandwich problems on orientations 27 janvier 2011 14 / 21

  60. Proof Theorem (de Gevigney, Klein, Nguyen, Szigeti 2010) The answer is Yes if and only if i E 1 ( X ) ≤ m ( X ) ≤ e E 2 ( X ) ∀ X ⊆ V . 1 Necessity : if sandwich graph G that has an m -orientation exists Each edge that contributes to i E 1 ( X ) must contribute to m ( X ) and 1 only the edges that contributes to e E 2 ( X ) may contribute to m ( X ). 2 2 Sufficiency : Let M = { F ⊆ E 2 : m ( X ) ≥ i F ( X ) ∀ X ⊆ V } . 1 M is a matroid of rank min { m ( V ( F )) + | E 2 \ F | : F ⊆ E 2 } . 2 By i E 1 ( X ) ≤ m ( X ) ∀ X ⊆ V , E 1 ∈ M . 3 For all F ⊆ E 2 , by m ( X ) ≤ e E 2 ( X ) ∀ X ⊆ V , applied for V \ V ( F ), and 4 by 2, rank of M is ≥ m ( V ). By 3 and 4, there exists E ∈ M that contains E 1 , of size m ( V ). 5 By 5, G = ( V , E ) is a sandwich graph that has, by Hakimi’s Theorem, 6 an m -orientation. Z. Szigeti (G-SCOP, Grenoble) Sandwich problems on orientations 27 janvier 2011 14 / 21

  61. Proof Theorem (de Gevigney, Klein, Nguyen, Szigeti 2010) The answer is Yes if and only if i E 1 ( X ) ≤ m ( X ) ≤ e E 2 ( X ) ∀ X ⊆ V . 1 Necessity : if sandwich graph G that has an m -orientation exists Each edge that contributes to i E 1 ( X ) must contribute to m ( X ) and 1 only the edges that contributes to e E 2 ( X ) may contribute to m ( X ). 2 2 Sufficiency : Let M = { F ⊆ E 2 : m ( X ) ≥ i F ( X ) ∀ X ⊆ V } . 1 M is a matroid of rank min { m ( V ( F )) + | E 2 \ F | : F ⊆ E 2 } . 2 By i E 1 ( X ) ≤ m ( X ) ∀ X ⊆ V , E 1 ∈ M . 3 For all F ⊆ E 2 , by m ( X ) ≤ e E 2 ( X ) ∀ X ⊆ V , applied for V \ V ( F ), and 4 by 2, rank of M is ≥ m ( V ). By 3 and 4, there exists E ∈ M that contains E 1 , of size m ( V ). 5 By 5, G = ( V , E ) is a sandwich graph that has, by Hakimi’s Theorem, 6 an m -orientation. Z. Szigeti (G-SCOP, Grenoble) Sandwich problems on orientations 27 janvier 2011 14 / 21

  62. Proof Theorem (de Gevigney, Klein, Nguyen, Szigeti 2010) The answer is Yes if and only if i E 1 ( X ) ≤ m ( X ) ≤ e E 2 ( X ) ∀ X ⊆ V . 1 Necessity : if sandwich graph G that has an m -orientation exists Each edge that contributes to i E 1 ( X ) must contribute to m ( X ) and 1 only the edges that contributes to e E 2 ( X ) may contribute to m ( X ). 2 2 Sufficiency : Let M = { F ⊆ E 2 : m ( X ) ≥ i F ( X ) ∀ X ⊆ V } . 1 M is a matroid of rank min { m ( V ( F )) + | E 2 \ F | : F ⊆ E 2 } . 2 By i E 1 ( X ) ≤ m ( X ) ∀ X ⊆ V , E 1 ∈ M . 3 For all F ⊆ E 2 , by m ( X ) ≤ e E 2 ( X ) ∀ X ⊆ V , applied for V \ V ( F ), and 4 by 2, rank of M is ≥ m ( V ). By 3 and 4, there exists E ∈ M that contains E 1 , of size m ( V ). 5 By 5, G = ( V , E ) is a sandwich graph that has, by Hakimi’s Theorem, 6 an m -orientation. Z. Szigeti (G-SCOP, Grenoble) Sandwich problems on orientations 27 janvier 2011 14 / 21

  63. Proof Theorem (de Gevigney, Klein, Nguyen, Szigeti 2010) The answer is Yes if and only if i E 1 ( X ) ≤ m ( X ) ≤ e E 2 ( X ) ∀ X ⊆ V . 1 Necessity : if sandwich graph G that has an m -orientation exists Each edge that contributes to i E 1 ( X ) must contribute to m ( X ) and 1 only the edges that contributes to e E 2 ( X ) may contribute to m ( X ). 2 2 Sufficiency : Let M = { F ⊆ E 2 : m ( X ) ≥ i F ( X ) ∀ X ⊆ V } . 1 M is a matroid of rank min { m ( V ( F )) + | E 2 \ F | : F ⊆ E 2 } . 2 By i E 1 ( X ) ≤ m ( X ) ∀ X ⊆ V , E 1 ∈ M . 3 For all F ⊆ E 2 , by m ( X ) ≤ e E 2 ( X ) ∀ X ⊆ V , applied for V \ V ( F ), and 4 by 2, rank of M is ≥ m ( V ). By 3 and 4, there exists E ∈ M that contains E 1 , of size m ( V ). 5 By 5, G = ( V , E ) is a sandwich graph that has, by Hakimi’s Theorem, 6 an m -orientation. Z. Szigeti (G-SCOP, Grenoble) Sandwich problems on orientations 27 janvier 2011 14 / 21

  64. Algorithmic aspects Theorem (de Gevigney, Klein, Nguyen, Szigeti 2010) The answer is Yes if and only if i E 1 ( X ) ≤ m ( X ) ≤ e E 2 ( X ) ∀ X ⊆ V . Z. Szigeti (G-SCOP, Grenoble) Sandwich problems on orientations 27 janvier 2011 15 / 21

  65. Algorithmic aspects Theorem (de Gevigney, Klein, Nguyen, Szigeti 2010) The answer is Yes if and only if i E 1 ( X ) ≤ m ( X ) ≤ e E 2 ( X ) ∀ X ⊆ V . 1 Decide : The answer is Yes if and only if both submodular functions b 1 ( X ) = m ( X ) − i E 1 ( X ) and b 2 ( X ) = e E 2 ( X ) − m ( X ) have minimum value 0 . Submodular function minimization is polynomial (Schrijver ; Fleicher, Fujishige, Iwata’2000). 2 Find : By the previous matroid property, greedy algorithm finds the sandwich graph G , and as seen, the m -orientation of G is easy to find. Z. Szigeti (G-SCOP, Grenoble) Sandwich problems on orientations 27 janvier 2011 15 / 21

  66. Algorithmic aspects Theorem (de Gevigney, Klein, Nguyen, Szigeti 2010) The answer is Yes if and only if i E 1 ( X ) ≤ m ( X ) ≤ e E 2 ( X ) ∀ X ⊆ V . 1 Decide : The answer is Yes if and only if both submodular functions b 1 ( X ) = m ( X ) − i E 1 ( X ) and b 2 ( X ) = e E 2 ( X ) − m ( X ) have minimum value 0 . Submodular function minimization is polynomial (Schrijver ; Fleicher, Fujishige, Iwata’2000). 2 Find : By the previous matroid property, greedy algorithm finds the sandwich graph G , and as seen, the m -orientation of G is easy to find. Z. Szigeti (G-SCOP, Grenoble) Sandwich problems on orientations 27 janvier 2011 15 / 21

  67. m -orientation Sandwich Problem 2 Mixed Graphs : G 1 , G 2 mixed graphs, Π = G has an m -orientation ( m : V → Z + ) . Z. Szigeti (G-SCOP, Grenoble) Sandwich problems on orientations 27 janvier 2011 16 / 21

  68. m -orientation Sandwich Problem 2 m -orientation Sandwich Problem for Mixed Graphs : Instance : Given mixed graphs G 1 = ( V , E 1 ∪ A 1 ) and G 2 = ( V , E 2 ∪ A 2 ) with E 1 ⊆ E 2 , A 1 ⊆ A 2 and a non-negative integer vector m on V . Question : Does there exist a sandwich mixed graph G = ( V , E ∪ A ) with G = ( V , − → E 1 ⊆ E ⊆ E 2 and A 1 ⊆ A ⊆ A 2 that has an orientation � E ∪ A ) whose in-degree vector is m that is d − G ( v ) = m ( v ) ∀ v ∈ V ? � Z. Szigeti (G-SCOP, Grenoble) Sandwich problems on orientations 27 janvier 2011 16 / 21

