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

An improved planar graph product structure theorem

Torsten Ueckerdt 222Institute of Theoretical Informatics, Karlsruhe Institute of Technology, Germany ([email protected]).   David R. Wood 555School of Mathematics, Monash University, Melbourne, Australia ([email protected]). Research supported by the Australian Research Council.   Wendy Yi 22footnotemark: 2
Abstract

Dujmović, Joret, Micek, Morin, Ueckerdt and Wood [J. ACM 2020] proved that for every planar graph GG there is a graph HH with treewidth at most 8 and a path PP such that GHPG\subseteq H\boxtimes P. We improve this result by replacing “treewidth at most 8” by “simple treewidth at most 6”.

1 Introduction

This paper is motivated by the following question: what is the global structure of planar graphs? Recently, Dujmović et al. [12] gave an answer to this question that describes planar graphs in terms of products of simpler graphs, in particular, graphs of bounded treewidth. In this note, we improve this result in two respects. To describe the result from [12] and our improvement, we need the following definitions.

A tree-decomposition of a graph GG is a collection (B_xV(G):xV(T))(B_{\_}x\subseteq V(G):x\in V(T)) of subsets of V(G)V(G) (called bags) indexed by the nodes of a tree TT, such that:

  1. (a)

    for every edge uvE(G)uv\in E(G), some bag B_xB_{\_}x contains both uu and vv, and

  2. (b)

    for every vertex vV(G)v\in V(G), the set {xV(T):vB_x}\{x\in V(T):v\in B_{\_}x\} induces a non-empty (connected) subtree of TT.

The width of a tree decomposition is the size of the largest bag minus 1. The treewidth of a graph GG, denoted by tw(G)\operatorname{tw}(G), is the minimum width of a tree decomposition of GG. These definitions are due to Robertson and Seymour [21]. Treewidth is recognised as the most important measure of how similar a given graph is to a tree. Indeed, a connected graph with at least two vertices has treewidth 1 if and only if it is a tree. See [15, 20, 3] for surveys on treewidth.

A tree-decomposition (B_x:xV(T))(B_{\_}x:x\in V(T)) of a graph GG is kk-simple, for some kk\in\mathbb{N}, if it has width at most kk, and for every set SS of kk vertices in GG, we have |{xV(T):SB_x}|2|\{x\in V(T):S\subseteq B_{\_}x\}|\leqslant 2. The simple treewidth of a graph GG, denoted by stw(G)\operatorname{stw}(G), is the minimum kk\in\mathbb{N} such that GG has a kk-simple tree-decomposition. Simple treewidth appears in several places in the literature under various guises [16, 17, 18, 22]. The following facts are well-known: A graph has simple treewidth 1 if and only if it is a linear forest. A graph has simple treewidth at most 2 if and only if it is outerplanar. A graph has simple treewidth at most 3 if and only if it has treewidth at most 3 and is planar [17]. The edge-maximal graphs with simple treewidth 3 are ubiquitous objects, called planar 3-trees or stacked triangulations in structural graph theory and graph drawing [2, 17], called stacked polytopes in polytope theory [7], and called Apollonian networks in enumerative and random graph theory [14]. It is also known and easily proved that tw(G)stw(G)tw(G)+1\operatorname{tw}(G)\leqslant\operatorname{stw}(G)\leqslant\operatorname{tw}(G)+1 for every graph GG (see [16, 22]).

The strong product of graphs AA and BB, denoted by ABA\boxtimes B, is the graph with vertex set V(A)×V(B)V(A)\times V(B), where distinct vertices (v,x),(w,y)V(AB)(v,x),(w,y)\in V(A\boxtimes B) are adjacent if (1) v=wv=w and xyE(B)xy\in E(B), or (2) x=yx=y and vwE(A)vw\in E(A), or (3) vwE(A)vw\in E(A) and xyE(B)xy\in E(B).

