FPT approximations tackle connectivity-constrained maximum coverage in bipartite graphs, highlighting algorithmic boundaries.
We revisit connectivity-constrained coverage through a unifying model, Partial Connected Red-Blue Dominating Set (PartialConRBDS). Given a bipartite graph G = (R∪ B,E) with red vertices R and blue vertices B, an auxiliary connectivity graph Gconn on R, and integers k,t, the task is to find a set S ⊆ R with |S| ≤ k such that Gconn[S] is connected and S dominates at least t blue vertices. This formulation captures connected variants of Maximum Coverage [Hochbaum-Rao, Inf. Proc. Lett., 2020; D'Angelo-Delfaraz, AAMAS 2025], Partial Vertex Cover, and Partial Dominating Set [Khuller et al., SODA 2014; Lamprou et al., TCS 2021] via standard encodings. Limits to parameterized tractability. PartialConRBDS is W[1]-hard parameterized by k even under strong restrictions: it remains hard when Gconn is a clique or a star and the incidence graph G is 3-degenerate, or when G is K2,2-free. Inapproximability. For every ε > 0, there is no polynomial-time (1, 1-1/e+ε)-approximation unless 𝖯 = NP. Moreover, under ETH, no algorithm running in f(k)⋅ nᵒ⁽ᵏ⁾ time achieves an g(k)-approximation for k for any computable function g(⋅), or for any ε > 0, a (1-1/e+ε)-approximation for t. Graphical special cases. Partial Connected Dominating Set is W[2]-hard parameterized by k and inherits the same ETH-based f(k)⋅ nᵒ⁽ᵏ⁾ inapproximability bound as above; Partial Connected Vertex Cover is W[1]-hard parameterized by k. These hardness boundaries delineate a natural "sweet spot" for study: within appropriate structural restrictions on the incidence graph, one can still aim for fine-grained (FPT) approximations. Our algorithms. We solve PartialConRBDS exactly by reducing it to Relaxed Directed Steiner Out-Tree in time (2e)^t ⋅ n𝒪(1). For biclique-free incidences (i.e., when G excludes Kd,d as an induced subgraph), we obtain two complementary parameterized schemes: - An Efficient Parameterized Approximation Scheme (EPAS) running in time 2𝒪(k² d/ε)⋅ n𝒪(1) that either returns a connected solution of size at most k covering at least (1-ε)t blue vertices, or correctly reports that no connected size-k solution covers t; and - A Parameterized Approximation Scheme (PAS) running in time 2𝒪(kd(k²+log d))⋅ n𝒪(1/ε) that either returns a connected solution of size at most (1+ε)k covering at least t blue vertices, or correctly reports that no connected size-k solution covers t. Together, these results chart the boundary between hardness and FPT-approximability for connectivity-constrained coverage.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
INAMDAR et al. (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: