Searcharxiv⌕ Search
Home/Archive/arXiv

arXiv · 2603.21442

Finding Minimum Distance Preservers: A Parameterized Study

Kirill Simonov·Farehe Soheil·Shaily Verma
View original source ↗Read source document ↗Export metadata ↓

Abstract

For a given graph $G$ and a subset of vertices $S$, a \emph{distance preserver} is a subgraph of $G$ that preserves shortest paths between the vertices of $S$. We distinguish between a \emph{subsetwise} distance preserver, which preserves distances between all pairs in $S$, and a \emph{pairwise} distance preserver, which preserves distances only between specific pairs of vertices in $S$, given in the input. While a large body of work is dedicated to upper and lower bounds on the size of distance preservers and, more generally, graph spanners, the computational complexity of finding the minimum distance preserver has received comparatively little attention. We consider the respective \scup{Subsetwise Distance Preserver}\xspace (\scup{SDP}\xspace) and \scup{Pairwise Distance Preserver}\xspace (\scup{PDP}\xspace) problems and initiate the study of their computational complexity. We provide a detailed complexity landscape with respect to natural parameters, including the number of terminals, solution size, vertex cover, and treewidth. Our main contributions are as follows: \begin{itemize} \setlength{\itemsep}{0.5em} \item Both \scup{PDP}\xspace and \scup{SDP}\xspace are \nph\ even on subgraphs of the grid. Moreover, when parameterized by the number of terminals, the problems are \wh{1}\ on subgraphs of the grid, while they become \textsc{FPT}\ on full grids. \item \scup{PDP}\xspace is \nph\ on graphs of vertex cover $3$, while \scup{SDP}\xspace is \textsc{FPT}\ when parameterized by the vertex cover of the graph. Thus, the vertex cover parameter distinguishes the two variants. \item Both problems are \textsc{FPT}\ when parameterized by the number of terminals and the treewidth of the graph. \end{itemize}

Explore related subjects

cs.DScs.CCcs.DM

Keep this discovery

BibTeXRIS

Kirill Simonov, Farehe Soheil, Shaily Verma. 2026-03-22. Finding Minimum Distance Preservers: A Parameterized Study. https://arxiv.org/abs/2603.21442

Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.

KEEP EXPLORING

Related papers

arXiv2026

Quasi-Monte Carlo Beyond Hardy-Krause II: $(1 + \varepsilon)n$ Samples Suffice

Numerical integration studies how well one can estimate the integral of a function $f$ over $[0,1)^d$ using $n$ sample points. The two classical methods, Monte Carlo (MC) and quasi-Monte Carlo (QMC), have complementary strengths and weaknesses, and a fundamental question is to design an approach that combines the benefits of both. Recently, building on the transference principle in discrepancy theory, Bansal and Jiang~\cite{BJ25a} gave a randomized QMC method that bridges MC and QMC guarantees using only i.i.d.\ samples. Their method also goes beyond the classical Koksma--Hlawka inequality: it achieves integration error $\widetilde{O}_d(\sigma_{\mathsf{SO}}(f)/n)$, where the smoothed-out variation $\sigma_{\mathsf{SO}}(f)$ can be substantially smaller than the Hardy--Krause variation that governs the classical bound. However, their algorithm requires $n^2$ i.i.d.\ samples as input, and this quadratic blowup is inherent to any method based on the transference principle. In this work, we bypass the quadratic blowup: for any constant $\varepsilon > 0$, we show that $(1+\varepsilon)n$ i.i.d.\ samples suffice to both obtain the beyond-Hardy--Krause guarantee of~\cite{BJ25a}, resolving an open problem posed there, and to produce low-discrepancy point sequences. Our algorithms are variants of the online Haar-thinning method of Dwivedi, Feldheim, Gurel-Gurevich, and Ramdas~\cite{DFG+19}.

cs.DS↗
arXiv2026

Single-Exponential Algorithms and a Polynomial Kernel for Strong Connectivity Augmentation

Strong Connectivity Augmentation (SCA) asks whether a directed acyclic graph can be made strongly connected by adding at most $k$ prescribed links whose total weight is within a given budget. Klinkby, Misra, and Saurabh (SODA 2021) gave an $O^*(2^{O(k\log k)})$-time algorithm and asked whether the problem admits a single-exponential parameterized algorithm and a polynomial kernel. We answer both questions affirmatively: SCA can be solved in $O^*(9^k)$ time and admits a polynomial kernel with $O(k^4)$ vertices and $O(k^{16})$ bits. For unweighted SCA, we obtain $O^*(4^k)$ time and a kernel with $O(k^3)$ vertices. Our algorithms are based on a particularly simple reduction to Strongly Connected Spanning Subgraph with two edge costs.

cs.DS↗