Dujmović et al. [12] proved the following theorem describing the global structure of planar graphs.

Theorem 1 ([12]).

Every planar graph GG is isomorphic to a subgraph of HPH\boxtimes P, for some planar graph HH with treewidth at most 8 and some path PP.

Theorem 1 has been used to solve several open problems regarding queue layouts [12], non-repetitive colourings [10], centered colourings [8], clustered colourings [11], adjacency labellings [4, 9, 13], and vertex rankings [5].

We modify the proof of Theorem 1 to establish the following.

Theorem 2.

Every planar graph GG is isomorphic to a subgraph of HPH\boxtimes P, for some planar graph HH with simple treewidth at most 6 and some path PP.

Theorem 2 improves upon Theorem 1 in two respects. First it is for simple treewidth (although it should be said that the proof of Theorem 1 gives the analogous result for simple treewidth 8). The main improvement is to replace 8 by 6, which does require new ideas. The proof of Theorem 2 builds heavily on the proof of Theorem 1, which in turn builds on a result of Pilipczuk and Siebertz [19], who showed that every planar graph has a partition into geodesic paths whose contraction gives a graph with treewidth at most 8.

2 Proof of Theorem 2

Our goal is to find a given planar graph GG as a subgraph of HPH\boxtimes P for some graph HH of small treewidth and path PP. Dujmović et al. [12] showed this can be done by partitioning the vertices of GG into so-called vertical paths in a BFS spanning tree so that contracting each path into a single vertex gives the graph HH (see Lemma 3 and Figure 1 below).

To formalise this idea, we need the following terminology and notation. A partition 𝒫\mathcal{P} of a graph GG is a set of connected subgraphs of GG, such that each vertex of GG is in exactly one subgraph in 𝒫\mathcal{P}. The quotient of 𝒫\mathcal{P}, denoted G/𝒫G/\mathcal{P}, is the graph with vertex set 𝒫\mathcal{P}, where distinct elements A,B𝒫A,B\in\mathcal{P} are adjacent in G/𝒫G/\mathcal{P} if there is an edge of GG with endpoints in AA and BB. Note that G/𝒫G/\mathcal{P} is a minor of GG, so if GG is planar then G/𝒫G/\mathcal{P} is planar.

If TT is a tree rooted at a vertex rr, then a non-empty path (x_0,,x_p)(x_{\_}0,\dots,x_{\_}p) in TT is vertical if for some d0d\geqslant 0 for all i[0,p]i\in[0,p] we have dist_T(x_i,r)=d+i\operatorname{dist}_{\_}T(x_{\_}i,r)=d+i.

Lemma 3 ([12]).

Let TT be a BFS spanning tree in a connected graph GG. Let 𝒫\mathcal{P} be a partition of GG into vertical paths in TT. Then GG is isomorphic to a subgraph of (G/𝒫)P(G/\mathcal{P})\boxtimes P, for some path PP.

Refer to caption
Figure 1: (a) A partition 𝒫\mathcal{P} of a planar graph GG into red vertical paths in a BFS spanning tree. (b) Illustration of GG as a subgraph of (G/𝒫)P(G/\mathcal{P})\boxtimes P.

The heart of this paper is Lemma 5 below, which is an improved version of the key lemma from [12]. The statement of Lemma 5 is identical to Lemma 13 from [12], except that we require FF to be partitioned into at most 55 instead of 66 paths and that the tree-decomposition of HH is 6-simple.

For a cycle CC, we write C=[P_1,,P_k]C=[P_{\_}1,\dots,P_{\_}k] if P_1,,P_kP_{\_}1,\dots,P_{\_}k are pairwise disjoint non-empty paths in CC, and the endpoints of each path P_iP_{\_}i can be labelled x_ix_{\_}i and y_iy_{\_}i so that y_ix_i+1E(C)y_{\_}ix_{\_}{i+1}\in E(C) for i[k]i\in[k], where x_k+1x_{\_}{k+1} means x_1x_{\_}1. This implies that V(C)=_i=1kV(P_i)V(C)=\bigcup_{\_}{i=1}^{k}V(P_{\_}i).

