Shortest path problem in bipartite graph

  • Context: Comp Sci 
  • Thread starter Thread starter SadPaul
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Algorithms Graph Path
Click For Summary
SUMMARY

The discussion centers on the application of the Bellman-Ford-Moore algorithm for computing shortest paths in directed bipartite graphs. The algorithm operates in O(nm) time complexity, where n1 and n2 represent the number of vertices in the two partitions of the bipartite graph. The correct number of iterations for the algorithm is established as min{n1, n2} + 1, which simplifies to n1 + 1, leading to a final time complexity of O(n1m). The focus is on clarifying the reasoning behind the iteration count, emphasizing that it is not O(n1 + n2).

PREREQUISITES
  • Understanding of the Bellman-Ford-Moore algorithm
  • Familiarity with directed bipartite graphs
  • Knowledge of time complexity analysis
  • Basic graph theory concepts
NEXT STEPS
  • Study the Bellman-Ford-Moore algorithm in detail
  • Research properties of directed bipartite graphs
  • Learn about time complexity and its implications in graph algorithms
  • Explore alternative shortest path algorithms for comparison
USEFUL FOR

Students and professionals in computer science, particularly those focusing on graph theory, algorithm design, and optimization techniques in directed bipartite graphs.

SadPaul
Messages
2
Reaction score
0
Homework Statement
Let G = (N1 U N2, A) be a bipartite directed network. Suppose that n1 = |N1|, n2 = |N2|
and n1 < n2. Show that the Bellman Ford algorithm solves the shortest path
problem in this network in O(n1m) time.
Relevant Equations
-
Hey guys, I need a little help with this exercise so I know I'm on the right path.

My explanation:
The Bellman-Ford-Moore algorithm computes shortest paths in O(nm) time, so in this situation we say that in a directed bipartite graph the number of iterations that the algorithm will do is min{n1, n2} + 1 = n1 + 1 and the algorithm takes O(m) time per iteration, so the final time is O(n1m).

So far so good, but I' m not really certain if I compute the number of iterations correctly, or how to explain it better.
Any usefull ideas would be welcome!
 
Physics news on Phys.org
I think the point here is to prove the number of iterations is not ##O(n_1+n_2)##, since normally the number of iterations is on the order of the number of vertices. You just kind of asserted it to be true.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 17 ·
Replies
17
Views
3K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
3K
  • · Replies 19 ·
Replies
19
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 15 ·
Replies
15
Views
3K
  • · Replies 11 ·
Replies
11
Views
4K
Replies
10
Views
4K
Replies
1
Views
2K