Low Recourse Arborescence Forests Under Uniformly Random Arcs

Basic Information

• Paper ID: 2510.02950
• Title: Low Recourse Arborescence Forests Under Uniformly Random Arcs
• Authors: Niklas Dahlmeier (RWTH Aachen), Ellis Hershkowitz (Brown University)
• Classification: cs.DS (Data Structures and Algorithms), cs.DM (Discrete Mathematics)
• Publication Date: October 13, 2025 (arXiv v2)
• Paper Link: https://arxiv.org/abs/2510.02950

Abstract

This paper investigates the problem of maintaining maximum-cardinality directed forest arborescences under arc insertion operations while minimizing reconfiguration cost—defined as the total number of arcs changed in the maintained solution. This problem represents the "directed tree version" of the maximum cardinality matching problem. On the impossibility side, the authors observe that even in the insertion-only model, m adversarially arriving arcs may necessarily incur Ω(m·n) reconfiguration cost, matching the trivial O(m·n) upper bound. On the possibility side, when all m arcs arrive uniformly at random, the authors provide an algorithm achieving expected reconfiguration cost O(m·log²n).

Research Background and Motivation

Problem Context

1. Importance of Directed Arborescence Problems: Directed arborescences are among the most thoroughly studied objects in algorithmic graph theory. Since the introduction of the Chu-Liu/Edmonds algorithm, they have found important applications across multiple domains including near-linear time algorithms, primal-dual methods, randomized algorithms, and approximation algorithms.
2. Reconfiguration Cost in Dynamic Algorithms: In dynamic environments, the objective is to maintain solutions as input changes over time. Reconfiguration cost (recourse) is a critical metric for measuring the quality of dynamic algorithms, quantifying the total variation of solutions over time. Low recourse algorithms both reduce the time complexity of updating solutions and provide inherently more stable solutions.
3. Gaps in Existing Research: While directed arborescences have been extensively studied in static settings, they are less well understood in dynamic settings. Recently, Buchbinder et al. provided low recourse algorithms for the vertex arrival model, but the arc arrival model remains unstudied.

Research Motivation

The motivation for this work is to fill gaps in dynamic algorithms for directed arborescences, specifically:

• Extending existing vertex arrival models to the more general arc arrival model
• Establishing analogical connections with maximum bipartite matching problems
• Exploring the boundaries of possibility under random models

Core Contributions

1. Established impossibility results for adversarial arc arrivals: Proved that even in the non-adaptive adversarial model, O(n) arc insertions may necessarily incur Ω(n²) reconfiguration cost.
2. Provided efficient algorithms for random arc arrivals: Under the uniformly random arc arrival model, presented a polynomial-time algorithm achieving expected reconfiguration cost O(m·log²n).
3. Established theoretical connections with maximum matching problems: Demonstrated similarities between the maximum directed forest problem and maximum cardinality matching under dynamic settings.
4. Developed novel analysis techniques: Combined random graph theory and amortized analysis, providing an analytical framework applicable to similar problems.

Methodology Details

Problem Definition

Maximum Directed Forest Problem:

• Input: Directed graph G = (V,A)
• Output: Directed forest F ⊆ A maximizing the number of arcs
• Constraint: Each weakly connected component of F is a directed arborescence

Incremental Maximum Directed Forest Problem:

• Given vertex set V and arc sequence a₁, a₂, ..., aₘ
• At step i, output maximum directed forest F⁽ⁱ⁾ of graph G⁽ⁱ⁾ := (V, ⋃ⱼ≤ᵢ{aⱼ})
• Objective: Minimize reconfiguration cost ∑ᵢ₌₁ᵐ⁻¹ |F⁽ⁱ⁾ \ F⁽ⁱ⁺¹⁾|

Algorithm Design

Core Algorithm Insight

The algorithm is based on the key observation that a directed forest F is maximum if and only if there exists no path between distinct roots in F (Lemma 3.2).

Path Update Operation

Definition 3 (Path Update): Given directed forest F and path P = (r, v₁, v₂, ..., vₖ, r') from root r to root r', define:

update(F,P) := (F \ ⋃ᵢ parent(vᵢ)) ∪ P

Feasible Paths

Definition 4 (Feasible Path): Path P from root r to root r' is feasible if P = Pₐ ⊕ Pᵥ, where:

• Arcs of Pₐ are contained in the arborescence rooted at r
• Vertices of Pᵥ are contained in the arborescence rooted at r'

Algorithm 1: Incremental Maximum Directed Forest Algorithm

Input: Vertex set V and arc sequence a₁, a₂, ..., aₘ
Output: F⁽¹⁾, F⁽²⁾, ..., F⁽ᵐ⁾

Initialize: F⁽⁰⁾ = (V, ∅)
for i = 1 to m:
    if F⁽ⁱ⁻¹⁾ has feasible path P in G⁽ⁱ⁾:
        F⁽ⁱ⁾ ← update(F⁽ⁱ⁻¹⁾, P)
    else:
        F⁽ⁱ⁾ ← F⁽ⁱ⁻¹⁾

Technical Innovations

1. Clever Definition of Feasible Paths: By restricting the structure of update paths, ensures that reconfiguration cost remains manageable.
2. Exploitation of Random Graph Structure: Transforms uniformly random arc arrivals into the D(n,p) random directed graph model, leveraging known structural properties.
3. Two-Phase Amortized Analysis:
   • Phase One (p < 2/n): Exploits existence of isolated vertices
   • Phase Two (p > 2/n): Exploits distributional properties of in-component sizes

Theoretical Analysis

Correctness Proofs

Lemma 3.2: For directed graph G, directed forest F ⊆ G is maximum if and only if there exists no path from root r to root r' for distinct roots r and r' in F.

