Forbidden graph characterization

Describing a family of graphs by excluding certain (sub)graphs

In graph theory, a branch of mathematics, many important families of graphs can be described by a finite set of individual graphs that do not belong to the family and further exclude all graphs from the family which contain any of these forbidden graphs as (induced) subgraph or minor.

A prototypical example of this phenomenon is Kuratowski's theorem, which states that a graph is planar (can be drawn without crossings in the plane) if and only if it does not contain either of two forbidden graphs, the complete graph K₅ and the complete bipartite graph K_3,3. For Kuratowski's theorem, the notion of containment is that of graph homeomorphism, in which a subdivision of one graph appears as a subgraph of the other. Thus, every graph either has a planar drawing (in which case it belongs to the family of planar graphs) or it has a subdivision of at least one of these two graphs as a subgraph (in which case it does not belong to the planar graphs).

Definition

More generally, a forbidden graph characterization is a method of specifying a family of graph, or hypergraph, structures, by specifying substructures that are forbidden to exist within any graph in the family. Different families vary in the nature of what is forbidden. In general, a structure G is a member of a family ${\displaystyle {\mathcal {F}}}$ if and only if a forbidden substructure is not contained in G. The forbidden substructure might be one of:

• subgraphs, smaller graphs obtained from subsets of the vertices and edges of a larger graph,
• induced subgraphs, smaller graphs obtained by selecting a subset of the vertices and using all edges with both endpoints in that subset,
• homeomorphic subgraphs (also called topological minors), smaller graphs obtained from subgraphs by collapsing paths of degree-two vertices to single edges, or
• graph minors, smaller graphs obtained from subgraphs by arbitrary edge contractions.

The set of structures that are forbidden from belonging to a given graph family can also be called an obstruction set for that family.

Forbidden graph characterizations may be used in algorithms for testing whether a graph belongs to a given family. In many cases, it is possible to test in polynomial time whether a given graph contains any of the members of the obstruction set, and therefore whether it belongs to the family defined by that obstruction set.

In order for a family to have a forbidden graph characterization, with a particular type of substructure, the family must be closed under substructures. That is, every substructure (of a given type) of a graph in the family must be another graph in the family. Equivalently, if a graph is not part of the family, all larger graphs containing it as a substructure must also be excluded from the family. When this is true, there always exists an obstruction set (the set of graphs that are not in the family but whose smaller substructures all belong to the family). However, for some notions of what a substructure is, this obstruction set could be infinite. The Robertson–Seymour theorem proves that, for the particular case of graph minors, a family that is closed under minors always has a finite obstruction set.

List of forbidden characterizations for graphs and hypergraphs

See also

• Erdős–Hajnal conjecture
• Forbidden subgraph problem
• Matroid minor
• Zarankiewicz problem

