Locally Searching for Large Induced Matchings Maximilian Fürst, Marilena Leichter, Dieter Rautenbach arxiv:1708.008v1 [math.co] 7 Aug 017 Institut für Optimierung und Operations Research, Universität Ulm, Ulm, Germany maximilian.fuerst@uni-ulm.de marilena.leichter@online.de dieter.rautenbach@uni-ulm.de Abstract It is an easy observation that a natural greedy approach yields ad O1-factor approximation algorithm for the maximum induced matching problem in d-regular graphs. The only considerable and non-trivial improvement of this approximation ratio was obtained by Gotthilf and Lewenstein using a combination of the greedy approach and local search, where understanding the performance of the local search was the challenging part of the analysis. We study the performance of their local search when applied to general graphs, C 4 -free graphs, {C 3,C 4 }-free graphs, C 5 -free graphs, and claw-free graphs. As immediate consequences, we obtain approximation algorithms for the maximum induced matching problem restricted to the d-regular graphs in these classes. Keywords: Induced matching; strong matching; local search 1 Introduction Finding a maximum induced matching in a given graph is a well-studied difficult problem [10], which remains hard even when restricted to regular graphs [5], regular bipartite graphs [4], or claw-free graphs [7]. Next to efficient algorithms for special graph classes [1,,5,8], and fixed parameter tractability [4], approximation algorithms have been studied. Duckworth, Manlove, and Zito [5,11] showed that simple and natural greedy strategies yield d O1-factor approximation algorithms for the maximum induced matching problem restricted to d-regular graphs. Up to the constant term, this is an immediate consequence of the two easy observations fact that every induced matching in a d-regular graph G contains at most mg d 1 edges, and that every maximal induced matching in G contains at least mg d d+1 edges, which already implies an approximation ratio of d d+1 d 1 = d 1 + 1 4d. The only considerable and non-trivial improvement of this approximation ratio was obtained by Gotthilf and Lewenstein [6] who described a 0.75d + 0.15-factor approximation algorithm for d-regular graphs that combines a greedy approach with local search. As shown in [9], for {C 3,C 5 }-free d-regular graphs, the approximation factor of their method can be improved to 0.708 3d + 0.45. Taking a closer look at the algorithm Gotthilf and Lewenstein, it turns out that its greedy part Greedyf cf. Algorithm below is a kind of preprocessing, which is rather easy to analyze yet ensures an important structural property that allows for a better analysis of the local search part Local Search cf. Algorithm 1 below. Their approach can actually improve the approximation ratio by at most a factor of, and is limited by the analysis of Local Search. 1
Local Search Input: A graph G. Output: An induced matching M of G. M ; repeat if M {e} is an induced matching of G for some edge e EG\M then M M {e}; end if M \{e} {e,e } is an induced matching of G for some three distinct edges e M and e,e EG\M then M M \{e} {e,e }; end until M does not increase during one iteration; return M; Algorithm 1: The algorithm Local Search. Since Local Search tries to enlarge the induced matching M by exchanging one edge in M against two other edges in EG \ M, it ensures that the subgraph formed by the so-called private conflict edges of each individual edge in M is K -free; a structural property that appears quite naturally in the context of induced matchings and the derived strong edge colorings [3]. In the present paper we analyze the performance of Local Search when applied to general graphs, C 4 -free graphs, {C 3,C 4 }-free graphs, C 5 -free graphs, and claw-free graphs. As immediate consequences, we obtain approximation algorithms for the maximum induced matching problem restricted to the d-regular graphs in these classes. A byproduct of our results is