Search arXiv⌕ Search
Home/Archive/arXiv

arXiv · 2508.07293

IP Models for Minimum Zero Forcing Sets, Forts, and Related Graph Parameters

Thomas R. Cameron·Jonad Pulaj
View original source ↗Read source document ↗Export metadata ↓

Abstract

Zero forcing is a binary coloring game on a graph where a set of filled vertices can force non-filled vertices to become filled following a color change rule. In 2008, the zero forcing number of a graph was shown to be an upper bound on its maximum nullity. In addition, the combinatorial optimization problem for the zero forcing number was shown to be NP-hard. Since then, the study of zero forcing and its related parameters has received considerable attention. In 2018, the forts of a graph were defined as non-empty subsets of vertices where no vertex outside the set has exactly one neighbor in the set. Forts have been used to model zero forcing as an integer program and provide lower bounds on the zero forcing number. To date, three integer programming models have been developed for the zero forcing number of a graph: the Infection Model, Time Step Model, and Fort Cover Model. In this article, we present variations of these models for computing the zero forcing number and related graph parameters, such as the minimum and maximum propagation times, throttling number, and fractional zero forcing number. In addition, we present several new models for computing the realized propagation time interval, all minimal forts of a graph, and the fort number of a graph. We conclude with several numerical experiments that demonstrate the effectiveness of our models when applied to small and medium order graphs. Moreover, we provide experimental evidence for several open conjectures regarding the propagation time interval, the number of minimal forts, the fort number, and the fractional zero forcing number of a graph.

Explore related subjects

math.COcs.DM

Keep this discovery

Explore connections, maps & timelines

BibTeXRIS

Thomas R. Cameron, Jonad Pulaj. 2025-08-10. IP Models for Minimum Zero Forcing Sets, Forts, and Related Graph Parameters. https://arxiv.org/abs/2508.07293

Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.

KEEP EXPLORING

Related papers

arXiv2026

Matching Complexes of Outerplanar Graphs

An outerplanar graph is a planar graph that has a planar drawing with all vertices on the unbounded face. The matching complex of a graph is the simplicial complex whose faces are subsets of disjoint edges of the graph. In this paper we prove that the matching complexes of outerplanar graphs are contractible or homotopy equivalent to a wedge of spheres. This extends known results about trees and polygonal line tilings.

math.CO↗
arXiv2026

Awesome graph parameters

For a graph $G$, we denote by $α(G)$ the size of a maximum independent set and by $ω(G)$ the size of a maximum clique in $G$. Our paper lies on the edge of two lines of research, related to $α$ and $ω$, respectively. One of them studies $α$-variants of graph parameters, such as $α$-treewidth or $α$-degeneracy. The second line deals with graph classes where some parameters are bounded by a function of $ω(G)$. A famous example of this type is the family of $χ$-bounded classes, where the chromatic number $χ(G)$ is bounded by a function of $ω(G)$. A Ramsey-type argument implies that if the $α$-variant of a graph parameter $ρ$ is bounded by a constant in a hereditary class $\mathcal{G}$, then $ρ$ is bounded by a function of $ω$ in $\mathcal{G}$. If the reverse implication also holds, we say that $ρ$ is awesome. Otherwise, we say that $ρ$ is awful. In the present paper, we identify a number of awesome and awful graph parameters, derive some algorithmic applications of awesomeness, and propose a number of open problems related to these notions.

math.CO↗
arXiv2026

Perfect matchings and $A_α$-spectral radius in 1-binding graphs

Let $G$ be a graph with vertex set $V(G)$ and edge set $E(G)$. For $α\in[0,1)$, we use $A_α(G)$ and $ρ_α(G)$ to denote the $A_α$-matrix and the $A_α$-spectral radius of $G$, respectively. The binding number $\mbox{bind}(G)$ of $G$ is defined by $\mbox{bind}(G)=\min\left\{\frac{|N_G(X)|}{|X|}:\emptyset\neq X\subseteq V(G),N_G(X)\neq V(G)\right\}$. If $\mbox{bind}(G)\geq1$, then $G$ is called 1-binding. A perfect matching in $G$ is a set of nonadjacent edges covering every vertex of $G$. Tutte proved that a graph $G$ of even order has a perfect matching if and only if $o(G-S)\leq|S|$ holds for every $S\subseteq V(G)$ [W. Tutte, The factorization of linear graphs, J. Lond. Math. Soc. 22 (1947) 107--111]. In this paper, we use Tutte's result to prove that a connected 1-binding graph $G$ of even order $n$ with $n\geq n(α)$ has a perfect matching unless $G=K_1\vee(K_{n-5}\cup K_3\cup K_1)$ if $ρ_α(G)\geqρ_α(K_1\vee(K_{n-5}\cup K_3\cup K_1))$, where $n(α)$ is defined as follows: $n(α)=\max\{18,\frac{2+8α}{1-2α}\}$ if $α\in[0,\frac{1}{2})$, and $n(α)=18$ if $α=\frac{1}{2}$.

math.CO↗