Tight Complexity Bounds for Counting Generalized Dominating Sets in Bounded-Treewidth Graphs Part I: Algorithmic Results
Abstract
We investigate how efficiently a well-studied family of domination-type problems can be solved on bounded-treewidth graphs. For sets of non-negative integers, a -set of a graph is a set of vertices such that for every , and for every . The problem of finding a -set (of a certain size) unifies standard problems such as Independent Set, Dominating Set, Independent Dominating Set, and many others. For all pairs of finite or cofinite sets , we determine (under standard complexity assumptions) the best possible value such that there is an algorithm that counts -sets in time (if a tree decomposition of width is given in the input). For example, for the Exact Independent Dominating Set problem (also known as Perfect Code) corresponding to and , we improve the algorithm of [van Rooij, 2020] to . Despite the unusually delicate definition of , an accompanying paper shows that our algorithms are most likely optimal, that is, for any pair of finite or cofinite sets where the problem is non-trivial, and any , a -algorithm counting the number of -sets would violate the Counting Strong Exponential-Time Hypothesis (#SETH). For finite sets and , these lower bounds also extend to the decision version, and hence, our algorithms are optimal in this setting as well. In contrast, for many cofinite sets, we show that further significant improvements for the decision and optimization versions are possible using the technique of representative sets.
Cite
@article{arxiv.2211.04278,
title = {Tight Complexity Bounds for Counting Generalized Dominating Sets in Bounded-Treewidth Graphs Part I: Algorithmic Results},
author = {Jacob Focke and Dániel Marx and Fionn Mc Inerney and Daniel Neuen and Govind S. Sankar and Philipp Schepper and Philip Wellnitz},
journal= {arXiv preprint arXiv:2211.04278},
year = {2025}
}
Comments
45 pages, 4 figures; second version splits the original paper into two parts: this is the first part with the algorithmic results followed by the accompanying paper arXiv:2306.03640 covering the second part with the hardness results; third version improves on the presentation