Volume 14, Number 5 INFORMATION PROCESSING LETTERS
DEPTH-FIRST SEARCH AND THE VERTEX COVER PROBLEM
Carla SAVAGE
Computer Science Department, North Carolina State Unioersity, Raleigh, NC 27650, U.S.A.
Received 16 July 1981; revised version received 25 January 1982
Keywords: Vertex cover, depth-first search, approximation
1. Introduction
A vertex cover in an undirected graph G =
(V, E) is a subset C of V such that every edge of E
is incident with at least one vertex in C. A mini-
mum cover of G is a vertex cover of minimum
cardinality. Since the problem of finding a mini-
mum cover in a graph is NP-complete [3], it is of
interest to devise efficient ways to find an ap-
proximate solution. Our main result in this paper
is to show that if T is any depth-first search
spanning tree of G [6], the nonleaf vertices of T
form a vertex cover of G which is guaranteed to be
within a factor two of the minimum cover in size.
The vertex cover problem is related to the prob-
lem of finding a maximum matching i.n a graph. A
matching of G = (V, E) is a subset M of E such
that no verterr of V is incident with more than one
edge of M. A maximum matching is a matching of
maximum cardinality. For bipartite graphs, the
size of a maximum matching is equal to the size of
a minimum cover [l]. Equality does not always
hold for a general graph. However, it is easy to
show that the size of a minimum cover is bounded
below by thle size of a maximum matching and
above by twice the size of a maximum matching.
It has been shown by Hopcroft and Karp [4]
that a maximum matching in a bipartite graph
G = (V,E) can be found in time O((m+ n)fi)
where m = j/El and n = ]Vl. From this matching a
minimum cover can be found within the same time
bound. Although the vertex cover problem is NP-
complete for general graphs [3], a maximum
0020-019OJ82/0000-0000/$02.75 0 1982 North-Holland
23 July 1982
algorithms, graph algorithms, combinatorial algorithms
matching in a general graph can be found in
polynomial time [ 21.
In this paper, we use the idea of a proper
mdching in a tree, introduced in [5], to exhibit
some relationships between a minimum cover in G
and a depth-first search (dfs) spanning tree of G.
Results on proper matching;s are reviewed in Sec-
tion 2. If G is a tree, the ‘algorithm of Iiopcroft
and Karp can be used to fi,qd a vertex cover in
time 0(nla5). We note in Section 3 that a proper
‘matching can be used to find a vertex cover in a
tree in time O(n). In Section 4 we prove the main
result, that if T is a dfs sparming tree of G, the
nonleaf vertices of T form a vertex cover for G no
worse than twice the minimum cover in size. If T
were an arbitrary spanning tree of G, the nonleaf
vertices of T would not necessarily even be a
vertex cover for G. As a corollary it is shown that
if T is any dfs spanning tree of G, a minimum
cover for T is at least half the size of a minimum
cover for G. Whereas, if T were an arbitrary
spanning tree of G, the ratio of the size of a
minimum cover for G to the size of a minimum
cover for T could be as large as O(n). Finally, in
Section 5, we exhibit some tradeoffs that arise in
this approximation technique which may be of use
in obtaining a better vertex cover approximation.
2. Maximum matchings and trees
All trees in this paper are considered to be
rooted. A rooted tree T = (V, E, r) is a tree with a
233
Volume 14, Number 5 INFORMATION PROCESSING LETTERS
vertex r of V distinguished as the root. For v E V,
let d(v) denote the distance from v io r. If w E V
and (w, v) E E and d(w) = d(v) + 1, then v is the
father of w and w is the son of v. Every vertex W,
distinct from r, has a father, denoted by f(w).
Vertices w, and w2 are brothers if there is a vertex
v with v = f(w,) = f(w2).
Let T = (V, E, r) be a tree rooted at r. If M is a
matching in, T, a vertex v is called free with respect
to M if v is not incident with any edge of M.
Define a proper matching of T to be a matching
M c E which satisfies the following property:
If a vertex w # r of T is free with respect to
M, then for some brother u of w in T the
edge (u, f(w)) is in M.
It was shown in [S] that if M is a proper matching
in T, then M must be a maximum matching of T.
An algorithm was presented which will find, in
any rooted tree T, a proper matching in T in time
O(n). The main result of [5] is the following.
Tbsorem 1. If T is a dfs spanning tree of G and
M(T) and M(G) are maximum matchings in T and
G, respectively, then ]M(G)]/]M(T)] G 2.
3. Vertex covers and trees
Let M be a proper matching in the tree T =
(V, E, r) and let S be the set of ‘sons’ in the edges
of M and F the set of ‘fathers’, that is,
S-l (wEV](w,f(w))EM),
F= (fjw)lwES}.
Any vertex not in S or F is free with respect to M.
Theorem 2. The set F is a minimum cover for T.
Proof. Since iF] = IM], if F is a vertex cover for T,
it must be miriimum. To show that F is a vertex
cover, let e = (w, v) be an edge of T with f(w) = V.
If w is free, v must be in F, since M is proper. If
w E S, then v E F by definition of S and F. Thus
either w or v must be in F.
234
23 July 1982
A vertex cover in T, theq can be found in time
O(n) by computing a proper matching in T.