The proof of Lemma 5 employs the following well-known variation of Sperner’s Lemma (see [1])

Lemma 4 (Sperner’s Lemma).

Let GG be a near-triangulation whose vertices are coloured 1,2,31,2,3, with the outerface F=[P_1,P_2,P_3]F=[P_{\_}1,P_{\_}2,P_{\_}3] where each vertex in P_iP_{\_}i is coloured ii. Then GG contains an internal face whose vertices are coloured 1,2,31,2,3.

Lemma 5.

Let G+G^{+} be a plane triangulation, let TT be a spanning tree of G+G^{+} rooted at some vertex rr on the outerface of G+G^{+}, and let P_1,,P_kP_{\_}1,\ldots,P_{\_}k for some k[5]k\in[5], be pairwise disjoint vertical paths in TT such that F=[P_1,,P_k]F=[P_{\_}1,\ldots,P_{\_}k] is a cycle in G+G^{+}. Let GG be the near-triangulation consisting of all the edges and vertices of G+G^{+} contained in FF and the interior of FF. Then GG has a partition 𝒫\mathcal{P} into paths in GG that are vertical in TT, such that P_1,,P_k𝒫P_{\_}1,\ldots,P_{\_}k\in\mathcal{P} and the quotient H:=G/𝒫H:=G/\mathcal{P} has a 6-simple tree-decomposition such that some bag contains all the vertices of HH corresponding to P_1,,P_kP_{\_}1,\ldots,P_{\_}k.

Proof.

The proof is by induction on n=|V(G)|n=|V(G)|. If n=3n=3, then GG is a 3-cycle and k3k\leqslant 3. The partition into vertical paths is 𝒫={P_1,,P_k}\mathcal{P}=\{P_{\_}1,\ldots,P_{\_}k\}. The tree-decomposition of HH consists of a single bag that contains the k3k\leqslant 3 vertices corresponding to P_1,,P_kP_{\_}1,\ldots,P_{\_}k. Now assume that n>3n>3.

We now set up an application of Sperner’s Lemma to the near-triangulation GG. We begin by colouring the vertices in k5k\leqslant 5 colours. For i{1,,k}i\in\{1,\ldots,k\}, colour each vertex in P_iP_{\_}i by ii. Now, for each remaining vertex vv in GG, consider the path P_vP_{\_}v from vv to the root of TT. Since rr is on the outerface of G+G^{+}, P_vP_{\_}v contains at least one vertex of FF. If the first vertex of P_vP_{\_}v that belongs to FF is in P_iP_{\_}i, then assign the colour ii to vv. The set V_iV_{\_}i of all vertices of colour ii induces a connected subgraph of GG for each i{1,,k}i\in\{1,\ldots,k\}. Consider the graph M=G/{V_1,,V_k}M=G/\{V_{\_}1,\ldots,V_{\_}k\} obtained by contracting each colour class V_iV_{\_}i into a single vertex c_ic_{\_}i. Since GG is planar, MM is planar. (In fact, MM is outerplanar, although we will not use this property.) Moreover, if k3k\geqslant 3 then [c_1,,c_k][c_{\_}1,\ldots,c_{\_}k] is a cycle in MM. Since M≇K_5M\not\cong K_{\_}5, we may assume without loss of generality that either k4k\leqslant 4 or k=5k=5 and c_2c_5c_{\_}2c_{\_}5 is not an edge in MM; that is, no vertex coloured 22 is adjacent to a vertex coloured 55.