  69. m -orientation Sandwich Problem 2 m -orientation Sandwich Problem for Mixed Graphs : Instance : Given mixed graphs G 1 = ( V , E 1 ∪ A 1 ) and G 2 = ( V , E 2 ∪ A 2 ) with E 1 ⊆ E 2 , A 1 ⊆ A 2 and a non-negative integer vector m on V . Question : Does there exist a sandwich mixed graph G = ( V , E ∪ A ) with G = ( V , − → E 1 ⊆ E ⊆ E 2 and A 1 ⊆ A ⊆ A 2 that has an orientation � E ∪ A ) whose in-degree vector is m that is d − G ( v ) = m ( v ) ∀ v ∈ V ? � Theorem (de Gevigney, Klein, Nguyen, Szigeti 2010) The answer is Yes if and only if i E 1 ( X ) + � v ∈ X d − A 1 ( v ) ≤ m ( X ) ≤ e E 2 ( X ) + � v ∈ X d − A 2 ( v ) ∀ X ⊆ V . Z. Szigeti (G-SCOP, Grenoble) Sandwich problems on orientations 27 janvier 2011 16 / 21

  70. m -orientation Sandwich Problem 2 m -orientation Sandwich Problem for Mixed Graphs : Instance : Given mixed graphs G 1 = ( V , E 1 ∪ A 1 ) and G 2 = ( V , E 2 ∪ A 2 ) with E 1 ⊆ E 2 , A 1 ⊆ A 2 and a non-negative integer vector m on V . Question : Does there exist a sandwich mixed graph G = ( V , E ∪ A ) with G = ( V , − → E 1 ⊆ E ⊆ E 2 and A 1 ⊆ A ⊆ A 2 that has an orientation � E ∪ A ) whose in-degree vector is m that is d − G ( v ) = m ( v ) ∀ v ∈ V ? � Theorem (de Gevigney, Klein, Nguyen, Szigeti 2010) The answer is Yes if and only if v ∈ X d − v ∈ X d − i E 1 ( X ) + � A 1 ( v ) ≤ m ( X ) ≤ e E 2 ( X ) + � A 2 ( v ) ∀ X ⊆ V . Special cases 1 E 2 = ∅ : result on the In-degree Constrained Sandwich Problem. 2 A 2 = ∅ : result on m -orient. Sandwich Problem for Undirected Graphs. Z. Szigeti (G-SCOP, Grenoble) Sandwich problems on orientations 27 janvier 2011 16 / 21

  71. Proof 1 Suppose that E 1 ⊆ E ⊆ E 2 has been choosen and oriented with in-degree vector m 1 . 2 Then the problem is reduced to the Dir. Degree Const. Sandw. Problem with m 2 ( v ) = m ( v ) − m 1 ( v ) ∀ v ∈ V for A 1 ⊆ A 2 , 3 which has a solution if and only if d − A 1 ( v ) ≤ m 2 ( v ) ≤ d − A 2 ( v ) ∀ v ∈ V . 4 or equivalently (1) m ( v ) − d − A 2 ( v ) ≤ m 1 ( v ) ≤ m ( v ) − d − A 1 ( v ) ∀ v ∈ V . 5 The problem is reduced to the m 1 -orientation Sandwich Problem for Undirected Graphs for E 1 ⊆ E 2 , 6 which has a solution iff (2) i E 1 ( X ) ≤ m 1 ( X ) ≤ e E 2 ( X ) ∀ X ⊆ V . 7 The Mixed m -orient. Sandwich Problem has an Yes answer if and only if there exists a function m 1 : V → Z satisfying (1) and (2). 8 By the Generalized Polymatroid Intersection Theorem, applied for v ∈ X ( m ( v ) − d − v ∈ X ( m ( v ) − d − p 1 ( X ) = � A 2 ( v )) , b 1 ( X ) = � A 1 ( v )) , p 2 ( X ) = i E 1 ( X ) , b 2 ( X ) = e E 2 ( X ) , we are done. Z. Szigeti (G-SCOP, Grenoble) Sandwich problems on orientations 27 janvier 2011 17 / 21

