Footnote:
Diese Datenquelle enthält auch Bestandsnachweise, die nicht zu einem Volltext führen.
Description:
The concept of Roman domination has recently been studied concerning enumerating and counting in F. N. Abu-Khzam et al. (WG 2022). More technically speaking, a function that assigns 0,1,2 to the vertices of an undirected graph is called a Roman dominating function if each vertex assigned zero has a neighbor assigned two. Such a function is called minimal if decreasing any assignment to any vertex would yield a function that is no longer a Roman dominating function. It has been shown that minimal Roman dominating functions can be enumerated with polynomial delay, i.e., between any two outputs of a solution, no more than polynomial time will elapse. This contrasts what is known about minimal dominating sets, where the question whether or not these can be enumerated with polynomial delay is open for more than 40 years. This makes the concept of Roman domination rather special and interesting among the many variants of domination problems studied in the literature, as it has been shown for several of these variants that the question of enumerating minimal solutions is tightly linked to that of enumerating minimal dominating sets, see M. Kanté et al. in SIAM J. Disc. Math., 2014. The running time of the mentioned enumeration algorithm for minimal Roman dominating functions (Abu-Khzam et al., WG 2022) could be estimated as 𝒪(1.9332ⁿ) on general graphs of order n. Here, we focus on special graph classes, as has been also done for enumerating minimal dominating sets before. More specifically, for chordal graphs, we present an enumeration algorithm running in time 𝒪(1.8940ⁿ). It is unknown if this gives a tight bound on the maximum number of minimal Roman dominating functions in chordal graphs. For interval graphs, we can lower this time bound further to 𝒪(1.7321ⁿ), which also matches the known lower bound concerning the maximum number of minimal Roman dominating functions. We can also provide a matching lower and upper bound for forests, which is (incidentally) the same, namely 𝒪^*(√3ⁿ). Furthermore, we present an ...