Group consecutive paths from P_1,,P_kP_{\_}1,\dots,P_{\_}k as follows:

  • If k=1k=1 then, since FF is a cycle, P_1P_{\_}1 has at least three vertices, so P_1=[v,P_1,w]P_{\_}1=[v,P_{\_}1^{\prime},w] for two distinct vertices vv and ww. Let R_1:=vR_{\_}1:=v, R_2:=P_1R_{\_}2:=P_{\_}1^{\prime} and R_3:=wR_{\_}3:=w.

  • If k=2k=2 then, without loss of generality, P_1P_{\_}1 has at least two vertices, say P_1=[v,P_1]P_{\_}1=[v,P_{\_}1^{\prime}]. Let R_1:=vR_{\_}1:=v, R_2:=P_1R_{\_}2:=P_{\_}1^{\prime} and R_3:=P_2R_{\_}3:=P_{\_}2.

  • If k=3k=3 then let R_1:=P_1R_{\_}1:=P_{\_}1, R_2:=P_2R_{\_}2:=P_{\_}2 and R_3:=P_3R_{\_}3:=P_{\_}3.

  • If k=4k=4 then let R_1:=P_1R_{\_}1:=P_{\_}1, R_2:=P_2R_{\_}2:=P_{\_}2 and R_3:=[P_3,P_4]R_{\_}3:=[P_{\_}3,P_{\_}4].

  • If k=5k=5 then let R_1:=P_1R_{\_}1:=P_{\_}1, R_2:=[P_2,P_3]R_{\_}2:=[P_{\_}2,P_{\_}3] and R_3:=[P_4,P_5]R_{\_}3:=[P_{\_}4,P_{\_}5].

We now derive a 33-colouring from the kk-colouring above. For i{1,2,3}i\in\{1,2,3\}, colour each vertex in R_iR_{\_}i by ii. Now, for each remaining vertex vv in GG, consider again the path P_vP_{\_}v from vv to the root of TT and if the first vertex of P_vP_{\_}v that belongs to FF is in R_iR_{\_}i, then assign the colour ii to vv. Hence, for k=3k=3 we obtain exactly the same 3-colouring as above, while for k{4,5}k\in\{4,5\} some pairs of colour classes from the kk-colouring are merged into one colour class in the 33-colouring. In each case, we obtain a 3-colouring of V(G)V(G) that satisfies the conditions of Lemma 4. Therefore there exists a triangular face τ=v_1v_2v_3\tau=v_{\_}1v_{\_}2v_{\_}3 of GG whose vertices are coloured 1,2,31,2,3 respectively; see Figure 2.

Refer to caption
Figure 2: Example of the proof of Lemma 5 with k=5k=5.

For each i{1,2,3}i\in\{1,2,3\}, let Q_iQ_{\_}i be the path in TT from v_iv_{\_}i to the first ancestor v_iv_{\_}i^{\prime} of v_iv_{\_}i in TT that is in FF. Observe that Q_1Q_{\_}1, Q_2Q_{\_}2, and Q_3Q_{\_}3 are disjoint since Q_iQ_{\_}i consists only of vertices coloured ii. Note that Q_iQ_{\_}i may consist of the single vertex v_i=v_iv_{\_}i=v_{\_}i^{\prime}. Let Q_iQ_{\_}i^{\prime} be Q_iQ_{\_}i minus its final vertex v_iv_{\_}i^{\prime}. Imagine for a moment that the cycle FF is oriented clockwise, which defines an orientation of R_1R_{\_}1, R_2R_{\_}2 and R_3R_{\_}3. Let R_iR_{\_}i^{-} be the subpath of R_iR_{\_}i that contains v_iv^{\prime}_{\_}i and all vertices that precede it, and let R_i+R_{\_}i^{+} be the subpath of R_iR_{\_}i that contains v_iv^{\prime}_{\_}i and all vertices that succeed it.