a much shorter proof of the original result of Gotthilf and Lewenstein [6]. Before we proceed to our results, we collect some notation and terminology. We consider only simple, finite, and undirected graphs. The vertex set and the edge set of a graph G are denoted by VG and EG, respectively. For a vertex u in a graph G, the neighborhood of u in G is N G u = {v VG : uv EG}, the closed neighborhood of u in G is N G [u] = {u} N G u, and the degree of u in G is d G u = N G u. A graph is d-regular if all vertices have degree d. For two disjoint sets X and Y of vertices of a graph G, let E G X,Y be the set of edges uv of G with u X and v Y, and let m G X,Y = E G X,Y. For a set X of vertices of G, let E G X be the edge set of the subgraph of G induced by X, and let m G X = E G X. For a set M of edges of a graph G, let VM denote the set of vertices that are incident with an edge in M. The set M is an induced matching if the subgraph G[VM] of G induced by VM is 1-regular. For a set F of graphs, a graph G is F-free if it contains no graph in F as an induced subgraph. If F contains only one graph F, then we write F-free instead of F-free. The cycle of order n is denoted by C n. The square G of a graph G has the same vertex set as G, and two vertices are adjacent in G if their distance in G is one or two. The line graph LG of G is the graph whose vertices are the edges of G, and in which two vertices are adjacent exactly if they share an incident vertex as edges of G. Note that induced matchings in G correspond to independent sets in LG. For an edge e of a graph G, let C G e = {e} N LG e = {f EG : dist LG e,f },
and let c G e = C G e. For a set M of edges of G and an edge e in M, let PC G M,e = C G e\ C G f, f M\{e} and let pc G M,e = PC G M,e. The set C G e contains e as well as all edges of G that are in conflict with e, that is, that cannot be in an induced matching together with e. The set PC G M,e contains the private conflict edges of e with respect to some set M, which will typically be an induced matching of G. Results Throughout this section, let G be a graph of maximum degree d for some d at least 3, and let M be an induced matching produced by applying Local Search to G. The two essential properties of M are that and that for every edge f of G, there is some edge e in M with f C G e 1 e C G e for every edge e in M, and every two edges e and e in PC G M,e. Property 1 means that M is a maximal induced matching, and a violation of property would allow Local Search to replace M with the larger induced matching M \{e} {e,e }. One ingredient of the analysis of Local Search is the following upper bound on the number c G xy of edges conflicting with any edge xy of G. If n xy = N G x N G y and m xy = m G N G x N G y\{x,y}, then G G c G xy {xy} +d N G x N G y\{x,y} m xy = {xy} +d N G x N G y }{{} + N } x\n {{ [y] + N } G y\n G [x] m }{{} xy =n xy d 1 n xy d 1 n xy 1+dn xy +dd 1 n xy m xy = d d+1 dn xy +m xy. 3 Another ingredient of the analysis of Local Search are upper bounds on the number of private conflict edges for the edges in M. Such bounds are the main concern of the following results. Let xy be an edge in M. Ourfirstlemmasummarizesstructural propertiesof thegraphformedbytheedges inpc G M,xy. Let N 1 be the set of vertices u in N G x N G y \ {x,y} that are incident with an edge in PC G M,xy, and let N bethesetofverticesuinvg\n G [x] N G [y]thatareincidentwithanedgeinpc G M,xy. Lemma 1 If G, M, xy, N 1, and N are as above, then the following statements hold. 3
