This paper was converted on www.awesomepapers.org from LaTeX by an anonymous user.
Want to know more? Visit the Converter page.

\DeclareLabelalphaTemplate\labelelement

inal]shorthand [strwidth=3,strside=left,ifnames=1]labelname trwidth=1,strside=left]labelname \labelelement

Graphs of bounded chordality

Aristotelis Chaniotis
Department of Combinatorics and Optimization

University of Waterloo
Waterloo Ontario N2L 3G1 Canada
Babak Miraftab
School of Computer Science

Carleton University
Ottawa Ontario K1S 5B6 Canada
Sophie Spirkl
Department of Combinatorics and Optimization
We acknowledge the support of the Natural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada (NSERC), [funding reference number RGPIN-2020-03912].
Cette recherche a été financée par le Conseil de recherches en sciences naturelles et en génie du Canada (CRSNG), [numéro de référence RGPIN-2020-03912].
This project was funded in part by the Government of Ontario.

University of Waterloo
Waterloo Ontario N2L 3G1 Canada
Abstract

A hole in a graph is an induced subgraph which is a cycle of length at least four. A graph is chordal if it contains no holes. Following McKee and Scheinerman (1993), we define the chordality of a graph GG to be the minimum number of chordal graphs on V(G)V(G) such that the intersection of their edge sets is equal to E(G)E(G). In this paper we study classes of graphs of bounded chordality.

In the 1970s, Buneman, Gavril, and Walter, proved independently that chordal graphs are exactly the intersection graphs of subtrees in trees. We generalize this result by proving that the graphs of chordality at most kk are exactly the intersection graphs of convex subgraphs of median graphs of tree-dimension kk.

A hereditary class of graphs 𝒜\mathcal{A} is χ\chi-bounded if there exists a function f:f\colon\mathbb{N}\rightarrow\mathbb{R} such that for every graph G𝒜G\in\mathcal{A}, we have χ(G)f(ω(G))\chi(G)\leq f(\omega(G)). In 1960, Asplund and Grünbaum proved that the class of all graphs of boxicity at most two is χ\chi-bounded. In his seminal paper “Problems from the world surrounding perfect graphs,” Gyárfás (1985), motivated by the above result, asked whether the class of all graphs of chordality at most two, which we denote by 𝒞𝔤𝒞\mathcal{C}\overset{\mathfrak{g}}{\cap}\mathcal{C}, is χ\chi-bounded. We discuss a result of Felsner, Joret, Micek, Trotter and Wiechert (2017), concerning tree-decompositions of Burling graphs, which implies an answer to Gyárfás’ question in the negative. We prove that two natural families of subclasses of 𝒞𝔤𝒞\mathcal{C}\overset{\mathfrak{g}}{\cap}\mathcal{C} are polynomially χ\chi-bounded.

Finally, we prove that for every k3k\geq 3 the kk-Chordality Problem, which asks to decide whether a graph has chordality at most kk, is \NP\NP-complete.

1 Introduction

For basic notions and notation not defined here we refer readers to [30]. In this paper we consider finite, undirected graphs with no loops or parallel edges. For a set SS we denote the power set of SS by 2S2^{S}, and the set of all size-two elements of 2S2^{S} by (S2)\binom{S}{2}. Let GG be a graph. We call a subset of V(G)V(G) a clique (respectively a stable set) of GG if it is a set of pairwise adjacent (respectively non-adjacent) vertices. A clique of size three is called a triangle. The clique number of GG, denoted by ω(G)\omega(G), is the maximum size of a clique in GG. For vertices u,vV(G)u,v\in V(G) a (u,v)(u,v)-path in GG is a path which has as ends the vertices uu and vv. A non-edge of GG is an element of the set (V(G)2)E(G)\binom{V(G)}{2}\setminus E(G). Given a graph HH we say that GG is HH-free (respectively contains HH) if it contains no (respectively contains an) induced subgraph isomorphic to HH. For a set XV(G)X\subseteq V(G), we denote by G[X]G[X] the subgraph of GG which is induced by XX. A class of graphs is hereditary if it is closed under isomorphism and under taking induced subgraphs.

Let G1,,GkG_{1},\ldots,G_{k} be graphs. Then, their intersection (respectively union), which we denote by i[k]Gi\cap_{i\in[k]}G_{i} (respectively i[k]Gi\cup_{i\in[k]}G_{i}), is the graph (i[k]V(Gi),i[k]E(Gi))(\cap_{i\in[k]}V(G_{i}),\cap_{i\in[k]}E(G_{i})) (respectively (i[k]V(Gi),i[k]E(Gi))(\cup_{i\in[k]}V(G_{i}),\cup_{i\in[k]}E(G_{i}))). Given graph classes 𝒢1,,𝒢k\mathcal{G}_{1},\ldots,\mathcal{G}_{k}, we denote by 𝒢1𝔤𝔤𝒢k\mathcal{G}_{1}\overset{\mathfrak{g}}{\cap}\ldots\overset{\mathfrak{g}}{\cap}\mathcal{G}_{k} the class {G:Gi𝒢i such that G=G1Gk}\{G:\exists G_{i}\in\mathcal{G}_{i}\text{ such that }G=G_{1}\cap\ldots\cap G_{k}\}, which we call the graph intersection of 𝒢1,,𝒢k\mathcal{G}_{1},\ldots,\mathcal{G}_{k}. The graph union of 𝒢1,,𝒢k\mathcal{G}_{1},\ldots,\mathcal{G}_{k}, which we denote by 𝒢1𝔤𝔤𝒢k\mathcal{G}_{1}\overset{\mathfrak{g}}{\cup}\ldots\overset{\mathfrak{g}}{\cup}\mathcal{G}_{k}, is the class {G:Gi𝒢i such that G=G1Gk}\{G:\exists G_{i}\in\mathcal{G}_{i}\text{ such that }G=G_{1}\cup\ldots\cup G_{k}\}.

Given a class of graphs 𝒜\mathcal{A} and a graph GG, we follow Kratochvíl and Tuza [17], and define the intersection dimension of GG with respect to 𝒜\mathcal{A} to be the minimum integer kk such that G𝔤i[k]𝒜G\in\overset{\mathfrak{g}}{\bigcap}_{i\in[k]}\mathcal{A} if such a kk exists, and ++\infty otherwise. We remark that the intersection dimension of graphs with respect to graph classes has been also studied by by Cozzens and Roberts [6] under a different name: they called a graph property PP dimensional if for every graph GG, the intersection dimension of GG with respect to the class 𝒜(P):={G:G has the property P}\mathcal{A}(P):=\{G:G\text{ has the property }P\} is finite. For a positive integer nn, we denote by KnK_{n} the complete graph on nn vertices, and by KnK_{n}^{-} the graph we obtain from KnK_{n} by deleting an edge. It is easy to observe that a graph property PP is dimensional if and only if for every for every positive integer nn, both the graphs KnK_{n} and KnK_{n}^{-} have the property PP.

A hole in a graph GG is an induced cycle of length at least four. A graph is chordal if it contains no holes, and we denote the class of chordal graphs by 𝒞\mathcal{C}. Following McKee and Scheinerman [20] we call the intersection dimension of a graph GG with respect to 𝒞\mathcal{C} the chordality of GG and we denote it by 𝖼𝗁𝗈𝗋(G)\mathsf{chor}(G). Since, for every positive integer nn, both the graphs KnK_{n} and KnK_{n}^{-} are chordal, it follows that the chordality of every graph is finite (and upper bounded by the number of its non-edges). To the best of our knowledge, chordality was first studied by Cozzens and Roberts [6] under the name rigid circuit dimension.

Given a finite family of nonempty sets 𝒮\mathcal{S}, the intersection graph of 𝒮\mathcal{S} is the graph which has as vertices the elements of 𝒮\mathcal{S} and two vertices are adjacent if and only if they have a non-empty intersection. Given a graph GG and a family 𝒮\mathcal{S} of subgraphs of GG, the intersection graph of 𝒮\mathcal{S} is the intersection graph of the family {V(H):H𝒮}\{V(H):H\in\mathcal{S}\}.

In the 1970s, Buneman [3], Gavril [12], and Walter [28, 29], proved independently that chordal graphs are exactly the intersection graphs of subtrees in trees. Let HH be a chordal graph. A tree TT is a representation tree of HH if there exists a function β:V(T)2V(H)\beta:V(T)\rightarrow 2^{V(H)} such that for every vV(H)v\in V(H), the subgraph T[β1(v)]T[\beta^{-1}(v)] of TT is connected, and HH is isomorphic to the intersection graph of the family {β1(v):vV(H)}\{\beta^{-1}(v):v\in V(H)\}. In this case we call the pair (T,β)(T,\beta) a representation of HH. By the aforementioned characterization of chordal graphs, it follows that every chordal graph has a representation. In Section 2, we prove a characterization of graphs of chordality at most kk which generalizes the above characterization of chordal graphs. We continue with some definitions before we state the main result of Section 2.

An interval graph is any graph which is isomorphic to the intersection graph of a family of intervals on the real line. We denote the hereditary class of interval graphs by \mathcal{I}. It is easy to see that the intersection graphs of subpaths in paths are exactly the interval graphs, and thus every interval graph is also chordal.

