, Volume 81, Issue 6, pp 2606–2632 | Cite as

On the Complexity Landscape of Connected f-Factor Problems

  • R. Ganian
  • N. S. Narayanaswamy
  • S. Ordyniak
  • C. S. RahulEmail author
  • M. S. Ramanujan


Let G be an undirected simple graph having n vertices and let \(f:V(G)\rightarrow \{0,\dots , n-1\}\) be a function. An f-factor of G is a spanning subgraph H such that \(d_H(v)=f(v)\) for every vertex \(v\in V(G)\). The subgraph H is called a connected f-factor if, in addition, H is connected. A classical result of Tutte (Can J Math 6(1954):347–352, 1954) is the polynomial time algorithm to check whether a given graph has a specified f-factor. However, checking for the presence of a connectedf-factor is easily seen to generalize Hamiltonian Cycle and hence is \(\mathsf {NP}\)-complete. In fact, the Connected f-Factor problem remains \(\mathsf {NP}\)-complete even when we restrict f(v) to be at least \(n^{\epsilon }\) for each vertex v and constant \(0\le \epsilon <1\); on the other side of the spectrum of nontrivial lower bounds on f, the problem is known to be polynomial time solvable when f(v) is at least \(\frac{n}{3}\) for every vertex v. In this paper, we extend this line of work and obtain new complexity results based on restrictions on the function f. In particular, we show that when f(v) is restricted to be at least \(\frac{n}{(\log n)^c}\), the problem can be solved in quasi-polynomial time in general and in randomized polynomial time if \(c\le 1\). Furthermore, we show that when \(c>1\), the problem is \(\mathsf {NP}\)-intermediate.


Connected f-factors Quasi-polynomial time algorithms Randomized algorithms \(\mathsf {NP}\)-intermediate Exponential time hypothesis 



The authors wish to thank the anonymous reviewers for their helpful comments. The authors acknowledge support by the Austrian Science Fund (FWF, Project P26696), and project TOTAL funded by the European Research Coun- cil (ERC) under the European Unions Horizon 2020 research and innovation programme (Grant Agreement No 677651). Robert Ganian is also affiliated with FI MU, Brno, Czech Republic.


