Classical bipartite cardinality matching: Difference between revisions

From Algowiki
Jump to navigation Jump to search
Line 34: Line 34:


'''Proof:'''
'''Proof:'''
Basically, we have to show that there is no more augmenting path if this modified DFS does not find one. So suppose for a contradiction that a search from an exposed node <math>u</math> fails although there is an augmenting path starting in <math>u</math>.
Basically, we have to show that there is no more augmenting path if this modified BFS does not find one. So suppose for a contradiction that a search from an exposed node <math>u</math> fails although there is an augmenting path starting in <math>u</math>.


'''Remark:'''
'''Remark:'''
This modified DFS could be realized by a regular DFS:
This modified BFS could be realized by a regular BFS:
# Duplicate each matched node <math>v</math> giviong <math>v_1</math> and <math>v_2</math>.
# Duplicate each matched node <math>v</math> giviong <math>v_1</math> and <math>v_2</math>.
# Replace each edge <math>\{v,w\}</math> by two arcs, <math>(v,w)</math> and <math>(w,v)</math>.
# Replace each edge <math>\{v,w\}</math> by two arcs, <math>(v,w)</math> and <math>(w,v)</math>.

Revision as of 15:04, 17 November 2014

Abstract view

Algorithmic problem: Cardinality-maximal matching in bipartite graphs.

Type of algorithm: loop.

Invariant: [math]\displaystyle{ M }[/math] is a matching in [math]\displaystyle{ G }[/math].

Variant: [math]\displaystyle{ |M| }[/math] is increased by one.

Break condition: There is no more augmenting path.

Induction basis

Abstract view: Initialize [math]\displaystyle{ M }[/math] to be a feasible matching, for example, the empty matching.

Induction step:

Abstract view:

  1. Search for an augmenting path.
  2. If there is none, the loop terminates.
  3. Let [math]\displaystyle{ p }[/math] denote the augmenting path found in step 1.
  4. Augment [math]\displaystyle{ M }[/math] along [math]\displaystyle{ p }[/math].

Implementation of step 1: From every exposed node, a modified BFS is started. This repeated BFS is finished once an augmenting path has been found. The modification of BFS is as follows:

  1. Whenever the current node [math]\displaystyle{ v }[/math] has been reached via an edge in [math]\displaystyle{ M }[/math], only edges in [math]\displaystyle{ E\setminus M }[/math] are considered for seeing new nodes.
  2. Mirror-symmetrically, whenever the current node [math]\displaystyle{ v }[/math] has been reached via an edge in [math]\displaystyle{ E\setminus M }[/math], only the (unique) edge in [math]\displaystyle{ M }[/math], if existing, is considered for seeing a new node.

Proof: Basically, we have to show that there is no more augmenting path if this modified BFS does not find one. So suppose for a contradiction that a search from an exposed node [math]\displaystyle{ u }[/math] fails although there is an augmenting path starting in [math]\displaystyle{ u }[/math].

Remark: This modified BFS could be realized by a regular BFS:

  1. Duplicate each matched node [math]\displaystyle{ v }[/math] giviong [math]\displaystyle{ v_1 }[/math] and [math]\displaystyle{ v_2 }[/math].
  2. Replace each edge [math]\displaystyle{ \{v,w\} }[/math] by two arcs, [math]\displaystyle{ (v,w) }[/math] and [math]\displaystyle{ (w,v) }[/math].
  3. For each matched node [math]\displaystyle{ v }[/math]:
    1. Let all incoming arcs of [math]\displaystyle{ v }[/math] in [math]\displaystyle{ M }[/math] point to [math]\displaystyle{ v_1 }[/math] and all outgoing arcs in [math]\displaystyle{ E\setminus M }[/math] leave [math]\displaystyle{ v_1 }[/math].
    2. Mirror-symmetrically, let all incoming arcs of [math]\displaystyle{ v }[/math] in [math]\displaystyle{ E\setminus M }[/math] point to [math]\displaystyle{ v_2 }[/math] and all outgoing arcs of [math]\displaystyle{ v }[/math] in [math]\displaystyle{ M }[/math] leave [math]\displaystyle{ v_2 }[/math].