Consider the subgraph of GG that consists of the edges and vertices of FF, the edges and vertices of τ\tau, and the edges and vertices of Q_1Q_2Q_3Q_{\_}1\cup Q_{\_}2\cup Q_{\_}3. This graph has an outerface, an inner face τ\tau, and up to three more inner faces F_1,F_2,F_3F_{\_}1,F_{\_}2,F_{\_}3 where F_i=[Q_i,R_i+,R_i+1,Q_i+1]F_{\_}i=[Q_{\_}i^{\prime},R_{\_}i^{+},R_{\_}{i+1}^{-},Q_{\_}{i+1}^{\prime}], where we use the convention that Q_4=Q_1Q_{\_}4=Q_{\_}1 and R_4=R_1R_{\_}4=R_{\_}1. Note that F_iF_{\_}i may be degenerate in the sense that [Q_i,R_i+,R_i+1,Q_i+1][Q_{\_}i^{\prime},R_{\_}i^{+},R_{\_}{i+1}^{-},Q_{\_}{i+1}^{\prime}] may consist only of a single edge v_iv_i+1v_{\_}iv_{\_}{i+1}.

Consider any non-degenerate F_i=[Q_i,R_i+,R_i+1,Q_i+1]F_{\_}i=[Q_{\_}i^{\prime},R_{\_}i^{+},R_{\_}{i+1}^{-},Q_{\_}{i+1}^{\prime}]. Note that these four paths are pairwise disjoint, and thus F_iF_{\_}i is a cycle. If Q_iQ_{\_}i^{\prime} and Q_i+1Q_{\_}{i+1}^{\prime} are non-empty, then each is a vertical path in TT. Furthermore, each of R_i+R_{\_}i^{+} and R_i+1R_{\_}{i+1}^{-} consists of at most two vertical paths in TT. Thus, F_iF_{\_}i is the concatenation of at most six vertical paths in TT. Let k_ik_{\_}i be the actual number of (non-empty) vertical paths whose concatenation gives F_iF_{\_}i. Then k_15k_{\_}1\leqslant 5 and k_35k_{\_}3\leqslant 5 since R_1R_{\_}1^{-} and R_1+R_{\_}1^{+} consist of only one vertical path in TT. Also, if k4k\leqslant 4 then R_2+R_{\_}2^{+} consists of only one vertical path in TT, implying k_25k_{\_}2\leqslant 5. If k=5k=5, then in our preliminary kk-colouring no vertex coloured 22 is adjacent to a vertex coloured 55. Since v_2v_3v_{\_}2v_{\_}3 is an edge, this means that either v_2v_{\_}2^{\prime} lies on P_3P_{\_}3 or v_3v_{\_}3^{\prime} lies on P_4P_{\_}4 or both. In any case, at least one of R_2+R_{\_}2^{+} and R_3R_{\_}3^{-} consists of only one vertical path in TT, which again gives k_25k_{\_}2\leqslant 5.

So F_iF_{\_}i is the concatenation of k_i5k_{\_}i\leqslant 5 vertical paths in TT for each i{1,2,3}i\in\{1,2,3\}. Let G_iG_{\_}i be the near-triangulation consisting of all the edges and vertices of G+G^{+} contained in F_iF_{\_}i and the interior of F_iF_{\_}i. Observe that G_iG_{\_}i contains v_iv_{\_}i and v_i+1v_{\_}{i+1} but not the third vertex of τ\tau. Therefore G_iG_{\_}i satisfies the conditions of the lemma and has fewer than nn vertices. By induction, G_iG_{\_}i has a partition 𝒫_i\mathcal{P}_{\_}i into vertical paths in TT, such that H_i:=G_i/𝒫_iH_{\_}i:=G_{\_}i/\mathcal{P}_{\_}i has a 6-simple tree-decomposition (B_ix:xV(J_i))(B^{i}_{\_}x:x\in V(J_{\_}i)) in which some bag B_iu_iB^{i}_{\_}{u_{\_}i} contains the vertices of H_iH_{\_}i corresponding to the at most five vertical paths that form F_iF_{\_}i. Do this for each non-degenerate F_iF_{\_}i.

