arXiv++ Combinatorics

Motivated by recently discovered connections between matroid depth measures and block-structured integer programming [ICALP 2020, 2022], we undertake a systematic study of recursive depth parameters for matrices and matroids, aiming to unify recently introduced and scattered concepts. We propose a general framework that naturally yields eight different depth measures for matroids, prove their fundamental properties and relationships, and relate them to two established notions in the field: matroid branch-depth and a newly introduced natural depth counterpart of matroid tree-width. In particular, we show that six of our eight measures are mutually functionally inequivalent, and among these, one is functionally equivalent to matroid branch-depth and another to matroid tree-depth. Importantly, we also prove that these depth measures coincide on matroids and on matrices over any field, which is (somehow surprisingly) not a trivial task. Finally, we provide a comparison between the matroid parameters and classical depth measures of graphs.

Contraction$^*$-depth is considered to be one of the analogues of graph tree-depth in the matroid setting. In this paper, we investigate structural properties of contraction$^*$-depth of matroids representable over finite fields and rationals. In particular, we prove that the obstructions for contraction$^*$-depth for these classes of matroids are bounded in size. From this we derive analogous results for related notions of contraction-depth and deletion-depth. Moreover, we define a dual notion to contraction$^*$-depth, named deletion$^*$-depth, for $\mathbb{F}$-representable matroids, and by duality extend our results from contraction$^*$-depth to this notion.

The notion of branch-depth for matroids was introduced by DeVos, Kwon and Oum as the matroid analogue of the tree-depth of graphs. The contraction-deletion-depth, another tree-depth like parameter of matroids, is the number of recursive steps needed to decompose a matroid by contractions and deletions to single elements. Any matroid with contraction-deletion-depth at most d has branch-depth at most d. However, the two notions are not functionally equivalent as contraction-deletion-depth of matroids with branch-depth two can be arbitrarily large. We show that the two notions are functionally equivalent for representable matroids when minor closures are considered. Namely, an F-representable matroid has small branch-depth if and only if it is a minor of an F-representable matroid with small contraction-deletion-depth. This implies that any class of F-representable matroids has bounded branch-depth if and only if it is a subclass of the minor closure of a class of F-representable matroids with bounded contraction-deletion-depth.

Twin-width is a width parameter introduced by Bonnet, Kim, Thomassé and Watrigant [FOCS'20, JACM'22], which has many structural and algorithmic applications. We prove that the twin-width of every graph embeddable in a surface of Euler genus $g$ is $18\sqrt{47g}+O(1)$, which is asymptotically best possible as it asymptotically differs from the lower bound by a constant multiplicative factor. Our proof also yields a quadratic time algorithm to find a corresponding contraction sequence. To prove the upper bound on twin-width of graphs embeddable in surfaces, we provide a stronger version of the Product Structure Theorem for graphs of Euler genus $g$ that asserts that every such graph is a subgraph of the strong product of a path and a graph with a tree-decomposition with all bags of size at most eight with a single exceptional bag of size $\max\{8,32g-27\}$.

The theory of limits of permutations leads to limit objects called permutons, which are certain Borel measures on the unit square. We prove that permutons avoiding a given permutation of order $k$ have a particularly simple structure. Namely, almost every fiber of the disintegration of the permuton (say, along the x-axis) consists only of atoms, at most $(k-1)$ many, and this bound is sharp. We use this to give a simple proof of the `permutation removal lemma'.