arXiv++ Combinatorics

A jump is a pair of consecutive elements in an extension of a poset which are incomparable in the original poset. The arboreal jump number is an NP-hard problem that aims to find an arboreal extension of a given poset with minimum number of jumps. The contribution of this paper is twofold: (i)~a characterization that reveals a relation between the number of jumps of an arboreal order extension and the size of a partition of its elements that satisfy some structural properties of the covering graph; (ii)~a compact integer programming model and a heuristic to solve the arboreal jump number problem along with computational results comparing both strategies. The exact method provides an optimality certificate for 18 out of 41 instances with execution time limited to two hours. Furthermore, our heuristic was able to find good feasible solutions for all instances in less than three minutes.

We study approaches for the exact solution of the \NP--hard minimum spanning tree problem under conflict constraints. Given a graph $G(V,E)$ and a set $C \subset E \times E$ of conflicting edge pairs, the problem consists of finding a conflict-free minimum spanning tree, i.e. feasible solutions are allowed to include at most one of the edges from each pair in $C$. The problem was introduced recently in the literature, with several results on its complexity and approximability. Some formulations and both exact and heuristic algorithms were also discussed, but computational results indicate considerably large duality gaps and a lack of optimality certificates for benchmark instances. In this paper, we build on the representation of conflict constraints using an auxiliary conflict graph $\hat{G}(E,C)$, where stable sets correspond to conflict-free subsets of $E$. We introduce a general preprocessing method and a branch and cut algorithm using an IP formulation with exponentially sized classes of valid inequalities for both the spanning tree and the stable set polytopes. Encouraging computational results indicate that the dual bounds of our approach are significantly stronger than those previously available, already in the initial LP relaxation, and we are able to provide new feasibility and optimality certificates.