i PC G M,xy = E G {x,y} N 1 E G N 1,N. ii N is independent. iii If u N G x N 1 is such that N G u N is maximum, then m G N G x N 1,N d 1+d 3n xu +m ux. Proof: i By the definition of N 1 and N, we have PC G M,xy E G {x,y} N 1 E G N 1,N, and it remains to show the inverse inclusion. Since M is an induced matching, we have xy PC G M,xy. If uv is an edge in C G xy such that u as well as v are both incident with an edge in PC G M,xy, then uv also belongs to PC G M,xy. This implies E G {x,y} N 1 E G N 1,N PC G M,xy, which completes the proof of i. ii If vw is an edge between two vertices v and w in N, then vw belongs neither to M nor to C G xy. By 1, we obtain vw C G e for some edge e in M that is distinct from xy, which implies the contradiction that v or w cannot be incident with an edge in PC G M,xy. iii Clearly, m G {u},n d 1 n ux. Let A = N G x N 1 N G u and B = N G x N 1 \N G u. Every vertex in A has at most d neighbors in N, and A n ux, because every vertex in A is a common neighbor of x and u. By, the choice of u implies that N G v N N G u N for every vertex v in B, which implies m G B,N m ux. Altogether, we obtain m G N G x N 1,N = m G {u},n +m G A,N +m G B,N d 1 n xu +d A +m G B,N d 1+d 3n xu +m ux. Our next result establishes a first upper bound on the number pc G M,xy of private conflict edges of xy, and is slightly more general than the analysis in [6]. Theorem Let G and M be as above. If c G xy f, and n xy g for every edge xy of G, then the following statements hold. i pc G M,xy 4d 1 f 6g M + m xy. ii M mg 3d d f d+6 g. Proof: i Let xy bean edge in M. Let N 1 and N beas above. Let u beas in Lemma 1iii. By 3, we have f c G ux d d+1 dn xu +m xu, which implies d 1+d 3n xu +m xu d d f 3g. Now, by symmetry between x and y, Lemma 1 implies pc G M,xy = PC G M,xy {xy} +m G {x,y},n 1 +m G N 1 +m G N G x N 1,N +m G N G y N 1,N 1+d +m xy +d d f 3g+d d f 3g = 4d 1 f 6g +m xy. Adding this inequality over all edges in M yields the desired bound. 4
ii If p is the number of pairs e,f with e M and f C G e, then p c G xy 3 d d+1 dg M Furthermore, since the only edges f of G, for which there is only one edge e in M with f C G e, are those in PC G M,xy, we obtain p mg m xy. pc G M,xy i mg 4d 1 f 6g M Combining the upper and lower bounds on p yields the desired bound. With Theorem at hand, it is now easy to recover the result of Gotthilf and Lewenstein [6]. Corollary 3 Gotthilf and Lewenstein [6] There is a polynomial time 3 4 d+ 1 8 + 1 16d 8 -factor approximation algorithm for the maximum induced matching problem in d-regular graphs. Proof: Let G be a given d-regular graph. Applying Greedyf to G with f = 3d d yields an output M,G with M mg mg f, and c G xy f for every edge xy of G. Now, by Theorem ii, applying Local Search to G yields an induced matching M of G with M mg 3d d f = mg f, where the last equality follows from the choice of f. It is easy to see cf. [9] that M M is an induced matching of G with M M mg f. Since ν s G mg νsg d 1, we obtain M M f d 1 = 3 4 d+ 1 8 + 1 16d 8, which completes the proof. Greedyf Input: A graph G. Output: A pair M,G such that M is an induced matching of G, and G is a subgraph of G. M ; G 0 G; i 1; while min{c Gi 1 e : e EG i 1 } f do end Choose an edge e i of G i 1 with c Gi 1 e i f; M M {e i }; G i G i 1 C Gi 1 e i ; i i+1; return M,G i 1 ; Algorithm : The algorithm Greedyf. Note that first applying Greedyf corresponds to a preprocessing ensuring a lower bound on min{c G xy : xy EG}, which is important for the performance of Local Search. Our next two results concern the performance of Local Search for C 4 -free and {C 3,C 4 }-free graphs. Both rely on the two step approach from Theorem of upper bounding pc G M,xy, and double-counting p. Theorem 4 Let G and M be as above. If G is C 4 -free, then the following statements hold. { i If xy is an edge in M, and N 1 and N are as above, then m G N 1,N max ii M mg max{d + d,9 8 d }. 5 m xy. d, d 4 }.