  1. 1.
    Akiyama, J., Kano, M.: Factors and factorizations of graphsa survey. J. Graph Theory 9(1), 1–42 (1985)MathSciNetCrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Bellman, R.E.: Dynamic programming treatment of the traveling salesman problem. J. ACM 9, 61–63 (1962)CrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Cheah, F., Corneil, D.G.: The complexity of regular subgraph recognition. Discrete Appl. Math. 27(1–2), 59–68 (1990)MathSciNetCrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Chung, F.R.K., Graham, R.L.: Recent results in graph decompositions. Lond. Math. Soc. Lect. Note Ser. 52, 103–123 (1981)MathSciNetzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Cornelissen, K., Hoeksma, R., Manthey, B., Narayanaswamy, N.S., Rahul, C.S., Waanders, M.: Approximation algorithms for connected graph factors of minimum weight. Theory Comput. Syst. 62(2), 441–464 (2018)MathSciNetCrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Cornelissen, K., Hoeksma, R., Manthey, B., Narayanaswamy, N.S., Rahul, C.S.: Approximability of connected factors. In: Kaklamanis, C., Pruhs, K. (eds.) Approximation and Online Algorithms. Lecture Notes in Computer Science, vol. 8447, pp. 120–131. Springer, Berlin (2014)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Cygan, M., Nederlof, J., Pilipczuk, M., Pilipczuk, M., van Rooij, J.M.M., Onufry Wojtaszczyk, J.: Solving connectivity problems parameterized by treewidth in single exponential time. In: Ostrovsky, R. (ed.) IEEE 52nd Annual Symposium on Foundations of Computer Science, FOCS 2011, Palm Springs, CA, USA, October 22–25, 2011, pp. 150–159. IEEE Computer Society (2011)Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Garey, M.R., Johnson, D.S.: Computers and Intractability: A Guide to the Theory of NP-Completeness. W. H. Freeman and Company, New York (1979)zbMATHGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Gutin, G.Z., Wahlström, M., Yeo, A.: Rural postman parameterized by the number of components of required edges. J. Comput. Syst. Sci. 83(1), 121–131 (2017)MathSciNetCrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Held, M., Karp, R.: A dynamic programming approach to sequencing problems. J. Soc. Ind. Appl. Math. 10(1), 196–210 (1962)MathSciNetCrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Impagliazzo, R., Paturi, R., Zane, F.: Which problems have strongly exponential complexity? J. Comput. Syst. Sci. 63(4), 512–530 (2001)MathSciNetCrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Kaiser, T.: A short proof of the tree-packing theorem. Discrete Math. 312(10), 1689–1691 (2012)MathSciNetCrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Kouider, M., Vestergaard, P.D.: Connected factors in graphs—a survey. Graphs Comb. 21(1), 1–26 (2005)MathSciNetCrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Lovász, L., Plummer, M.D.: Matching Theory, Volume 121 of North-Holland Mathematics Studies. Elsevier, Amsterdam (1986)Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Narayanaswamy, N.S., Rahul, C.S.: Approximation and exact algorithms for special cases of connected f-factors. In: Beklemishev, L.D., Musatov, D.V. (eds.) Computer Science-Theory and Applications–10th International Computer Science Symposium in Russia, CSR 2015, Listvyanka, Russia, July 13–17, 2015, Proceedings. Lecture Notes in Computer Science, vol. 9139, pp. 350–363. Springer, Berlin (2015)Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Petersen, J.: Die Theorie der regulären graphs. Acta Math. 15(1), 193–220 (1891)MathSciNetCrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Philip, G., Ramanujan, M.S.: Vertex exponential algorithms for connected f-factors. In: Venkatesh, R., and Suresh, S.P. (eds.) 34th International Conference on Foundation of Software Technology and Theoretical Computer Science, FSTTCS 2014, December 15–17, 2014, New Delhi, India, Volume 29 of LIPIcs, pp. 61–71. Schloss Dagstuhl - Leibniz-Zentrum fuer Informatik (2014)Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    Plummer, M.D.: Graph factors and factorization: 1985–2003: a survey. Discrete Math. 307(7–8), 791–821 (2007)MathSciNetCrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Schwartz, J.T.: Fast probabilistic algorithms for verification of polynomial identities. J. ACM 27(4), 701–717 (1980)MathSciNetCrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Tutte, W.T.: The factorization of linear graphs. J. Lond. Math. Soc. 1(2), 107–111 (1947)MathSciNetCrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Tutte, W.T.: The factors of graphs. Can. J. Math. 4(3), 314–328 (1952)CrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Tutte, W.T.: A short proof of the factor theorem for finite graphs. Can. J. Math. 6(1954), 347–352 (1954)MathSciNetCrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Wahlström, M.: Abusing the Tutte matrix: an algebraic instance compression for the k-set-cycle problem. In: Natacha, P., Thomas, W. (eds.) 30th International Symposium on Theoretical Aspects of Computer Science, STACS 2013, February 27–March 2, 2013, Kiel, Germany, Volume 20 of LIPIcs, pp. 341–352. Schloss Dagstuhl - Leibniz-Zentrum fuer Informatik (2013)Google Scholar
  24. 24.
    West, D.B.: Introduction to Graph Theory. Prentice Hall, Upper Saddle River (2001)Google Scholar
  25. 25.
    Zippel, R.: Probabilistic algorithms for sparse polynomials. In: Ng, E.W. (ed.) Symbolic and Algebraic Computation, EUROSAM ’79, An International Symposium on Symbolic and Algebraic Computation, Marseille, France, June 1979, Proceedings, Volume 72 of Lecture Notes in Computer Science, pp. 216–226. Springer, Berlin (1979)Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media, LLC, part of Springer Nature 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Algorithms and Complexity GroupTU WienViennaAustria
  2. 2.Indian Institute of Technology MadrasChennaiIndia
  3. 3.Department of Computer ScienceUniversity of SheffieldSheffieldUK
  4. 4.Faculty of Mathematics, Informatics and MechanicsUniversity of WarsawWarsawPoland

Personalised recommendations