Let GG be a graph. A chordal completion (respectively interval completion) of GG is a supergraph of GG on the same vertex which is chordal (respectively interval). Since every complete graph is an interval graph, it follows that every graph has an interval and thus a chordal completion.

A tree-decomposition of GG is a representation (T,β)(T,\beta) of a chordal completion HH of GG. Fix a chordal completion HH of GG and a representation (T,β)(T,\beta) of HH. For every tV(T)t\in V(T), we call the set β(t)\beta(t) the bag of tt. It is easy to see that every bag is a clique of HH and that every clique of HH is contained in a bag of TT. We say that (T,β)(T,\beta) is a complete tree-decomposition of GG if for every tV(T)t\in V(T), the set β(t)\beta(t) is a clique of GG. If TT is a path, then HH is an interval completion of GG and we call tree-decomposition (T,β)(T,\beta) a path-decomposition of GG. It is easy to see that a graph has a complete tree-decomposition (respectively complete path-decomposition) if and only if it is chordal (respectively interval). The width of a tree-decomposition is the the clique number of the corresponding chordal completion minus one111The “minus one” in the definition of the width serves so that trees have tree-width one.. The tree-width (respectively path-width) of GG, denoted by 𝗍𝗐(G)\mathsf{tw}(G) (respectively 𝗉𝗐(G)\mathsf{pw}(G)) is the minimum width of a tree-decomposition (respectively path-decomposition) of GG. That is, 𝗍𝗐(G):=min{ω(H)1:H is a chordal completion of G}\mathsf{tw}(G):=\min\{\omega(H)-1:H\text{ is a chordal completion of }G\}, and 𝗉𝗐(G):=min{ω(I)1:I is an interval completion of G}\mathsf{pw}(G):=\min\{\omega(I)-1:I\text{ is an interval completion of }G\}. A tree-decomposition separates a non-edge ee if ee is a non-edge of the chordal completion which corresponds to this tree-decomposition. Let 𝒯\mathcal{T} be a family of tree-decompositions of GG. We say that 𝒯\mathcal{T} is a non-edge-separating family of tree-decompositions if for every non-edge ee of GG, there exists a tree-decomposition in 𝒯\mathcal{T} which separates ee.

Below is the main result of Section 2, we postpone some definitions for Section 2.

Theorem 1.1.

Let GG be a graph and kk be a positive integer. Then the following are equivalent:

  1. 1.

    The graph GG has chordality kk.

  2. 2.

    The minimum size of a non-edge-separating family of tree-decompositions of GG is kk.

  3. 3.

    kk is the minimum integer such that the graph GG is the intersection graph of a family of convex subgraphs of the Cartesian product of kk trees.

  4. 4.

    kk is the minimum integer such that the graph GG is the intersection graph of a family of convex subgraphs of a median graph of tree-dimension kk.

  5. 5.

    The graph GG has tree-median-dimension kk.

In Section 3 we focus on the chromatic number of graphs of bounded chordality.

For a positive integer kk we denote by [k][k] the set of integers {1,,k}\{1,\ldots,k\}. A kk-coloring of GG is a function f:V(G)[k]f\colon V(G)\rightarrow[k] such that for every i[k]i\in[k] we have that f1(i)f^{-1}(i) is a stable set. A graph is kk-colorable if it admits a kk-coloring, and the chromatic number of a graph GG, denoted by χ(G)\chi(G), is the minimum integer kk, for which GG is kk-colorable.

It is immediate that for every graph GG we have χ(G)ω(G)\chi(G)\geq\omega(G), and it is easy to see that there are graphs GG for which we have χ(G)>ω(G)\chi(G)>\omega(G) (for example odd cycles). Moreover, the gap between the chromatic number and the clique number can be arbitrarily large. Indeed, Tutte [7, 8] first proved in the 1940s that there exist triangle-free graphs of arbitrarily large chromatic number (for other such constructions see also [4, 21, 31]). Thus, in general, the chromatic number is not upper-bounded by a function of the clique number.

A graph GG is perfect if every induced subgraph HH of GG satisfies χ(H)=ω(H)\chi(H)=\omega(H). Berge [2] proved in 1960 that chordal graphs are perfect. What can we say for the connection between χ\chi and ω\omega for graphs of bounded chordality?

In his seminal paper “Problems from the world surrounding perfect graphs”, Gyárfás [15] introduced the χ\chi-bounded graph classes as “natural extensions of the world of perfect graphs”. We say that a hereditary class 𝒜\mathcal{A} is χ\chi-bounded if there exists a function f:f\colon\mathbb{N}\rightarrow\mathbb{R} such that for every graph G𝒜G\in\mathcal{A}, we have χ(G)f(ω(G))\chi(G)\leq f(\omega(G)). Such a function ff is called a χ\chi-bounding function for 𝒜\mathcal{A}. For more on χ\chi-boundedness we refer the readers to the surveys of Scott and Seymour [26], and Scott [25]. The examples of triangle-free graphs of arbitrarily large chromatic number that we mention above imply that the class of all graphs is not χ\chi-bounded.

A natural direction of research on χ\chi-boundedness is to consider operations that we can apply among graphs of different classes in order to obtain new classes of graphs, and study (from the perspective of χ\chi-boundedness) graph classes which are obtained via this way from χ\chi-bounded classes.

Gyárfás [15, Section 5] considered graph intersections and graph unions of χ\chi-bounded graph classes from the perspective of χ\chi-boundedness. Graph unions of χ\chi-bounded graph classes are χ\chi-bounded222It is easy to observe that for any two graphs G1G_{1} and G2G_{2}, we have χ(G1G2)χ(G1)χ(G2)\chi(G_{1}\cup G_{2})\leq\chi(G_{1})\chi(G_{2}) and that ω(G1G2)max{ω(G1),ω(G2)}\omega(G_{1}\cup G_{2})\geq\max\{\omega(G_{1}),\omega(G_{2})\}. Thus, if for each i[k]i\in[k] we have that fif_{i} is a χ\chi-bounding function for a class 𝒢i\mathcal{G}_{i}, then f:=i[k]fif:=\prod_{i\in[k]}f_{i} is a χ\chi-bounding function for the class 𝔤i[k]𝒢i\overset{\mathfrak{g}}{\bigcup}_{i\in[k]}\mathcal{G}_{i}.. The situation with intersections of graphs is different. In an upcoming paper two of us, in joint work with Rimma Hämäläinen and Hidde Koerts, study further the interplay between graph intersections and χ\chi-boundedness.

Since interval graphs are chordal, it follows that they are perfect as well. Following [23], we define the boxicity of GG to be the minimum integer kk such that GG is isomorphic to the intersection graph of a family of axis-aligned boxes in k\mathbb{R}^{k}. We denote the boxicity of a graph GG by 𝖻𝗈𝗑(G)\mathsf{box}(G). It easy to see that the boxicity kk of a graph is equal to its intersection dimension with respect to the class of interval graphs.

In 1965, in his Ph.D. thesis [4] Burling introduced a sequence {Bk}k1\{B_{k}\}_{k\geq 1} of families of axis-aligned boxes in 3\mathbb{R}^{3} such that for each kk the intersection graph of BkB_{k} is triangle-free and has chromatic number at least kk. Thus, for every k3k\geq 3 the class of all graphs of boxicity at most kk, that is, the class 𝔤i[k]\overset{\mathfrak{g}}{\bigcap}_{i\in[k]}\mathcal{I}, is not χ\chi-bounded. Hence, for every k3k\geq 3 the class of graphs of chordality at most kk is not χ\chi-bounded.

What about the class 𝒞𝔤𝒞\mathcal{C}\overset{\mathfrak{g}}{\cap}\mathcal{C}? Asplund and Grünbaum [1], in one of the first results which provides an upper bound of the chromatic number in terms of the clique number for a class of graphs, proved in 1960 that every intersection graph of axis-aligned rectangles in the plane with clique number ω\omega is 𝒪(ω2)\mathcal{O}(\omega^{2})-colorable. Hence the class 𝔤\mathcal{I}\overset{\mathfrak{g}}{\cap}\mathcal{I} is χ\chi-bounded (see also [5] for a better χ\chi-bounding function).

Since the class 𝔤\mathcal{I}\overset{\mathfrak{g}}{\cap}\mathcal{I} is χ\chi-bounded it is natural to ask whether any proper superclasses of this class are χ\chi-bounded as well. Gyárfás, asked the following question:

Problem 1.2 (Gyárfás, [15, Problem 5.7]).

Is the class 𝒞𝔤𝒞\mathcal{C}\overset{\mathfrak{g}}{\cap}\mathcal{C} χ\chi-bounded? In particular, is 𝒞𝔤\mathcal{C}\overset{\mathfrak{g}}{\cap}\mathcal{I} χ\chi-bounded?

In Subsection 3.1 we discuss a result of Felsner, Joret, Micek, Trotter and Wiechert [10] which implies that Burling graphs are contained in 𝒞𝔤\mathcal{C}\overset{\mathfrak{g}}{\cap}\mathcal{I}, and thus that the answer to Gyárfás’ question is negative.

In the rest of Section 3 we consider two families of subclasses of the class 𝒞𝔤𝒞\mathcal{C}\overset{\mathfrak{g}}{\cap}\mathcal{C}, which we prove are χ\chi-bounded. In Subsection 3.2 we prove the following:

Theorem 1.3.