Proof: i Let N 1 be the set of those u in N 1 that have a neighbor in N. Let N x = N 1 \ N Gy, N y = N 1 \N Gx, and N xy = N 1 N Gx N G y. Suppose, for a contradiction, that u and u are two non-adjacent vertices in N x N xy. Let v be a neighbor of u in N, and let v be a neighbor of u in N. Since G is C 4 -free, the vertices u and u have no common neighbor in N ; in particular, the vertices v and v are distinct. Since, by Lemma 1ii, the vertices v and v are non-adjacent, we obtain a contradiction to. Hence, N x N xy, and, by symmetry, also N y N xy are cliques in G. Suppose, for a contradiction, that the two vertices u in N x and u in N y both have at least two neighbors in N. Since G is C 4 -free, the vertices u and u are non-adjacent. By, and since, by Lemma 1ii, the set N is independent, it follows that u and u have two common neighbors in N, contradicting the C 4 -freeness of G. Hence, we may assume, by symmetry between x and y, that each vertex in N y has exactly one neighbor in N. It follows that, if d x = N x, d xy = N xy, and d y = N xy, then every vertex in N x has at most d 1 d x +d xy 1 neighbors in N, every vertex in N xy has at most d d x +d xy +d y 1 neighbors in N, and every vertex in N y has one neighbor in N. Note that d x +d xy d G x 1 d 1 and d y +d xy d G y 1 d 1, and that the function x d xx has its unique maximum d /4 at x = d/. 4 First, we assume that d x and d y are both positive. If u N x and v N y, then, by, yv C G e for every edge e in PC G M,xy incident with u, which implies that v is adjacent to every neighbor of u in N. Since v has exactly one neighbor, say w, in N, and the choice of u within N x was unrestricted, it follows that N G u N = {w} for every vertex u in N x. Now, by recovered symmetry between x and y, it follows that N G v N = {w} for every vertex v in N y. If d x +d xy +d y d 1, then m G N 1,N d x + d d x +d xy +d y 1 d xy +d y d x +d y d G w d. } {{ } 0 If d x +d xy +d y < d 1, then m G N 1,N d x + d d x +d xy +d y 1 d xy +d y }{{} 4 1 d 1 d x +d xy +d y d x +d xy +d y d 1 4 Next, we assume that d y = 0. In this case, we obtain m G N 1,N d 1 d x +d xy 1 d x + d d x +d xy d x +d xy. d d x +d xy +d y 1 d xy 6
4 d 4. Finally, if d x = 0, then a similar argument implies m G N 1,N d 4, which completes the proof of i. ii By i, we obtain, similarly as in the proof of Theorem i, and, hence, } pc G M,xy 1+d +m xy +m G N 1,N i max {3d 1, d 4 +d 1 +m xy, } pc G M,xy max {3d 1, d 4 +d 1 M + Counting the p pairs as in the proof of Theorem ii, we obtain p d d+1 M and p mg max { 3d 1, d 4 +d 1 } M Theorem 5 Let G and M be as above. If G is {C 3,C 4 }-free, then the following statements hold. i If xy is an edge in M, then pc G M,xy d 1. ii M mg d. m xy m xy m xy, which yields the desired bound. Proof: iletn 1 andn beasabove. SinceGisC 3 -free, theset N 1 partitionsintothetwoindependent sets N x = N 1 N G x and N y = N 1 N G y. If one of the two sets N x or N y contains two vertices with a neighbor in N, then we obtain a similar contradiction as in the proof of Theorem 4i. Hence, both sets contain at most one such vertex. If both sets N x and N y contain no vertex with a neighbor in N, then pc G M,xy d 1. If N x contains a vertex with a neighbor in N but N y does not, then N y is empty, and, hence, pc G M,xy d 1. Finally, if the vertex u in N x as well as the vertex v in N y both have a neighbor in N, then, since, by, xu C G e for every edge e in PC G M,xy that is incident with v, and yv C G f for every edge f in PC G M,xy that is incident with u, it follows that the vertices u and v both have exactly the same neighbors in N. Since G is {C 3,C 4 }-free, the vertices u and v have a unique neighbor w in N, in particular, N = {w}. If N x contains a vertex u distinct from u, then xu C G vw, which is a contradiction to. Hence, N x, and, by symmetry, also N y both contain exactly one vertex, and pc G M,xy = 5 d 1. ii If p is as in the previous proofs, we obtain p d d+1 M and p mg d 1 M, which yields the desired bound. Since Theorem 4 and Theorem 5 do not require a lower bound on max{c G xy : xy EG}, they imply that Local Search alone is an approximation algorithm in the regular case. Corollary 6 Local Search is i a polynomial time 9 33 16d+ 80 -factor approximation algorithm for the maximum induced matching problem in d-regular C 4 -free graphs, and ii a polynomial time d + 1 4 + 1 8d 4 -factor approximation algorithm for the maximum induced matching problem in d-regular {C 3,C 4 }-free graphs. 7
