← all papers · overview

FPT algorithms over linear delta-matroids with applications

Abstract

Matroids, particularly linear ones, have been a powerful tool in parameterized complexity for algorithms and kernelization. They have sped up or replaced dynamic programming. Delta-matroids generalize matroids by encapsulating structures such as non-maximum matchings in general graphs and various path-packing and topological configurations. Linear delta-matroids (represented by skew-symmetric matrices) offer significant expressive power and enable powerful algorithms. We investigate parameterized complexity aspects of problems defined over linear delta-matroids or with delta-matroid constraints. Our analysis of basic intersection and packing problems reveals a different complexity landscape compared to the familiar matroid case. In particular, there is a stark contrast between the cardinality parameter $k$ and the rank parameter $r$. For example, finding an intersection of size $k$ of three linear delta-matroids is W[1]-hard when parameterized by $k$, while more general problems (e.g., finding a set packing of size $k$ feasible in a linear delta-matroid) are FPT when parameterized by $r$. We extend the recent determinantal sieving procedure of Eiben, Koana and Wahlstr\"om (SODA 2024) to sieve a polynomial for a monomial whose support is feasible in a linear delta-matroid by $r$. Second, we investigate a class of problems that remains FPT when parameterized by $k$, even on delta-matroids of unbounded rank. We begin with Delta-matroid Triangle Cover - finding a feasible set of size $k$ that can be covered by a vertex-disjoint packing of triangles (sets of size 3) from a given collection. This approach allows us to find a packing of $K_3$'s and $K_2$'s in a graph with a maximum number of edges, parameterized above the matching number. As applications, we settle questions on the FPT status of Cluster Subgraph and Strong Triadic Closure parameterized above the matching number.

Related papers

Ranked by semantic similarity — how closely each paper's abstract matches this one (100% = near-identical topic).