Algorithms and Discrete Applied

Mathematics First International

Conference CALDAM 2015 Kanpur India
February 8 10 2015 Proceedings 1st
Edition Sumit Ganguly
Visit to download the full and correct content document:
https://textbookfull.com/product/algorithms-and-discrete-applied-mathematics-first-int
ernational-conference-caldam-2015-kanpur-india-february-8-10-2015-proceedings-1st
-edition-sumit-ganguly/
More products digital (pdf, epub, mobi) instant
download maybe you interests ...

Algorithms and Discrete Applied Mathematics Second

International Conference CALDAM 2016 Thiruvananthapuram
India February 18 20 2016 Proceedings 1st Edition
Sathish Govindarajan
https://textbookfull.com/product/algorithms-and-discrete-applied-
mathematics-second-international-conference-
caldam-2016-thiruvananthapuram-india-
february-18-20-2016-proceedings-1st-edition-sathish-govindarajan/

Distributed Computing and Internet Technology 11th

International Conference ICDCIT 2015 Bhubaneswar India
February 5 8 2015 Proceedings 1st Edition Raja
Natarajan
https://textbookfull.com/product/distributed-computing-and-
internet-technology-11th-international-conference-
icdcit-2015-bhubaneswar-india-february-5-8-2015-proceedings-1st-
edition-raja-natarajan/

Exploring Services Science 6th International Conference

IESS 2015 Porto Portugal February 4 6 2015 Proceedings
1st Edition Henriqueta Nóvoa

https://textbookfull.com/product/exploring-services-science-6th-
international-conference-iess-2015-porto-portugal-
february-4-6-2015-proceedings-1st-edition-henriqueta-novoa/

Algorithms and Complexity 9th International Conference

CIAC 2015 Paris France May 20 22 2015 Proceedings 1st
Edition Vangelis Th. Paschos

https://textbookfull.com/product/algorithms-and-complexity-9th-
international-conference-ciac-2015-paris-france-
may-20-22-2015-proceedings-1st-edition-vangelis-th-paschos/
Information Security Practice and Experience 11th
International Conference ISPEC 2015 Beijing China May 5
8 2015 Proceedings 1st Edition Javier Lopez

https://textbookfull.com/product/information-security-practice-
and-experience-11th-international-conference-ispec-2015-beijing-
china-may-5-8-2015-proceedings-1st-edition-javier-lopez/

Advanced Information Systems Engineering 27th

International Conference CAiSE 2015 Stockholm Sweden
June 8 12 2015 Proceedings 1st Edition Jelena
Zdravkovic
https://textbookfull.com/product/advanced-information-systems-
engineering-27th-international-conference-caise-2015-stockholm-
sweden-june-8-12-2015-proceedings-1st-edition-jelena-zdravkovic/

Security Privacy and Applied Cryptography Engineering

8th International Conference SPACE 2018 Kanpur India
December 15 19 2018 Proceedings Anupam Chattopadhyay

https://textbookfull.com/product/security-privacy-and-applied-
cryptography-engineering-8th-international-conference-
space-2018-kanpur-india-december-15-19-2018-proceedings-anupam-
chattopadhyay/

Applied Algorithms First International Conference ICAA

2014 Kolkata India January 13 15 2014 Proceedings 1st
Edition Bhargab B. Bhattacharya

https://textbookfull.com/product/applied-algorithms-first-
international-conference-icaa-2014-kolkata-india-
january-13-15-2014-proceedings-1st-edition-bhargab-b-
bhattacharya/

Collaborative Computing Networking Applications and

Worksharing 11th International Conference
CollaborateCom 2015 Wuhan November 10 11 2015 China
Proceedings 1st Edition Song Guo
https://textbookfull.com/product/collaborative-computing-
networking-applications-and-worksharing-11th-international-
conference-collaboratecom-2015-wuhan-november-10-11-2015-china-
 Sumit Ganguly
Ramesh Krishnamurti (Eds.)

Algorithms
LNCS 8959

and Discrete Applied

Mathematics
First International Conference, CALDAM 2015
Kanpur, India, February 8–10, 2015
Proceedings

123
Lecture Notes in Computer Science 8959
Commenced Publication in 1973
Founding and Former Series Editors:
Gerhard Goos, Juris Hartmanis, and Jan van Leeuwen

Editorial Board
David Hutchison
Lancaster University, UK
Takeo Kanade
Carnegie Mellon University, Pittsburgh, PA, USA
Josef Kittler
University of Surrey, Guildford, UK
Jon M. Kleinberg
Cornell University, Ithaca, NY, USA
Friedemann Mattern
ETH Zurich, Switzerland
John C. Mitchell
Stanford University, CA, USA
Moni Naor
Weizmann Institute of Science, Rehovot, Israel
C. Pandu Rangan
Indian Institute of Technology, Madras, India
Bernhard Steffen
TU Dortmund University, Germany
Demetri Terzopoulos
University of California, Los Angeles, CA, USA
Doug Tygar
University of California, Berkeley, CA, USA
Gerhard Weikum
Max Planck Institute for Informatics, Saarbruecken, Germany
Sumit Ganguly Ramesh Krishnamurti (Eds.)

Algorithms
and Discrete Applied
Mathematics
First International Conference, CALDAM 2015
Kanpur, India, February 8-10, 2015
Proceedings

13
Volume Editors
Sumit Ganguly
Indian Institute of Technology
Department of Computer Science and Engineering
Kanpur 208016, India
E-mail: sganguly@cse.iitk.ac.in
Ramesh Krishnamurti
Simon Fraser University
School of Computing Science
Burnaby, BC V5A 1S6, Canada
E-mail: ramesh@sfu.ca

ISSN 0302-9743 e-ISSN 1611-3349

ISBN 978-3-319-14973-8 e-ISBN 978-3-319-14974-5
DOI 10.1007/978-3-319-14974-5
Springer Cham Heidelberg New York Dordrecht London

Library of Congress Control Number: 2014959099

LNCS Sublibrary: SL 1 – Theoretical Computer Science and General Issues

© Springer International Publishing Switzerland 2015
This work is subject to copyright. All rights are reserved by the Publisher, whether the whole or part of
the material is concerned, specifically the rights of translation, reprinting, reuse of illustrations, recitation,
broadcasting, reproduction on microfilms or in any other physical way, and transmission or information
storage and retrieval, electronic adaptation, computer software, or by similar or dissimilar methodology
now known or hereafter developed. Exempted from this legal reservation are brief excerpts in connection
with reviews or scholarly analysis or material supplied specifically for the purpose of being entered and
executed on a computer system, for exclusive use by the purchaser of the work. Duplication of this publication
or parts thereof is permitted only under the provisions of the Copyright Law of the Publisher’s location,
in ist current version, and permission for use must always be obtained from Springer. Permissions for use
may be obtained through RightsLink at the Copyright Clearance Center. Violations are liable to prosecution
under the respective Copyright Law.
The use of general descriptive names, registered names, trademarks, service marks, etc. in this publication
does not imply, even in the absence of a specific statement, that such names are exempt from the relevant
protective laws and regulations and therefore free for general use.
While the advice and information in this book are believed to be true and accurate at the date of publication,
neither the authors nor the editors nor the publisher can accept any legal responsibility for any errors or
omissions that may be made. The publisher makes no warranty, express or implied, with respect to the
material contained herein.
Typesetting: Camera-ready by author, data conversion by Scientific Publishing Services, Chennai, India
Printed on acid-free paper
Springer is part of Springer Science+Business Media (www.springer.com)
 Preface

The First International Conference on Algorithms and Discrete Applied

Mathematics was held during February 8–10, 2015, at the Indian Institute of
Technology, Kanpur, India. This event was organized by the Department of
Computer Science and Engineering, Indian Institute of Technology Kanpur. The
workshop covered a diverse range of topics on algorithms and discrete mathe-
matics, comprising computational geometry, algorithms including approximation
algorithms, graph theory and computational complexity. This volume contains
26 contributed papers presented during CALDAM 2015. There were 58 submis-
sions from 10 countries. These submissions were carefully reviewed by the Pro-
gram Committee members with the help of external reviewers. Pavol Hell and
C.R. Subramanian delivered excellent invited talks whose abstracts are included
in this volume.
We would like to thank the authors for contributing high-quality research
papers to the workshop. We express our thanks to the Program Committee
members and the external reviewers for their active participation in reviewing the
papers. We thank Springer for publishing the proceedings in the reputed Lecture
Notes in Computer Science series. We thank our invited speakers Pavol Hell and
C.R. Subramanian. We thank the Organizing Committee chaired by Surender
Baswana and the CSE IIT Kanpur technical team B.M. Shukla, Meeta Bagga,
Nagendra Yadav and Adarsh Jagannatha from CSE IIT Kanpur, for the smooth
functioning of the workshop. We thank the chair of the Steering Committee,
Subir Ghosh, for his active help, support and guidance throughout. We thank our
sponsor Google Inc. for their financial support. Finally, we thank the EasyChair
conference management system which was very effective in handling the entire
reviewing process.

November 2014 Sumit Ganguly

Ramesh Krishnamurti
 Organization

Program Committee
Amitabha Bagchi Indian Institute of Technology, Delhi, India
Amitava Bhattacharya Tata Institute of Fundamental Research,
Bombay, India
Bostjan Bresar University of Maribor, Slovenia
Sunil Chandran Indian Institute of Science, Bangaluru, India
Manoj Changat University of Kerala, India
Sandip Das Indian Statistical Institute, Kolkata, India
Giuseppe Di Battista Universita’ Roma Tre, Rome, Italy
Sumit Ganguly (Co-Chair) Indian Institute of Technology, Kanpur, India
Daya Gaur University of Lethbridge, Canada
Partha P. Goswami University of Calcutta, India
Sathish Govindarajan Indian Institute of Science, Bengaluru, India
Prahladh Harsha Tata Institute of Fundamental Research,
Bombay, India
R. Inkulu Indian Institute of Technology, Guwahati, India
Matthew Katz Ben-Gurion University, Israel
Ken-Ichi Kawarabayashi National Institute of Informatics, Japan
Shuji Kijima Kyushu University, Japan
Sandi Klavzar University of Ljubljana, Slovenia
Ramesh Krishnamurti
(Co-Chair) Simon Fraser University, Canada
Andrzej Lingas Lund University, Sweden
Anil Maheshwari Carleton University, Canada
Bojan Mohar Simon Fraser University, Canada
Ian Munro University of Waterloo, Canada
N.S. Narayanaswamy Indian Institute of Technology, Madras,
Chennai, India
Sudebkumar P. Pal Indian Institute of Technology, Kharagpur,
India
Abhiram Ranade Indian Institute of Technology, Bombay, India
Bhawani S. Panda Indian Institute of Technology, Delhi, India
Kunihiko Sadakane National Institute of Informatics, Japan
Shakhar Smorodinsky Ben-Gurion University, Israel
Angelika Steger ETH Zurich, Switzerland
C.R. Subramanian Institute of Mathematical Sciences, Chennai,
India
Pavel Valtr Charles University Prague, Czech Republic
David Wood Monash University, Australia
VIII Organization

Additional Reviewers

Abu-Affash, A. Karim Morgenstern, Gila

Angelini, Patrizio Mukherjee, Joydeep
Arun-Kumar, S. Muthu, Rahul
Babu, Jasine Nilsson, Bengt J.
Basavaraju, Manu Otachi, Yota
Benkoczi, Robert Pal, Sudebkumar
Da Lozzo, Giordano Pradhan, Dinabandhu
Di Donato, Valentino Rafiey, Arash
Floderus, Peter Ramakrishna, Gadhamsetty
Ganian, Robert Ranu, Sayan
Gonzalez Yero, Ismael Rizzi, Romeo
Hell, Pavol Roy, Bodhayan
Iranmanesh, Ehsan Saumell, Maria
Jakovac, Marko Singh, Nitin
Kabanets, Valentine Tewari, Raghunath
Khodamoradi, Kamyar Thiagarajan, Karthick
Krohn, Erik Vadivel Murugan, Sunitha
Levcopoulos, Christos Varma, Girish
Manokaran, Rajsekar Varma, Nithin
Meierling, Dirk Venkateswaran, Jayendran
Mishra, Tapas Kumar Żyliński, Pawel
Invited Talk (Abstracts)
 Obstruction Characterizations
in Graphs and Digraphs

