Skip to main content

graphs and networks - Strategies for solving problems involving searches


As an example of a search-oriented problem, consider finding all constrained $n$-colorings of a graph. An "$n$-coloring" associates one of $n \ge 1$ colors to each vertex in such a way that no edge connects vertices of the same color. A "constrained" coloring requires that certain vertices have certain fixed colors.


For instance, here is a graph with one of its vertices already colored red; the default (cyan) vertices are as yet uncolored:


Partial coloring of a graph


There are 10 ways to color this graph using three colors; say, {red, green, blue}, while keeping the red vertex red:


All constrained 3-colorings


(Notice that the colorings are not up to isomorphism: all six vertices are considered to be distinct and not interchangeable.)


These solutions are found with a brute-force recursive search. The approach exemplifies a large class of problems, such as playing games and solving puzzles. In most interesting cases the search can take a long time (and have a large amount of output), so it is important to find appropriate data structures and efficient search methods. I am interested in Mathematica-specific advice and strategies for making such searches efficient.


To make this question clearer and more focused, I invite your critical comments concerning this particular solution to the constrained $n$-coloring problem:


constrainedColorings[graph[vertices_, nbrhds_], colors_List, start_List] := Module[

{unassigned, v, candidates},
unassigned = Complement[vertices, start[[All, 1]]];
If[unassigned == {}, Return[start]];
v = First[unassigned];
candidates = Complement[colors, v /. nbrhds /. start];
Map[constrainedColorings[graph[vertices, nbrhds], colors, Append[start, v -> #]] &, candidates]
];

Its arguments are





  • graph, which contains a list of the vertices and a list of rules assigning to each vertex the set of its immediate neighbors in the graph;




  • colors, which is a list of the available colors; and




  • start, which is a (possibly empty) list of rules assigning vertices to colors: it stipulates any constraints. It is expected that the colors appearing in start are contained within colors.





Its output is a deeply nested list (representing the search tree) whose leaves are lists of rules assigning colors to vertices.


Like most such searches, it follows a familiar logic:




  1. Determine whether the search is finished.




  2. If not, make a list of possible next moves (candidates),





  3. ... and tentatively make each move in turn, recursively searching for all solutions arising from it.




  4. Return a set of all solutions found.




To illustrate its use, consider the preceding example. It started out as a Mathematica Graph (in order to exploit its graph visualization capabilities) and was converted into a more convenient graph structure for this search:


\[Gamma] = Graph[{v1, v2, v3, v4, v5}, 
{v1 \[UndirectedEdge] v2, v1 \[UndirectedEdge] v4, v1 \[UndirectedEdge] v5,
v2 \[UndirectedEdge] v3, v3 \[UndirectedEdge] v4, v3 \[UndirectedEdge] v5},

VertexShapeFunction -> "Circle", VertexSize -> 0.4];
g = graph[VertexList[\[Gamma]], # -> Cases[EdgeList[\[Gamma]],
# \[UndirectedEdge] v_ | v_ \[UndirectedEdge] # -> v] & /@ VertexList[\[Gamma]]];

Here is the search itself, whereby the available colors are stipulated and the initial constraints are provided:


colorings = constrainedColorings[g, {Red, Green, Blue}, {v5 -> Red}];

We can flatten the output to get a list of all solutions:


colorings /. x : List[_Rule ..] :> coloring @@ x // Flatten


If you care to play with this code, you will want to draw the output:


display[g_Graph, c_coloring] :=  HighlightGraph[g, List @@ c /. Rule -> Style];
display[\[Gamma], #] & /@ colorings

Here, then, is the specific question:



  • In what ways can this code be improved to be faster, simpler, and more flexible?


I am especially interested in advice that would apply not just to this particular problem but to the entire class of problems. What kinds of data structures should one prefer to represent combinatorial objects: arrays, rules, something else? Or perhaps there is no general answer? Are there ways to expedite such searches, such as (possibly) exploiting Mathematica's built-in graph programming capabilities?


General replies are fine and so are answers that specifically improve the code here, provided it is clear how such improvements could be applied more generally.




Answer



One can also go about this using integer linear programming, with an array of 0-1 variables indexed by vertices and colors. Here is one encoding of that approach.


constrainedColorings2[graph[vertices_, nbrhds_], colors_List, 
start_List, v_] := Module[
{unassigned, nv = Length[vertices], nc = Length[colors], vars,
fvars, c1, c2, c3, c4, pos1, pos2, constraints, solns},
vars = Array[v, {nv, nc}];
fvars = Flatten[vars];
c1 = Map[0 <= # <= 1 &, fvars];
c2 = Map[Total[#] == 1 &, vars];

c3 = Map[Table[
pos1 = Position[vertices, #[[1]]][[1, 1]];
pos2 = Position[vertices, #[[2, j]]][[1, 1]];
v[pos1, k] + v[pos2, k] <= 1, {k, nc}, {j, Length[#[[2]]]}] &,
nbrhds];
c4 = Map[(pos1 = Position[vertices, #[[1]]][[1, 1]];
pos2 = Position[colors, #[[2]]][[1, 1]];
v[pos1, pos2] == 1
) &, start];
constraints = Flatten[Join[c1, c2, c3, c4]];

solns = Solve[constraints, fvars, Integers];
Map[Thread[vertices -> ((vars /. #).colors)] &, solns]
]

