Metric Dimension Parameterized by Feedback Vertex Set and Other Structural Parameters

TL;DR

This paper investigates the computational complexity of the Metric Dimension problem, showing it is W[1]-hard with certain parameters but fixed-parameter tractable with others, advancing understanding of its parameterized complexity.

Contribution

It proves W[1]-hardness for Metric Dimension parameterized by feedback vertex set plus pathwidth, and FPT results for parameters like distance to cluster or co-cluster.

Findings

W[1]-hard when parameterized by feedback vertex set plus pathwidth

FPT when parameterized by distance to cluster

FPT when parameterized by distance to co-cluster

Abstract

For a graph $G$, a subset $S \subseteq V(G)$ is called a \emph{resolving set} if for any two vertices $u,v \in V(G)$, there exists a vertex $w \in S$ such that $d(w,u) \neq d(w,v)$. The {\sc Metric Dimension} problem takes as input a graph $G$ and a positive integer $k$, and asks whether there exists a resolving set of size at most $k$. This problem was introduced in the 1970s and is known to be \NP-hard~[GT~61 in Garey and Johnson's book]. In the realm of parameterized complexity, Hartung and Nichterlein~[CCC~2013] proved that the problem is \W[2]-hard when parameterized by the natural parameter $k$. They also observed that it is \FPT\ when parameterized by the vertex cover number and asked about its complexity under \emph{smaller} parameters, in particular the feedback vertex set number. We answer this question by proving that {\sc Metric Dimension} is \W[1]-hard when parameterized by the combined parameter feedback vertex set number plus pathwidth. This also improves the result of Bonnet and Purohit~[IPEC 2019] which states that the problem is \W[1]-hard parameterized by the pathwidth. On the positive side, we show that {\sc Metric Dimension} is \FPT\ when parameterized by either the distance to cluster or the distance to co-cluster, both of which are smaller parameters than the vertex cover number.