arXiv++ Combinatorics

The dimension of a partial order $P$ is the minimum number of linear orders whose intersection is $P$. There are efficient algorithms to test if a partial order has dimension at most $2$. In 1982 Yannakakis showed that for $k\geq 3$ to test if a partial order has dimension $\leq k$ is NP-complete. The height of a partial order $P$ is the maximum size of a chain in $P$. Yannakakis also showed that for $k\geq 4$ to test if a partial order of height $2$ has dimension $\leq k$ is NP-complete. The complexity of deciding whether an order of height $2$ has dimension $3$ was left open. This question became one of the best known open problems in dimension theory for partial orders. We show that the problem is NP-complete. Technically we show that the decision problem (3DH2) for dimension is equivalent to deciding for the existence of bipartite triangle containment representations (BTCon). This problem then allows a reduction from a class of planar satisfiability problems (P-3-CON-3-SAT(4)) which is known to be NP-hard.

It has been known since 1991 that the problem of recognizing grid intersection graphs is NP-complete. Here we use a modified argument of the above result to show that even if we restrict to the class of unit grid intersection graphs (UGIGs), the recognition remains hard, as well as for all graph classes contained inbetween. The result holds even when considering only graphs with arbitrarily large girth. Furthermore, we ask the question of representing UGIGs on grids of minimal size. We show that the UGIGs that can be represented in a square of side length 1+epsilon, for a positive epsilon no greater than 1, are exactly the orthogonal ray graphs, and that there exist families of trees that need an arbitrarily large grid.

We start with the well-known game below: Two players hold a sheet of paper to their forehead on which a positive integer is written. The numbers are consecutive and each player can only see the number of the other one. In each time step, they either say nothing or tell what number they have. Both of them will eventually figure out their number after a certain amount of time. The game is rather cooperative than competitive, and employs the notions of common knowledge and mutual knowledge. We generalize this game to arbitrary (directed and non-directed) simple graphs and try to establish for which graphs one or both of them will figure out the solution, and how long they do need to find it. We give a complete answer for the case of two players, even if they are both allowed to discuss before the start of the game.