Your example, slightly altered (I'm not getting the graphing right and don't have time for that now) looks like this.


c2 = 
constrainedColorings2[g, {rRed, gGreen, bBlue}, {v5 -> rRed}, v]

(* Out[220]= {{v1 -> bBlue, v2 -> gGreen, v3 -> bBlue, v4 -> gGreen,
v5 -> rRed}, {v1 -> bBlue, v2 -> gGreen, v3 -> bBlue, v4 -> rRed,

v5 -> rRed}, {v1 -> bBlue, v2 -> rRed, v3 -> bBlue, v4 -> gGreen,
v5 -> rRed}, {v1 -> bBlue, v2 -> rRed, v3 -> bBlue, v4 -> rRed,
v5 -> rRed}, {v1 -> bBlue, v2 -> rRed, v3 -> gGreen, v4 -> rRed,
v5 -> rRed}, {v1 -> gGreen, v2 -> bBlue, v3 -> gGreen, v4 -> bBlue,
v5 -> rRed}, {v1 -> gGreen, v2 -> bBlue, v3 -> gGreen, v4 -> rRed,
v5 -> rRed}, {v1 -> gGreen, v2 -> rRed, v3 -> bBlue, v4 -> rRed,
v5 -> rRed}, {v1 -> gGreen, v2 -> rRed, v3 -> gGreen, v4 -> bBlue,
v5 -> rRed}, {v1 -> gGreen, v2 -> rRed, v3 -> gGreen, v4 -> rRed,
v5 -> rRed}} *)

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

plotting - Plot 4D data with color as 4th dimension

I have a list of 4D data (x position, y position, amplitude, wavelength). I want to plot x, y, and amplitude on a 3D plot and have the color of the points correspond to the wavelength. I have seen many examples using functions to define color but my wavelength cannot be expressed by an analytic function. Is there a simple way to do this? Answer Here a another possible way to visualize 4D data: data = Flatten[Table[{x, y, x^2 + y^2, Sin[x - y]}, {x, -Pi, Pi,Pi/10}, {y,-Pi,Pi, Pi/10}], 1]; You can use the function Point along with VertexColors . Now the points are places using the first three elements and the color is determined by the fourth. In this case I used Hue, but you can use whatever you prefer. Graphics3D[ Point[data[[All, 1 ;; 3]], VertexColors -> Hue /@ data[[All, 4]]], Axes -> True, BoxRatios -> {1, 1, 1/GoldenRatio}]

plotting - Filling between two spheres in SphericalPlot3D

Manipulate[ SphericalPlot3D[{1, 2 - n}, {θ, 0, Pi}, {ϕ, 0, 1.5 Pi}, Mesh -> None, PlotPoints -> 15, PlotRange -> {-2.2, 2.2}], {n, 0, 1}] I cant' seem to be able to make a filling between two spheres. I've already tried the obvious Filling -> {1 -> {2}} but Mathematica doesn't seem to like that option. Is there any easy way around this or ... Answer There is no built-in filling in SphericalPlot3D . One option is to use ParametricPlot3D to draw the surfaces between the two shells: Manipulate[ Show[SphericalPlot3D[{1, 2 - n}, {θ, 0, Pi}, {ϕ, 0, 1.5 Pi}, PlotPoints -> 15, PlotRange -> {-2.2, 2.2}], ParametricPlot3D[{ r {Sin[t] Cos[1.5 Pi], Sin[t] Sin[1.5 Pi], Cos[t]}, r {Sin[t] Cos[0 Pi], Sin[t] Sin[0 Pi], Cos[t]}}, {r, 1, 2 - n}, {t, 0, Pi}, PlotStyle -> Yellow, Mesh -> {2, 15}]], {n, 0, 1}]

plotting - Mathematica: 3D plot based on combined 2D graphs

I have several sigmoidal fits to 3 different datasets, with mean fit predictions plus the 95% confidence limits (not symmetrical around the mean) and the actual data. I would now like to show these different 2D plots projected in 3D as in but then using proper perspective. In the link here they give some solutions to combine the plots using isometric perspective, but I would like to use proper 3 point perspective. Any thoughts? Also any way to show the mean points per time point for each series plus or minus the standard error on the mean would be cool too, either using points+vertical bars, or using spheres plus tubes. Below are some test data and the fit function I am using. Note that I am working on a logit(proportion) scale and that the final vertical scale is Log10(percentage). (* some test data *) data = Table[Null, {i, 4}]; data[[1]] = {{1, -5.8}, {2, -5.4}, {3, -0.8}, {4, -0.2}, {5, 4.6}, {1, -6.4}, {2, -5.6}, {3, -0.7}, {4, 0.04}, {5, 1.0}, {1, -6.8}, {2, -4.7}, {3, -1....