Proof: Using Theorem 4ii, part i follows as in Corollary 3, since max{d + d,9 8 d } d 1 9 16 d + 33 80 for d 3. Similarly, part ii follows from Theorem 5ii. Next, we consider C 5 -free graphs. As it turns out, a better bound can be obtained for these graphs, if the lower and upper bounds on p are not handled separately. Theorem 7 Let G and M be as above. If G is C 5 -free, then the following statements hold. i If xy is an edge in M, and N 1 and N are as above, then m G N 1,N d 1 d y d x +d d xy +d 1 d x d y for non-negative integers d x,d xy, and d y with d x +d xy d 1, d y +d xy d 1, and d xy n xy. ii M mg 3. d d+ 1 Proof: i Let N x, N y, N xy, d x, d y, and d xy be as in the proof of Theorem 4i. Clearly, d x +d xy d G x 1 d 1 and d y +d xy d G y 1 d 1. Furthermore, n xy = N G x N G y d xy. Since G is C 5 -free, implies that every vertex in N x is adjacent to every vertex in N y, that is, every vertex in N x has at most d 1 d y neighbors in N, and every vertex in N y has at most d 1 d x neighbors in N. Since every vertex in N xy has at most d neighbors in N, part i follows. ii For every edge xy in M, i implies pc G M,xy 1+d +m xy + d 1 d y d x +d d xy +d 1 d x d y, 5 where d x, d y, and d xy are non-negative integers that depend on xy, and satisfy the restrictions stated in i. If p is as in the previous proofs, then mg pc G M,xy p d d+1 dd xy m xy, where the second inequality follows from 3 using d xy n xy. By 5, we obtain d dd xy +d 1 d y d x +d d xy +d 1 d x d y mg. 6 Since max{d 1 yx+d 1 xy : 0 x,y d 1} = d 1, we obtain, using 6 and d xy 0, that d +d 1 M mg, which completes the proof of ii. For regular graphs, we obtain an approximation guarantee as above. Corollary 8 Local Search is a polynomial time 3 4 d 1 8 + 3 16d 8 -factor approximation algorithm for the maximum induced matching problem in d-regular C 5 -free graphs. Proof: This follows by evaluating 3 d d+ 1 d 1. Now, we consider claw-free graphs. Our next result illustrates the consequences of applying the above arguments to these graphs. 8
Lemma 9 If G and M are as above, and G is K 1,3 -free, then M mg d +d 1. Proof: If xy is an edge in M, and N 1 and N are as above, then claw-freeness and Lemma 1ii together imply that every vertex in N 1 has at most one neighbor in N, which implies m G N 1,N N 1 d, and, hence, pc G M,xy 1+d +m xy +d = 4d 3+m xy. Double-counting p as before yields the desired result. In contrast to the classes of graphs that we considered before, no edge xy in a claw-free graph G of maximum degree d can have up to d + Od many conflict edges, that is, claw-freeness implies a better upper bound on c G xy, which implies that already maximal induced matchings cannot be too small. The next result quantifies this observation. Recall that two vertices u and v are true twins in a graph G if N G [u] = N G [v]. Theorem 10 If G is a claw-free graph of maximum degree at most d for some d at least 3, and M is a maximal induced matching, then M mg. 7 6 d +d Proof: Let xy be an edge in M. Let N x = N G x \ N G [y], N y = N G y \ N G [x], and N xy = N G x N G y, and let d x = N x, d y = N y, and d xy = N xy. Since c G xy 1+dd x +d xy +d y m xy, in order to upper bound c G xy, we need a lower bound on m xy. Let H = G[N x N xy N y ]. By definition, m xy = mh. Since G is claw-free, i N x and N y are cliques in H, and ii αh[n x N xy ] and αh[n xy N y ]. Claim 1 mh d x + p + dxy p + dy +pdx +d y for some non-negative integer p dxy Proof of Claim 1: Suppose that, subject to i and ii, the graph H is such that mh is minimum. Our first goal is to show that H[N xy ] is the disjoint union of cliques. Suppose, for a contradiction, that uvw is an induced path of order three in H[N xy ]. If d H u < d H v, then removing v, and introducing a new vertex that is a true twin of u yields a graph with less edges than H that satisfies i and ii, which is a contradiction. If d H u,d H w d H v, then removing u and w, and