Let k1k_{1} and k2k_{2} be positive integers, and let G1G_{1} and G2G_{2} be chordal graphs such that for each i[2]i\in[2] the graph GiG_{i} has a representation (Ti,βi)(T_{i},\beta_{i}), where 𝗉𝗐(Ti)ki\mathsf{pw}(T_{i})\leq k_{i}. If GG is a graph such that G=G1G2G=G_{1}\cap G_{2}, then GG is 𝒪(ω(G)log(ω(G)))(k1+1)(k2+2)\mathcal{O}(\omega(G)\log(\omega(G)))(k_{1}+1)(k_{2}+2)-colorable.

We remark that each of the classes which satisfies the assumptions of Theorem 1.3 is a proper superclass of 𝔤\mathcal{I}\overset{\mathfrak{g}}{\cap}\mathcal{I}.

Let uu and vv be two vertices of a graph GG. Then their distance, which we denote by d(u,v)d(u,v), is the length of a shortest (u,v)(u,v)-path in GG. A rooted tree is a tree TT with one fixed vertex rV(T)r\in V(T) which we call the root of TT. The height of a rooted tree TT with root rr is h(T,r):=max{d(r,t):tV(T)}h(T,r):=\max\{d(r,t):t\in V(T)\}. The radius of a tree TT, which we denote by 𝗋𝖺𝖽(T)\mathsf{rad}(T), is the nonnegative integer min{h(T,r):rV(T)}\min\{h(T,r):r\in V(T)\}. In Subsection 3.3 we prove the following:

Theorem 1.4.

Let kk be a positive integer, and let G1G_{1} and G2G_{2} be chordal graphs such that the graph G1G_{1} has a representation (T1,β1)(T_{1},\beta_{1}) where 𝗋𝖺𝖽(T1)k\mathsf{rad}(T_{1})\leq k. If GG is a graph such that G=G1G2G=G_{1}\cap G_{2}, then χ(G)kω(G)\chi(G)\leq k\cdot\omega(G).

In Section 4, we consider the recognition problem for the class of graphs of chordality at most kk. The kk-Chordality Problem is the following: Given a graph GG as an input, decide whether or not 𝖼𝗁𝗈𝗋(G)k\mathsf{chor}(G)\leq k. We prove the following:

Theorem 1.5.

For every k3k\geq 3, the kk-Chordality Problem is \NP\NP-complete.

Since chordal graphs can be recognized efficiently (see, for example, [11, 19]), the only open case in order to fully classify the complexity of the kk-Chordality Problem, is the case k=2k=2. In an upcoming paper, in joint work with Therese Biedl and Taite LaGrange, we prove that the 22-Chordality Problem is \NP\NP-complete as well.

2 A characterization of the graphs of chordality kk

In this section we prove Theorem 1.1 which provides different characterizations of graphs of bounded chordality. We also point out how our proof of Theorem 1.1 can be adapted (in a straight-forward way) to provided analogous characterizations for graphs of bounded boxicity.

The key notion that we use for the proof of Theorem 1.1 is that of the tree-median-dimension of a graph, introduced by Stavropoulos [27], which we prove is equivalent to chordality. We introduce the tree-median-dimension of a graph in Subsection 2.1. We first need some definitions.

Let GG be a graph. For u,vV(G)u,v\in V(G), a (u,v)(u,v)-geodesic is a shortest (u,v)(u,v)-path. We denote by d(u,v)d(u,v) the distance of uu and vv. We also denote by I(u,v)I(u,v) the set of all vertices of GG which lie in a (u,v)(u,v)-geodesic, that is, I(u,v):={xV(G)d(u,v)=d(u,x)+d(x,v)}I(u,v):=\{x\in V(G)\mid d(u,v)=d(u,x)+d(x,v)\}. Given three distinct vertices u,v,wV(G)u,v,w\in V(G) we denote by I(u,v,w)I(u,v,w) the set I(u,v)I(u,w)I(v,w)I(u,v)\cap I(u,w)\cap I(v,w).

A graph MM is a median graph if it is connected and for every choice of three distinct vertices u,v,wV(M)u,v,w\in V(M), there exists a vertex xx with the property that I(u,v,w)={x}I(u,v,w)=\{x\}. In this case, the vertex xx is called the median of u,v,wu,v,w. For three distinct vertices u,v,wV(G)u,v,w\in V(G), we denote their median vertex by 𝗆𝖾𝖽𝗂𝖺𝗇(u,v,w)\mathsf{median}(u,v,w). It is immediate that trees are median graphs.

Given two graphs GG and HH, their Cartesian product is the graph GH:=(V,E)G\mathbin{\Box}H:=(V,E) where V:=V(G)×V(H)V:=V(G)\times V(H) and {(v1,h1),(v2,h2)}E\{(v_{1},h_{1}),(v_{2},h_{2})\}\in E if and only if v1=v2v_{1}=v_{2} and h1h2E(H)h_{1}h_{2}\in E(H), or h1=h2h_{1}=h_{2} and v1v2E(G)v_{1}v_{2}\in E(G). A graph is GG isometrically embeddable into a graph HH if there exists a map ϕ:V(G)V(H)\phi:V(G)\rightarrow V(H) such that for every u,vV(G)u,v\in V(G) we have dG(u,v)=dH(ϕ(u),ϕ(v))d_{G}(u,v)=d_{H}(\phi(u),\phi(v)). In this case we write GHG\hookrightarrow H and we call the map ϕ\phi an isometric embedding. The tree-dimension (respectively path-dimension) of a graph GG, denoted by 𝗍𝖽(G)\mathsf{td}(G) (respectively 𝗉𝖽(G)\mathsf{pd}(G)) is the minimum kk such that GG has an isometric embedding into the Cartesian product of kk trees (respectively paths) if such an embedding exists, and infinite otherwise.

For every positive integer nn the hypercube QnQ_{n} is a graph isomorphic to the Cartesian product of nn copies of K2K_{2}. A partial cube is a graph which is isometrically embeddable into a hypercube. Median graphs form a proper subclass of partial cubes (see, for example, [22, Theorem 5.75]). Hence, both the tree-dimension and the path-dimension of every median graph are finite. We observe that for any graph GG, we have 𝗍𝖽(G)𝗉𝖽(G)\mathsf{td}(G)\leq\mathsf{pd}(G).

We say that a set SV(G)S\subseteq V(G) is geodesically convex or simply convex if for every u,vSu,v\in S, we have I(u,v)SI(u,v)\subseteq S. We remark that if GG is a connected graph and SV(G)S\subseteq V(G) is a convex set, then G[S]G[S] is connected. A subgraph HH of GG is a convex subgraph if the set V(H)V(H) is convex.

2.1 The tree-median-dimension of a graph

In his Ph.D. thesis, Stavropoulos [27] introduced median-decompositions of graphs, and a variant of those, kk-median-decompositions. We find it more convenient for the context of this paper to use the term kk-tree-median-decomposition for the notion of kk-median-decomposition.

Let kk be a positive integer. We say that a graph HH has the property k\mathcal{M}_{k} if HH is the intersection graph of a family of convex subgraphs of a median graph of tree-dimension kk. A representation of a graph GG with the property k\mathcal{M}_{k} is a pair (M,γ)(M,\gamma), where MM is a median graph and γ:V(M)2V(G)\gamma:V(M)\rightarrow 2^{V(G)} is a function such that for every vV(G)v\in V(G), we have that M[γ1(v)]M[\gamma^{-1}(v)] is a convex subgraph of MM, and GG is isomorphic to the intersection graph of the family {γ1(v):vV(G)}\{\gamma^{-1}(v):v\in V(G)\}.

Let GG be a graph. A kk-tree-median-completion of GG is a supergraph HH of GG such that V(H)=V(G)V(H)=V(G), and HH has the property k\mathcal{M}_{k}. Observe that GG always has a kk-tree-median-completion since every complete graph has the property k\mathcal{M}_{k}. A kk-tree-median-decomposition of GG is a representation (M,γ)(M,\gamma) of a kk-tree-median-completion HH of GG. For every xV(M)x\in V(M), we call the set γ(x)\gamma(x) the bag of xx. We say that (M,γ)(M,\gamma) is a complete kk-tree-median-decomposition of GG if every bag of MM is a clique of GG. Following Stavropoulos [27], a median-decomposition of a graph GG is a kk-tree-median-decomposition for some kk. Stavropoulos proved the following:

Theorem 2.1 (Stavropoulos, [27, Theorem 5.12]).

Every graph GG has a complete median-decomposition.

We define the tree-median-dimension of a graph GG, denoted by 𝗍𝗆𝖽(G)\mathsf{tmd}(G), as the minimum integer kk such that GG has a complete kk-tree-median-decomposition. By Theorem 2.1 it follows that the tree-median-dimension is well defined.

By the following theorem we have that every 11-tree-median-decomposition is a tree-decomposition, and vice versa.

Theorem 2.2 (Buneman [3], Gavril [12], and Walter [28, 29]).

A graph GG is the intersection graph of subtrees of a tree if and only if GG is chordal.

We omit the proof of the following proposition as it follows immediately from the corresponding definitions.

Proposition 2.3.

Let GG be a graph and kk be a positive integer. Then GG has a complete kk-tree-median-decomposition if and only if GG has the property k\mathcal{M}_{k}.

2.4 and 2.5 follow immediately by Theorem 2.2 and 2.3.

Corollary 2.4.