  72. Proof 1 Suppose that E 1 ⊆ E ⊆ E 2 has been choosen and oriented with in-degree vector m 1 . 2 Then the problem is reduced to the Dir. Degree Const. Sandw. Problem with m 2 ( v ) = m ( v ) − m 1 ( v ) ∀ v ∈ V for A 1 ⊆ A 2 , 3 which has a solution if and only if d − A 1 ( v ) ≤ m 2 ( v ) ≤ d − A 2 ( v ) ∀ v ∈ V . 4 or equivalently (1) m ( v ) − d − A 2 ( v ) ≤ m 1 ( v ) ≤ m ( v ) − d − A 1 ( v ) ∀ v ∈ V . 5 The problem is reduced to the m 1 -orientation Sandwich Problem for Undirected Graphs for E 1 ⊆ E 2 , 6 which has a solution iff (2) i E 1 ( X ) ≤ m 1 ( X ) ≤ e E 2 ( X ) ∀ X ⊆ V . 7 The Mixed m -orient. Sandwich Problem has an Yes answer if and only if there exists a function m 1 : V → Z satisfying (1) and (2). 8 By the Generalized Polymatroid Intersection Theorem, applied for v ∈ X ( m ( v ) − d − v ∈ X ( m ( v ) − d − p 1 ( X ) = � A 2 ( v )) , b 1 ( X ) = � A 1 ( v )) , p 2 ( X ) = i E 1 ( X ) , b 2 ( X ) = e E 2 ( X ) , we are done. Z. Szigeti (G-SCOP, Grenoble) Sandwich problems on orientations 27 janvier 2011 17 / 21

  73. Proof 1 Suppose that E 1 ⊆ E ⊆ E 2 has been choosen and oriented with in-degree vector m 1 . 2 Then the problem is reduced to the Dir. Degree Const. Sandw. Problem with m 2 ( v ) = m ( v ) − m 1 ( v ) ∀ v ∈ V for A 1 ⊆ A 2 , 3 which has a solution if and only if d − A 1 ( v ) ≤ m 2 ( v ) ≤ d − A 2 ( v ) ∀ v ∈ V . 4 or equivalently (1) m ( v ) − d − A 2 ( v ) ≤ m 1 ( v ) ≤ m ( v ) − d − A 1 ( v ) ∀ v ∈ V . 5 The problem is reduced to the m 1 -orientation Sandwich Problem for Undirected Graphs for E 1 ⊆ E 2 , 6 which has a solution iff (2) i E 1 ( X ) ≤ m 1 ( X ) ≤ e E 2 ( X ) ∀ X ⊆ V . 7 The Mixed m -orient. Sandwich Problem has an Yes answer if and only if there exists a function m 1 : V → Z satisfying (1) and (2). 8 By the Generalized Polymatroid Intersection Theorem, applied for v ∈ X ( m ( v ) − d − v ∈ X ( m ( v ) − d − p 1 ( X ) = � A 2 ( v )) , b 1 ( X ) = � A 1 ( v )) , p 2 ( X ) = i E 1 ( X ) , b 2 ( X ) = e E 2 ( X ) , we are done. Z. Szigeti (G-SCOP, Grenoble) Sandwich problems on orientations 27 janvier 2011 17 / 21

  74. Proof 1 Suppose that E 1 ⊆ E ⊆ E 2 has been choosen and oriented with in-degree vector m 1 . 2 Then the problem is reduced to the Dir. Degree Const. Sandw. Problem with m 2 ( v ) = m ( v ) − m 1 ( v ) ∀ v ∈ V for A 1 ⊆ A 2 , 3 which has a solution if and only if d − A 1 ( v ) ≤ m 2 ( v ) ≤ d − A 2 ( v ) ∀ v ∈ V . 4 or equivalently (1) m ( v ) − d − A 2 ( v ) ≤ m 1 ( v ) ≤ m ( v ) − d − A 1 ( v ) ∀ v ∈ V . 5 The problem is reduced to the m 1 -orientation Sandwich Problem for Undirected Graphs for E 1 ⊆ E 2 , 6 which has a solution iff (2) i E 1 ( X ) ≤ m 1 ( X ) ≤ e E 2 ( X ) ∀ X ⊆ V . 7 The Mixed m -orient. Sandwich Problem has an Yes answer if and only if there exists a function m 1 : V → Z satisfying (1) and (2). 8 By the Generalized Polymatroid Intersection Theorem, applied for v ∈ X ( m ( v ) − d − v ∈ X ( m ( v ) − d − p 1 ( X ) = � A 2 ( v )) , b 1 ( X ) = � A 1 ( v )) , p 2 ( X ) = i E 1 ( X ) , b 2 ( X ) = e E 2 ( X ) , we are done. Z. Szigeti (G-SCOP, Grenoble) Sandwich problems on orientations 27 janvier 2011 17 / 21