introducing two new vertices that are true twins of v yields a graph with less edges than H that satisfies i and ii, which is a contradiction. Hence, by ii, the graph H[N xy ] is the union of two cliques, C 1 of order p and C of order d xy p, where 0 p dxy. Note that p = 0 corresponds to the case that G[N xy] is just one clique. By ii, every vertex in N x is adjacent to all vertices in C 1 or to all vertices in C. By the choice of H, and symmetry between N x and N y, we obtain, that N x N y is completely joined to C 1, and the desired lower bound on mh follows. Let d x = dx d, dxy = dxy d, dy = dy d, and p = p d. Since 1 + dx+p+dxy p+dy d d implies. 1 d + d d = 1 d, Claim 1 c G xy 1+dd x +d xy +d y mh dx p dxy p dy 1+dd x +d xy +d y pd x +d y d d x + d xy + d y 1 d x 1 p 1 dxy p 1 d y p d x + d y + 1, 7 }{{} d =:f d x, d xy, d y, p 9
where d x + d xy 1, 8 d y + d xy 1, 9 p d xy, and 10 d x, d xy, d y, p 0. 11 Supposethat, subjectto8to11, thevaluesof d x, d xy, d y, and parechosensuchthatf dx, d xy, d y, p assumes its maximum value f max. Since f dx, d xy, d y, p equals 1 d x+1 p d x plus a function that does not depend on d x, and, hence, d x f dx, d xy, d y, p = 1 p d x, it follows that condition 8, and, by symmetry, also condition 9 holds with equality. Setting g dxy, p := f 1 d xy, d xy,1 d xy, p, we obtain g dxy, p = 1 3 d xy p + d xy p+3 d xy p. First, suppose that d xy 3. Since g dxy, p = 1+3 p 3 d d xy xy, we obtain that d xy = p+ 1 3, and that 0 p 1 3. Note that in this case g p+ 13, p = 7 6 p+ 1 p 7 6. 1 Next, suppose that d xy 3. Since p g dxy, p = 3 d xy p, we obtain that p = 3 d xy 1, and that 3 d xy 1. Note that in this case g d xy, 3 d xy 1 = d xy + 3 4 d xy 1. 13 In view of 1 and 13, we obtain f max = 7 6, which, by 7, implies c Gxy 7 6 d +d. If p is as in the previous proofs, then p c G xy 7 6 d +d M, and, by the maximality of M, we obtain p mg, which implies the desired lower bound on M. We close with the obvious corollary. Corollary 11 Local Search is a polynomial time 1 d+ 3 4 1 8d 4 -factor approximation algorithm for the maximum induced matching problem in claw-free d-regular graphs. Furthermore, choosing any maximal induced matching is a polynomial time for the same problem. 7 19 1d+ 4 + 19 48d 4 -factor approximation algorithm It seems possible to generalize Theorem 10 and Corollary 11 to K 1,r -free graphs. Combining Local Search with some greedy preprocessing might further improve the approximation guarantees obtained in this paper. 10
References [1] A. Brandstädt and R. Mosca, On distance-3 matchings and induced matchings, Discrete Appl. Math. 159 011 509-50. [] K. Cameron, Induced matchings in intersection graphs, Discrete Math. 78 004 1-9. [3] F.R.K.Chung, A. Gyárfás, Zs.Tuza, andw.t. Trotter, Themaximumnumberofedges ink -free graphs of bounded degree, Discrete Math. 81 1990 19-135. [4] K.K. Dabrowski, M. Demange, and V.V. Lozin, New results on maximum induced matchings in bipartite graphs and beyond, Theor. Comput. Sci. 478 013 33-40. [5] W. Duckworth, D.F. Manlove, and M. Zito, On the approximability of the maximum induced matching problem, J. Discrete Algorithms 3 005 79-91. [6] Z. Gotthilf and M. Lewenstein, Tighter approximations for maximum induced matchings in regular graphs, Lect. Notes Comput. Sci. 3879 006 70-81. [7] D. Kobler and U. Rotics, Finding Maximum Induced Matchings in Subclasses of Claw-Free and P 5 -Free Graphs, and in Graphs with Matching and Induced Matching of Equal Maximum Size, Algorithmica 37 003 37-346. [8] V.V. Lozin, On maximum induced matchings in bipartite graphs, Inf. Process. Lett. 81 00 7-11. [9] D. Rautenbach, Two greedy consequences for maximum induced matchings, Theor. Comput. Sci. 60 015 3-38. [10] L.J. Stockmeyer and V.V. Vazirani, NP-completeness of some generalizations of the maximum matching problem, Inf. Process. Lett. 15 198 14-19. [11] M. Zito, Induced matchings in regular graphs and trees, Lect. Notes Comput. Sci. 1665 1999 89-100. 11