Finding Geometric Representations of Apex Graphs is NP-Hard

TL;DR

This paper proves that determining the existence of geometric representations for apex graphs is NP-hard, even for graphs close to planar, advancing understanding of geometric graph recognition complexity.

Contribution

It establishes NP-hardness for recognizing geometric representations of apex graphs within various graph classes, partially answering an open problem and simplifying previous reductions.

Findings

Recognition of geometric representations for apex graphs is NP-hard.

NP-hardness holds even for apex graphs of high girth.

Reduces from Planar Hamiltonian Path Completion problem.

Abstract

Planar graphs can be represented as intersection graphs of different types of geometric objects in the plane, e.g., circles (Koebe, 1936), line segments (Chalopin \& Gon{\c{c}}alves, 2009), \textsc{L}-shapes (Gon{\c{c}}alves et al, 2018). For general graphs, however, even deciding whether such representations exist is often $NP$-hard. We consider apex graphs, i.e., graphs that can be made planar by removing one vertex from them. We show, somewhat surprisingly, that deciding whether geometric representations exist for apex graphs is $NP$-hard. More precisely, we show that for every positive integer $k$, recognizing every graph class $\mathcal{G}$ which satisfies $\textsc{PURE-2-DIR} \subseteq \mathcal{G} \subseteq \textsc{1-STRING}$ is $NP$-hard, even when the input graphs are apex graphs of girth at least $k$. Here, $PURE-2-DIR$ is the class of intersection graphs of axis-parallel line segments (where intersections are allowed only between horizontal and vertical segments) and \textsc{1-STRING} is the class of intersection graphs of simple curves (where two curves share at most one point) in the plane. This partially answers an open question raised by Kratochv{\'\i}l \& Pergel (2007). Most known $NP$-hardness reductions for these problems are from variants of 3-SAT. We reduce from the \textsc{PLANAR HAMILTONIAN PATH COMPLETION} problem, which uses the more intuitive notion of planarity. As a result, our proof is much simpler and encapsulates several classes of geometric graphs.