  75. Proof 1 Suppose that E 1 ⊆ E ⊆ E 2 has been choosen and oriented with in-degree vector m 1 . 2 Then the problem is reduced to the Dir. Degree Const. Sandw. Problem with m 2 ( v ) = m ( v ) − m 1 ( v ) ∀ v ∈ V for A 1 ⊆ A 2 , 3 which has a solution if and only if d − A 1 ( v ) ≤ m 2 ( v ) ≤ d − A 2 ( v ) ∀ v ∈ V . 4 or equivalently (1) m ( v ) − d − A 2 ( v ) ≤ m 1 ( v ) ≤ m ( v ) − d − A 1 ( v ) ∀ v ∈ V . 5 The problem is reduced to the m 1 -orientation Sandwich Problem for Undirected Graphs for E 1 ⊆ E 2 , 6 which has a solution iff (2) i E 1 ( X ) ≤ m 1 ( X ) ≤ e E 2 ( X ) ∀ X ⊆ V . 7 The Mixed m -orient. Sandwich Problem has an Yes answer if and only if there exists a function m 1 : V → Z satisfying (1) and (2). 8 By the Generalized Polymatroid Intersection Theorem, applied for v ∈ X ( m ( v ) − d − v ∈ X ( m ( v ) − d − p 1 ( X ) = � A 2 ( v )) , b 1 ( X ) = � A 1 ( v )) , p 2 ( X ) = i E 1 ( X ) , b 2 ( X ) = e E 2 ( X ) , we are done. Z. Szigeti (G-SCOP, Grenoble) Sandwich problems on orientations 27 janvier 2011 17 / 21

  76. Proof 1 Suppose that E 1 ⊆ E ⊆ E 2 has been choosen and oriented with in-degree vector m 1 . 2 Then the problem is reduced to the Dir. Degree Const. Sandw. Problem with m 2 ( v ) = m ( v ) − m 1 ( v ) ∀ v ∈ V for A 1 ⊆ A 2 , 3 which has a solution if and only if d − A 1 ( v ) ≤ m 2 ( v ) ≤ d − A 2 ( v ) ∀ v ∈ V . 4 or equivalently (1) m ( v ) − d − A 2 ( v ) ≤ m 1 ( v ) ≤ m ( v ) − d − A 1 ( v ) ∀ v ∈ V . 5 The problem is reduced to the m 1 -orientation Sandwich Problem for Undirected Graphs for E 1 ⊆ E 2 , 6 which has a solution iff (2) i E 1 ( X ) ≤ m 1 ( X ) ≤ e E 2 ( X ) ∀ X ⊆ V . 7 The Mixed m -orient. Sandwich Problem has an Yes answer if and only if there exists a function m 1 : V → Z satisfying (1) and (2). 8 By the Generalized Polymatroid Intersection Theorem, applied for v ∈ X ( m ( v ) − d − v ∈ X ( m ( v ) − d − p 1 ( X ) = � A 2 ( v )) , b 1 ( X ) = � A 1 ( v )) , p 2 ( X ) = i E 1 ( X ) , b 2 ( X ) = e E 2 ( X ) , we are done. Z. Szigeti (G-SCOP, Grenoble) Sandwich problems on orientations 27 janvier 2011 17 / 21

  77. Proof 1 Suppose that E 1 ⊆ E ⊆ E 2 has been choosen and oriented with in-degree vector m 1 . 2 Then the problem is reduced to the Dir. Degree Const. Sandw. Problem with m 2 ( v ) = m ( v ) − m 1 ( v ) ∀ v ∈ V for A 1 ⊆ A 2 , 3 which has a solution if and only if d − A 1 ( v ) ≤ m 2 ( v ) ≤ d − A 2 ( v ) ∀ v ∈ V . 4 or equivalently (1) m ( v ) − d − A 2 ( v ) ≤ m 1 ( v ) ≤ m ( v ) − d − A 1 ( v ) ∀ v ∈ V . 5 The problem is reduced to the m 1 -orientation Sandwich Problem for Undirected Graphs for E 1 ⊆ E 2 , 6 which has a solution iff (2) i E 1 ( X ) ≤ m 1 ( X ) ≤ e E 2 ( X ) ∀ X ⊆ V . 7 The Mixed m -orient. Sandwich Problem has an Yes answer if and only if there exists a function m 1 : V → Z satisfying (1) and (2). 8 By the Generalized Polymatroid Intersection Theorem, applied for v ∈ X ( m ( v ) − d − v ∈ X ( m ( v ) − d − p 1 ( X ) = � A 2 ( v )) , b 1 ( X ) = � A 1 ( v )) , p 2 ( X ) = i E 1 ( X ) , b 2 ( X ) = e E 2 ( X ) , we are done. Z. Szigeti (G-SCOP, Grenoble) Sandwich problems on orientations 27 janvier 2011 17 / 21