A graph GG has a complete tree-decomposition if and only if GG is chordal.

Corollary 2.5.

Let GG be a graph. Then 𝗍𝗆𝖽(G)=k\mathsf{tmd}(G)=k if and only if kk is the minimum integer for which GG has the property k\mathcal{M}_{k}.

2.2 A characterization of the graphs of chordality kk

The main ingredient that we need for the proof of Theorem 1.1 is the following:

Theorem 2.6.

If GG is a graph, then the tree-median-dimension of GG is equal to its chordality.

We begin with the following easy observation about chordality.

Lemma 2.7.

Let GG be a graph. Then the chordality of GG is equal to the minimum size of a non-edge-separating family of tree-decompositions of GG.

Proof of 2.7.

Let mm be the minimum size of a non-edge-separating family of tree-decompositions of GG.

Let k:=𝖼𝗁𝗈𝗋(G)k:=\mathsf{chor}(G), and let G1,,GkG_{1},\ldots,G_{k} be kk chordal graphs such that G=i[k]GiG=\bigcap_{i\in[k]}G_{i}. For each i[k]i\in[k] let (Ti,βi)(T_{i},\beta_{i}) be the tree-decomposition of GG which is obtained from the chordal completion GiG_{i}, and let 𝒯:={(Ti,βi):i[k]}\mathcal{T}:=\{(T_{i},\beta_{i}):i\in[k]\}. Let {u,v}\{u,v\} be a non-edge of GG. Then there exists ii such that {u,v}\{u,v\} is a non-edge of GiG_{i}. Since the bags of (Ti,βi)(T_{i},\beta_{i}) are cliques in GiG_{i}, it follows that (Ti,βi)(T_{i},\beta_{i}) separates {u,v}\{u,v\}. Thus m𝖼𝗁𝗈𝗋(G)m\leq\mathsf{chor}(G).

Let 𝒯={(Ti,βi)}i[m]\mathcal{T}=\{(T_{i},\beta_{i})\}_{i\in[m]} be a non-edge-separating family of tree-decompositions of GG such that |𝒯||\mathcal{T}| is minimized. For each i[k]i\in[k], let GiG_{i} be the chordal completion of GG which corresponds to the tree-decomposition (Ti,βi)(T_{i},\beta_{i}). Let {u,v}\{u,v\} be a non-edge of GG and let (Ti,βi)(T_{i},\beta_{i}) be the tree-decomposition of GG which separates {u,v}\{u,v\}. Then {u,v}E(Gi)\{u,v\}\notin E(G_{i}). Thus, G=i[k]GiG=\bigcap_{i\in[k]}G_{i}, and 𝖼𝗁𝗈𝗋(G)m\mathsf{chor}(G)\leq m. ∎

In light of 2.7, in order to prove Theorem 2.6, it suffices to prove that the tree-median-dimension of a graph GG is equal to the minimum size of a non-edge-separating family of tree-decompositions of GG. We begin with the following lemma, whose proof we omit, as it follows immediately from the corresponding definitions.

Lemma 2.8.

Let MM be a median graph, and let T1,,TkT_{1},\ldots,T_{k} be trees such that there exists an isometric embedding ϕ:V(M)T1Tk\phi\colon V(M)\rightarrow T_{1}\mathbin{\Box}\cdots\mathbin{\Box}T_{k}. Let a,bV(M)a,b\in V(M), let πi:V(T1Tk)V(Tj)\pi_{i}:V(T_{1}\mathbin{\Box}\cdots\mathbin{\Box}T_{k})\rightarrow V(T_{j}) be the projection to the ii-th coordinate, and let Q=x1,,xlQ=x_{1},\ldots,x_{l} be a shortest (a,b)(a,b)-path in MM. Then the following hold:

  1. 1.

    Let i[k]i\in[k]. If πi(ϕ(a))=πi(ϕ(b))=:ti\pi_{i}(\phi(a))=\pi_{i}(\phi(b))=:t_{i}, then for every j[l]j\in[l] we have πi(ϕ(xj))=ti\pi_{i}(\phi(x_{j}))=t_{i}.

  2. 2.

    For every i[k]i\in[k], we have that Wiπi(ϕ(x1)),,πi(ϕ(xl))W_{i}\coloneqq\pi_{i}(\phi(x_{1})),\ldots,\pi_{i}(\phi(x_{l})) is a sequence of vertices of TiT_{i} which contains exactly the vertices of the (πi(ϕ(x1)),πi(ϕ(xl)))\left(\pi_{i}(\phi(x_{1})),\pi_{i}(\phi(x_{l}))\right)-path=:P=:P in TiT_{i}, and these vertices appear in WiW_{i}, possibly with repetitions, in the same order as in PP.

Lemma 2.9.

Let GG be a graph. If 𝒯\mathcal{T} is a non-edge-separating family of tree-decompositions of GG, then the tree-median-dimension of GG is at most |𝒯||\mathcal{T}|.

Proof of 2.9.

Let 𝒯:={(Ti,βi)}i[k]\mathcal{T}:=\{(T_{i},\beta_{i})\}_{i\in[k]} be a family of kk tree-decompositions of GG as in the statement of the lemma. We construct a complete ii-tree-median-decomposition of GG, with iki\leq k. Let M:=T1TkM:=T_{1}\mathbin{\Box}\ldots\mathbin{\Box}T_{k}. Then MM is a median graph of tree-dimension at most kk. Let γ:V(M)2V(G)\gamma:V(M)\rightarrow 2^{V(G)} defined as follows: for every xV(M)x\in V(M), we have γ(x):=i[k]βi(πi(x))\gamma(x):=\cap_{i\in[k]}\beta_{i}(\pi_{i}(x)).

We claim that for every vV(G)v\in V(G), the subgraph M[γ1(v)]M[\gamma^{-1}(v)] of MM is convex. Indeed, the claim follows from 2.8, and the fact that the Cartesian product of connected graphs is a connected graph.

We claim that for every xV(M)x\in V(M), the bag γ(x)\gamma(x) is a clique. Indeed, this follows from the definition of γ\gamma and the fact that for every non-edge of GG there exists i[k]i\in[k] such that no bag of the tree-decomposition (Ti,βi)(T_{i},\beta_{i}) contains both uu and vv.

By the above it follows that (M,γ)(M,\gamma) is a complete ii-tree-median-decomposition of GG which witnesses that 𝗍𝗆𝖽(G)k\mathsf{tmd}(G)\leq k. ∎

In order to complete the proof of Theorem 2.6, it remains to prove that the minimum size of a non-edge-separating family of tree-decompositions of a graph GG is upper-bounded by the tree-median-dimension of GG. To this end we need some preliminary results. We begin with the statement of a theorem of Stavropoulos [27] which states that given a kk-tree-median-decomposition of a graph GG, one can obtain a family of kk tree-decompositions of GG which satisfy certain nice properties. We then show that if we apply this theorem to a complete kk-tree-median-decomposition, then the family of kk tree-decompositions that we get is non-edge-separating.

Theorem 2.10 (Stavropoulos, [27, Lemma 6.1, Theorem 6.7]).

Let GG be a graph, and let (M,γ)(M,\gamma) be a kk-tree-median-decomposition of GG. Then there exists a family 𝒯={(Ti,βi)}i[k]\mathcal{T}=\{(T_{i},\beta_{i})\}_{i\in[k]} of kk tree-decompositions of GG such that:

  1. 1.

    There exists an isometric embedding ϕ\phi of MM to the graph T1TkT_{1}\mathbin{\Box}\cdots\mathbin{\Box}T_{k}.

  2. 2.

    For every i[k]i\in[k] and for every tV(Ti)t\in V(T_{i}), we have ϕ(V(M))πi1(t)\phi(V(M))\cap\pi_{i}^{-1}(t)\neq\emptyset, where πi:V(T1Tk)V(Tj)\pi_{i}:V(T_{1}\mathbin{\Box}\cdots\mathbin{\Box}T_{k})\rightarrow V(T_{j}) is the projection to the ii-th coordinate.

  3. 3.

    For every xV(M)x\in V(M), we have γ(x)=πi(ϕ(x)),i[k]βi(πi(ϕ(x)))\gamma(x)=\bigcap_{\pi_{i}(\phi(x)),i\in[k]}\beta_{i}(\pi_{i}(\phi(x))).

  4. 4.

    For every i[k]i\in[k], and for every tV(Ti)t\in V(T_{i}), we have βi(t)={xV(M):πi(ϕ(x))=t}γ(x)\beta_{i}(t)=\bigcup_{\{x\in V(M):\pi_{i}(\phi(x))=t\}}\gamma(x).

Given a set XX, we say that a family 𝒳:={Xi}iI\mathcal{X}:=\{X_{i}\}_{i\in I} of subsets of XX satisfies the Helly property if for every III^{\prime}\subseteq I the following holds: if XiXjX_{i}\cap X_{j}\neq\emptyset for all i,jIi,j\in I^{\prime}, then we have that iIXi\bigcap_{i\in I^{\prime}}X_{i}\neq\emptyset. The following is a folklore (see, for example, [14, Proposition 4.7]):

Proposition 2.11.

Every family of subtrees of a tree satisfies the Helly property.

Lemma 2.12.