Pavol Hell

School of Computing Science, Simon Fraser University, Canada

Abstract. Some of the nicest characterizations of graph families are

stated in terms of obstructions – forbidden induced subgraphs or other
substructures. A typical example characterizes interval graphs by the ab-
sence of asteroidal triples and induced cycles of length greater than three.
I will discuss similar obstruction characterizations for classes of digraphs.
The obstructions are novel, but similar in spirit to asteroidal triples.
Surprisingly, these obstructions permit new characterizations even for
undirected graphs. In particular, I will describe the first obstruction
characterization of circular arc graphs, and a corresponding certifying
polynomial time recognition algorithm for this graph class. The digraph
results are joint with Arash Rafiey, Jing Huang, and Tomás Feder, and
the circular arc graph characterization and algorithm results are joint
with Juraj Stacho and Mathew Francis.
Probabilistic Arguments in Graph Coloring

C.R. Subramanian
The Institute of Mathematical Sciences,
Taramani, Chennai - 600 113, India
crs@imsc.res.in

Abstract. Probabilistic arguments has come to be a powerful way to

obtain bounds on various chromatic numbers. It plays an important role
not only in obtaining upper bounds but also in establishing the tightness
of these upper bounds. It often calls for the application of various (often
simple) ideas, tools and techniques (from probability theory) like mo-
ments, concentration inequalities, known estimates on tail probabilities
and various other probability estimates. A number of examples illus-
trate how this approach can be a very useful tool in obtaining chromatic
bounds. For many of these bounds, no other approach for obtaining them
is known so far. In this talk, we illustrate this approach with some spe-
cific applications to graph coloring. On the other hand, several specific
applications of this approach have also motivated and led to the devel-
opment of powerful tools for handling discrete probability spaces. An
important tool (for establishing the tightness results) is the notion of
random graphs. We do not necessarily present the best results (obtained
using this approach) since the main purpose is to provide an introduction
to the power and simplicity of the approach. Many of the examples and
the results are already known and published in the literature and have
also been improved further.
 Table of Contents

Probabilistic Arguments in Graph Coloring (Invited Talk) . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1

C.R. Subramanian

Approximation Algorithms
A PTAS for the Metric Case of the Minimum Sum-Requirement
Communication Spanning Tree Problem . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9
Santiago V. Ravelo and Carlos E. Ferreira

Constant Approximation for Broadcasting in k -cycle Graph . . . . . . . . . . . 21

Puspal Bhabak and Hovhannes A. Harutyunyan

Computational Geometry
Three Paths to Point Placement . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 33
Md. Shafiul Alam and Asish Mukhopadhyay

Vertex Guarding in Weak Visibility Polygons . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 45

Pritam Bhattacharya, Subir Kumar Ghosh, and Bodhayan Roy

On Collections of Polygons Cuttable with a Segment Saw . . . . . . . . . . . . . 58

Adrian Dumitrescu, Anirban Ghosh, and Masud Hasan

Rectilinear Path Problems in Restricted Memory Setup . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 69

Binay K. Bhattacharya, Minati De, Anil Maheshwari,
Subhas C. Nandy, and Sasanka Roy

Graph Theory
New Polynomial Case for Efficient Domination in P6 -free Graphs . . . . . . 81
T. Karthick

Higher-Order Triangular-Distance Delaunay Graphs: Graph-Theoretical

Properties . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 89
Ahmad Biniaz, Anil Maheshwari, and Michiel Smid

Separator Theorems for Interval Graphs and Proper Interval Graphs . . . 101
B.S. Panda

Bounds for the b-chromatic Number of Induced Subgraphs

and G – e . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 111
P. Francis and S. Francis Raj
XIV Table of Contents

New Characterizations of Proper Interval Bigraphs and Proper Circular

Arc Bigraphs . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 117
Ashok Kumar Das and Ritapa Chakraborty

On Spectra of Corona Graphs . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 126

Rohan Sharma, Bibhas Adhikari, and Abhishek Mishra

Axiomatic Characterization of the Median and Antimedian Functions

on Cocktail-Party Graphs and Complete Graphs . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 138
Manoj Changat, Divya Sindhu Lekha, Henry Martyn Mulder,
and Ajitha R. Subhamathi

Tree Path Labeling of Hypergraphs – A Generalization of the

Consecutive Ones Property . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 150
N.S. Narayanaswamy and Anju Srinivasan

On a Special Class of Boxicity 2 Graphs . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 157

Sujoy Kumar Bhore, Dibyayan Chakraborty, Sandip Das,
and Sagnik Sen

Domination in Some Subclasses of Bipartite Graphs . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 169

Arti Pandey and B.S. Panda

Computational Complexity
Parameterized Analogues of Probabilistic Computation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 181
Ankit Chauhan and B.V. Raghavendra Rao

Algebraic Expressions of Rhomboidal Graphs . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 193

Mark Korenblit

Solving Hamiltonian Cycle by an EPT Algorithm for a Non-sparse

Parameter . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 205
Sigve Hortemo Sæther

Algorithms
Associativity for Binary Parallel Processes: A Quantitative Study . . . . . . 217
Olivier Bodini, Antoine Genitrini, Frédéric Peschanski,
and Nicolas Rolin

A Tight Bound for Congestion of an Embedding . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 229

Paul Manuel, Indra Rajasingh, R. Sundara Rajan,
N. Parthiban, and T.M. Rajalaxmi

Auction/Belief Propagation Algorithms for Constrained Assignment

Problem . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 238
Mindi Yuan, Wei Shen, Jun Li, Yannis Pavlidis, and Shen Li
 Table of Contents XV

Bi-directional Search for Skyline Probability . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 250

Arun K. Pujari, Venkateswara Rao Kagita, Anubhuti Garg,
and Vineet Padmanabhan

Cumulative Vehicle Routing Problem: A Column Generation

Approach . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 262
Daya Ram Gaur and Rishi Ranjan Singh

Energy Efficient Sweep Coverage with Mobile and Static Sensors . . . . . . . 275
Barun Gorain and Partha Sarathi Mandal

Generation of Random Digital Curves Using Combinatorial

Techniques . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 286
Apurba Sarkar, Arindam Biswas, Mousumi Dutt,
and Arnab Bhattacharya

Author Index . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 299

 Probabilistic Arguments in Graph Coloring
(Invited Talk)

C.R. Subramanian

The Institute of Mathematical Sciences,

Taramani, Chennai - 600 113, India
crs@imsc.res.in

Abstract. Probabilistic arguments has come to be a powerful way to

obtain bounds on various chromatic numbers. It plays an important role
not only in obtaining upper bounds but also in establishing the tightness
of these upper bounds. It often calls for the application of various (often
simple) ideas, tools and techniques (from probability theory) like mo-
ments, concentration inequalities, known estimates on tail probabilities
and various other probability estimates. A number of examples illus-
trate how this approach can be a very useful tool in obtaining chromatic
bounds. For many of these bounds, no other approach for obtaining them
is known so far. In this talk, we illustrate this approach with some spe-
cific applications to graph coloring. On the other hand, several specific
applications of this approach have also motivated and led to the devel-
opment of powerful tools for handling discrete probability spaces. An
important tool (for establishing the tightness results) is the notion of
random graphs. We do not necessarily present the best results (obtained
using this approach) since the main purpose is to provide an introduction
to the power and simplicity of the approach. Many of the examples and
the results are already known and published in the literature and have
also been improved further.

1 Introduction
We mostly focus on simple undirected graphs G = (V, E). A proper k-coloring of
G is any map f : V → [k] which satisfies f (u) = f (v) for every uv ∈ E. Here, [k]
denotes {1, . . . , k}. The least value of k for which G admits a proper k-coloring
is known as the chromatic number of G and is denoted by χ(G). The chromatic
index of G (denoted by χ (G)) is the least value of k such that there is a map
f : E → [k] satisfying f (uv) = f (uw) for every uv, uw ∈ E with v = w. It is
well-known (from the theorems of Brooks and Vizing) that χ(G) ≤ d + 1 and
d ≤ χ (G) ≤ d + 1 for any graph G with maximum degree d.
Several variants of vertex/edge colorings have also been introduced and stud-
ied as these notions model several situations arising in practice. Some of these
variants impose further restrictions on the standard notion of colorings men-
tioned before, while others generalize this standard notion. For example, an
acyclic vertex k-coloring is a proper k-coloring in which every cycle of G is col-
ored with three or more colors. Eqivalently, the union of any two color classes

S. Ganguly and R. Krishnamurti (Eds.): CALDAM 2015, LNCS 8959, pp. 1–8, 2015.

c Springer International Publishing Switzerland 2015
2 C.R. Subramanian

induces a forest. The acyclic chromatic number a(G) is the least k for which G
admits such a coloring. When the union is further restricted to be a star forest,
it is called a star coloring with star chromatic number being the corresponding
invariant. Acyclic and star colorings were introduced by Grünbaum [2]. Acyclic
and star colorings model certain partition problems arising in sparse matrix com-
putation [26]. Further examples of such restrictions could be proper colorings in
which the union of any two color classes induces (i) a partial 2-tree or (ii) a
planar graph, etc.
An example of a generalization is a list coloring f in which each u ∈ V
is provided with a list Lu of colors and f satisfies f (u) ∈ Lu for each u and
f (u) = f (v) for every uv ∈ E. Such a coloring is referred to as a proper L-
coloring where L = {Lu : u ∈ V }. The least value of k such that G admits a
L-coloring for every L satisfying |Lu | ≥ k (for every u ∈ V ) is known as the
choice number or list chromatic number of G and is denoted by ch(G). Clearly,
χ(G) ≤ ch(G) for any G.
List colorings naturally model scheduling problems where one needs to find
a conflict-free schedule of resources to users where a resource can be assigned
only to a user who is willing to accept that resource. List colorings also naturally
arise in constructive proofs of chromatic bounds. To prove the existence of a k-
coloring, one starts with an initial partial proper coloring which colors a subset
of vertices and extends this partial coloring in an iterative fashion to a full
coloring of V . Any such extension is essentially about proving the existence of
a list coloring where any uncolored vertex is forbidden to use colors used on its
colored neighbors.
Total coloring is another generalization. A total k-coloring is a k-coloring f
of V ∪ E with colors from [k] such that (i) f restricted to V (or E) is a proper
vertex (or edge) coloring and (ii) f (u) = f (uv) for every uv ∈ E. The least k
for which G admits a total k-coloring is known as the total chromatic number
of G and is denoted by χT (G). A trivial bound is χT (G) ≤ χ(G) + χ (G).
Given a coloring notion, one is interested in knowing whether the associated
chromatic number can be bounded by a function g of one or more of other
graph invariants like maximum degree Δ(G), maximum clique size ω(G) or the
standard chromatic number χ(G) ? In addition, one is interested in actually
obtaining such a function g and also in determining how tight the estimate
provided by g is ? To establish tightness, one needs to obtain implicit or explicit
examples of graphs where any such coloring will require a number of colors which
is closer to the estimate provided by g. Probabilistic arguments is a very useful
way to obtain bounds and also to establish their tightness.

