Opened 8 years ago
Last modified 3 years ago
#11736 needs_info enhancement
Linear time implementation of lex_BFS()
Reported by:  ddestrada  Owned by:  jason, ncohen, rlm 

Priority:  major  Milestone:  sage6.4 
Component:  graph theory  Keywords:  lexbfs 
Cc:  ncohen, dcoudert  Merged in:  
Authors:  Reviewers:  
Report Upstream:  N/A  Work issues:  
Branch:  public/11736 (Commits)  Commit:  906438689c7b8b32756c8799fb410682b0c1dea8 
Dependencies:  Stopgaps: 
Description (last modified by )
The current implementation of lex_BFS() is quadratic, which is not optimal. The usual way to do it in linear time is through a clever use of doubly linked lists, but in (1) there is a way with static arrays, which I coded in Python.
There is one thing, though: in (2) there is a new algorithm for is_interval() that avoids PQtrees, and just uses various passes of lex_BFS() (implemented with doubly linked lists). So maybe in the long run it would be better to do it with doubly linked lists in Cython.
(1) Habib, McConnell?, Paul and Viennot. LexBFS and Partition Refinement, with Applications to Transitive Orientation, Interval Graph Recognition and Consecutive Ones Testing. TCS 234, 2000.
(2) Corneil, Olariu and Stewart. The LBFS Structure and Recognition of Interval Graphs. SIAMDM 23(4), 2009.
Attachments (2)
Change History (26)
comment:1 Changed 8 years ago by
 Owner changed from jason, ncohen, rlm to ddestrada
 Type changed from PLEASE CHANGE to enhancement
comment:2 Changed 8 years ago by
 Owner changed from ddestrada to jason, ncohen, rlm
comment:3 Changed 8 years ago by
 Description modified (diff)
comment:4 followup: ↓ 6 Changed 8 years ago by
 Status changed from new to needs_review
comment:5 Changed 8 years ago by
 Status changed from needs_review to needs_work
Changed 8 years ago by
comment:6 in reply to: ↑ 4 ; followup: ↓ 7 Changed 8 years ago by
 Status changed from needs_work to needs_review
Replying to ncohen: Thank you! Here I fixed the "build/" thing, but I'm having trouble running the tests (in OSX 10.7 and Ubuntu 11.04), so expect it to break some of them. I'm sorry.
comment:7 in reply to: ↑ 6 ; followup: ↓ 8 Changed 8 years ago by
 Status changed from needs_review to needs_work
Thank you! Here I fixed the "build/" thing, but I'm having trouble running the tests (in OSX 10.7 and Ubuntu 11.04), so expect it to break some of them. I'm sorry.
Perhaps I can help you with this test problem ? The thing is that right now the patch does not seem to work :
sage: graphs.RandomInterval(30).is_interval()  TypeError Traceback (most recent call last) /home/ncohen/sage/devel/sage3/sage/graphs/<ipython console> in <module>() /home/ncohen/sage/local/lib/python2.6/sitepackages/sage/graphs/generic_graph.pyc in is_interval(self, certificate) 9606 # by the way :) 9607 > 9608 if not self.is_chordal(): 9609 return False 9610 /home/ncohen/sage/local/lib/python2.6/sitepackages/sage/graphs/generic_graph.pyc in is_chordal(self, certificate) 9492 for v in peo: 9493 > 9494 if t_peo.out_degree(v)>0: 9495 9496 x = t_peo.neighbor_out_iterator(v).next() /home/ncohen/sage/local/lib/python2.6/sitepackages/sage/graphs/digraph.pyc in out_degree(self, vertices, labels) 1176 return di 1177 else: > 1178 return list(self.out_degree_iterator(vertices, labels=labels)) 1179 1180 def out_degree_iterator(self, vertices=None, labels=False): /home/ncohen/sage/local/lib/python2.6/sitepackages/sage/graphs/digraph.pyc in out_degree_iterator(self, vertices, labels) 1221 yield (v, d) 1222 else: > 1223 for v in vertices: 1224 d = 0 1225 for e in self.outgoing_edge_iterator(v): TypeError: 'int' object is not iterable sage: graphs.RandomInterval(30).is_interval()  IndexError Traceback (most recent call last) /home/ncohen/sage/devel/sage3/sage/graphs/<ipython console> in <module>() /home/ncohen/sage/local/lib/python2.6/sitepackages/sage/graphs/generic_graph.pyc in is_interval(self, certificate) 9606 # by the way :) 9607 > 9608 if not self.is_chordal(): 9609 return False 9610 /home/ncohen/sage/local/lib/python2.6/sitepackages/sage/graphs/generic_graph.pyc in is_chordal(self, certificate) 9484 return all( gg.is_chordal() for gg in self.connected_components_subgraphs() ) 9485 > 9486 peo,t_peo = self.lex_BFS(tree=True) 9487 9488 g = self.copy() /home/ncohen/sage/local/lib/python2.6/sitepackages/sage/graphs/generic_graph.pyc in lex_BFS(self, reverse, tree, initial_vertex) 11617 if subslice[a] < old_k: 11618 subslice[a] = k > 11619 slice_head[k] = l 11620 k += 1 11621 slice_of[l] = subslice[a] IndexError: list assignment index out of range
On random interval graphs sometimes the is_interval function works, sometimes it does not... ^^;
I tested you patch after having applied #11738 and #11735 but I do not think this is where the bug comes from. Could you also add some comments to your code, along with a reference to the paper you are following for this implementation ? :)
Nathann
comment:8 in reply to: ↑ 7 Changed 8 years ago by
 Status changed from needs_work to needs_review
Replying to ncohen: Hello Nathann, I think the bug is now fixed (it was a very simple mistake). I added the reference, but the comments are still missing. Thanks!