  78. Proof 1 Suppose that E 1 ⊆ E ⊆ E 2 has been choosen and oriented with in-degree vector m 1 . 2 Then the problem is reduced to the Dir. Degree Const. Sandw. Problem with m 2 ( v ) = m ( v ) − m 1 ( v ) ∀ v ∈ V for A 1 ⊆ A 2 , 3 which has a solution if and only if d − A 1 ( v ) ≤ m 2 ( v ) ≤ d − A 2 ( v ) ∀ v ∈ V . 4 or equivalently (1) m ( v ) − d − A 2 ( v ) ≤ m 1 ( v ) ≤ m ( v ) − d − A 1 ( v ) ∀ v ∈ V . 5 The problem is reduced to the m 1 -orientation Sandwich Problem for Undirected Graphs for E 1 ⊆ E 2 , 6 which has a solution iff (2) i E 1 ( X ) ≤ m 1 ( X ) ≤ e E 2 ( X ) ∀ X ⊆ V . 7 The Mixed m -orient. Sandwich Problem has an Yes answer if and only if there exists a function m 1 : V → Z satisfying (1) and (2). 8 By the Generalized Polymatroid Intersection Theorem, applied for v ∈ X ( m ( v ) − d − v ∈ X ( m ( v ) − d − p 1 ( X ) = � A 2 ( v )) , b 1 ( X ) = � A 1 ( v )) , p 2 ( X ) = i E 1 ( X ) , b 2 ( X ) = e E 2 ( X ) , we are done. Z. Szigeti (G-SCOP, Grenoble) Sandwich problems on orientations 27 janvier 2011 17 / 21

Download Presentation
Download Policy: The content available on the website is offered to you 'AS IS' for your personal information and use only. It cannot be commercialized, licensed, or distributed on other websites without prior consent from the author. To download a presentation, simply click this link. If you encounter any difficulties during the download process, it's possible that the publisher has removed the file from their server.

Recommend

Page 1 Pros and Cons of Sandwich Testing Top and Bottom Layer Tests can be done in parallel

Page 1 Pros and Cons of Sandwich Testing Top and Bottom Layer Tests can be done in parallel

Podcast Ch11-04 Title : Sandwich Testing Description : Sandwich Testing Strategy, Pros and Cons of Sandwich Testing, Modified Sandwich Testing Participants : Barry Kurtz (instructor); Brandon Winters, Sara Hyde, Cheng Vue, Dan Baehr

303 views • 3 slides
Orientations for gauge-theoretic moduli problems Yuuji Tanaka, Oxford University Oxford, January

Orientations for gauge-theoretic moduli problems Yuuji Tanaka, Oxford University Oxford, January

Gauge-theoretic moduli problem Anti-self-dual instanton moduli space Orientations Orientations for gauge-theoretic moduli problems Yuuji Tanaka, Oxford University Oxford, January 2019. Based on work with Dominic Joyce and Markus Upmeier in

657 views • 21 slides
-Orientations Definition. Given G = ( V , E ) and : V I N. An -orientation of G is an

-Orientations Definition. Given G = ( V , E ) and : V I N. An -orientation of G is an

-Orientations Definition. Given G = ( V , E ) and : V I N. An -orientation of G is an orientation with outdeg( v ) = ( v ) for all v . Reverting directed cycles preserves -orientations. Theorem. The set of -orientations of

354 views • 20 slides
The Sandwich Lettuce Cucumber Pepper sandwich Pronunciation: / san(d)w d , -w t

The Sandwich Lettuce Cucumber Pepper sandwich Pronunciation: / san(d)w d , -w t

The Sandwich Lettuce Cucumber Pepper sandwich Pronunciation: / san(d)w d , -w t / an item of food consisting of two pieces of bread with a fi lling between them, eaten as a light meal Oxford Online Dictionary Origins: The

579 views • 16 slides
BUCKLING OF SANDWICH BEAMS USING THE EXTENDED HIGH-ORDER SANDWICH PANEL THEORY AND COMPARISON

BUCKLING OF SANDWICH BEAMS USING THE EXTENDED HIGH-ORDER SANDWICH PANEL THEORY AND COMPARISON

18 TH INTERNATIONAL CONFERENCE ON COMPOSITE MATERIALS BUCKLING OF SANDWICH BEAMS USING THE EXTENDED HIGH-ORDER SANDWICH PANEL THEORY AND COMPARISON WITH ELASTICITY C. Phan 1* , G. Kardomateas 1 , Y. Frostig 2 1 Department of Aerospace

197 views • 6 slides
The Sandwich Generation: Challenges of Caring for Parents, Children, and Yourself Dr.