Let GG be a graph, let (T,β)(T,\beta) be a tree-decomposition of GG, and let {u,v}\{u,v\} be a non-edge of GG such that (T,β)(T,\beta) does not separate {u,v}\{u,v\}. Let t1,t2V(T)t_{1},t_{2}\in V(T) be such that uβ(t1)u\in\beta(t_{1}) and vβ(t2)v\in\beta(t_{2}), and let PP be the (t1,t2)(t_{1},t_{2})-path in TT. Then, there exists pV(P)p\in V(P) such that {u,v}β(p)\{u,v\}\subseteq\beta(p).

Proof of 2.12.

Since (T,β)(T,\beta) does not separate {u,v}\{u,v\}, we have that β1(u)β1(v)\beta^{-1}(u)\cap\beta^{-1}(v)\neq\emptyset. Moreover, since uβ(t1)u\in\beta(t_{1}) and vβ(t2)v\in\beta(t_{2}), we have that β1(u)V(P)\beta^{-1}(u)\cap V(P)\neq\emptyset and β1(v)V(P)\beta^{-1}(v)\cap V(P)\neq\emptyset. Hence, by 2.11, it follows that β1(u)β1(v)V(P)\beta^{-1}(u)\cap\beta^{-1}(v)\cap V(P)\neq\emptyset. ∎

We are now ready to prove that the minimum size of a non-edge-separating family of tree-decompositions of a graph GG is upper bounded by the tree-median-dimension of GG.

Lemma 2.13.

Let GG be a graph, and let (M,γ)(M,\gamma) be a complete kk-tree-median-decomposition of GG. Let 𝒯={(Ti,βi)}i[k]\mathcal{T}=\{(T_{i},\beta_{i})\}_{i\in[k]} be a family of kk tree-decompositions of GG which satisfies the conditions of Theorem 2.10. Then for every non-edge ee of GG, there exists i[k]i\in[k] such that (Ti,βi)(T_{i},\beta_{i}) separates ee.

Proof of 2.13.

Let us suppose towards a contradiction that the lemma does not hold. Let {u,v}(V(G)2)E(G)\{u,v\}\in\binom{V(G)}{2}\setminus E(G) be such that no tree-decomposition in 𝒯\mathcal{T} separates {u,v}\{u,v\}, and let ϕ\phi be an isometric embedding of MM to the graph T1TkT_{1}\mathbin{\Box}\cdots\mathbin{\Box}T_{k}, as in the statement of Theorem 2.10.

Let S:={(a,b)V(M)×V(M):uγ(a),vγ(b)}S:=\{(a,b)\in V(M)\times V(M):u\in\gamma(a),v\in\gamma(b)\}, and for each j[k]j\in[k], let Sj:={(a,b)S:(lj)[πl(ϕ(a))=πl(ϕ(b))=:tl}.S_{j}:=\{(a,b)\in S:(\forall l\leq j)[\pi_{l}(\phi(a))=\pi_{l}(\phi(b))=:t_{l}\}. In what follows we derive the desired contradiction by proving that there exists a vertex of MM whose bag, in (M,γ)(M,\gamma), contains both the vertices uu and vv. To this end it suffices to prove that SkS_{k}\neq\emptyset.

Claim 1.

For each j[k]j\in[k], we have SjS_{j}\neq\emptyset.

Proof of 1.

Since {u,v}β1(t1)\{u,v\}\subseteq\beta_{1}(t_{1}), by Theorem 2.10 (4), there exist not necessarily distinct a,bV(M)a,b\in V(M) such that π1(ϕ(a))=π1(ϕ(b))=t1\pi_{1}(\phi(a))=\pi_{1}(\phi(b))=t_{1}, uγ(a)u\in\gamma(a), and vγ(b)v\in\gamma(b). Hence (a,b)S1(a,b)\in S_{1} and thus S1S_{1}\neq\emptyset. Let j:=max{i[k]:(li)[Si]}j:=\max\{i\in[k]:(\forall l\leq i)[S_{i}\neq\emptyset]\}. Since S1S_{1}\neq\emptyset, we have that jj is well defined. Let us suppose towards a contradiction that j<kj<k, and let (a,b)Sj(a,b)\in S_{j}. For each i[j]i\in[j], let tiV(Ti)t_{i}\in V(T_{i}) be such that πi(ϕ(a))=πi(ϕ(b))=ti\pi_{i}(\phi(a))=\pi_{i}(\phi(b))=t_{i}. Let PP be the ((πj+1(ϕ(a))),(πj+1(ϕ(b))))\big{(}(\pi_{j+1}(\phi(a))),(\pi_{j+1}(\phi(b)))\big{)}-path in Tj+1T_{j+1}. By 2.12, it follows that there exists tV(P)V(Tj+1)t\in V(P)\subseteq V(T_{j+1}) such that {u,v}βj+1(t)\{u,v\}\subseteq\beta_{j+1}(t). Let tj+1t_{j+1} be such a vertex, and let QQ be a shortest (a,b)(a,b)-path in MM.

We claim that there exists zV(Q)z\in V(Q) such that for each i[j+1]i\in[j+1] we have πi(ϕ(z))=ti\pi_{i}(\phi(z))=t_{i}. Indeed, by 2.8, we know that for every vertex qV(Q)q\in V(Q) and for every i[j]i\in[j] we have πi(ϕ(q))=ti\pi_{i}(\phi(q))=t_{i}. Since tj+1t_{j+1} lies in PP, it follows, by 2.8, that there exists zV(Q)z\in V(Q) such that πj+1(ϕ(z))=tj+1\pi_{j+1}(\phi(z))=t_{j+1}. Let zz be such a vertex. Then zz satisfies our claim.

Since {u,v}βj+1(tj+1)\{u,v\}\subseteq\beta_{j+1}(t_{j+1}), by Theorem 2.10 (4), it follows that there exist not necessarily distinct vertices x,yV(M)x,y\in V(M) such that uγ(x),vγ(y)u\in\gamma(x),v\in\gamma(y) and πj+1(ϕ(x))=πj+1(ϕ(y))=tj+1\pi_{j+1}(\phi(x))=\pi_{j+1}(\phi(y))=t_{j+1}.

Let a:=𝗆𝖾𝖽𝗂𝖺𝗇(a,x,z)a^{\prime}:=\mathsf{median}(a,x,z) and b:=𝗆𝖾𝖽𝗂𝖺𝗇(b,y,z)b^{\prime}:=\mathsf{median}(b,y,z). Then, by 2.8, we have πi(ϕ(a))=πi(ϕ(b))=ti\pi_{i}(\phi(a^{\prime}))=\pi_{i}(\phi(b^{\prime}))=t_{i} for all i[j+1]i\in[j+1]. Hence (a,b)Sj+1(a^{\prime},b^{\prime})\in S_{j+1}, and thus Sj+1S_{j+1}\neq\emptyset which contradicts to the choice of jj. This concludes the proof of 1. ∎

Let (a,b)Sk(a,b)\in S_{k}. Then, by the definition of SS and Theorem 2.10, we have that γ(a)=γ(b)\gamma(a)=\gamma(b). In particular, {u,v}γ(a)\{u,v\}\subseteq\gamma(a) which is a contradiction. This concludes the proof of 2.13. ∎

2.14 follows immediately from 2.13 and 2.9.

Corollary 2.14.

Let GG be a graph. Then the tree-median-dimension of GG is equal to the minimum size of a non-edge-separating family of tree-decompositions of GG.

Now Theorem 2.6, which states that the tree-median-dimension of a graph is equal to its chordality, follows immediately by 2.7 and 2.14.

Theorem 1.1, is an immediate corollary of Theorem 2.6, 2.3, 2.5 and 2.7. We remark that Theorem 1.1 generalizes Theorem 2.2 and 2.4.

The notion of kk-path-median-decomposition can be defined similarly with that of kk-tree-median-decomposition, by considering completions which are intersection graphs of convex subgraphs of median graphs of path-median-dimension kk. By modifying the proofs of this section in a trivial way we can derive the following characterizations of boxicity.

Theorem 2.15.

Let GG be a graph and kk be a positive integer. Then the following are equivalent:

  1. 1.

    The graph GG has boxicity kk.

  2. 2.

    The minimum size of a non-edge-separating family of path-decompositions of GG is kk.

  3. 3.

    kk is the minimum integer such that the graph GG is the intersection graph of a family of convex subgraphs of the Cartesian product of kk paths.

  4. 4.

    kk is the minimum integer such that the graph GG is the intersection graph of a family of convex subgraphs of a median graph of path-dimension kk.

  5. 5.

    The graph GG has path-median-dimension kk.

3 Chordality and χ\chi-boundedness

We study classes of graphs of bounded chordality from the perspective of χ\chi-boundedness.

3.1 The class 𝒞𝔤\mathcal{C}\overset{\mathfrak{g}}{\cap}\mathcal{I} is not χ\chi-bounded

In [9] Dujmovic, Joret, Morin, Norin, and Wood studied graphs which have two tree-decompositions such that “each bag of the first decomposition has a bounded intersection with each bag of the second decomposition”, and pointed out a connection of this concept with the concept of χ\chi-boundedness.

Following [9] we say that two tree-decompositions (T1,β1)(T_{1},\beta_{1}) and (T2,β2)(T_{2},\beta_{2}) of a graph GG are kk-orthogonal if for every t1T1t_{1}\in T_{1} and t2T2t_{2}\in T_{2}, we have |β1(t1)β2(t)|k|\beta_{1}(t_{1})\cap\beta_{2}(t)|\leq k.