We now construct the desired partition 𝒫\mathcal{P} of GG. Initialise 𝒫:={P_1,,P_k}\mathcal{P}:=\{P_{\_}1,\ldots,P_{\_}k\}. Then add each non-empty Q_iQ_{\_}i^{\prime} to 𝒫\mathcal{P}. Now for each non-degenerate F_iF_{\_}i, classify each path in 𝒫_i\mathcal{P}_{\_}i as either external (that is, fully contained in F_iF_{\_}i) or internal (with no vertex in F_iF_{\_}i). Add all the internal paths of 𝒫_i\mathcal{P}_{\_}i to 𝒫\mathcal{P}. By construction, 𝒫\mathcal{P} partitions V(G)V(G) into vertical paths in TT and 𝒫\mathcal{P} contains P_1,,P_kP_{\_}1,\ldots,P_{\_}k.

Let H:=G/𝒫H:=G/\mathcal{P}. Next we construct a tree-decomposition of HH. Let JJ be the tree obtained from the disjoint union of J_iJ_{\_}i, taken over the i{1,2,3}i\in\{1,2,3\} such that F_iF_{\_}i is non-degenerate, by adding one new node uu adjacent to each u_iu_{\_}i. (Recall that u_iu_{\_}i is the node of J_iJ_{\_}i for which the bag B_iu_iB^{i}_{\_}{u_{\_}i} contains the vertices of H_iH_{\_}i corresponding to the paths that form F_iF_{\_}i.) Let the bag B_uB_{\_}u contain all the vertices of HH corresponding to P_1,,P_k,Q_1,Q_2,Q_3P_{\_}1,\ldots,P_{\_}k,Q^{\prime}_{\_}1,Q^{\prime}_{\_}2,Q^{\prime}_{\_}3. For each non-degenerate F_iF_{\_}i, and for each node xV(J_i)x\in V(J_{\_}i), initialise B_x:=B_ixB_{\_}x:=B^{i}_{\_}x. Recall that vertices of H_iH_{\_}i correspond to contracted paths in 𝒫_i\mathcal{P}_{\_}i. Each internal path in 𝒫_i\mathcal{P}_{\_}i is in 𝒫\mathcal{P}. Each external path PP in 𝒫_i\mathcal{P}_{\_}i is a subpath of P_jP_{\_}j for some j[k]j\in[k] or is one of Q_1,Q_2,Q_3Q^{\prime}_{\_}1,Q^{\prime}_{\_}2,Q^{\prime}_{\_}3. For each such path PP, for every xV(J)x\in V(J), in bag B_xB_{\_}x, replace each instance of the vertex of H_iH_{\_}i corresponding to PP by the vertex of HH corresponding to the path among P_1,,P_k,Q_1,Q_2,Q_3P_{\_}1,\ldots,P_{\_}k,Q^{\prime}_{\_}1,Q^{\prime}_{\_}2,Q^{\prime}_{\_}3 that contains PP. This completes the description of (B_x:xV(J))(B_{\_}x:x\in V(J)). By construction, |B_x|k+38|B_{\_}x|\leqslant k+3\leqslant 8 for every xV(J)x\in V(J).

First we show that for each vertex aa in HH, the set X:={xV(J):aB_x}X:=\{x\in V(J):a\in B_{\_}x\} forms a subtree of JJ. If aa corresponds to a path distinct from P_1,,P_k,Q_1,Q_2,Q_3P_{\_}1,\ldots,P_{\_}k,Q^{\prime}_{\_}1,Q^{\prime}_{\_}2,Q^{\prime}_{\_}3 then XX is fully contained in J_iJ_{\_}i for some i{1,2,3}i\in\{1,2,3\}. Thus, by induction XX is non-empty and connected in J_iJ_{\_}i, so it is in JJ. If aa corresponds to PP which is one of the paths among P_1,,P_k,Q_1,Q_2,Q_3P_{\_}1,\ldots,P_{\_}k,Q^{\prime}_{\_}1,Q^{\prime}_{\_}2,Q^{\prime}_{\_}3 then uXu\in X and whenever XX contains a vertex of J_iJ_{\_}i it is because some external path of 𝒫_i\mathcal{P}_{\_}i was replaced by PP. In particular, we would have u_iXu_{\_}i\in X in that case. Again by induction each XJ_iX\cap J_{\_}i is connected and since uu_iE(T)uu_{\_}i\in E(T), we conclude that XX induces a (connected) subtree of JJ.