Lemma 3.5: The output F⁽ⁱ⁾ of Algorithm 1 is a maximum directed forest of G⁽ⁱ⁾ for each i.

Reconfiguration Cost Analysis

Lower Bound Results

Theorem 1.1: There exists an incremental maximum directed forest instance on n vertices where O(n) arc insertions necessarily incur reconfiguration cost at least Ω(n²) for any solution.

Proof Strategy: Constructs bidirectional paths forcing entire path direction reversals upon each arc insertion.

Upper Bound Results

Theorem 1.2: Under the uniformly random arc arrival model, there exists a polynomial-time algorithm achieving expected reconfiguration cost O(m·log²n).

Proof Highlights:

1. Reconfiguration Cost Bounds (Lemma 3.7): Cost of each update is at most the size of merged arborescences
2. In-Component Size Control (Lemma 3.11): Leverages random graph properties to control occurrence of large in-components
3. Amortized Analysis: Two-phase analysis controls frequency of parent arc deletions for vertices

Experimental Results

This is primarily a theoretical work without traditional experimental evaluation. Theoretical results include:

Main Results

1. Tight Lower Bounds: Ω(m·n) reconfiguration cost is unavoidable in adversarial models
2. Near-Optimal Upper Bounds: O(m·log²n) expected reconfiguration cost is achievable in random models
3. Algorithm Efficiency: Polynomial time complexity

Theoretical Findings

1. Model Sensitivity: Vast differences between adversarial vs. random arc arrivals
2. Structural Insights: In-component size is key to controlling reconfiguration cost
3. Technical Generality: Analysis techniques potentially applicable to other randomized models

Related Work

Static Directed Arborescence Algorithms

• Chu-Liu/Edmonds minimum weight arborescence algorithm
• Near-linear time, primal-dual, and randomized algorithms
• Matroid intersection and totally unimodular matrix theory

Low Recourse Dynamic Algorithms

• Set cover, matching, load balancing
• Minimum spanning trees, Steiner trees, TSP
• Clustering and convex body tracking problems

Most Relevant Work

• Buchbinder et al. BGH+24: O(n log²n) reconfiguration cost for vertex arrival model
• Bernstein and Dudeja BD20: Random edge arrival for bipartite matching
• Bernstein et al. BHR19: Adversarial edge arrival matching lower bounds

Conclusions and Discussion

Main Conclusions

1. In adversarial arc arrival models, non-trivial reconfiguration cost bounds are impossible
2. In random arc arrival models, O(log²n) amortized reconfiguration cost is achievable
3. Directed forest problems and maximum matching exhibit similar complexity under dynamic settings

Limitations

1. Model Restrictions: Considers only uniformly random arc arrivals, potentially unrealistic in applications
2. Analysis Complexity: Requires sophisticated random graph theory and amortized analysis
3. Practical Applicability: Lacks experimental validation on real datasets

Future Directions

1. Extended Random Models: Consider adversarial graphs with random arc sequences
2. Improved Bounds: Explore whether the log²n factor can be improved
3. Practical Applications: Test algorithm performance on real network evolution scenarios

In-Depth Evaluation

Strengths

1. Theoretical Rigor: Provides complete upper and lower bound analysis, filling important theoretical gaps
2. Technical Innovation: Cleverly combines random graph theory and amortized analysis with novel techniques
3. Problem Importance: Directed arborescences are fundamental graph structures with broad application value for dynamic maintenance
4. Presentation Clarity: Well-structured paper with detailed proofs, easy to understand and verify

Weaknesses

1. Practical Limitations: Uniform randomness assumption may be overly idealistic for real applications
2. Missing Experiments: As theoretical work, lacks experimental validation of practical performance
3. Hidden Constants: While asymptotically optimal, hidden constants may be large
4. Model Scope: Considers only insertion operations; handling deletions remains open

Impact

1. Theoretical Contribution: Establishes theoretical foundations for dynamic directed arborescence algorithms
2. Methodological Value: Analysis techniques provide guidance for related problems
3. Open Problems: Raises multiple valuable directions for future research
4. Cross-Domain Connections: Establishes deep connections between directed arborescences and matching problems

Applicable Scenarios

1. Network Evolution Analysis: Dynamic structure maintenance for social networks and citation networks
2. Dependency Management: Dynamic updates for software package dependencies and task scheduling
3. Theoretical Research: Provides analytical framework and technical reference for other dynamic graph algorithms

References

The paper cites extensive related work, primarily including:

• Classical directed arborescence algorithm literature (Chu, Edmonds, etc.)
• Dynamic algorithms and reconfiguration cost research (Gupta, Bernstein, etc.)
• Random graph theory (Frieze, Karoński, etc.)
• Matroid theory and combinatorial optimization foundations

This paper makes important contributions to theoretical computer science, not only solving a fundamental and significant problem but also providing valuable techniques and insights for subsequent research. While having certain limitations in practical applicability, its theoretical value and methodological contributions are substantial.