1.1 Constrained Colorings

For an illustration, consider the example of b-frugal colorings. For a given b ≥ 1,

a proper k-coloring f of G is a b-frugal coloring if for every u ∈ V and j ∈ [k], at
most b neighbors of u are colored j. The least k for which such a coloring exists,
is known as the b-frugal chromatic number of G and is denoted by χfb rug (G). By
 Probabilistic Arguments in Graph Coloring 3

introducing randomness, one can show that for every b ≥ 1, we have

χfb rug (G) ≤ 16db+1/b . . . . . . (A)

for every G of maximum degree d. Hind, et.al. [8] obtained this bound with e3
in place of 16. The idea is as follows : Define k = 16db+1/b . Choose uniformly at
random a k-coloring f : V → [k]. Define a collection of bad events as follows :
(i) For every uv ∈ E, Euv happens if f (u) = f (v).
(ii) For every u, S ⊆ N (u) with |S| = b + 1, Eu,S happens if f (v) = f (w) for
every v, w ∈ S.
The random choice f is proper and b-frugal if none of these events (referred to
as bad events) happens. Note that the claimed bound (A) is true if it can be
shown that, (C1) : with positive probability f satisfies none of the bad events.
(C1) can be established by applying a powerful probability tool known as Local
Lemma (discovered by Erdös and Lovasz [6]) (see also [17]). This tool is very
useful in situations where we have a collection of bad events each of which is
independent of all but at most a ”small” number of other events. The precise
meaning of ”small” will vary with events and are implicitly captured by a set of
inequalities (involving probabilities of bad events and the number of influential
events) which need to be satisfied.
The choice and definition of bad events play an important role in simplifying
and shortening the proof arguments. Another important factor is in obtaining
tight bounds on the number of events influencing a given bad event. Good esti-
mates of probabilities also play an important role.
Using probabilitic arguments (particularly, Local Lemma), good upper bounds
(many of them are also tight) have been obtained on various constrained chro-
matic numbers. For a sample, we suggest the reader to [7] (acyclic chromatic
number), [14] (star chromatic numbers), [25, 10] (acyclic chromatic index), [13]
(generalized acyclic chromatic number), [11] (k-intersection chromatic index),
[5] (chromatic number bounds for graphs with sparse neighborhoods).
Recently, Aravind and Subramanian [22] have generalized the notions of
acyclic chromatic number, frugal chromatic number, etc. to a generic notion of
(j, F )-colorings and and obtained upper bounds (in terms of Δ) on the associated
chromatic numbers. Here, j ≥ 2 and F is a family of connected j-colorable graphs
with each member being a graph on more than j vertices. A (j, F )-coloring of
G is a proper vertex coloring such that the union of any j color classes induces
a subgraph which is free of any copy of any member of F . The (j, F )-chromatic
number of G (denoted by χj,F (G)) is the least k used on any such coloring. This
notion specializes to star colorings if we set j = 2 and F = {P4 }. It specializes
to b-frugal colorings if we set j = 2 and F = {K1,b+1 }.
In a related work [21], they also considered the edge analogues of (j, F )-
colorings and obtained nearly tight (within a constant multiplicative factor)
upper bounds on the associated chromatic indices. For both vertex and edge
colorings, it was also shown that several such restrictions (with each specified
by a pair (ji , Fi )) can be simultaneously enforced on the colorings. As a sample
4 C.R. Subramanian

consequence, it follows that graphs of maximum degree d can be properly edge

colored with O(d) colors so that all of the following restrictions can be simultane-
ously enforced : (i) union of any four matchings forms a partial 2-tree, (ii) union
2
of any 16 matchings forms a 5-degenerate graph, (iii) union of any k −k+2 2 (for
fixed k) matchings forms a k-colorable graph, etc. The upper bounds of [22, 21]
were based on probabilistic arguments employing Local Lemma.
In a subsequent work [23],  the authors improved the bound of [22] (for the
m 
special case of j = 2) to O d m−1 . Here, m denotes the minimum number of
edges in any member of F . This bound is also nearly tight in view of the lower
bounds in derived in [22] for the case j = 2. In this work, a connection between
(j, F )-chromatic numbers and oriented chromatic numbers was also established.
It also presented an improvement of the previously best bound of 2d2 2d (due to
Kostochka, Sopena and Zhu [16]) to 16kd2d on the oriented chromatic number.
Here, d refers to the maximum degree and k denotes the degeneracy.
The oriented chromatic number χo (G) of G is the least K such that for every
orientation G of E(G), there is an oriented graph (without self-loops) H on K
vertices admitting a homomorphism f : G → H. The improvement is basically
due to a more careful analysis of the proof of the bound obtained in [16]. It works
by proving the existence of a tournament T on K vertices in which for every
I ⊆ V (T ), |I| = i ≤ d and for every a ∈ {IN, OU T }i , there are at least kd + 1
vertices in V (T ) \ I all having a as the set of orientations into I. The existence
was proved by choosing a random tournament on K vertices and showing that
it satisfies the required conditions with a positive probability.

1.2 Randomized Coloring Procedure

Sometimes, to obtain strong and tight chromatic bounds, proving the existence of
a coloring does not reduce to the probabilistic analysis of one random experiment.
It may call for repeated random choices and analyses to arrive at the conclusion.
In other words, it reduces to building a desired coloring in an incremental fashion
by starting with an initial partial coloring and extending it to a full coloring.
Each such extension will involve random choices and their analyses.
One paradigm that has been successfully employed in deriving several chro-
matic bounds is the following procedure (referred to as randomized coloring
procedure in [12]) :

• Each uncolored vertex u picks a color randomly from the list of colors avail-
able to it. This coloring may not be proper. In that case, uncolor any recently
colored vertex whose choice conficts with the random choice or pre-assigned
color of any neighbor.

An application of this procedure initially helps us in obtaining a proper partial

coloring that takes care of at least the colored vertices. This forces us to prune the
list of colors available to uncolored vertices. However, one needs to ensure that
each such list is of ”sufficient” size to ensure that one can proceed further and
obtain a full coloring of desired type. This calls for analyzing the randomized
 Probabilistic Arguments in Graph Coloring 5

coloring procedure using some of the various concentration inequalities (like

Azuma’s martingale inequality, Talagrand’s inequality) and tail bounds. Some
striking applications of this procedure (and its variants) are the list chromatic
index bounds (obtained by Kahn [3]), list chromatic bounds for triangle-free
graphs (by Kim [4]), list coloring constants (by Reed and Sudakov [24]), total
chromatic number bounds (by Hind, Molloy and Reed [9]), frugal coloring and
weighted equitable coloring bounds (by Srinivasan and Pemmaraju [12]).

1.3 List Coloring

As mentioned before, we have χ(G) ≤ ch(G) for any G. How large can ch(G)
be compared to χ(G). It can be shown that ch(Kn,n ) = Θ(ln n) and hence one
cannot hope to bound ch(G) by only a function of χ(G). One can easily see that
ch(G) ≤ d(G) + 1 ≤ Δ(G) + 1 for any G. Here, d(G) denotes the degeneracy
of G. As the example of Kn,n shows, even these bounds can be quite far from
ch(G).
The following upper bound is well-known (as has been observed by several
researchers using probabilistic arguments)

(B1 :) ch(G) ≤ cχ(G)(ln n)

for any G, where c > 0 is a constant. An asymptotic improvement of this bound

was obtained by Noga Alon in [1] for very special classes of graphs. It was shown
that ch(Kr∗m ) ≤ cr(ln m) for every r, m ≥ 2. Here, Km∗r denotes a complete
r-partite graph with each part being of size m. For those m satisfying m = no(1)
where n = rm, this leads to an asymptotic improvement. This bound was also
established to be tight within a constant multiplicative factor for every r, m ≥ 2.
The proof is based on probabilistic arguments.
√ Consider the unique optimal
coloring (V1 , . . . , Vr ) of Kr∗m . If r ≤ n, then m ≥ r and hence (B1) can be
applied. When r ≥ m, let L = ∪u Lu and consider the bipartition L = L1 ∪ L2
formed by a uniformly random choice of h : L → {1, 2}. Prune each Lu into
Lu ∩ L1 or Lu ∩ L2 depending on whether u ∈ ∪j≤r/2 Vj or otherwise. It can be
shown (using Chernoff bounds on tail probabilities) that this random pruning of
lists does not reduce the list sizes by too much. Now it reduces to proving the
bound for K r2 ∗m . Continuing in this way, one reaches a stage where (B1) can be
applied. The assumption of equal part sizes played a very important role in this
proof.
Later, Subramanian [18] extended the proof arguments of [1] to work for any
G. Precisely, it was shown that
 
n
(B2 :) ch(G) ≤ cχ(G) ln + 1
χ
for any G. The main difficulty in extending the arguments was the potentially
highly non-uniform part sizes in any optimal coloring of G under consideration.
Hence, to obtain a proof based on inductive reduction on the value of χ, a sim-
ple uniform bipartition of L will not work and one needs to choose a random
6 C.R. Subramanian

bipartition which takes into account the sizes of the parts and which also en-
sures that the pruned lists are of required length (with positive probability) as
determined by the upper bound one wants to establish. [18] shows how such a
random bipartition can be achieved which finally establishes the bound (B2). It
was also shown how the proof arguments lead to an efficient algorithm producing
a L-coloring provided the lists are of sufficient length.
In a subsequent work [19], the author extended the result of [18] to obtain
an analogue of (B2) for the list version of hereditary colorings. For a given
hereditary property P, a P-coloring is a partition of V into parts such that the
subgraph induced by each part is a member of P. The minimum k such that
there exists V = V1 ∪ . . . ∪ Vk where each G[Vi ] ∈ P is known as the P-chromatic
number χP (G). One can define list version of P-colorings and [19] establishes
that  
n
(B3 :) chP (G) ≤ cχP (G) ln +1
χP
for any G.
In a further subsequent work [20], this result is being further extended to list
version of various constrained colorings of graphs and hypergraphs.

1.4 Establishing Tightness

We illustrate the application of probabilistic arguments for establishing the tight-
ness of chromatic bounds with a simple example. Recall the bound χf2 rug (G) ≤
16d3/2 for any G.
 1/3
Consider the random graph G ∈ G(n, p) with p = 6 lnnn . Define μ =
 2/3 
(n − 1)p ≈ 6 n (ln n) 1/3
. It is well known (from an application of Chernoff
bounds) that μ 
(A) : Pr ≤ d ≤ 2μ → 1 as n → ∞
2
where d denotes the maximum degree of G.
Consider any fixed partition (V1 , . . . , Vs ) of V into s ≤ n/3 parts. Remove
at most 2 least numbered vertices from each part so as to get a new collection
(U1 , . . . , Ut ) (where t ≤ s) of non-empty parts with each of size divisible by 3
and each Uj being a subset of some Vi . The number of vertices removed is at
most 2n/3 and hence the new collection has at least n/3 vertices. Now, further
dividing each part into sets of size 3 each, we get a collection (W1 , . . . , Wr ) (for
some r ≥ n/9) of smaller parts totally which are such that union Wi ∪ Wj of
any two smaller parts induces a subgraph with maximum degree less than 3. For
any fixed pair this happens with probability at most 1 − p3 . Since these events
are independent for different pairs (involving disjoint edges), we deduce that
n/9 n 2
3
Pr(χf2 rug (G) ≤ n/3) ≤ nn · (1 − p3 )( 2 ) ≤ en(ln n)− 162 p
216n(ln n)
≤ en(ln n)− 162 = o(1)
Thus, (B) : χf2 rug (G) > n/3 with a probability approaching 1 as n → 1.
Comparing (A) and (B), we deduce that for some postive constant C, there are
 Probabilistic Arguments in Graph Coloring 7

infinitely many values of d for which there is a graph G having maximum degree
3/2
d and χf2 rug (G) ≥ C (lndd)1/2 . This establishes the tightness of the upper bound
within a multiplicative factor (ln d)1/2 . This proof is a simplification of the proof
of a more general theorem which can be found in [22], the latter proof using
arguments similar to those employed in [7].

2 Conclusions

For a good introduction to the applications of probabilistic arguments in graph

coloring and in combinatorics generally, the interested reader is referred to the
book by Molloy and Reed [15] and also the one by Alon and Spencer [17], apart
from the various references provided below.