Now we show that, for every edge abab of HH, there is a bag B_xB_{\_}x that contains aa and bb. If aa and bb are both obtained by contracting any of P_1,,P_k,Q_1,Q_2,Q_3P_{\_}1,\ldots,P_{\_}k,Q^{\prime}_{\_}1,Q^{\prime}_{\_}2,Q^{\prime}_{\_}3, then aa and bb both appear in B_uB_{\_}u. If aa and bb are both in H_iH_{\_}i for some i{1,2,3}i\in\{1,2,3\}, then some bag B_ixB^{i}_{\_}x contains both aa and bb. Finally, when aa is obtained by contracting a path P_aP_{\_}a in G_iV(F_i)G_{\_}i-V(F_{\_}i) and bb is obtained by contracting a path P_bP_{\_}b not in G_iG_{\_}i, then the cycle F_iF_{\_}i separates P_aP_{\_}a from P_bP_{\_}b so the edge abab is not present in HH. This concludes the proof that (B_x:xV(J))(B_{\_}x:x\in V(J)) is a tree-decomposition of HH. Note that B_uB_{\_}u contains the vertices of HH corresponding to P_1,,P_kP_{\_}1,\dots,P_{\_}k.

By assumption the tree-decomposition (B_ix:xV(J_i))(B^{i}_{\_}x:x\in V(J_{\_}i)) of H_iH_{\_}i is 6-simple for i{1,2,3}i\in\{1,2,3\}. Since |B_uB_u_i|5|B_{\_}u\cap B_{\_}{u_{\_}i}|\leqslant 5 for each i{1,2,3}i\in\{1,2,3\}, the tree-decomposition (B_x:xV(J))(B_{\_}x:x\in V(J)) of HH is 6-simple, unless |B_u|=8|B_{\_}u|=8, which only occurs if k=5k=5 (since |B_u|k+3|B_{\_}u|\leqslant k+3). Now assume that k=5k=5. Recall again that either v_2v_{\_}2^{\prime} lies on P_3P_{\_}3 or v_3v_{\_}3^{\prime} lies on P_4P_{\_}4 or both. Without loss of generality, v_3v_{\_}3^{\prime} lies on P_4P_{\_}4, and thus there is no edge between Q_2Q_{\_}2^{\prime} and P_5P_{\_}5.

Refer to caption
Figure 3: Illustration of 6-simple tree-decomposition for a possible scenario with k=4k=4 (left) and k=5k=5 (right).

