Brooks' Theorem in Graph Streams: A Single-Pass Semi-Streaming Algorithm for $\Delta$-Coloring
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Every graph with maximum degree $\Delta$ can be colored with $(\Delta+1)$ colors using a simple greedy algorithm. Remarkably, recent work has shown that one can find such a coloring even in the semi-streaming model. But, in reality, one almost never needs $(\Delta+1)$ colors to properly color a graph. Indeed, the celebrated \Brooks' theorem states that every (connected) graph beside cliques and odd cycles can be colored with $\Delta$ colors. Can we find a $\Delta$-coloring in the semi-streaming model as well? We settle this key question in the affirmative by designing a randomized semi-streaming algorithm that given any graph, with high probability, either correctly declares that the graph is not $\Delta$-colorable or outputs a $\Delta$-coloring of the graph. The proof of this result starts with a detour. We first (provably) identify the extent to which the previous approaches for streaming coloring fail for $\Delta$-coloring: for instance, all these approaches can handle streams with repeated edges and they can run in $o(n^2)$ time -- we prove that neither of these tasks is possible for $\Delta$-coloring. These impossibility results however pinpoint exactly what is missing from prior approaches when it comes to $\Delta$-coloring. We then build on these insights to design a semi-streaming algorithm that uses $(i)$ a novel sparse-recovery approach based on sparse-dense decompositions to (partially) recover the "problematic" subgraphs of the input -- the ones that form the basis of our impossibility results -- and $(ii)$ a new coloring approach for these subgraphs that allows for recoloring of other vertices in a controlled way without relying on local explorations or finding "augmenting paths" that are generally impossible for semi-streaming algorithms. We believe both these techniques can be of independent interest.
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 | 0.005 | 0.022 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.006 |
| Open science | 0.005 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 0.002 |
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".