References

[1] Alon, N.: Choice numbers of graphs: A probabilistic approach. Combinatorics,

Probability and Computing 1(2), 107–114 (1992)
[2] Grünbaum, B.: Acyclic colorings of planar graphs. Israel Journal of Mathemat-
ics 14(3), 390–408 (1973)
[3] Kahn, J.: Asymptotically good list-colorings. Journal of Combinatorial Theory,
Series A 73(1), 1–59 (1996)
[4] Kim, J.H.: On brooks’ theorem for sparse graphs. Combinatorics, Probability and
Computing 4(2), 97–132 (1995)
[5] Alon, N., Krivelevich, M., Sudakov, B.: Colouring graphs with sparse neighbor-
hoods. Journal of Combinatorial Theory, Series B 77(1), 73–82 (1999)
[6] Erdös, P., Lovasz, L.: Problems and results on 3-chromatic hypergraphs and some
related questions. In: Hajnal, A., Rado, R., Sos, V.T. (eds.) Infinite and Finite
Series, pp. 609–628 (1975)
[7] Alon, N., McDiarmid, C., Reed, B.: Acyclic coloring of graphs. Random Structures
and Algorithms 2(3), 277–288 (1991)
[8] Hind, H., Molloy, M., Reed, B.: Colouring a graph frugally. Combinatorica 17(4),
469–482 (1997)
[9] Hind, H., Molloy, M., Reed, B.: Total coloring with Δ + poly(log Δ) colors. SIAM
Journal on Computing 28(3), 816–821 (1998)
[10] Muthu, R., Narayanan, N., Subramanian, C.R.: Improved bounds on acylic edge
colouring. Discrete Mathematics 307(23), 3063–3069 (2007)
[11] Muthu, R., Narayanan, N., Subramanian, C.R.: On k-intersection edge colourings.
Discussiones Mathematicae Graph Theory 29(2), 411–418 (2009)
[12] Pemmaraju, S., Srinivasan, A.: The randomized coloring procedure with
symmetry-breaking. In: Aceto, L., Damgård, I., Goldberg, L.A., Halldórsson,
M.M., Ingólfsdóttir, A., Walukiewicz, I. (eds.) ICALP 2008, Part I. LNCS,
vol. 5125, pp. 306–319. Springer, Heidelberg (2008)
[13] Greenhill, C., Pikhurko, O.: Bounds on the generalized acylic chromatic numbers
of bounded degree graphs. Graphs and Combinatorics 21(4), 407–419 (2005)
[14] Fertin, G., Raspaud, A., Reed, B.: Star coloring of graphs. Journal of Graph
Theory 47(3), 163–182 (2004)
8 C.R. Subramanian

[15] Molly, M., Reed, B.: Graph Colouring and the Probabilistic Method. Springer,
Germany (2000)
[16] Kostochka, A.V., Sopena, E., Zhu, X.: Acyclic and oriented chromatic numbers of
graphs. Journal of Graph Theory 24(4), 331–340 (1997)
[17] Alon, N., Spencer, J.H.: The Probabilistic Method, 3rd edn. John Wiley & Sons,
Inc., New York (2008)
[18] Subramanian, C.R.: List set coloring: bounds and algorithms. Combinatorics,
Probability and Computing 16(1), 145–158 (2007)
[19] Subramanian, C.R.: List hereditary colorings. In: Proceedings of the 2nd Interna-
tional Conference on Discrete Mathematics (ICDM), India, June 6-10. RMS Lec-
ture Note Series, vol. 13, pp. 191–205. Ramanujan Mathematical Society (2010)
[20] Subramanian, C.R.: List hereditary colorings of graphs and hypergraphs (2014)
(manuscript)
[21] Aravind, N.R., Subramanian, C.R.: Bounds on edge colorings with restrictions on
the union of color classes. SIAM Journal of Discrete Mathematics 24(3), 841–852
(2010)
[22] Aravind, N.R., Subramanian, C.R.: Bounds on vertex colorings with restrictions
on the union of color classes. Journal of Graph Theory 66(3), 213–234 (2011)
[23] Aravind, N.R., Subramanian, C.R.: Forbidden subgraph colorings and the oriented
chromatic number. European Journal of Combinatorics 34, 620–631 (2013)
[24] Reed, B., Sudakov, B.: Asymptotically the list colouring constants are 1. Journal
of Combinatorial Theory, Series B 86(1), 27–37 (2002)
[25] Alon, N., Sudakov, B., Zaks, A.: Acylic edge colorings of graphs. Journal of Graph
Theory 37(3), 157–167 (2001)
[26] Gebremedhin, A., Tarafdar, A., Manne, F., Pothen, A.: New acyclic and star
coloring algorithms with applications to Hessian computation. SIAM Journal on
Scientific Computing 29, 1042–1072 (2007)
 A PTAS for the Metric Case of the Minimum
Sum-Requirement Communication Spanning
Tree Problem

Santiago V. Ravelo and Carlos E. Ferreira

Instituto de Matemática e Estatı́stica, Universidade de São Paulo, Brasil

{ravelo,cef}@ime.usp.br

Abstract. This work considers the metric case of the minimum sum-
requirement communication spanning tree problem (SROCT), which is
an NP-hard particular case of the minimum communication spanning
tree problem (OCT). Given an undirected graph G = (V, E) with non-
negative lengths ω(e) associated to the edges satisfying the triangular
inequality and non-negative routing weights r(u) associated to nodes
u∈ V , the
 objective is to find a spanning tree T of G, that minimizes:
1
2 u∈V v∈V (r(u) + r(v)) d(T, u, v), where d(H, x, y) is the minimum
distance between nodes x and y in a graph H ⊆ G. We present a polyno-
mial approximation scheme for the metric case of the SROCT improving
the until now best existing approximation algorithm for this problem.

1 Introduction
In this work we consider a particular case of the minimum communication span-
ning tree problem (OCT). The OCT was introduced by Hu in 1974. In the
problem it is given an undirected graph G = (V, E) with non-negative length
ω(e) associated to each edge e ∈ E and non-negative requirement ψ(u, v) between
each pair of nodes u, v ∈ V . The problem is to finda spanning
 tree T of G which
minimizes the total communication cost: C(T ) = u∈V v∈V ψ(u, v)d(T, u, v),
where d(H, x, y) denotes the minimum distance between nodes x and y in the
sub-graph H of G. ([1,2])
In [3] it was proved that the minimum routing cost spanning tree problem
(MRCT) is NP-hard (by a reduction from the 3-exact cover problem (3-EC)).
Observe that MRCT is a particular case of OCT where the requirement be-
tween all pair of nodes is equal to one (ψ(u, v) = 1 for all u, v ∈ V ). In [4] a
PTAS for the MRCT was given. The authors presented a reduction from the
general to the metric case, which implies that MRCT with edge-lengths that
satisfy the triangular inequality is also NP-hard. Also, in [4] an O(log2 (n))-
approximation was given for OCT applying a result from [5] which was later
improved to a O(log(n))-approximation by [6].
In [7], the minimum product-requirement communication spanning tree prob-
lem (PROCT) and the minimum sum-requirement communication spanning
tree problem (SROCT) were introduced. In these problems each vertex u ∈ V

S. Ganguly and R. Krishnamurti (Eds.): CALDAM 2015, LNCS 8959, pp. 9–20, 2015.

c Springer International Publishing Switzerland 2015
10 S.V. Ravelo and C.E. Ferreira

has a non-negative routing weight r(u). For PROCT the requirement is defined
as ψ(u, v) = 12 r(u)r(v), and for SROCT ψ(u, v) = 12 (r(u) + r(v)). Both prob-
lems are NP-hard. In [7] a 1.577-approximation algorithm for PROCT and a
2-approximation for SROCT are presented.
The approximation ratio for PROCT was improved in [8] where a PTAS
was given. A particular case of SROCT is the weighted p-MRCT, were given
an integer p, only p nodes of the graph will have a positive routing weight (i.e.
the remaining nodes have zero weight). The particular case in which the p nodes
have routing weight 1 is called p-MRCT. In [9] it was proved that 2-MRCT is
NP-hard. It also was proved in [10] where PTASs for 2-MRCT and the metric
case of weighted 2-MRCT were given.
To the best of our knowledge, there are no results improving the 2-approxima-
tion ratio for SROCT which is also the best known ratio for the metric case of
SROCT (denoted by m-SROCT). Observe that this problem is also NP-hard,
since MRCT is a particular case in which r(u) = 1 for all u ∈ V .
In this work we give a PTAS for m-SROCT improving the best previous
known result for this problem. The idea of our algorithm was inspired in the
previous PTASs for related problems such as MRCT and PROCT. This paper
is organized as follows. In the next section we present some notation. In section
3 we show how to obtain an optimal k-star for SROCT in polynomial time for
a fixed integer k. In section 4 we present a PTASfor the m-SROCT. Finally, in
section 5 the conclusions and future work are given.

2 Definitions

Unless specified we consider all graphs as undirected graphs. Given a graph G

we denote the set of its nodes by VG and the set of its edges by EG (when G is
implicit by context we use V as VG and E as EG ).

Definition 1. Given a graph G with non-negative lengths associated to its edges,

the length of a path in G is defined as the sum of the lengths of its edges (a
path with no edges has length zero). The distance between node x and node y
in H sub-graph of G is the length of a path with minimum length between x and
y in H and is denoted by d(H, x, y).

Now we can define SROCT as:

Problem 1. SROCT - Sum-Requirement Communication Spanning Tree

problem
Input: A graph G, a non-negative length function over the edges of G, ω :
E → Q+ and a non-negative routing weight function over the nodes of G, r :
V → Q+ .
Output: A spanning tree T of G which minimizes the total weighted routing
cost:
   
C(T ) = u∈V v∈V 12 (r(u) + r(v))d(T, u, v) = u∈V v∈V r(u)d(T, u, v).
 A PTAS for the Metric Case of the Minimum SROCT 11

Definition 2. Given a graph G and a non-negative

 routing weight function over
the nodes of G, r : V → Q+ , we denote r(G) = u∈VG r(u) and n(G) = |VG |.
When G is implicit by the context we use R to denote r(G) and n to denote
n(G).

This paper considers the m-SROCT, the metric case of SROCT, which is
the particular case of SROCT where the graph G is complete and the length
function over the edges satisfies the triangular inequality. In order to approximate
an optimal solution of m-SROCT we introduce the concept of a k-star1 :

Definition 3. Given a graph G and a positive integer k, a k-star of G is a

spanning tree of G with no more than k internal nodes (that is, at least n − k
leaves). A core of a k-star T of G is a tree resulting by eliminating n − k leaves
from T .

Note that a k-star T can be represented by (τ, S), where τ is a core of T and
S = {Su1 , ..., Suk } is a vector indexed by the nodes in τ where Sui is the set of
leaves adjacent in T to ui ∈ Vτ (1 ≤ i ≤ k).
The problem of finding an optimal k-star for m-SROCT can be defined as:

Problem 2. Optimum k-star for m-SROCT

Input: A positive integer k and an instance of m-SROCT: a complete graph
G, a non-negative length function over the edges of G which satisfies the trian-
gular inequality, ω : E → Q+ and a non-negative routing weight function over
the nodes of G, r : V → Q+ .
Output:A k-star T of G which minimizes the total weighted routing cost:
C(T ) = u∈V v∈V r(u)d(T, u, v).

The next section shows an efficient algorithm to find an optimal k-star.

3 Optimal k-Star for m-SROCT

First we introduce the notion of configuration of a k-star:

Definition 4. Given a k-star T = (τ, S) a configuration of T is (τ, L) where

L = {lu1 , ..., luk } is a vector of integers being lui = |Sui | (1 ≤ i ≤ k). A configu-
ration (τ, L) is over (k, G), where k is a positive integer and  G is a graph, if τ
is a tree of G with k nodes (that is, τ ⊆ G and |Vτ | = k) and u∈Vτ lu = n − k.

In [4] it was observed that given a complete graph G and a fixed positive
integer k, the number of configurations over (k, G) is polynomial in n, resulting
O(k k n2k−1 ). Then, given an instance G, ω, r, k of the optimum k-star for m-
SROCT, our proposal is to enumerate all possible configurations over (K, G),
1
The definition of k-star used in this paper is the same used by [4,7,8], which is
different from the usual definition of k-star in graph theory (a tree with k leaves
linked to a single vertex of degree k).
12 S.V. Ravelo and C.E. Ferreira

finding an optimal k-star of each configuration, and finally select the best k-star
among them.
We find an optimal k-star for an instance G, ω, r, k of the optimum k-star
for m-SROCT and a configuration (τ, L) over (k, G), reducing the problem to
an uncapacitated minimum cost flow problem (UMCF).

Problem 3. UMCF - Uncapacitated Minimum Cost Flow problem

Input: A directed graph G, a cost function over the arcs ω : E → Q+ and a
demand function over the nodes r : V → Z.
Output: An integer vector indexed by the arcs X = (xe )e∈E which minimizes
C(X)
 =  e and guaranties for each node u ∈ V :
e∈E ω(e)x
+
e∈δ (u) x e − e∈δ − (u) xe = r(u),
where e ∈ δ + (w) and e ∈ δ − (v) iff e = v, w (∀e ∈ E, v, w ∈ V ).

Proposition 1. Given an instance I = G, ω, r, k of the optimum k-star for

m-SROCT and a configuration c = (τ, L) over (k, G), the problem of finding an
optimal k-star with configuration c for I can be reduced in polynomial time to
the UMCF with instance I  = G , ω  , r , where:

– VG = VG ;
– EG = {(u, v)|u ∈ VG−τ ∧ v ∈ τ };
– ω  (u, v) = Rω(u, v)+ w∈Vτ r(u) (d(τ, v, w)+ω(u, v)) (lw +1) −2r(u)ω(u, v);
– if u ∈ VG−τ then r (u) = −1, otherwise r (u) = lu .

The graph G is a complete bipartite graph on the same node set VG of G.

The bi-partition is given by the nodes in τ and outside this set. The cost of
arc u, v is equivalent to the value of assigning u as adjacent of v in a k-star
with the given configuration. We have to consider the cost of sending the routing
weight from u to all nodes of τ assuming that each node w ∈ Vτ receives (lw + 1)
times the value r(u) (considering the transmission to the node w and the leaves
adjacent to it); also, we add the cost of sending the routing weight of the entire
graph (R − r(u)) to node u, which must pass by node v. Finally the demands r
are set to ensure assignment between nodes out of τ and nodes in τ .

Proof. Since demands are integer we know that in any feasible solution the values
xe will be either zero or one. Moreover, exactly n − k arcs of G will have value
1. This guaranties that every feasible solution S  of the flow problem represents
an assignment of leaves outside τ to be adjacent to nodes in τ for a k-star T
of G with configuration (τ, L). Also, it is easy to see that any k-star T with
configuration (τ, L) provides a feasible solution to the flow problem: connect
node u ∈ τ to the lu leaves adjacent  to it in 
T.

 Observe
 that 2
: C(S ) = C(T ) − u∈Vτ v∈Vτ r(v)d(τ, u, v)(lu + 1), where
u∈Vτ v∈Vτ r(v)d(τ, u, v)(l u + 1) is the same for every solution with the same
configuration. Then, an optimum of UMCF with instance I  is associated to an
optimal k-star with configuration c of m-SROCT with instance I.
2
A detailed proof of this fact can be found in the full version of the paper.
 A PTAS for the Metric Case of the Minimum SROCT 13

In order to obtain I  from I the cost of each arc in G must be calculated.

This can be done in O((n − k)k 3 ). Defining the demands and the graph G itself
can be done in O((n − k)k + n). Finally, obtaining the k-star T associated to a
solution S  can be done in O(n − k), while the complexity of calculating C(T )
would be O(k 3 ). So, the reduction above can be done in O(nk 3 ).

It is well known that UMCF can be solved in O(n log(n)(nk + n log(n))) =
O(n2 log2 (n)) (e.g. [11]). Then, finding an optimal k-star for m-SROCT with
fixed k can be done efficiently.
Lemma 1. The optimum k-star for m-SROCT with fixed k can be solve in
O(n2k+1 log2 (n)).

4 PTAS for m-SROCT

In this section we prove that for 0 < δ ≤ 12 there exists a k-star, with k depending
1
on δ, which is a 1−δ -approximation of m-SROCT. For that, from now on, we will
consider an instance I of m-SROCT. Remember that n = n(G) and R = r(G).
The idea of the proof is similar to those presented in [4], [7] and [8]. Given
0 < δ ≤ 12 and a spanning tree T of G, we show the existence of a set Y of
internally disjoint paths whose union results in a sub-tree S of T , such that the
communication cost of each component B ∈ T − S is at most a small fraction of
the communication cost of T , which implies that most of the communication cost
of T passes by S. Also, we prove that the size of Y is limited by a function of δ and
we show how to construct a k-star from Y , where the value of k depends on the
size of Y . The communication cost of the k-star approximates the communication
1
cost of T by a factor of 1−δ .

4.1 Notation
First, in order to present the results of this section, we need some notation,
which generalizes the notation given in [4], [7] and [8]:
Definition 5. Given a spanning tree T of G, a set of edges H of T and a node
u of T , V B(T, H, u) is the set of nodes in the component of T − H containing
the vertex u.
Definition 6. Given a spanning tree T of G, a path P = u1 , ..., uh of T , we
denote by fP (or f , when P is clear by the context) the first node of P and lP
(or l) the last node. We will use η to denote number of nodes and ρ to denote
communication requirements. We define:
For the number of nodes (figure 1 gives an example of these notation):

– ηPf = |V B(T, EP , f )| and ηPl = |V B(T, EP , l)|, are the number of nodes in
the component of T − EP containing the first node of P and the component
containing the last node of P ,
14 S.V. Ravelo and C.E. Ferreira

– ηPm = n − ηPf − ηPl , is the number of nodes of all the component of T − EP

containing anh−1internal node of P ,
– N (P, v) = i=2 |V B(T, EP , ui )| d(P, v, ui ), is the sum over each internal
node ui of P of the number of nodes in the component of T − EP containing
ui times the distance in P from ui to node v,
– Nf (P ) = N (P, f ), Nl (P ) = N (P, l), represent the sums over each internal
node ui of P of the number of nodes in the component of T − EP containing
ui times the distance in P from ui to the first node of P and to the last node
of P ,
– ηPs = max{ηPf , ηPl }, ηPi = min{ηPf , ηPl }, represents the number of nodes in
the greater component of T − EP containing an extremal node of P ,
– if ηPf = ηPs then N (P ) = Nf (P ), else N (P ) = Nl (P ).

Analogously, for the communication requirements:

– ρfP = r (V B(T, EP , f )), ρlP = r (V B(T, EP , l), ρm f l

P = R − ρP − ρP ,
h−1
– R(P, v) = i=2 r (V B(T, EP , ui )) d(P, v, ui ), Rf (P ) = R(P, f ), Rl (P ) =
R(P, l),
– ρsP = max{ρfP , ρlP }, ρiP = min{ρfP , ρlP },
– if ρfP = ρsP then R(P ) = Rf (P ), else R(P ) = Rl (P ).

u3 u5
fP lP
u2 u4

Fig. 1. Consider the above spanning tree T of a graph G, where all the edges have
unitary weights and P is the path of T from node fP to lP . Observe that V B(T, EP , fP )
is the set of nodes to the left of fP (including fP ), V B(T, EP , lP ) is the set of nodes
to the right of lP (including lP ), V B(T, EP , u2 ) is the set of nodes containing u2
and the three nodes above it, V B(T, EP , u3 ) = {u3 }, V B(T, EP , u4 ) is the set of
nodes containing u4 and the two nodes below it, and V B(T, EP , u5 ) is the set of
nodes containing u5 and the node above it. Then, ηPf = 9, ηPl = 5, ηPm = 10, and thus
ηPs = 9 and ηPl = 5. Also, Nf (P ) = |V B(T, EP , u2 )| × 1 + |V B(T, EP , u3 )| × 2 +
|V B(T, EP , u4 )|×3+|V B(T, EP , u5 )|×4 = 4×1+1×2+3×3+2×4 = 23 and Nl (P ) =
|V B(T, EP , u2 )|×4+|V B(T, EP , u3 )|×3+|V B(T, EP , u4 )|×2+|V B(T, EP , u5 )|×1 =
4 × 4 + 1 × 3 + 3 × 2 + 2 × 1 = 27 , which yields N (p) = 23.

Now we introduce definitions for separators. A δ-separator is a sub-tree of a

spanning tree T of G, whose deletion gives rise to components that are bounded
(in the number of nodes, routing weight or both) by a factor δ of the total value
(n or R). Formally:
 A PTAS for the Metric Case of the Minimum SROCT 15

Definition 7. Given 0 < δ ≤ 12 and a spanning tree T of G, a sub-tree S of T

is a δ-η-separator of T if every component B of T − S, satisfies n(B) ≤ δn. If
every component B of T − S, satisfies r(B) ≤ δR, S is a δ-ρ-separator of T . If
both conditions apply, S is a δ-ηρ-separator of T .
Also, we define δ-ηρ-path and δ-ηρ-spine:
Definition 8. Given 0 < δ ≤ 12 and a spanning tree T of G, a path P of T is a
δ-ηρ-path of T if ηPm ≤ δ n6 and ρm R
P ≤ δ6.

Definition 9. Given 0 < δ ≤ 12 and a spanning tree T of G, a set Y =

{P , P , ..., Pl } of δ-ηρ-paths internally-disjoint of T is a δ-ηρ-spine, if S =
l 1 2
i=1 Pi is a minimal δ-ηρ-separator of T . ext(Y ) denotes the endpoints set of
all paths in Y .

4.2 Approximation Lemma

Using those definitions we prove that for any 0 < δ ≤ 12 , any spanning tree T of
G and any δ-ηρ-spine Y of T , there exists a |ext(Y )|-star with communication
1
cost bounded by 1−δ C(T ). This lemma, together with lemma 4 are the basis of
the main result of this work.
Lemma 2. Given 0 < δ ≤ 12 , a spanning tree T of G and a δ-ηρ-spine Y of T ,
there exists a |ext(Y )|-star X of G satisfying C(X) ≤ 1−δ
1
C(T ).

In order to conclude that result, first we use the following three propositions3 .
Proposition 2. Given 0 < δ ≤ 12 a δ-ηρ-path P of a δ-ηρ-spine of a spanning
tree T of G, then:
 
f l l f
(R + n − ηPm − ρm
P ) ηP ρP + ηP ρP ω(P )
    
+ ηPl + ρlP ω(P ) ηPm ρfP + ηPf ρm P + RN l (P ) + nRl (P )
 
f f   m l l m
 
+ ηP + ρP ω(P ) ηP ρP + ηP ρP + RNf (P ) + nRf (P )
6 + 5δ  
≤ (R + n) ηPf ρlP + ηPl ρfP + ηPi ρm m i
P + ηP ρP ω(P )
6     
+ (R + n) ηPs − ηPi R(P ) + ρsP − ρiP N (P ) .
Proposition 3. Given 0 < δ ≤ 12 , a spanning tree T of G and a δ-ηρ-spine Y
of T , there exists a |ext(Y )|-star X of G which satisfies:
 f 
C(X) ≤ ηP ρlP + ρfP ηPl ω(P ) + min {Δf l (P ), Δlf (P )}
P ∈Y
 
+R d(T, u, S) + (n − 2) r(u)d(T, u, S).
u∈VG u∈VG
3
The proofs of the propositions are intricate and do not bring any new insight into
the problem, also they can be found in the full version of the paper.
16 S.V. Ravelo and C.E. Ferreira

Where Δwz (P) = ω(P ) (ηPm ρw m w

P + ρP ηP ) + RNz (P ) + (n − 2)Rz (P ), w, z ∈
{f, l}, and S = P ∈Y P .
Observe that the result above shows the existence of a |ext(Y )|-star X of G
(which comes from a δ-ηρ-spine Y of a spanning tree of G) and also gives us an
upper bound for the associated communication cost of X. The next proposition
gives us a lower bound for the communication cost of a spanning tree of G.
Proposition 4. Given 0 < δ ≤ 12 , a spanning tree T of G and a δ-ηρ-spine Y
of T , then:
 
C(T ) ≥ ρlP ηPf + ρfP ηPl + ρiP ηPm + ηPi ρm
P ω(P )
P ∈Y
   
+ ηPs − ηPi R(P ) + ρsP − ρiP N (P )
P ∈Y
 
+(1 − δ) n r(u)d(T, u, S) + R d(T, u, S) .
u∈VG u∈VG

Where S = P ∈Y P.
Now we demonstrate the lemma 2, which states that if we are given a δ-ηρ-
spine Y of a spanning tree T , then we can construct a star whose core lies on
1
ext(Y ), such that its communication cost is bounded by 1−δ C(T ).

Proof. Let S = P ∈Y P be the minimal δ-ηρ-separator associated with Y and
X the |ext(Y )|-star of G given by proposition 3, then:
 f 
C(X) ≤ ηP ρlP + ρfP ηPl ω(P ) + min {Δf l (P ), Δlf (P )}
P ∈Y
 
+R d(T, u, S) + (n − 2) r(u)d(T, u, S)
u∈VG u∈VG
 R + n − ρm − η m  f 
≤ P
m
P
m ηP ρlP + ρfP ηPl ω(P ) + min {Δf l (P ), Δlf (P )}
R + n − ρP − ηP
P ∈Y
 
+R d(T, u, S) + n r(u)d(T, u, S).
u∈VG u∈VG

Since the minimum between two numbers is less than or equal to their weighted
median, we have:
 R + n − ρm − η m  f 
C(X) ≤ P
m
P
m ηP ρlP + ρfP ηPl ω(P )
R + n − ρP − ηP
P ∈Y
 ηPl + ρlP ηPf + ρfP
+ Δf l (P ) + Δlf (P )
ηPl + ρlP + ηPf + ρfP
P ∈Y ηPl + ρlP + ηPf + ρfP
 
+R d(T, u, S) + n r(u)d(T, u, S).
u∈VG u∈VG
Another random document with
no related content on Scribd:
From the mountains on the east danger was threatened by a number
of restless tribes. The advantages of this salient were by no means
lost on Cæsar, nor the central position which it afforded. He utilized it
in the same fashion as Napoleon did Switzerland in 1800. His first
war, against the Helvetii, was intended to and resulted in protecting
the right flank of the salient, an absolute essential to safety in
advancing into north or north-west Gaul. From this point, duly
secured, northerly, the Rhine, and the Jura and Vosegus mountains
protected in a marked degree the right of an advancing army,
provided the tribes west of this river were not unfriendly; and it will be
noticed that one of Cæsar’s early efforts was directed to winning the
friendship of these tribes by generous treatment and effective
protection against their German enemies. When he could not so
accomplish his end he resorted to drastic measures. Cæsar thus
advanced his salient along the Mosa as far as the Sabis, and could
then debouch from the western watershed of the Mosa down the
valleys of the Matrona and Axona with perfect safety. For, besides
the friendship of the near-by tribes, he always kept strongly fortified
camps among them. The line of the Axona thus furnished him an
advanced base from which to operate against the Belgæ, and from
their territory, once gained, safely move even so far as Britain, if he
but protected his rear and accumulated provisions. Having subdued
the Belgæ he could turn to the south-west corner of Gaul, against
Aquitania. Cæsar thus exemplified in the fullest degree the
advantage in grand strategy of central lines of operation. And his
most serious work was devoted to establishing this central salient by
alliance or conquest. Once gained, this simplified his operations to
isolated campaigns.
There is nothing more noteworthy in all military history than
Cæsar’s broad conception of the Gallic problem, nor more
interesting than his self-education. It is true that a soldier is born, but
he has also to be made; and Cæsar made himself more distinctly
than the others. He began with his native ability alone. He went to
school as Cæsar in the Gallic War. He graduated as one of the six
great captains. Cæsar was always numerically weaker than the
enemy, but far stronger in every other quality, especially in self-
confidence and capacity for work. His legionaries would bear
anything, and could do anything. They were very Yankees for
ingenuity. Cæsar did not mix Gallic allies with his legions, as
Alexander or Hannibal mixed natives with their phalanxes. He
employed only native bowmen in addition to his native cavalry. He
worked his army well concentrated. If he divided his forces it was but
for a short time, soon to concentrate again. But he improved every
chance to attack the enemy before he had concentrated. Speed of
foot, with Cæsar, stood in place of numbers. His objective was
always well chosen, and was either the most important point, or
more commonly, the army of the enemy.
It was impossible that during this period of schooling, Cæsar
should not make blunders—grave ones; but all his errors bore fruit,
and raised the tone of both consul and legions. One can see, step by
step, how success and failure each taught its lesson; how native
ability came to the surface; how the man impressed his individuality
on whatever he did; and how intelligence led him to apply whatever
he learned to his future policy. No praise is too high for the conduct
or moral qualities of the army. From Cæsar down, through every
grade, military virtue was pronounced. In organization and discipline,
ability to do almost any work, endurance of danger and trial,
toughness and manhood, it was a model to the rest of Rome. And
not only his legionaries, but his auxiliary troops were imbued with the
same spirit,—all breathed not only devotion to Cæsar, but reflected
his own great qualities.
Cæsar had some worthy opponents. Vercingetorix, Ariovistus,
Casivelaunus, were, each in his own way, able leaders. That they
were overcome by Cæsar was to be expected. Disciplined troops
well led cannot but win against barbarians. The end could not be
otherwise. And while the Gallic War does not show Cæsar—as the
second Punic War did Hannibal—opposed to the strongest military
machine in existence, it did show him opposed to generals and
troops quite equal to most of those encountered by Alexander. The
Gauls must not be underrated. They were distinctly superior to most
uncivilized nations. Some of their operations, and all of their fighting,
call for genuine admiration. They contended nobly for their
independence. Defeat never permanently discouraged them. Once
put down, they again rose in assertion of their liberty, so soon as the
strong hand was removed. They were in no sense to be despised,
and while Cæsar’s army proved superior to them, yet, in their
motives and hearty coöperation, they were more commendable than
Cæsar pursuing his scheme of conquest.
Anarchy in Rome and his disagreement with Pompey brought
about the Civil War; this immediately succeeded the Gallic. Cæsar
was ready for it. Pompey practically controlled the whole power of
Rome. Cæsar had only his twelve legions. But these were veterans
used to victory, and belonged to him body and soul. He could do with
them whatever he chose. Cæsar was the embodiment of success,
and fresh legions were sure to spring up at his approach. Pompey
lived on his past fame; Cæsar, on to-day’s. Pompey had made no
preparation; Cæsar was armed and equipped. Pompey controlled
vast resources, but they were not ready to hand. What Cæsar had
was fit. Moreover, Cæsar was shrewd enough to keep the apparent
legal right upon his side, as well as constantly to approach Pompey
with proposals for peace, which, however, he was no doubt aware
Pompey would not accept.
Pompey was a man of ability, but age, as is not uncommon, had
sapped his power of decision. He began by a fatal mistake. Instead
of meeting Cæsar on his native soil, and fighting there for Rome, he
moved to Greece so soon as Cæsar reached his front, and left the
latter to supplant him in the political and armed control of Italy.
Cæsar was wont to push for his enemy as objective, and one
would expect to see him follow Pompey to Greece, for it is a maxim,
and maxims are common sense, first to attack the most dangerous
part of your enemy’s divided forces. But there were seven Pompeian
legions left in Spain, and fearing that these might fall upon his rear,
Cæsar concluded to turn first toward the peninsula, relying on
Pompey’s hebetude to remain inactive where he stood. He knew his
man.
 CIVIL WAR
It had taken but sixty days for Cæsar to make himself master of
all Italy. In six weeks after reaching Spain, by a brilliant series of
manœuvres near Ilerda, in which he utilized every mistake Pompey’s
lieutenants made, and without battle, for he wished to be looked on
as anxious to avoid the spilling of Roman blood, he had neutralized
and disbanded the seven legions. This accomplishment of his object
by manœuvres instead of fighting is one of the very best examples of
its kind in antiquity, and is equal to any of Hannibal’s. Meanwhile,
Pompey had not lifted a hand against him. This was good luck; but
was it not fitting that fortune should attend such foresight, activity,
and skill?
Cæsar returned to Italy. He was now ready to follow his enemy
across to Epirus. Pompey controlled the sea with his five hundred
vessels. Cæsar had no fleet, and, curiously enough, had neglected,
in the past few months, to take any steps to create one. And yet he
determined to cross from Brundisium to the coast of Greece by sea.
It is odd that he did not rather march by land, through Illyricum, thus
basing himself on his own province; for a large part of his legions
was already on the Padus. But he chose the other means, and
when, with half his force, he had stolen across, Pompey’s fleet
dispersed his returning transports, and so patrolled the seas that he
commanded the Adriatic between the two halves of Cæsar’s army.
This was not clever management. Cæsar was in grave peril, and
simply by his own lack of caution. If Pompey concentrated he could
crush him by mere weight. But, nothing daunted, Cæsar faced his
opponent and for many months skilfully held his own.
Finally, Antonius, with the other half, eluded the Pompeian fleet
and reached the coast, where, by an able series of marches, Cæsar
made his junction with him. He even now had but about half
Pompey’s force, but despite this he continued to push his adversary
by superior activity and intelligence, and actually cooped him up in
siege-lines near Dyrrachium. This extraordinary spectacle of Cæsar
bottling up Pompey, who had twice his force (May, 48), by lines of
circumvallation sixteen miles long, borders on the ridiculous, and
well illustrates his moral superiority. But so bold a proceeding could
not last. Combats became frequent, and grew in importance. The
first battle of Dyrrachium was won by Cæsar. The second proved
disastrous, but still Cæsar held on. The third battle was a decisive
defeat for Cæsar, but this great man’s control over his troops was
such that he withdrew them in good condition and courage, and
eluded Pompey’s pursuit. In fact, the defeat both shamed and
encouraged his legionaries. Cæsar’s position and plan had been so
eccentric that it was from the beginning doomed to failure. It was one
of those cases where his enterprise outran his discretion.
Cæsar now moved inland, to gain elbow-room to manœuvre.
Pompey followed, each drawing in his outlying forces. The rival
armies finally faced each other at Pharsalus.
Pompey commanded a force sufficient to hold Cæsar at his
mercy. So certain were his friends of victory that already they saw
their chief at the head of the Roman state, and quarrelled about the
honors and spoils. The cry to be led against Cæsar grew among
soldiers and courtiers alike.
Pompey believed that Cæsar’s troops were not of the best; that
he had few Gallic veterans; that his young soldiers could not stand
adversity; that his own cavalry was superior to Cæsar’s; and that
with the preponderance of numbers there could be no doubt of
victory. There was abundant reason for his belief. But one lame
premise lay in his argument. He forgot that he had Cæsar in his
front. The great weakness in Pompey’s army was the lack of one
head, one purpose to control and direct events.
Cæsar, on the other hand, was his army. The whole body was
instinct with his purpose. From low to high all worked on his own
method. He controlled its every mood and act. He was the main-
spring and balance-wheel alike. And he now felt that he could again
rely upon his legions,—perhaps better than before their late defeat.
He proposed to bring Pompey to battle.
The test soon came. In the battle of Pharsalus (Aug. 48) Pompey
was, by tactical ability on Cæsar’s part and by the disgraceful
conduct of his own cavalry, wholly defeated; fifteen thousand of his
army were killed and twenty-four thousand captured. Pompey
himself fled to Egypt, where he was murdered. In eighteen months
from taking up arms, Cæsar had made himself master of the world
by defeating the only man who disputed him this title.
Cæsar now committed one of those foolhardy acts of which
several mar his reputation for wisdom, and from which only “Cæsar’s
luck” delivered him. He followed Pompey to Egypt with but three
thousand men, and attempted to dictate to the Government. In
consequence of this heedless proceeding, he and this handful—he,
the man who disposed of the forces of the whole world—were
beleaguered in Alexandria by an Egyptian army for eight months,
until he could procure the assistance of allies. He was finally rescued
by Mithridates, King of Pergamus, and the Egyptians were defeated
at the battle of the Nile.
The months thus wasted by Cæsar’s lack of caution gave the
Pompeian party a breathing-spell and the opportunity of taking fresh
root in Africa. This was what necessitated the two additional
campaigns, one in Africa and one in Spain. Had Cæsar, immediately
after Pharsalus, turned sharply upon Pompey’s adherents; or had he
taken four or five legions with him to Alexandria; or had he put aside
the question of the rule of Egypt by a temporizing policy, and turned
to the more important questions at hand, he would have saved
himself vast future trouble.
The force he carried with him was absurdly inadequate. By
extreme good luck alone was he able to seize the citadel and
arsenal, and the tower on the Pharos, and thus save himself from
collapse. “There seems to be nothing remarkable about the
campaign,” says Napoleon. “Egypt might well have become, but for
Cæsar’s wonderful good fortune, the very grave of his reputation.”
Cæsar was now called against Pharnaces, King of Pontus, who,
during the distractions of the Civil War, was seeking to enlarge his
territory. It was this five days’ campaign (Aug. 47) which led Cæsar
to exclaim, “Veni, Vidi, Vici!” And here again he committed the
blunder of opening a campaign with too small a force, and came
within an ace of failure. Fortune saved Alexander in many acts of
rashness; she was called on to rescue Cæsar from many acts of
folly.
Cæsar had barely arrived in Rome when his presence was
demanded in Africa to put down the coalition of Pompey’s
lieutenants; and for the fourth time he was guilty of the same
imprudence. In his over-ardor to reach the scene, he gave indefinite
orders to his fleet, and once more landed on the African coast with
but three thousand men in his immediate command, while the enemy
had near at hand quadruple the force, and along the coast, within
two or three days’ march, some fifty thousand men. But again
Cæsar’s audacity stood in stead of legions, and gradually
reënforcements came to hand (Dec. 47). Time fails to follow up this
campaign. Full of all that characterizes the great man and greater
captain, it not only excites our wonder, but puzzles us by alternate
hypercaution and intellectual daring. After a series of movements
extending over four months, during which he made constant use of
field fortifications, much in our own manner, Cæsar absolutely
overthrew the Pompeians (Apr. 46) at Thapsus and dispersed the
coalition to the winds. Only the two sons of Pompey in Spain
remained in arms.
 An interesting fact in the campaigns of Cæsar, which cannot but
impress itself on every American soldier, is the handiness of Cæsar’s
legionaries in the use of pick and shovel. These entrenching tools,
quite apart from fortifying the daily camp, seemed to be as important
to the soldiers as their weapons or their shields. They often dug
themselves into victory.
Cæsar’s manœuvring and fighting were equally good. The
reason for some of his entrenching in Africa is hard to comprehend.
Cæsar was a fighter in his way, but he often appeared disinclined to
fight, even when his men were in the very mood to command
success. He was so clever at manœuvring that he seemed to desire,
for the mere art of the thing, to manœuvre his enemy into a corner
before attack. His pausing at the opening of the battle of Thapsus
has led to the remark, that while he prepared for the battle, it was his
men who won it.
We cannot follow the Spanish campaign, which ended Cæsar’s
military exploits, and which came to an end in the remarkable battle
of Munda (March, 45), of which Cæsar remarked that he had often
fought for victory, but here fought for life. We must treat of the man
rather than events.
Cæsar had the inborn growth of the great captain. In the Civil
War he made fewer errors than in the Gallic. His operations, all
things considered, were well-nigh faultless. He first chose Rome, the
most important thing, as his objective; and in sixty days, by mere
moral ascendant, had got possession of the city. The enemy was on
three sides of him, Spain, Africa, Greece,—he occupying the central
position, and this he was very quick to see. He turned first on Spain,
meanwhile holding Italy against Pompey by a curtain of troops.
Spain settled, he moved over to Epirus with a temerity from which
arch luck alone could save him, and, victorious here, he turned on
Africa. There is no better example in history of the proper use of
central lines on a gigantic scale, though the first recognition of these
is often ascribed to Napoleon. In these splendid operations Cæsar
made repeated errors of precipitancy,—at Dyrrachium, at Alexandria,
in Pontus, in Africa. That, despite these errors, he was still victorious
in so comparatively short a time he owes to his extraordinary ability,
his simply stupendous good fortune, and the weakness of his