4. Vertex cover approximation
We now prove the main result.
Theorem 3. Let T be a dfs spanning tree of G with
NL(T) the set of nonleaves of T and let C(G) be a
minimum cover for G. Then NL(T) is a vertex cover
for G with ]NL(T)]/]C(G)] e 2.
Proof. Let L(T) be the set of leaves of T. Since T is
a dfs spanning tree, no edge of G can join two
vertices of L(T), so NL(T) is a vertex cover for G.
For a vertex v of T, let sons(v) denote the number
of sons of v in T. Then,
IWI = 2 (sons(v) - 1) + 1.
vENL(T)
Let M(T) be a proper (and therefore maximum)
maching in T and let X be the set of vertices in T
which are free with respect to M(T). If a vertex w
in X is not the root of T, then the father of w, v, is
a nonleaf vertex which is matched in M(T) with a
brother of w. Thus, sons(v) a 2. Since at most one
vertex of X may be the root of T, we have
IL(T)] a (IX] - 1) + 1 = 1x1.
Since IX] .= n - 2]M(t)] and (L(T)] = n - (NL(T)],
we have ]NL(T)] < 2]M(T)]. In summary,
]M(T)] s ]M(G)] G ]C(G)] < INL(T)I G 2]M(T>
and thus ]NL(T)]/]C(G)] G 2.
It can be seen that this bound is tight bY
considering the case in which G is a path of (0 dd
length and the depth-first search is done from a
vertex of degree 1.
Note that the string of inequalities
IM(T)I 6 (M(G)1 g IW)l sG
IWT)l fGW(T)I
shows that /M(G)]/(M(T)] e 2. This provides a
proof of Theorem 1 which is much simpler than
the proof appearing in [S].
If T is a dfs spanning tree of G, Theorem 3 can
Volume 14, Number 5 INFORMATION
be used to relate the size of a minimum cover of T
to a minimum cover of G.
Corollary 4. If C(G) is a vertex cover of G and T a
dfs spanning tree of G with vertex cover C(T), then
ICCG)l/lW)l g 2.
Proof. Let M(T) be a maximum matching in T and
NL(T) the set of nonleaves of T. From the proof
of Theorem 3 we have that
IC(T)l G IC(G)l G INL(T)J 6 2(M(T)] = 2)C(T)I.
The result follows.
Note that this bound is tight. If G = K n for n
odd, then IC(G)l = n - 1. A dfs spanning tree T
for G would be a path of length n - 1 with IC(T)I =
i(n - 1).
5. Tradeoffs
If T is a dfs spanning tree of G and C(T), C(G),
M(T), M(G) and NL(T) are defined as in the
preceding sections, we have the following stnng of
inequalities:
We have already noted that IM(G)I/IM\T)I s 2
and INL(T)I//C(G)l s 2 and we must have
IC(G)I/IM(G)IS 2. But, in fact, we have the
stronger result that the product of any two of these
three ratios must be less than or equal to 2. In fact,
This shows, for example, that if NL(T) is a rela-
tively bad approximation to C(G), then M(T) is a
relatively good approximation to M(G). Also, the
ratio IC(G)I/!M(G)I must then be relatively small,
a property of G which is independent of the choice
of T among dfs spanning trees. It may be possible
to show for some k, 1 < k < 2, that if
INLtT)I/IC(G)I ’ k, another approximation
PROCESSING LETTERS 23 July 1982
scheme, more suited to graphs with IM(G)I/JM(T)I
< 2/k. c;ln be used to obtain a vertex cover for G
within a factor k of the minimum.
It should be mentioned here that Gavril has
noted another technique for approximating a vertex
cover [3]. A maximal matching in G is a matching
N with the property that no edge in G joins two
vertices which are free with respect to N. The set
E(N) of endpoints of edges in N forms a vertex
cover for G and the following inequalities will
hold:
INI Q IM(G)I Q ICWI QlW)I = 2lNI.
Thus, JE(N)I/IC(G)I d 2. In fact,
IEW
-*-*-= lW)l IMW 2
IW)l IMW IN/ l
So it also occurs in this approximation technique
that if E(N) is a relatively bad approximation to
C(G), then IC(G)I/IM(G)I is relatively small.
Acknowledgement
The author wishes to thank the referees for
their helpful comments and in particular for point-
ing out that the proof of Theorem 3 provides a
simple proof of [S, Theorem 1).
References
[I] J.A. Bondy and U.S.R. Murty, Graph Theory with Applica-
tions (North-Holland, New York).
[2] S. Even and 0. Kariv, An 0(n2.s) algorithm for maximum
matching in general graphs, Proc. 16th Annual ;EEE Symp.
on Foundations of Computer science ( 1975) i 13 - I 12.
[3) M.R. Garey and D.S. Johnson, Computers and Intra~tahil-
ity (Freeman, San Francisco).
[4] J.E. Hopcroft and R.M. Karp, An n’, - el
maximum matching in bipartite graphs, SIAM J. Comput 2
(1973) 225-231.
(51 C. Savage, Maximum matchings and trees Inform. Prarccr~~
Lett. IO (4/S) (1980) 202-205.
[6] R.E. I arjan, Depth-first search and linear graph ~l~~~r~t~rn~.
SIAM J. Comput. I (1972) l46- 160.