The Sandwich Generation: Challenges of Caring for Parents, Children, and Yourself Dr.

The Sandwich Generation: Challenges of Caring for Parents, Children, and Yourself Dr. Katherine L. Fiori Derner Institute March 20 th , 2012 The Sandwich Generation The term describing a generation of people who care for their

1.12k views • 33 slides
A Trace (of) Sandwich Christoph Rauch , Sergey Goncharov, Lutz Schr oder, Maciej Pir og TCS

A Trace (of) Sandwich Christoph Rauch , Sergey Goncharov, Lutz Schr oder, Maciej Pir og TCS

A Trace (of) Sandwich A Trace (of) Sandwich Christoph Rauch , Sergey Goncharov, Lutz Schr oder, Maciej Pir og TCS Seminar SS 2019 FAU Erlangen-N urnberg July 2, 2019 A Trace (of) Sandwich A prototype While language Syntax s =

700 views • 43 slides
OLDE SANDWICH TOWNE OLDE SANDWICH TOWNE COMMUNITY IMPROVEMENT PLAN (CIP) COMMUNITY IMPROVEMENT

OLDE SANDWICH TOWNE OLDE SANDWICH TOWNE COMMUNITY IMPROVEMENT PLAN (CIP) COMMUNITY IMPROVEMENT

Cover.jpg OLDE SANDWICH TOWNE OLDE SANDWICH TOWNE COMMUNITY IMPROVEMENT PLAN (CIP) COMMUNITY IMPROVEMENT PLAN (CIP) PUBLIC MEETING #2 October 15, 2008 Topics Topics Topics Project Update 1) Preliminary Financial Incentive Programs 2)

522 views • 28 slides
Enumerating Eulerian Orientations. Andrew Elvey Price Joint work with Tony Guttmann and Mireille

Enumerating Eulerian Orientations. Andrew Elvey Price Joint work with Tony Guttmann and Mireille

Enumerating Eulerian Orientations. Andrew Elvey Price Joint work with Tony Guttmann and Mireille Bousquet-Melou The University of Melbourne 20/11/2017 Enumerating Eulerian Orientations. Andrew Elvey Price R OOTED PLANAR E ULERIAN ORIENTATIONS

1.32k views • 130 slides
Continuous Production of Honeycomb Sandwich Panels All Aboard with Light and Cost-efficient

Continuous Production of Honeycomb Sandwich Panels All Aboard with Light and Cost-efficient

Continuous Production of Honeycomb Sandwich Panels All Aboard with Light and Cost-efficient Technology John Sewell, EconCore Innovation Day of CFK Valley Belgium Composites and RailWay 29 June 2016, Brussels Introduction: Sandwich

487 views • 20 slides
Ham Sandwich Theorem Carola Wenk 3/8/16 1 CMPS 6640/4040 Computational Geometry Ham-Sandwich

Ham Sandwich Theorem Carola Wenk 3/8/16 1 CMPS 6640/4040 Computational Geometry Ham-Sandwich

CMPS 6640/4040 Computational Geometry Spring 2016 Ham Sandwich Theorem Carola Wenk 3/8/16 1 CMPS 6640/4040 Computational Geometry Ham-Sandwich Theorem Theorem: Let P and Q be two finite point sets in the plane Then there exists a line l such

297 views • 19 slides
5 orientations of learning constructivist humanist behaviorist social learning cognitivist

5 orientations of learning constructivist humanist behaviorist social learning cognitivist

5 orientations of learning constructivist humanist behaviorist social learning cognitivist presentation 5 orientations of learning are discussed under the following headings: What is learning? The goal of Education Main

514 views • 14 slides
A fast Monte Carlo algorithm for the homogeneous set sandwich problem Vincius Gusmo Pereira

A fast Monte Carlo algorithm for the homogeneous set sandwich problem Vincius Gusmo Pereira

A fast Monte Carlo algorithm for the homogeneous set sandwich problem Vincius Gusmo Pereira de S Guilherme Dias da Fonseca Celina Miraglia Herrera de Figueiredo Universidade Federal do Rio de Janeiro Sandwich Graphs A graph G 2 ( V 2 , E

633 views • 42 slides
Canonical Orientations for the Moduli Space of G 2 -instantons Markus Upmeier (joint with Dominic

Canonical Orientations for the Moduli Space of G 2 -instantons Markus Upmeier (joint with Dominic