Lemma 3.1.

Let GG be a graph and kk be a positive integer. Then the following hold:

  1. 1.

    The graph GG has two kk-orthogonal path-decompositions if and only if GG is a subgraph of a graph HH such that HH has boxicity at most two, and ω(H)k\omega(H)\leq k.

  2. 2.

    The graph GG has two kk-orthogonal tree-decompositions if and only if GG is a subgraph of a graph HH such that HH has chordality at most two, and ω(H)k\omega(H)\leq k.

  3. 3.

    The graph GG has a tree-decomposition and a path-decomposition which are kk-orthogonal if and only if GG is a subgraph of a graph HH such that H𝒞𝔤H\in\mathcal{C}\overset{\mathfrak{g}}{\cap}\mathcal{I}, and ω(H)k\omega(H)\leq k.

Proof of 3.1.

Follows immediately by the corresponding definitions and the facts that every bag of a tree-decomposition is a clique of the corresponding chordal completion, and that every clique of a chordal completion is contained in a bag of the corresponding tree-decomposition. ∎

The following is an immediate corollary of 3.1.

Proposition 3.2.

Let 𝒞\mathcal{C} be the class of chordal graphs and \mathcal{I} be the class of interval graphs. The following hold:

  1. 1.

    The class 𝔤\mathcal{I}\overset{\mathfrak{g}}{\cap}\mathcal{I} is χ\chi-bounded if and only if there exists a function f:f\colon\mathbb{N}\rightarrow\mathbb{R} such that for every graph GG which has two kk-orthogonal path-decompositions, we have χ(G)f(k)\chi(G)\leq f(k).

  2. 2.

    The class 𝒞𝔤𝒞\mathcal{C}\overset{\mathfrak{g}}{\cap}\mathcal{C} is χ\chi-bounded if and only if there exists a function f:f\colon\mathbb{N}\rightarrow\mathbb{R} such that for every graph GG which has two kk-orthogonal tree-decompositions, we have χ(G)f(k)\chi(G)\leq f(k).

  3. 3.

    The class 𝒞𝔤\mathcal{C}\overset{\mathfrak{g}}{\cap}\mathcal{I} is χ\chi-bounded if and only if there exists a function f:f\colon\mathbb{N}\rightarrow\mathbb{R} such that for every graph GG which has a tree-decomposition and a path-decomposition which are kk-orthogonal, we have χ(G)f(k)\chi(G)\leq f(k).

The authors of [9] posed the following question, for which they conjectured a positive answer.

Problem 3.3 (Dujmovic, Joret, Morin, Norin, and Wood, [9, Open Problem 3]).

Is there a function ff such that every graph GG that has two kk-orthogonal tree-decompositions is f(k)f(k)-colorable?

By 3.2, it follows that the above question is equivalent to the first part of the question of Gyárfás that we metioned in the Introduction (1.2), which asks whether the class of all graphs of chordality at most two is χ\chi-bounded.

In [10] Felsner, Joret, Micek, Trotter and Wiechert, answered 3.3 in the negative, and in particular they answered Gyárfás’s question (1.2), in the negative.

Felsner, Joret, Micek, Trotter and Wiechert [10] proved the following, which answers in the negative both the questions in 1.2 and 3.3.

Theorem 3.4 (Felsner, Joret, Micek, Trotter and Wiechert, [10, Theorem 2]).

For every positive integer kk, there is a graph with chromatic number at least kk which has a tree-decomposition (T,β)(T,\beta) and a path-decomposition (P,γ)(P,\gamma), which are 2-orthogonal. That is, for every tV(T)t\in V(T) and for every pV(P)p\in V(P), we have |β(t)γ(p)|2|\beta(t)\cap\gamma(p)|\leq 2.

The following is an immediate corollary of 3.1 and Theorem 3.4.

Corollary 3.5.

For every positive integer kk, there exist a graph Hk𝒞𝔤H_{k}\in\mathcal{C}\overset{\mathfrak{g}}{\cap}\mathcal{I} such that HkH_{k} is triangle-free and has chromatic number at least kk.

Corollary 3.6.

The class 𝒞𝔤\mathcal{C}\overset{\mathfrak{g}}{\cap}\mathcal{I} is not χ\chi-bounded. In particular, since 𝒞\mathcal{I}\subseteq\mathcal{C}, it follows that the class of all the graphs of chordality at most two is not χ\chi-bounded.

3.2 Subclasses of 𝒞𝔤𝒞\mathcal{C}\overset{\mathfrak{g}}{\cap}\mathcal{C}: When each chordal graph has a representation tree of bounded path-width

In Subsection 3.1, we saw that the class 𝒞𝔤\mathcal{C}\overset{\mathfrak{g}}{\cap}\mathcal{I} is not χ\chi-bounded. From the characterization of chordal (respectively interval) graphs as intersection graphs of subtrees (respectively subpaths) of trees (respectively paths) that we presented in the Introduction, it follows that 𝔤\mathcal{I}\overset{\mathfrak{g}}{\cap}\mathcal{I} is the subclass of 𝒞𝔤𝒞\mathcal{C}\overset{\mathfrak{g}}{\cap}\mathcal{C} in which each of the two chordal graphs in the intersection has a representation tree which is a path.

In this subsection we consider the family of subclasses of 𝒞𝔤𝒞\mathcal{C}\overset{\mathfrak{g}}{\cap}\mathcal{C} (and superclasses of 𝔤\mathcal{I}\overset{\mathfrak{g}}{\cap}\mathcal{I}) in which each of the two chordal graphs in the intersection has a representation tree of bounded path-width. We prove that these classes are χ\chi-bounded.

Theorem 3.7.

Let k1k_{1} and k2k_{2} be positive integers, and let G1G_{1} and G2G_{2} be chordal graphs such that for each i[2]i\in[2] the graph GiG_{i} has a representation (Ti,βi)(T_{i},\beta_{i}), where 𝗉𝗐(Ti)ki\mathsf{pw}(T_{i})\leq k_{i}. If GG is a graph such that G=G1G2G=G_{1}\cap G_{2}, then GG is 𝒪(ω(G)log(ω(G)))(k1+1)(k2+1)\mathcal{O}(\omega(G)\log(\omega(G)))(k_{1}+1)(k_{2}+1)-colorable.

The main step towards our proof of Theorem 3.7 is to prove that the vertex set of a graph GG as in the statement of Theorem 3.7 can be partitioned into a constant number of sets so that each of these sets induces a graph of boxicity at most two. Then we use the fact that the class 𝔤\mathcal{I}\overset{\mathfrak{g}}{\cap}\mathcal{I} is χ\chi-bounded and we color each of these induced subgraphs with a different palette of colors.

Lemma 3.8.

Let k1k_{1} and k2k_{2} be positive integers, and let G1G_{1} and G2G_{2} be chordal graphs such that for each i[2]i\in[2] the graph GiG_{i} has a representation (Ti,βi)(T_{i},\beta_{i}), where 𝗉𝗐(Ti)ki\mathsf{pw}(T_{i})\leq k_{i}. If GG is a graph such that G=G1G2G=G_{1}\cap G_{2}, then there exists a partition 𝒫\mathcal{P} of V(G)V(G) such that |𝒫|(k1+1)(k2+1)|\mathcal{P}|\leq(k_{1}+1)(k_{2}+1) and for every V𝒫V\in\mathcal{P}, the graph G[V]G[V] has boxicity at most two.

In 2021, Chalermsook and Walczak [5] provided an improvement on the upper bound of Asplund and Grünbaum [1] for the chromatic number of graphs of boxicity at most two.

Theorem 3.9 (Chalermsook and Walczak, [5]).

Every family of axis-parallel rectangles in the plane with clique number ω\omega is 𝒪(ωlog(ω))\mathcal{O}(\omega\log(\omega))-colorable, and an 𝒪(ωlog(ω))\mathcal{O}(\omega\log(\omega))-coloring of it can be computed in polynomial time.

Since Theorem 3.7 follows immediately by 3.8 and Theorem 3.9, in order to prove Theorem 3.7 it remains to prove 3.8. The main observation that we need is that if a graph has path-width at most kk, then it can decomposed into a family of k+1k+1 disjoint subgraphs, each of which is a disjoint union of induced paths.

We first need a result about tree-decompositions. Let GG be a graph, XV(G)X\subseteq V(G), and u,wu,w two vertices of GG. We say that XX separates uu from ww in GG if uu and ww are in different components of the graph GXG-X.

Lemma 3.10 (Robertson and Seymour [24, (2.4)]).

Let GG be a graph, (T,β)(T,\beta) be a tree-decomposition of GG, let {t1,t2}\{t_{1},t_{2}\} be an edge of TT. If T1T_{1} and T2T_{2} are the components of T{t1,t2}T\setminus\{t_{1},t_{2}\}, where t1V(T1)t_{1}\in V(T_{1}) and t2V(T2)t_{2}\in V(T_{2}), then β(t1)β(t2)\beta(t_{1})\cap\beta(t_{2}) separates V1:=tV(T1)β(t)V_{1}:=\bigcup_{t\in V(T_{1})}\beta(t) from V2:=tV(T2)β(t)V_{2}:=\bigcup_{t\in V(T_{2})}\beta(t) in GG.

Lemma 3.11.