comment:9 Changed 8 years ago by
 Status changed from needs_review to needs_work
Hello !!
This patch still produces many errors when running the doctests...
sage t "devel/sage3/sage/graphs/generic_graph.py" IBM ILOG License Manager: "IBM ILOG Optimization Suite for Academic Initiative" is accessing CPLEX 12 with option(s): "e m b q ". ********************************************************************** File "/home/ncohen/.Sage/devel/sage3/sage/graphs/generic_graph.py", line 9412: sage: (2*g).is_chordal() Exception raised: Traceback (most recent call last): File "/home/ncohen/.Sage/local/bin/ncadoctest.py", line 1231, in run_one_test self.run_one_example(test, example, filename, compileflags) File "/home/ncohen/.Sage/local/bin/sagedoctest.py", line 38, in run_one_example OrigDocTestRunner.run_one_example(self, test, example, filename, compileflags) File "/home/ncohen/.Sage/local/bin/ncadoctest.py", line 1172, in run_one_example compileflags, 1) in test.globs File "<doctest __main__.example_137[6]>", line 1, in <module> (Integer(2)*g).is_chordal()###line 9412: sage: (2*g).is_chordal() File "/home/ncohen/.Sage/local/lib/python/sitepackages/sage/graphs/generic_graph.py", line 9474, in is_chordal return all( gg.is_chordal() for gg in self.connected_components_subgraphs() ) File "/home/ncohen/.Sage/local/lib/python/sitepackages/sage/graphs/generic_graph.py", line 9474, in <genexpr> return all( gg.is_chordal() for gg in self.connected_components_subgraphs() ) File "/home/ncohen/.Sage/local/lib/python/sitepackages/sage/graphs/generic_graph.py", line 9488, in is_chordal if t_peo.out_degree(v)>0 and g.neighbors(v) not in neighbors_subsets[t_peo.neighbor_out_iterator(v).next()]: File "/home/ncohen/.Sage/local/lib/python/sitepackages/sage/graphs/digraph.py", line 1178, in out_degree return list(self.out_degree_iterator(vertices, labels=labels)) File "/home/ncohen/.Sage/local/lib/python/sitepackages/sage/graphs/digraph.py", line 1223, in out_degree_iterator for v in vertices: TypeError: 'int' object is not iterable ********************************************************************** File "/home/ncohen/.Sage/devel/sage3/sage/graphs/generic_graph.py", line 9436: sage: hole Expected: Subgraph of (Petersen graph): Graph on 5 vertices Got: Subgraph of (Petersen graph): Graph on 4 vertices ********************************************************************** File "/home/ncohen/.Sage/devel/sage3/sage/graphs/generic_graph.py", line 9438: sage: hole.is_isomorphic(graphs.CycleGraph(5)) Expected: True Got: False ********************************************************************** File "/home/ncohen/.Sage/devel/sage3/sage/graphs/generic_graph.py", line 9554: sage: g.is_interval() Expected: True Got: False ********************************************************************** File "/home/ncohen/.Sage/devel/sage3/sage/graphs/generic_graph.py", line 9562: sage: d = g.is_interval(certificate = True) Exception raised: Traceback (most recent call last): File "/home/ncohen/.Sage/local/bin/ncadoctest.py", line 1231, in run_one_test self.run_one_example(test, example, filename, compileflags) ...