opponents. In success he was brilliant, in disaster strong and elastic,
and he never weakened in morale. It is adversity which proves the
man.
Cæsar’s strategy was broad and far-seeing. His tactics were
simple. There are no striking examples in his battles of tactical
formations like Epaminondas’ oblique order at Leuctra, Alexander’s
wedge at Arbela, Hannibal’s withdrawing salient at Cannæ. Though
the military writers of this age exhibit great technical familiarity with
tactical formations, Cæsar was uniformly simple in his.
From the beginning Cæsar grew in every department of the art
of war. In strategy, tactics, fortification, sieges, logistics, he showed
larger ability at the end of his career than at any previous time. To his
personality his soldiers owed all they knew and all they were.
Remarkable for discipline, esprit de corps, adaptiveness, toughness,
patience in difficulty, self-denial, endurance and boldness in battle,
attachment to and confidence in their general, his legionaries were
an equal honor to Cæsar and to Rome, as they were a standing
reproach to Roman rottenness in their splendid soldierly qualities.
Pompey’s men could not compare with them in any sense, and this
was because Pompey had made his soldiers and Cæsar had made
his.
It is difficult to compare Cæsar with Alexander or Hannibal. To
make such comparison leads towards the trivial. A few of their
marked resemblances or differences can alone be pointed out and
their elemental causes suggested; every one must draw his own
conclusions; and the fact that the equipment of all great captains is
the same will excuse apparent iteration of military virtues.
In Cæsar we can hardly divorce the ambitious statesman from
the soldier. We are apt to lose sight of the soldier proper. The two
characters are closely interwoven. In the motive of his labors Cæsar
is unlike Alexander or Hannibal. He strove, in Gaul, solely for military
power; after Pharsalus he worked with the ample power so gained.
Hannibal was never anything but a subordinate of the Carthaginian
Senate. He had no political ambition whatever; military success was
his sole aim,—and this on patriotic grounds. Alexander was a
monarch ab initio. His inspiration was the love of conquest,—the
greed of territory, if you like,—but as a king.
As a soldier, pure and simple, however, Cæsar is on an equal
level, though his campaigns were markedly colored by his political
aspirations. Hannibal employed state-craft to further his warlike
aims; Cæsar waged war to further his political aims. Alexander had
no political aims. His ambition was to conquer; to make Macedon the
mistress of the world, as he was master of Macedon, and then to
weld his dominions into one body. Rome was already mistress of the
world, and Cæsar aimed to make himself master of Rome. Each had
his own motive as a keynote.
In personal character, Hannibal stands higher than either. His
ambition was purely for Carthage. The man was always merged in
the patriot. He himself could acquire no greatness, rank, or power.
His service of his country after Zama abundantly demonstrates
Hannibal’s lofty, self-abnegating public spirit. What we know of
Hannibal is derived, mostly, from Roman writers, and these are, of
necessity, prejudiced. How could they be otherwise towards a man
who for more than half a generation had humiliated their country as
she had never been humiliated before? But in reading between the
lines you readily discover what manner of soldier and man Hannibal
truly was.
In personal attributes there is a divinity which hedges Alexander
beyond all others. Despite his passionate outbursts and their often
lamentable consequences, a glamour surrounds him unlike any hero
of antiquity. But in mind and will, in true martial bearing, all are alike.
The conduct of each is equally a pattern to every soldier.
Alexander and Hannibal, from youth up, led a life of simplicity
and exercise, and their physique, naturally good, became adapted to
their soldier’s work. Cæsar led the youth of a man of the world, and
was far from strong at birth. He did, however, curb his pleasure to his
ambition until he grew easily to bear the fatigue incident to the
command of armies. Throughout life he accomplished a fabulous
amount of work, mental and physical. His nervous force was
unparalleled.
Intelligence and character were alike pronounced in all. But
Alexander, perhaps because young, exceeded Cæsar and Hannibal
in fire and in unreasoning enthusiasm. Hannibal possessed far more
quiet wisdom, power of weighing facts, and valor tempered with
discretion. In Cæsar we find an unimpassioned pursuit of his one
object with cold, calculating brain-tissue, and all the vigor of body
and soul put at the service of his purpose to control the power of the
Roman State.
In each, the will and intellect were balanced, as they must be in
a great captain. But in Alexander, the will often outran the
intelligence; in Hannibal the intelligence occasionally overruled the
ambition to act; in Cæsar it was now one, now the other bias which
took the upper hand. Alexander was always daring, never cautious.
Hannibal was always cautious, often daring. Cæsar was over-daring
and over-cautious by turns. This is perhaps to an extent due to the
ages of each, already given,—twenty-five, thirty-four, fifty-two.
Each possessed breadth, depth, strength, energy, persistent
activity throughout his entire career, a conception covering all fields,
a brain able to cope with any problem. But in Alexander we find
these qualities coupled with the effervescence of imaginative youth;
in Hannibal, with singular sharpness and the judgment of maturity; in
Cæsar, with the cool circumspection of years, not unmixed with a
buoyant contempt of difficulty. The parts of each were equally
developed by education. By contact with the world, perhaps most in
Cæsar, least in Hannibal.
The high intellectuality of each is shown in the art of their plans,
in their ability to cope with difficult problems in the cabinet, and work
them out in the field; and with this went daring, caution, zeal,
patience, nervous equipoise which never knew demoralization. With
each, intelligence and decision grew with the demand. They were
never overtaxed. Strain made them the more elastic. Danger lent
them the greater valor. With each the brain worked faster and more
precisely the graver the test. As good judgment became more
essential, the power rightly to judge increased.
All were equally alert, untiring, vigilant, indomitable. But
Alexander was sometimes carried beyond the bounds of reason by
his defiance of danger. Cæsar’s intellectual powers were more
pronounced in action than his physical. Hannibal was always, in
brain and heart, the true captain; remembering his own necessity to
his cause, but remembering also the necessity to his cause of
victory.
All maintained discipline at an equal standard. All fired their
soldiers to the utmost pitch in battle, all encouraged them to bear
privation in the field, and bore it with them. All equally won their
soldiers’ hearts. All obtained this control over men by scrupulous
care of their army’s welfare, courage equal to any test, readiness to
participate in the heat and labor of the day, personal magnetism,
justice in rewards and punishments, friendliness in personal
intercourse, and power of convincing men. In what they said,
Alexander and Hannibal spoke plain truths plainly. Cæsar was a
finished orator. But Cæsar and Alexander were so placed as readily
to win the hearts of their soldiers. That Hannibal did so, and kept the
fealty of his motley crowd of many nationalities throughout thirteen
long years of disaster, is one of the phenomenal facts of history.
Personal indifference or cruelty can not be charged to the score
of any one of them. Each gave frequent proof that he possessed
abundant human kindness. But Alexander was at times guilty of acts
of brutality and injustice. To Hannibal’s score can be put nothing of
the kind. Cæsar by no means lacked the gentler virtues. Some claim
for him sweetness equal to his genius. But he exhibited in the Gallic
War a singularly blunted conscience. Peoples were mere stepping-
stones to his progress. Judging Cæsar solely by his Commentaries,
there goes hand in hand with a chivalrous sense a callousness
which is unapproached. He could be liberal in his personal dealings,
and unfeeling in his public acts; magnanimous and ruthless.
Alexander and Hannibal were ambitious, but nobly so, and
generous withal. Cæsar’s ambition more nearly approached egotism.
It was not honor, but power, he sought. Not that he loved Rome less,
but Cæsar more. He was satisfied with nothing falling short of
absolute control. But Cæsar was not miserly. Gold was only counted
as it could contribute to his success. He was as lavish in the use of
money as he was careless of his methods of getting it. So far as
native generosity was concerned, Cæsar had, perhaps, as much as
either of the others.
All three were keen in state-craft. But Alexander was frankly
above-board in his dealings. Hannibal kept his own counsel, making
no promises, nor giving his confidence to any. Cæsar was able, but
underhanded whenever it suited his purpose. He could be more
cunning in negotiation than even Hannibal, because less scrupulous.
He could exert his powers to bring the wavering or inimical to his
side in a most faultless manner.
In accomplishing vast results with meagre means, Alexander
apparently did more than either Hannibal or Cæsar in contending
with savage or semi-civilized tribes. The difference in numbers
between Alexander and the Oriental armies he met was greater, as a
rule, than anything Cæsar had to encounter. Yet on one or two
occasions, as at the River Axona and at Alesia, Cæsar was faced by
overwhelming odds. Hannibal was the only one of the three who
contended against forces better armed, better equipped, more
intelligent, and ably led. There is no denying him the palm in this. Of
all the generals the world has ever seen, Hannibal fought against the
greatest odds. Alexander never encountered armies which were
such in the sense the Macedonian army was. Cæsar fought both
against barbarians and against Romans. Not equal, perhaps, in his
contests with the former, to Alexander, he was never taxed with such
opponents as was Hannibal. It is difficult to say that either of the
three accomplished more with slender means than the other. To
reduce them to the level of statistics savors of the absurd.
Each devoted scrupulous care to the welfare of his troops; to
feeding, clothing, and arming them; to properly resting them in winter
quarters, or after great exertions, and to watching their health.
 Fortune, that fickle jade, was splendid Alexander’s constant
companion from birth till death. She forsook patient Hannibal after
Cannæ, and thenceforward persistently frowned upon him. She
occasionally left brilliant Cæsar,—but it was for a bare moment,—
she always returned to save him from his follies, and was, on the
whole, marvellously constant to him. Cæsar had to work for his
results harder than Alexander, but in no sense like overtaxed,
indomitable Hannibal. Alexander will always remain essentially the
captain of fortune; Hannibal essentially the captain of misfortune;
Cæsar holds a middle place. But had not Fortune on many
occasions rushed to the rescue Cæsar would never have lived to be
Cæsar.
In common, these three great men obtained their results by their
organized system of war, that is, war founded on a sound theory,
properly worked out. To-day war has been reduced to a science
which all may study. Alexander knew no such science, nor Hannibal,
nor indeed Cæsar. What was, even so late as Cæsar’s day, known
as the art of war, covered merely the discipline of the troops, camp
and permanent fortifications, sieges according to the then existing
means, and the tactics of drill and battle. What has come down to
this generation, as a science, is a collection of the deeper lessons of
these very men and a few others, reduced during the past century by
able pens to a form which is comprehensible. Even Napoleon was
annoyed at Jomini’s early publications, lest the world and his
opponents should learn his methods of making war. We must
remember that these captains of ancient times were great primarily,
because they created what Napoleon calls methodical war. It was
many centuries before any one understood the secret of their
success. But Gustavus, Frederick, and Napoleon guessed the secret
and wrought according to it; and they made war in a day when busy
brain-tissue could analyze their great deeds for the benefit of
posterity.
Whatever their terms for designating their operations, the great
captains of antiquity always had a safe and suitable base; always
secured their rear, flanks, and communications; always sought the
most important points as objective, generally the enemy himself; and
divided their forces only for good reasons, at the proper moment
again to bring them together. We find in their history few infractions
of the present maxims of war, and only such as a genius is justified
in making, because he feels his ability to dictate to circumstances.
War to these men was incessant labor, never leisure. It was only
at rare intervals that they stopped even to gather breath; and this
done, their work was again resumed with double vigor. Each sought
to do that which his enemy least expected, and looked upon no
obstacle as too great to be overcome. Each was careful in the matter
of logistics, according to the existing conditions. Each was careful to
husband his resources, and each had a far-reaching outlook on the
future.
Their battle tactics were alike in suiting the means at disposal to
the end to be accomplished, and in originating new methods of
disturbing the equipoise of the enemy, and thus leading up to his
defeat. Each of them used his victories to the utmost advantage.
Even Hannibal, though after the first few years he was unable to
reap any harvest from his wonderful work, continued his campaign
by occasional minor victories, while awaiting recognition from home.
Alexander’s and Cæsar’s victories were uniformly decisive; from the
very nature of the case, Hannibal’s could not be so.
In field fortification, Cæsar was far in the lead. At a long interval
followed Hannibal. Alexander made little or no use of this method of
compelling victory. In regular sieges, both Alexander and Cæsar
stand much higher than Hannibal, who disliked siege-work, and
whose only brilliant example is the siege of Saguntum. Nor can this
compare with Tyre or Alesia.
What has Cæsar done for the art of war? Nothing beyond what
Alexander and Hannibal had done before him. But it has needed, in
the history of war, that ever and anon there should come a master
who could point the world to the right path of methodical war from
which it is so easy to stray. Nothing shows this better than the fact
that, for seventeen centuries succeeding Cæsar, there was no great
captain. There were great warriors,—men who did great deeds, who
saved Europe “from the civil and religious yoke of the Koran,” as
Charles Martel did at Tours, or England from the craft of Rome and
power of Philip, as Howard, Drake, and Hawkins did in destroying
the Invincible Armada,—men who changed the course of the world’s
events. But these were not great captains, in the sense that they
taught us lessons in the art of war. The result of their victories was
vast; but from their manner of conducting war we can learn nothing.
Cæsar is of another stamp. In every campaign there are many
lessons for the student of to-day. In his every soldierly attribute,
intellectual and moral, we find something to invite imitation. It is
because Cæsar waged war by the use of purely intellectual means,
backed up by a character which overshadowed all men he ever met,
that he is preëminent. Conquerors and warriors who win important
battles, even battles decisive of the world’s history, are not, of
necessity, great in this sense. All that Alexander, or Hannibal, or
Cæsar would need in order to accomplish the same results in our
day and generation which they accomplished before the Christian
era, would be to adapt their work to the present means, material, and
conditions. And it is the peculiar qualification of each that he was
able, under any and all conditions, to fuse into success the elements
as they existed, by the choice from the means at hand of those
which were peculiarly suited to the bearings of the time.
Cæsar was tall and spare. His face was mobile and intellectual.
He was abstinent in diet, and of sober habit. As a young man he had
been athletic and noted as a rider. In the Gallic campaigns he rode a
remarkable horse which no one else could mount. He affected the
society of women. His social character was often a contrast to his
public acts. He was a good friend, a stanch enemy, affable and high-
bred. As a writer, he was simple, direct, convincing; as an orator,
second to no one but Cicero. No doubt Cæsar’s life-work was as
essential in the Roman economy as it was admirably rounded. But
that he was without reproach, as he certainly was without fear, can
scarcely be maintained.
In leaving Cæsar, we leave the last great captain of ancient
times, and, perhaps, taking his life-work,—which it has been outside
my province to dwell upon,—the greatest, though not the most
admirable, man who ever lived.
 L E C T U R E I V.
GUSTAVUS ADOLPHUS.