Let GG be a connected graph and let kk be a positive integer. If GG has path-width at most kk, then there exists an induced path QQ which is a subgraph of GG such that GV(Q)G\setminus V(Q) has path-width at most k1k-1.

Proof of 3.11.

Consider a path-decomposition (P,β)(P,\beta) of GG which realizes its path-width. Let p1,,plp_{1},\ldots,p_{l} be the elements of V(P)V(P) enumerated in the order that they appear in PP. Let v1V(G)β(p1)v_{1}\in V(G)\cap\beta(p_{1}) and vlV(G)β(pl)v_{l}\in V(G)\cap\beta(p_{l}), and let QQ be an induced (v1,vl)(v_{1},v_{l})-path in GG. We define the function β:V(P)2V(G)\beta^{\prime}:V(P)\rightarrow 2^{V(G)} as follows: for every pV(p)p\in V(p) we have β(p):=β(p)V(Q)\beta^{\prime}(p):=\beta(p)\setminus V(Q). Then (P,β)(P,\beta^{\prime}) is a path-decomposition of the graph GV(Q)G\setminus V(Q). Moreover, by 3.10, it follows that for each i[l]i\in[l] we have V(Q)β(pi)V(Q)\cap\beta(p_{i})\neq\emptyset. Thus, the width of (P,β)(P,\beta^{\prime}) is at most k1k-1. ∎

Corollary 3.12.

Let kk be a positive integer. If GG is a graph of path-width at most kk, then there exist (possibly null) induced subgraphs P1,,Pk+1P_{1},\ldots,P_{k+1} of GG such that the following hold:

  1. 1.

    Every component of the graph P1P_{1} is a path.

  2. 2.

    For each i[2,k+1]i\in[2,k+1], PiP_{i} is an induced subgraph of G(V(P1)V(Pi1))G\setminus(V(P_{1})\cup\ldots\cup V(P_{i-1})), and every component of Gj<iV(Pj)G\setminus\cup_{j<i}V(P_{j}) contains exactly one component of PiP_{i}.

  3. 3.

    V(G)=i[k+1]V(Pi)V(G)=\bigcup_{i\in[k+1]}V(P_{i}).

Proof of 3.12.

We prove the statement by induction on kk. If the graph GG has path-width equal to one, then GG is the disjoint union of paths, and letting P1:=GP_{1}:=G we see that the statement of 3.12 holds.

Let k>1k>1 and suppose that the statement of 3.12 holds for every positive integer k<kk^{\prime}<k. Let C1,,ClC_{1},\ldots,C_{l} be the connected components of GG. For each j[l]j\in[l], we have that CjC_{j} is a connected graph of path-width at most kk. Let P1jP_{1}^{j} be a subgraph of CjC_{j} which is a path as in the statement of 3.11. Let P1:=j[l]P1jP_{1}:=\cup_{j\in[l]}P_{1}^{j}. Consider the graph G:=GV(P1)G^{\prime}:=G\setminus V(P_{1}) which, by 3.11, has path-width at most k:=k1<kk^{\prime}:=k-1<k. Then, by applying the induction hypothesis to the graph GG^{\prime}, we obtain subgraphs P2,,Pk+1P_{2},\ldots,P_{k+1} of GG^{\prime} such that the subgraphs P1,,Pk+1P_{1},\ldots,P_{k+1} of GG satisfy the statement of 3.12. ∎

We are now ready to prove 3.8.

Proof of 3.8.

Let P1,,Pk1+1P_{1},\ldots,P_{k_{1}+1} and Q1,,Qk2+1Q_{1},\ldots,Q_{k_{2}+1} be subgraphs of T1T_{1} and T2T_{2} respectively, chosen as in 3.12.

Let XX be a subtree of T1T_{1}. We define the level of XX, denoted by L1(X)L_{1}(X), as follows:

L1(X):=min{i[k1+1]:V(X)V(Pi)}.L_{1}(X):=\min\{i\in[k_{1}+1]:V(X)\cap V(P_{i})\neq\emptyset\}.

Similarly, we define the level of a subtree XX of T2T_{2} as follows:

L2(X):=min{i[k2+1]:V(X)V(Qi)}.L_{2}(X):=\min\{i\in[k_{2}+1]:V(X)\cap V(Q_{i})\neq\emptyset\}.
Claim 2.

Let XX and YY be subtrees of T1T_{1} such that L1(X)=L1(Y)=lL_{1}(X)=L_{1}(Y)=l. Then the following hold:

  1. 1.

    Both XPlX\cap P_{l} and YPlY\cap P_{l} are paths; and

  2. 2.

    V(X)V(Y)V(X)\cap V(Y)\neq\emptyset if and only if V(X)V(Y)V(Pl)V(X)\cap V(Y)\cap V(P_{l})\neq\emptyset.

Similarly for subtrees of T2T_{2}.

Proof of 2.

We prove the claim for T1T_{1}; the proof for T2T_{2} is identical. Since L1(X)=lL_{1}(X)=l, we have that V(X)(V(P1)V(Pl1))=V(X)\cap(V(P_{1})\cup\ldots\cup V(P_{l-1}))=\emptyset. Thus XX is contained in a connected component of the forest T(V(P1)V(Pl1))T\setminus(V(P_{1})\cup\ldots\cup V(P_{l-1})). Let CC be this component. By 3.12, we have that Z:=PlCZ:=P_{l}\cap C is a path, and thus XPlX\cap P_{l} is a path as well. With identical arguments we get that YPlY\cap P_{l} is a path.

For the second statement of our claim: The reverse implication is immediate. For the forward implication: Since V(X)V(Y)V(X)\cap V(Y)\neq\emptyset, both the subtrees XX and YY are contained in the same connected component of the forest T(V(P1)V(Pl1))T\setminus(V(P_{1})\cup\ldots\cup V(P_{l-1})). Let CC be this component. By 3.12, we have that Z:=PlCZ:=P_{l}\cap C is a path. Consider the tree CC and its family of subtrees {X,Y,Z}\{X,Y,Z\}. Since V(X)V(Z)V(X)\cap V(Z)\neq\emptyset, V(Y)V(Z)V(Y)\cap V(Z)\neq\emptyset and V(X)V(Y)V(X)\cap V(Y)\neq\emptyset, by 2.11, it follows that V(X)V(Y)V(Z)V(X)\cap V(Y)\cap V(Z)\neq\emptyset. In particular V(X)V(Y)V(Pl)V(X)\cap V(Y)\cap V(P_{l})\neq\emptyset. This concludes the proof of 2. ∎

In what follows in this proof, for every vV(G)v\in V(G) and i[2]i\in[2], we denote by TivT_{i}^{v} the subtree Ti[βi(v)]T_{i}[\beta_{i}(v)] of TiT_{i}. For each i[k1+1]i\in[k_{1}+1] and for each j[k2+1]j\in[k_{2}+1], we define a subset of V(G)V(G) as follows:

Vi,j:={vV(G):L1(T1v)=i and L2(T2v)=j}.V_{i,j}:=\{v\in V(G):L_{1}(T_{1}^{v})=i\text{ and }L_{2}(T_{2}^{v})=j\}.

Let 𝒫:={Vi,j}i[k1+1],j[k2+1]\mathcal{P}:=\{V_{i,j}\}_{i\in[k_{1}+1],j\in[k_{2}+1]} and observe that 𝒫\mathcal{P} is a partition of V(G)V(G).

Claim 3.

For each i[k1+1]i\in[k_{1}+1] the graph G1[j[k2+1]Vi,j]G_{1}[\bigcup_{j\in[k_{2}+1]}V_{i,j}] is an interval graph. Similarly for each j[k2+1]j\in[k_{2}+1], and G2[i[k1+1]Vi,j]G_{2}[\bigcup_{i\in[k_{1}+1]}V_{i,j}].

Proof of 3.

We prove the claim for G1G_{1}; the proof for G2G_{2} is identical. For each vertex vG1[j[k2+1]Vi,j]v\in G_{1}[\bigcup_{j\in[k_{2}+1]}V_{i,j}], let Piv:=PiT1vP_{i}^{v}:=P_{i}\cap T_{1}^{v}. Then, by 2, we have that PivP_{i}^{v} is a path. Let u,vG1[j[k2+1]Vi,j]u,v\in G_{1}[\bigcup_{j\in[k_{2}+1]}V_{i,j}]. Then, by 2, we have that uu is adjacent to vv if and only if PiuPivP_{i}^{u}\cap P_{i}^{v}\neq\emptyset.

Hence, the graph G1[j[k2+1]Vi,j]G_{1}[\bigcup_{j\in[k_{2}+1]}V_{i,j}] is the intersection graph of the family {Piv:vG1[j[k2+1]Vi,j]}\{P_{i}^{v}:v\in G_{1}[\bigcup_{j\in[k_{2}+1]}V_{i,j}]\} of subpaths PiP_{i}. Since PiP_{i} is the disjoint union of paths it follows that every component of G1[j[k2+1]Vi,j]G_{1}[\bigcup_{j\in[k_{2}+1]}V_{i,j}] is an interval graph, and so G1[j[k2+1]Vi,j]G_{1}[\bigcup_{j\in[k_{2}+1]}V_{i,j}] is an interval graph as well. ∎

Let i[k1+1]i\in[k_{1}+1] and j[k2+1]j\in[k_{2}+1]. Then, by 3, we have G[Vi,j]𝔤G[V_{i,j}]\in\mathcal{I}\overset{\mathfrak{g}}{\cap}\mathcal{I}. Hence 𝒫\mathcal{P} is the desired partition. ∎

3.3 Subclasses of 𝒞𝔤𝒞\mathcal{C}\overset{\mathfrak{g}}{\cap}\mathcal{C}: When at least one chordal graph has a representation tree of bounded radius

For each positive integer kk we consider the subclass of 𝒞𝔤𝒞\mathcal{C}\overset{\mathfrak{g}}{\cap}\mathcal{C} in which one of the two chordal graphs in the intersection has a representation tree of radius at most kk, and we prove that this class is χ\chi-bounded.