We now modify the above tree-decomposition of HH in the k=5k=5 case. See Figure 3 for an illustration. First delete node uu from JJ and the corresponding bag B_uB_{\_}u. Add a new node yy to JJ adjacent to u_1u_{\_}1 and u_2u_{\_}2, where B_yB_{\_}y consists of the vertices of HH corresponding to P_1,,P_4,Q_1,Q_2,Q_3P_{\_}1,\ldots,P_{\_}4,Q^{\prime}_{\_}1,Q^{\prime}_{\_}2,Q^{\prime}_{\_}3. Thus |B_y|=7|B_{\_}y|=7. Add a node zz to JJ adjacent to yy and u_3u_{\_}3, where B_zB_{\_}z consists of the vertices of HH corresponding to P_1,,P_5,Q_1,Q_3P_{\_}1,\dots,P_{\_}5,Q^{\prime}_{\_}1,Q^{\prime}_{\_}3. Thus |B_z|=7|B_{\_}z|=7 and (B_x:xV(J))(B_{\_}x:x\in V(J)) is a tree-decomposition of HH with width 6. Since P_5P_{\_}5 has no vertex in G_1G_2G_{\_}1\cup G_{\_}2, the vertex of HH corresponding to P_5P_{\_}5 is not in B_u_1B_u_2B_{\_}{u_{\_}1}\cup B_{\_}{u_{\_}2}, and thus the nodes of JJ whose bags contain this vertex form a connected subtree of JJ. Similarly, the vertex of HH corresponding to Q_2Q^{\prime}_{\_}2 is not in B_u_3B_{\_}{u_{\_}3} and thus the nodes of JJ whose bags contain this vertex form a connected subtree of JJ. The argument for the other vertices of HH is identical to that above. This completes the proof that (B_x:xV(J))(B_{\_}x:x\in V(J)) is a tree-decomposition of HH with width at most 6. It is 6-simple since the tree-decompositions of G_1G_{\_}1, G_2G_{\_}2 and G_3G_{\_}3 are 6-simple, and |B_yB_u_1|5|B_{\_}y\cap B_{\_}{u_{\_}1}|\leqslant 5 and |B_yB_u_2|5|B_{\_}y\cap B_{\_}{u_{\_}2}|\leqslant 5 and |B_zB_u_3|5|B_{\_}z\cap B_{\_}{u_{\_}3}|\leqslant 5. Moreover, B_zB_{\_}z contains the vertices of HH corresponding to P_1,,P_5P_{\_}1,\dots,P_{\_}5 as desired. ∎

The following corollary of Lemma 5 is a direct analogue of the corresponding result in [12, Theorem 12].

Corollary 6.

Let TT be a rooted spanning tree in a connected planar graph GG. Then GG has a partition 𝒫\mathcal{P} into vertical paths in TT such that stw(G/𝒫)6\operatorname{stw}(G/\mathcal{P})\leqslant 6.

Proof.

The result is trivial if |V(G)|<3|V(G)|<3. Now assume |V(G)|3|V(G)|\geqslant 3. Let rr be the root of TT. Let G+G^{+} be a plane triangulation containing GG as a spanning subgraph with rr on the outerface of G+G^{+}. The three vertices on the outerface of G+G^{+} are vertical (singleton) paths in TT. Thus, G+G^{+} satisfies the assumptions of Lemma 5 with k=3k=3 and FF being the outerface, which implies that G+G^{+} has a partition 𝒫\mathcal{P} into vertical paths in TT such that stw(G+/𝒫)6\operatorname{stw}(G^{+}/\mathcal{P})\leqslant 6. Note that G/𝒫G/\mathcal{P} is a subgraph of G+/𝒫G^{+}/\mathcal{P}. Hence stw(G/𝒫)6\operatorname{stw}(G/\mathcal{P})\leqslant 6. ∎

Corollaries 6 and 3 imply Theorem 2 (since we may assume that GG is connected).

We conclude with an open problem. Bose et al. [6] defined the row treewidth of a graph GG to be the minimum integer kk such that GG is isomorphic to a subgraph of HPH\boxtimes P for some graph HH with treewidth kk and for some path PP. Theorem 1 by Dujmović et al. [12] says that planar graphs have row treewidth at most 8. Our Theorem 2 improves this upper bound to 6. Dujmović et al. [12] proved a lower bound of 3. In fact, they showed that for every integer \ell there is a planar graph GG such that for every graph HH and path PP, if GG is isomorphic to a subgraph of HPK_H\boxtimes P\boxtimes K_{\_}\ell, then HH contains K_4K_{\_}4 and thus has treewidth at least 3. What is the maximum row treewidth of a planar graph is a tantalising open problem.

References