THE difference between ancient and modern war is marked, but

each is consistent with its conditions. In ancient days the armies of
the civilized nations were, as a rule, not large. They could generally
find sustenance wherever they moved, and were obliged to carry but
a few days’ victuals with them. Their arms were such as not only to
remain long fit for service, but they were capable of repair upon the
spot. Neither trains to carry provision and munitions of war were
essential, nor were fortified magazines for storing such material
indispensable. The communications of an army had not to be so
zealously guarded, for it could live and fight even if cut off from its
base. On the other hand, battle was of the utmost importance, and
the average campaign was but a march toward the enemy, a fight in
parallel order and a victory. A battle, owing to the short reach of
missiles, was of necessity a more or less hand-to-hand affair. First,
the light troops, archers and slingers, advanced like our skirmishers,
and opened the fighting. They were then withdrawn and the lines of
heavy foot advanced to within javelin-throwing distance. Here they
stood and cast their weapons, with which the light troops kept them
supplied. At intervals groups from the lines closed and the sword
was used, or the heavy thrusting pike. Meanwhile the cavalry, always
on the extreme wings, charged the enemy’s, and if it could defeat it,
wheeled in on the flanks of the infantry, and this was apt to decide
the day.
Once engaged, an army could not be withdrawn, as ours can be,
under cover of artillery, whose effective use from a distance over the
heads of the troops will retard or prevent the enemy’s pursuit. Battles
joined had to be fought out to the end. Thus victory to one was wont
to be annihilation to the other. From these simple conditions it
resulted that the art of war among the ancients was confined to
tactical values, or the evolutions of the battle-field, and to fortification
and sieges. The ancient military writings cover no other ground.
There was little conception of what we call strategy,—the art of so
moving armies over the surface of a country, that as great damage
may be done to the enemy as by battle, or at least that the enemy
may be so compromised as that a victory over him shall be a
decisive one. Strategy among the ancients was mere stratagem,—
except in the case of the great captains, whose genius made them
instinctively great strategists,—for strategy is the highest grade of
intellectual common sense. But the reasons for their strategic
movements were not understood by the rest of the world, as we to-
day can understand them. Others could not make sound strategic
manœuvres, and saw good in naught but battle.
From the time of Cæsar, there was a gradual decline in the
conduct of war, which he had so highly illustrated, and there is little,
from his age to the invention of gunpowder, which has any bearing of
value on the art to-day. There were great generals, there were
victories which changed the destinies of the world, but there was no
method in war. For many centuries there was scarcely such a thing
as an art of war. One might say that matters had reverted to the old
lack of system antedating Alexander.
After the discovery of gunpowder, however, there was a gradual
revival of scientific, or more properly methodical war, to which
Gustavus Adolphus gave the first intellectual impulse. The conditions
of warfare became completely changed by this great invention in
ballistics. Fire-arms soon got into the hands of both infantry and
cavalry. Artillery took on importance and effectiveness. Armies
became numerically stronger, depots for the needful materials were
established in their rear, and the troops were supplied from these
depots. This gave great importance to fortifying cities and to
fortresses, in which lay the provision and war material; and as
rations, ammunition, and stores had to be constantly brought from
these depots to the front,—to maintain the communications of the
armies with these strong places became a matter of primary
importance. For the loss of a great fortress containing the army’s
bread and powder and ball might have as grave consequences as
the loss of a battle,—even graver.
Armies, thus handicapped with heavier trains and with artillery-
parks, had less mobility, and were less fitted for pursuit than the old
troops, which could carry all they needed with them. Victories were
not followed up. Battles became less decisive, and dropped into
disuse. Strategy had not yet grown to be the science to which
Gustavus Adolphus, Frederick, and Napoleon elevated it, and
generals had not learned so to manœuvre as to make battles
decisive when won. Modern war, up to the days of Gustavus, was
clumsy and lacking in general scheme. It was rescued from this
condition by the Swedish king.
In antiquity, battle was the head and front of all things, and
armies were nimble and independent. In the seventeenth century, on
the contrary, the construction and preservation of fortresses and
depots, and communications with these, and operations against the
enemy’s fortresses, depots, and communications became the chief
study. This marked difference in system is shown in the military
literature of these periods. Any operations which lay outside of battle,
the ancients ascribed to the genius of the general, assumed that
these were subject to no method and could not be learned; or at best
classed them with mere stratagems. Their object and scope was not
understood, nor indeed considered of much moment. Older military
literature does not in any sense deal with them. Soldiers believed
that the whole success of war was based on courage and hard
knocks.
But about the time of the Thirty Years’ War, theorists had
discovered that there were other means, besides battle, of doing
harm to the enemy, and began to reduce such principles as they
could extract from the campaigns of the better generals to a
permanent form. Their work was, however, only partial and scrappy.
The most important document which first saw the light was Frederick
the Great’s “General Principles” or “Instructions” for his officers. This
paper, written before the Seven Years’ War and purposely kept in
manuscript for a number of years, was finally pirated and published
in 1753. It is a noble work. But Frederick’s deeds inspired a yet more
important one. Serving in the Austrian army as captain of light-horse,
was a young Welshman of good education and extraordinary
perceptions,—Henry Lloyd. This man’s inquiring mind was not
satisfied with the half-and-half explanations which the then military
books could give him of the wonderful exploits of the great king,
whose marvellous manœuvres he had so often followed on scouting
duty, and from which the Austrian army so bitterly suffered. He
began, with singular critical and analytical equipoise, to study these
and seek reasons for their success. He served under Ferdinand of
Brunswick in the two last campaigns of the Seven Years’ War, and
later was Major-general in the Russian army. He spent his old age in
Belgium. Among other works he wrote a “Military and Political
Memoir,” which contains the important part of his labors. It was
issued in 1780. The ground-work of our modern science of war is
therein laid down. It is the first work except Frederick’s in which are
exhibited in comprehensible form the true principles of conducting
war. It is here first pointed out that intellect and moral forces
combined go to make up the great captain. But what Lloyd says is
mainly applicable to his own times and conditions, and is not
exhaustive. He remarks that the art of war is, like all other art,
founded on well-settled rules, to which alterations can only be made
in the application. He divides it into two parts, the material, which can
be subjected to rules, and another part which one can neither limit
nor teach, and which consists in the ability to apply the rules of the
first part quickly and correctly under rapidly changing and various
circumstances. This is the same distinction which Napoleon draws
between what he aptly calls the terrestrial and the divine in the art.
The divine part, says he, embraces all that comes from the moral
forces of the character and talents, from the power to gauge your
adversary, to infuse confidence and spirit into the soldier, who will be
strong and victorious, feeble and beaten, according as he thinks he
is. The terrestrial part comprises the arms, entrenchments, orders of
battle, all which consists in the mere combination or use of everyday
matters. It is singular that this analysis of the art of the great soldier
is but one hundred years old, that only within three generations has
been recognized its divine part.