Canonical Orientations for the Moduli Space of G 2 -instantons Markus Upmeier (joint with Dominic Joyce) Talk based on: Joyce, Upmeier - Orientations for moduli spaces of G 2 -instantons . ( Soon ) Joyce, Tanaka, Upmeier - On orientations for

1.51k views • 92 slides
Quantum Mechanics As a Sandwich Theory Simone Severini University College London with Adn

Quantum Mechanics As a Sandwich Theory Simone Severini University College London with Adn

Quantum Mechanics As a Sandwich Theory Simone Severini University College London with Adn Cabello (Sevilla), Runyao Duan (UTS), Laura Mancinska (IQC/NUS), Giannicola Scarpa (CWI), Andreas Winter (ICREA) Quantum Mechanics As a Sandwich

1.39k views • 95 slides
Scaling and local limits of Baxter permutations and bipolar orientations through coalescent-walk

Scaling and local limits of Baxter permutations and bipolar orientations through coalescent-walk

Scaling and local limits of Baxter permutations and bipolar orientations through coalescent-walk processes Jacopo Borga UZH ZRICH (joint work with M. Maazoun) Permuton limits Bipolar orientations and walks in cones Coalescent-walk

197 views • 18 slides
#prep Y assembly 01-A: Sandwich IF you are building JellyBOX with the Heated Bed upgrade, please

#prep Y assembly 01-A: Sandwich IF you are building JellyBOX with the Heated Bed upgrade, please

#prep Y assembly 01-A: Sandwich IF you are building JellyBOX with the Heated Bed upgrade, please refer to the instructions on the next page 'Heated Bed Sandwich' JellyBox Build: 09_Y-Assembly In this video, we build the 'Y assembly ' = 'bed' =

91 views • 8 slides
Proposi'onal Logic Proofs An argument is a sequence of

Proposi'onal Logic Proofs An argument is a sequence of

1/23/15 Inference Rules (Rosen, Section 1.5) TOPICS Logic Proofs via Truth Tables via Inference Rules Proposi'onal Logic Proofs An argument is a sequence of proposi'ons:

299 views • 13 slides
Integration Testing Functional Decomposition Based Chapter 13 Integration Testing Test the

Integration Testing Functional Decomposition Based Chapter 13 Integration Testing Test the

Integration Testing Functional Decomposition Based Chapter 13 Integration Testing Test the interfaces and interactions among separately tested units Three different approaches Based on functional decomposition Based on call

501 views • 35 slides
GPU Computing E. Carlinet, J. Chazalon { firstname.lastname@lrde.epita.fr} Apr20 EPITA

GPU Computing E. Carlinet, J. Chazalon { firstname.lastname@lrde.epita.fr} Apr20 EPITA

GPU Computing E. Carlinet, J. Chazalon { firstname.lastname@lrde.epita.fr} Apr20 EPITA Research &amp; Development Laboratory (LRDE) 1 Fifty shades of Parallelism 2 How to get things done quicker 1. Do less work 2. Do some work better (i.e.

848 views • 21 slides
Meaning Representation and Semantic Analysis Ling 571 Deep Processing Techniques for NLP

Meaning Representation and Semantic Analysis Ling 571 Deep Processing Techniques for NLP

Meaning Representation and Semantic Analysis Ling 571 Deep Processing Techniques for NLP February 9, 2011 Roadmap Meaning representation: Event representations Temporal representation Semantic Analysis

626 views • 52 slides
Solidity Pt. 1 Solidity idity Javascript-like programming language for writing programs that

Solidity Pt. 1 Solidity idity Javascript-like programming language for writing programs that

Solidity Pt. 1 Solidity idity Javascript-like programming language for writing programs that run on the Ethereum Virtual Machine Domain-specific language that supports abstractions required for operation of smart contracts e.g.

763 views • 44 slides
Math 104 Calculus 10.1 Sequences Math 104 - Yu

Math 104 Calculus 10.1 Sequences Math 104 - Yu

Math 104 Calculus 10.1 Sequences Math 104 - Yu Infinite sequences A sequence is an ordered list of numbers { a 1 , a 2 , a 3 , , a n , } . If we

401 views • 12 slides
CS4102 Algorithms Summer 2020 Warm up Why is an algorithms space complexity (how much memory

CS4102 Algorithms Summer 2020 Warm up Why is an algorithms space complexity (how much memory

CS4102 Algorithms Summer 2020 Warm up Why is an algorithms space complexity (how much memory it uses) important? Why might a memory- intensive algorithm be a bad one? 1 Why lots of memory is bad 2 Greedy Algorithms Require

1.05k views • 70 slides

More recommend