References

1. Diestel, Reinhard (2000), Graph Theory, Graduate Texts in Mathematics, vol. 173, Springer-Verlag, ISBN 0-387-98976-5.
2. Auer, Christopher; Bachmaier, Christian; Brandenburg, Franz J.; Gleißner, Andreas; Hanauer, Kathrin; Neuwirth, Daniel; Reislhuber, Josef (2013), "Recognizing outer 1-planar graphs in linear time", in Wismath, Stephen; Wolff, Alexander (eds.), 21st International Symposium, GD 2013, Bordeaux, France, September 23-25, 2013, Revised Selected Papers, Lecture Notes in Computer Science, vol. 8242, pp. 107–118, doi:10.1007/978-3-319-03841-4_10.
3. Gupta, A.; Impagliazzo, R. (1991), "Computing planar intertwines", Proc. 32nd IEEE Symposium on Foundations of Computer Science (FOCS '91), IEEE Computer Society, pp. 802–811, doi:10.1109/SFCS.1991.185452, S2CID 209133.
4. Robertson, Neil; Seymour, P. D.; Thomas, Robin (1993), "Linkless embeddings of graphs in 3-space", Bulletin of the American Mathematical Society, 28 (1): 84–89, arXiv:math/9301216, doi:10.1090/S0273-0979-1993-00335-5, MR 1164063, S2CID 1110662.
5. Béla Bollobás (1998) "Modern Graph Theory", Springer, ISBN 0-387-98488-7 p. 9
6. Kashiwabara, Toshinobu (1981), "Algorithms for some intersection graphs", in Saito, Nobuji; Nishizeki, Takao (eds.), Graph Theory and Algorithms, 17th Symposium of Research Institute of Electric Communication, Tohoku University, Sendai, Japan, October 24-25, 1980, Proceedings, Lecture Notes in Computer Science, vol. 108, Springer-Verlag, pp. 171–181, doi:10.1007/3-540-10704-5_15.
7. Chudnovsky, Maria; Robertson, Neil; Seymour, Paul; Thomas, Robin (2006), "The strong perfect graph theorem" (PDF), Annals of Mathematics, 164 (1): 51–229, arXiv:math/0212070v1, doi:10.4007/annals.2006.164.51, S2CID 119151552.
8. Beineke, L. W. (1968), "Derived graphs of digraphs", in Sachs, H.; Voss, H.-J.; Walter, H.-J. (eds.), Beiträge zur Graphentheorie, Leipzig: Teubner, pp. 17–33.
9. El-Mallah, Ehab; Colbourn, Charles J. (1988), "The complexity of some edge deletion problems", IEEE Transactions on Circuits and Systems, 35 (3): 354–362, doi:10.1109/31.1748.
10. Takamizawa, K.; Nishizeki, Takao; Saito, Nobuji (1981), "Combinatorial problems on series–parallel graphs", Discrete Applied Mathematics, 3 (1): 75–76, doi:10.1016/0166-218X(81)90031-7.
11. Földes, Stéphane; Hammer, Peter Ladislaw (1977a), "Split graphs", Proceedings of the Eighth Southeastern Conference on Combinatorics, Graph Theory and Computing (Louisiana State Univ., Baton Rouge, La., 1977), Congressus Numerantium, vol. XIX, Winnipeg: Utilitas Math., pp. 311–315, MR 0505860
12. Bodlaender, Hans L. (1998), "A partial k-arboretum of graphs with bounded treewidth", Theoretical Computer Science, 209 (1–2): 1–45, doi:10.1016/S0304-3975(97)00228-4, hdl:1874/18312.
13. Bodlaender, Hans L.; Thilikos, Dimitrios M. (1999), "Graphs with branchwidth at most three", Journal of Algorithms, 32 (2): 167–194, doi:10.1006/jagm.1999.1011, hdl:1874/2734.
14. Seinsche, D. (1974), "On a property of the class of n-colorable graphs", Journal of Combinatorial Theory, Series B, 16 (2): 191–193, doi:10.1016/0095-8956(74)90063-X, MR 0337679
15. Golumbic, Martin Charles (1978), "Trivially perfect graphs", Discrete Mathematics, 24 (1): 105–107, doi:10.1016/0012-365X(78)90178-4.
16. Metelsky, Yury; Tyshkevich, Regina (1997), "On line graphs of linear 3-uniform hypergraphs", Journal of Graph Theory, 25 (4): 243–251, doi:10.1002/(SICI)1097-0118(199708)25:4<243::AID-JGT1>3.0.CO;2-K, MR 1459889
17. Jacobson, M. S.; Kézdy, Andre E.; Lehel, Jeno (1997), "Recognizing intersection graphs of linear uniform hypergraphs", Graphs and Combinatorics, 13 (4): 359–367, doi:10.1007/BF03353014, MR 1485929, S2CID 9173731
18. Naik, Ranjan N.; Rao, S. B.; Shrikhande, S. S.; Singhi, N. M. (1982), "Intersection graphs of k-uniform hypergraphs", European Journal of Combinatorics, 3: 159–172, doi:10.1016/s0195-6698(82)80029-2, MR 0670849
19. Yu, Yanming (2006), "More forbidden minors for wye-delta-wye reducibility", The Electronic Journal of Combinatorics, 13, doi:10.37236/1033 Website
20. Jiang, Zilin; Polyanskii, Alexandr (2020-03-01). "Forbidden Subgraphs for Graphs of Bounded Spectral Radius, with Applications to Equiangular Lines". Israel Journal of Mathematics. 236 (1): 393–421. arXiv:1708.02317. doi:10.1007/s11856-020-1983-2. ISSN 1565-8511.