Theorem 3.13.

Let kk be a positive integer, and let G1G_{1} and G2G_{2} be chordal graphs such that the graph G1G_{1} has a representation (T1,β1)(T_{1},\beta_{1}) where 𝗋𝖺𝖽(T1)k\mathsf{rad}(T_{1})\leq k. If GG is a graph such that G=G1G2G=G_{1}\cap G_{2}, then χ(G)kω(G)\chi(G)\leq k\cdot\omega(G).

The main observation that we need for the proof of Theorem 3.13 is the following:

Lemma 3.14.

Let GG be a chordal graph and kk be a positive integer. If GG has a representation (T,β)(T,\beta) such that 𝗋𝖺𝖽(T)k\mathsf{rad}(T)\leq k, then there exists a partition 𝒫\mathcal{P} of V(G)V(G) such that |𝒫|k|\mathcal{P}|\leq k and for each V𝒫V\in\mathcal{P} we have that G[V]G[V] is a disjoint union of complete graphs.

We show how Theorem 3.13 follows from 3.14.

Proof of Theorem 3.13 assuming 3.14.

Let GG be a graph as in the statement of Theorem 3.13, and let 𝒫\mathcal{P} be a partition of V(G1)V(G_{1}) as in the statement of 3.14.

We claim that for each V𝒫V\in\mathcal{P}, we have χ(G[V])ω(G)\chi(G[V])\leq\omega(G). Indeed, let V𝒫V\in\mathcal{P}. Then the graph G1[V]G_{1}[V] is a disjoint union of complete graphs. Hence, the graph G[V]=G1[V]G2[V]G[V]=G_{1}[V]\cap G_{2}[V] is the intersection of a chordal graph with a disjoint union of cliques, and thus a chordal graph. Hence, χ(G[V])ω(G[V])ω(G)\chi(G[V])\leq\omega(G[V])\leq\omega(G).

For each V𝒫V\in\mathcal{P}, we can color the graph G[V]G[V] with a different palette of ω(G)\omega(G) colors, and obtain a (kω(G))(k\cdot\omega(G))-coloring of GG. Hence χ(G)kω(G)\chi(G)\leq k\cdot\omega(G). ∎

It remains to prove 3.14.

Proof of 3.14.

Let rr be a vertex of TT which, chosen as a root, realizes the radius of TT. For each vertex vV(G)v\in V(G), we denote by TvT^{v} the subtree T[β(v)]T[\beta(v)] of TT. Furthermore, for each subtree XX of TT, we denote by L(X)L(X) the value min{d(r,x):xV(X)}\min\{d(r,x):x\in V(X)\}, and by r(X)r(X) the root of XX, which is the unique element of the set argminxV(X)d(r,x)\operatorname*{arg\,min}_{x\in V(X)}d(r,x). We refer to the value L(X)L(X) as the level of XX.

Let S:={Tv:vV(G)}S:=\{T^{v}:v\in V(G)\}, and for each i[k]i\in[k], let Li:={XS:L(X)=i}L_{i}:=\{X\in S:L(X)=i\}. Observe that, since TT has radius at most kk, we have that {Li}i[k]\{L_{i}\}_{i\in[k]} is a partition of SS.

The main observation that we need is that two subtrees XX and YY of the same level intersect if and only if they have the same root (and no other common vertex).

Thus, for each level i[k]i\in[k], the relation of intersection of subtrees is an equivalence relation in LiL_{i}, and the corresponding induced subgraph of GG is a disjoint union of complete graphs.

For each i[k]i\in[k], let Vi:={vV(G):TvLi}V_{i}:=\{v\in V(G):T^{v}\in L_{i}\}. Then 𝒫:={Vi:i[k] and Vi}\mathcal{P}:=\{V_{i}:i\in[k]\text{ and }V_{i}\neq\emptyset\} is the desired partition of V(G)V(G). ∎

4 The kk-Chordality Problem is \NP\NP-complete for k3k\geq 3

We recall from the Section 1 that for a fixed positive integer kk, the kk-Chordality Problem is the following: Given a graph GG as an input, decide whether 𝖼𝗁𝗈𝗋(G)k\mathsf{chor}(G)\leq k. In this section we study the computational complexity of this problem. For k=1k=1, the 11-Chordality Problem is to decide whether a given graph is chordal, and there exists a polynomial-time algorithm for this problem (see, for example, [11, 18]). In this section we prove Theorem 1.5 which we restate here.

Theorem 4.1.

For every k3k\geq 3, the kk-Chordality Problem is \NP\NP-complete.

In an upcoming paper, in joint work with Therese Biedl and Taite LaGrange, using different techniques we prove that the 22-Chordality Problem is \NP\NP-complete as well.

For a fixed positive integer kk the kk-Coloring Problem is the following: Given a graph GG as an input, decide whether GG has a kk-coloring.

Theorem 4.2 (Karp, [16, Main Theorem]).

For every k3k\geq 3, the kk-Coloring Problem is \NP\NP-complete.

We immediately see that for every positive integer kk, the kk-Chordality Problem is in \NP\NP. We prove Theorem 4.1 by proving a polynomial-time reduction of the kk-Coloring Problem to the kk-Chordality Problem. We first state some preliminary definitions and results.

Theorem 4.3 (McKee and Scheinerman, [20, Corollary 4]).

Let GG be a graph. Then 𝖼𝗁𝗈𝗋(G)χ(G)\mathsf{chor}(G)\leq\chi(G).

Given two graphs GG and HH, the lexicographic product of GG with HH, denoted by GHG\cdot H, is the graph which has as vertices the elements of the set V(G)×V(H)V(G)\times V(H), and where two vertices (x1,y1)(x_{1},y_{1}) and (x2,y2)(x_{2},y_{2}) are adjacent if and only if {x1,x2}E(G)\{x_{1},x_{2}\}\in E(G), or x1=x2x_{1}=x_{2} and {y1,y2}E(H)\{y_{1},y_{2}\}\in E(H). The graph GHG\cdot H can be though as the graph that we obtain if in GG we “substitute” a copy of HH for each vertex of GG.

Theorem 4.4 (Geller and Stahl, [13, Theorem 3]).

Let GG and HH be two graphs. If χ(H)=n\chi(H)=n, then χ(GH)=χ(GKn)\chi(G\cdot H)=\chi(G\cdot K_{n}).

Proposition 4.5.

Let GG be a graph. Then χ(G)k\chi(G)\leq k if and only if 𝖼𝗁𝗈𝗋(GK2c)k\mathsf{chor}(G\cdot K_{2}^{c})\leq k.

Proof of 4.5.

For the forward direction: By Theorem 4.3 and Theorem 4.4 we have that 𝖼𝗁𝗈𝗋(GK2c)χ(GK2c)=χ(GK1)=χ(G)k\mathsf{chor}(G\cdot K_{2}^{c})\leq\chi(G\cdot K_{2}^{c})=\chi(G\cdot K_{1})=\chi(G)\leq k.

For the reverse direction: Suppose that 𝖼𝗁𝗈𝗋(GK2c)k\mathsf{chor}(G\cdot K_{2}^{c})\leq k and let H1,,HkH_{1},\ldots,H_{k} be chordal graphs such that GK2c=H1HkG\cdot K_{2}^{c}=H_{1}\cap\ldots\cap H_{k}. Let V(K2c)={1,2}V(K_{2}^{c})=\{1,2\}. Let f:V(G)[k]f\colon V(G)\rightarrow[k] be defined as follows: f(v)=i[k]f(v)=i\in[k], where ii is chosen so that it satisfies {(v,1),(v,2)}E(Hi)\{(v,1),(v,2)\}\notin E(H_{i}). We claim that ff is a proper kk-coloring of GG. Suppose not. Let {u,v}E(G)\{u,v\}\in E(G) be such that f(u)=f(v)=:if(u)=f(v)=:i. Then we have that {(v,1),(v,2)}E(Hi)\{(v,1),(v,2)\}\notin E(H_{i}) and {(u,1),(u,2)}E(Hi)\{(u,1),(u,2)\}\notin E(H_{i}). Thus, Hi[{(v,1),(v,2),(u,1),(u,2)}]H_{i}[\{(v,1),(v,2),(u,1),(u,2)\}] is a hole in HiH_{i} which is a contradiction. ∎

Corollary 4.6.

Let GG be a graph. Then, in polynomial-time in the size of GG we can construct a graph GG^{\prime} such that the following hold: χ(G)=k\chi(G)=k if and only if 𝖼𝗁𝗈𝗋(G)=k\mathsf{chor}(G^{\prime})=k.

Now Theorem 4.1 follows immediately by Theorem 4.2 and 4.6.

References