Perhaps we can help with your problem running doctests ? It something does not work on this side, it is another bug of Sage's ! ;)
Nathann
comment:10 followup: ↓ 11 Changed 7 years ago by
I was ready to help with the doctests issues, but I'm unable to install the patch on sage5.0.beta9.
comment:11 in reply to: ↑ 10 Changed 7 years ago by
Replying to dcoudert:
I was ready to help with the doctests issues, but I'm unable to install the patch on sage5.0.beta9.
Hello! I'm sorry I disappeared. I will fix this in the next few days.
Changed 7 years ago by
comment:12 Changed 7 years ago by
 Status changed from needs_work to needs_review
comment:13 Changed 7 years ago by
 Cc dcoudert added
comment:14 followup: ↓ 15 Changed 7 years ago by
I think this patch is working now and passes all the doctests. I'm sure the errors I get while doctesting are bugs of Sage 4.8 (for example, on both Ubuntu 10.10 and OS X 10.7 I get an error in line 15146 of generic_graph.py: "ValueError?: Database has no tablegraph_data.").
comment:15 in reply to: ↑ 14 Changed 7 years ago by
 Status changed from needs_review to needs_work
Helloooooo Diego !!
I'm sorry but your patch can not be applied on top of the latest release of Sage, that is sage5.0beta11 (https://groups.google.com/d/topic/sagerelease/XnyN3tx4Bow/discussion). Plenty of stuff has been added in the 5.0beta? series, and that is probably the explanation :)
About your path, though : it removes the old code that computed (more slowly) a BFS ordering for the vertices. This being said, I think this code could still be useful to ... check that the new algorithm actually returns a correct BFS ordering ! Of course, as it is slower, this ordering should not be checked by default, but it would be nice to be able to run doctests which check for each computation of BFS ordering whether this ordering is indeed correct. This can be done by actually checking in turn that each vertex of the ordering is maximal at the moment when it is removed.
Do you think it could be possible to comment your code a bit more ? As it is, reading the paper to understand what happens seems to be the only alternative :)
Nathann
comment:16 Changed 6 years ago by
 Milestone changed from sage5.11 to sage5.12
comment:17 Changed 6 years ago by
 Milestone changed from sage6.1 to sage6.2
comment:18 Changed 5 years ago by
 Milestone changed from sage6.2 to sage6.3
comment:19 Changed 5 years ago by
 Milestone changed from sage6.3 to sage6.4
comment:20 Changed 4 years ago by
 Branch set to public/11736
comment:21 Changed 4 years ago by
 Commit set to 588c43140644c9d43cfae2e27e116566eda9ac54
Branch pushed to git repo; I updated commit sha1. New commits:
588c431  trac #11736: convert hg patch to git

comment:22 Changed 4 years ago by
 Status changed from needs_work to needs_info
Hello,
This patch has been sleeping for very very long time.
I did a first git version of the patch with some corrections. This is far from final version and we have currently 2 implementations to ease tests. To use the new version, you need to set parameter new_version=True
.
Since the code has no comments, it is hard to know whats going on. I have corrected at least one bug (a missing j = l
), but I have the following issue:
sage: g = graphs.PathGraph(3).lexicographic_product(graphs.CompleteGraph(2)) sage: g.lex_BFS(reverse=True) [(2, 1), (2, 0), (1, 1), (1, 0), (0, 1), (0, 0)] sage: g.lex_BFS(reverse=True, new_version=True) [(2, 1), (2, 0), (1, 1), (1, 0), (0, 1), (0, 0)] sage: g.lex_BFS(reverse=False) [(0, 0), (0, 1), (1, 0), (1, 1), (2, 0), (2, 1)] sage: g.lex_BFS(reverse=False, new_version=True) [(0, 0), (0, 1), (1, 0), (1, 1), (2, 0), (2, 1)]
The new version is more consistant (and also way faster). Furthermore, on this example, both reverse orderings are correct.
However, when making the new version the default one, many tests for is_chordal
and is_interval
are broken.
Any help is welcome.
David.
comment:23 Changed 3 years ago by
 Commit changed from 588c43140644c9d43cfae2e27e116566eda9ac54 to 12fdf755595a2a19a333e7928e8d1ef6d2e3f649
Branch pushed to git repo; I updated commit sha1. New commits:
12fdf75  Merge branch 'public/11736' in 7.5.b1

comment:24 Changed 3 years ago by
 Commit changed from 12fdf755595a2a19a333e7928e8d1ef6d2e3f649 to 906438689c7b8b32756c8799fb410682b0c1dea8
Branch pushed to git repo; I updated commit sha1. New commits:
9064386  trac 11736 pep8

Hello Diego !!!
Same comment (see #11738) for this patch about the "build/" folder. I also expect that this patch breaks doctests in Sage's library, so please check it too, correcting the doctests themselves if it makes sense
:)
Nathann