English
 
Help Privacy Policy Disclaimer
  Advanced SearchBrowse

Item

ITEM ACTIONSEXPORT

Released

Paper

A Simple Sweep Line Algorithm for Counting Triangulations and Pseudo-triangulations

MPS-Authors
/persons/resource/persons44182

Bringmann,  Karl       
Algorithms and Complexity, MPI for Informatics, Max Planck Society;

/persons/resource/persons45269

Ray,  Saurabh
Algorithms and Complexity, MPI for Informatics, Max Planck Society;

External Resource
No external resources are shared
Fulltext (restricted access)
There are currently no full texts shared for your IP range.
Fulltext (public)

arXiv:1312.3188.pdf
(Preprint), 625KB

Supplementary Material (public)
There is no public supplementary material available
Citation

Alvarez, V., Bringmann, K., & Ray, S. (2013). A Simple Sweep Line Algorithm for Counting Triangulations and Pseudo-triangulations. Retrieved from http://arxiv.org/abs/1312.3188.


Cite as: https://hdl.handle.net/11858/00-001M-0000-0024-421B-8
Abstract
Let $P\subset\mathbb{R}^{2}$ be a set of $n$ points. In this paper we show two new algorithms, one to compute the number of triangulations of $P$, and one to compute the number of pseudo-triangulations of $P$. We show that our algorithms run in time $O^{*}(t(P))$ and $O^{*}(pt(P))$ respectively, where $t(P)$ and $pt(P)$ are the largest number of triangulation paths (T-paths) and pseudo-triangulations paths (PT-paths), respectively, that the algorithms encounter during their execution. Moreover, we show that $t(P) = O^{*}(9^{n})$, which is the first non-trivial bound on $t(P)$ to be known. While there already are algorithms that count triangulations in $O^{*}\left(2^n\right)$, and $O^{*}\left(3.1414^{n}\right)$, there are sets of points where the number of T-paths is $O(2^{n})$. In such cases the algorithm herein presented could potentially be faster. Furthermore, it is not clear whether the already-known algorithms can be modified to count pseudo-triangulations so that their running times remain $O^{*}(c^n)$, for some small constant $c\in\mathbb{R}$. Therefore, for counting pseudo-triangulations (and possibly other similar structures) our approach seems better.