Reconfiguration of Colorable Sets in Classes of Perfect Graphs
Bibliographic record
Abstract
A set of vertices in a graph is c-colorable if the subgraph induced by the set has a proper c-coloring. In this paper, we study the problem of finding a step-by-step transformation (reconfiguration) between two c-colorable sets in the same graph. This problem generalizes the well-studied Independent Set Reconfiguration problem. As the first step toward a systematic understanding of the complexity of this general problem, we study the problem on classes of perfect graphs. We first focus on interval graphs and give a combinatorial characterization of the distance between two c-colorable sets. This gives a linear-time algorithm for finding an actual shortest reconfiguration sequence for interval graphs. Since interval graphs are exactly the graphs that are simultaneously chordal and co-comparability, we then complement the positive result by showing that even deciding reachability is PSPACE-complete for chordal graphs and for co-comparability graphs. The hardness for chordal graphs holds even for split graphs. We also consider the case where c is a fixed constant and show that in such a case the reachability problem is polynomial-time solvable for split graphs but still PSPACE-complete for co-comparability graphs. The complexity of this case for chordal graphs remains unsettled. As by-products, our positive results give the first polynomial-time solvable cases (split graphs and interval graphs) for Feedback Vertex Set Reconfiguration.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.007 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.006 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.006 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".