RECORD
Structure of Graphs with Locally Restricted Crossings
Combinatorics · Submitted 14 Jun 2015
abstract compiled · 2026-09-23 · no language-model review
The authors' main claim We show that an $n$-vertex graph embedded on a surface of genus $g$ with at most $k$ crossings per edge has treewidth $O(\sqrt{(g+1)(k+1)n})$ and layered treewidth $O((g+1)k)$, and that these bounds are tight up to a constant factor.
The compiled record
The paper's own sentences, arranged. Each label is drawn from a closed vocabulary; the number beside it is the probability the classifier gave that label. Numbers in the tables are the authors', checked by code. No sentence in this record was written by a model.
Open the compiled record
The abstract, sentence by sentence
We consider relations between the size, treewidth, and local crossing number (maximum number of crossings per edge) of graphs embedded on topological surfaces. We show that an $n$-vertex graph embedded on a surface of genus $g$ with at most $k$ crossings per edge has treewidth $O(\sqrt{(g+1)(k+1)n})$ and layered treewidth $O((g+1)k)$, and that these bounds are tight up to a constant factor. As a special case, the $k$-planar graphs with $n$ vertices have treewidth $O(\sqrt{(k+1)n})$ and layered treewidth $O(k+1)$, which are tight bounds that improve a previously known $O((k+1)^{3/4}n^{1/2})$ treewidth bound. Analogous results are proved for map graphs defined with respect to any surface. Finally, we show that for $g<m$, every $m$-edge graph can be embedded on a surface of genus~$g$ with $O((m/(g+1))\log^2 g)$ crossings per edge, which is tight to a polylogarithmic factor.
background contribution method result interpretation main claim
| # | sentence | role | the authors' own work | states the main conclusion | strength |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| s0 | We consider relations between the size, treewidth, and local crossing number (maximum number of crossings per edge) of graphs embedded on topological surfaces. | background 0.76 | 0.37 | 0.04 | unclear 0.81 |
| s1 | We show that an $n$-vertex graph embedded on a surface of genus $g$ with at most $k$ crossings per edge has treewidth $O(\sqrt{(g+1)(k+1)n})$ and layered treewidth $O((g+1)k)$, and that these bounds are tight up to a constant factor. | result 0.99 | 0.97 | 0.81 | asserted 1.00 |
| s2 | As a special case, the $k$-planar graphs with $n$ vertices have treewidth $O(\sqrt{(k+1)n})$ and layered treewidth $O(k+1)$, which are tight bounds that improve a previously known $O((k+1)^{3/4}n^{1/2})$ treewidth bound. | result 0.97 | 0.90 | 0.20 | asserted 1.00 |
| s3 | Analogous results are proved for map graphs defined with respect to any surface. | result 0.88 | 0.89 | 0.04 | asserted 0.99 |
| s4 | Finally, we show that for $g<m$, every $m$-edge graph can be embedded on a surface of genus~$g$ with $O((m/(g+1))\log^2 g)$ crossings per edge, which is tight to a polylogarithmic factor. | result 0.98 | 0.94 | 0.09 | asserted 1.00 |
What was examined, and what was not
- arXiv listing abstract v2
- full text
- figures and tables
- references and citing sentences
- relations to other papers
- P abstract
- S sections
- T body sentences
- C citations
- R cross-paper relations
The paper
Original abstract
We consider relations between the size, treewidth, and local crossing number (maximum number of crossings per edge) of graphs embedded on topological surfaces. We show that an $n$-vertex graph embedded on a surface of genus $g$ with at most $k$ crossings per edge has treewidth $O(\sqrt{(g+1)(k+1)n})$ and layered treewidth $O((g+1)k)$, and that these bounds are tight up to a constant factor. As a special case, the $k$-planar graphs with $n$ vertices have treewidth $O(\sqrt{(k+1)n})$ and layered treewidth $O(k+1)$, which are tight bounds that improve a previously known $O((k+1)^{3/4}n^{1/2})$ treewidth bound. Analogous results are proved for map graphs defined with respect to any surface. Finally, we show that for $g<m$, every $m$-edge graph can be embedded on a surface of genus~$g$ with $O((m/(g+1))\log^2 g)$ crossings per edge, which is tight to a polylogarithmic factor.
Human review
Discussion
Know something about this paper? Leave a comment, or highlight any passage above to comment on it.