Dynamic Planar Embedding Is in DynFO

Authors Samir Datta , Asif Khan, Anish Mukherjee

Thumbnail PDF


  • Filesize: 0.97 MB
  • 15 pages

Document Identifiers

Author Details

Samir Datta
  • Chennai Mathematical Institute & UMI ReLaX, Chennai, India
Asif Khan
  • Chennai Mathematical Institute, India
Anish Mukherjee
  • University of Warwick, Coventry, UK


Thanks to Nils Vortmeier and Thomas Zeume for illuminating discussions.

Cite AsGet BibTex

Samir Datta, Asif Khan, and Anish Mukherjee. Dynamic Planar Embedding Is in DynFO. In 48th International Symposium on Mathematical Foundations of Computer Science (MFCS 2023). Leibniz International Proceedings in Informatics (LIPIcs), Volume 272, pp. 39:1-39:15, Schloss Dagstuhl – Leibniz-Zentrum für Informatik (2023)


Planar Embedding is a drawing of a graph on the plane such that the edges do not intersect each other except at the vertices. We know that testing the planarity of a graph and computing its embedding (if it exists), can efficiently be computed, both sequentially [John E. Hopcroft and Robert Endre Tarjan, 1974] and in parallel [Vijaya Ramachandran and John H. Reif, 1994], when the entire graph is presented as input. In the dynamic setting, the input graph changes one edge at a time through insertion and deletions and planarity testing/embedding has to be updated after every change. By storing auxilliary information we can improve the complexity of dynamic planarity testing/embedding over the obvious recomputation from scratch. In the sequential dynamic setting, there has been a series of works [David Eppstein et al., 1996; Giuseppe F. Italiano et al., 1993; Jacob Holm et al., 2018; Jacob Holm and Eva Rotenberg, 2020], culminating in the breakthrough result of polylog(n) sequential time (amortized) planarity testing algorithm of Holm and Rotenberg [Jacob Holm and Eva Rotenberg, 2020]. In this paper we study planar embedding through the lens of DynFO, a parallel dynamic complexity class introduced by Patnaik et al [Sushant Patnaik and Neil Immerman, 1997] (also [Guozhu Dong et al., 1995]). We show that it is possible to dynamically maintain whether an edge can be inserted to a planar graph without causing non-planarity in DynFO. We extend this to show how to maintain an embedding of a planar graph under both edge insertions and deletions, while rejecting edge insertions that violate planarity. Our main idea is to maintain embeddings of only the triconnected components and a special two-colouring of separating pairs that enables us to side-step cascading flips when embedding of a biconnected planar graph changes, a major issue for sequential dynamic algorithms [Jacob Holm and Eva Rotenberg, 2020; Jacob Holm and Eva Rotenberg, 2020].

Subject Classification

ACM Subject Classification
  • Theory of computation → Complexity theory and logic
  • Theory of computation → Finite Model Theory
  • Dynamic Complexity
  • Planar graphs
  • Planar embedding


  • Access Statistics
  • Total Accesses (updated on a weekly basis)
    PDF Downloads


  1. Eric Allender and Meena Mahajan. The complexity of planarity testing. Inf. Comput., 189(1):117-134, 2004. Google Scholar
  2. David A. Mix Barrington, Neil Immerman, and Howard Straubing. On uniformity within NC¹. J. Comput. Syst. Sci., 41(3):274-306, 1990. Google Scholar
  3. Giuseppe Di Battista and Roberto Tamassia. On-line maintenance of triconnected components with spqr-trees. Algorithmica, 15(4):302-318, 1996. Google Scholar
  4. Kellogg S. Booth and George S. Lueker. Testing for the consecutive ones property, interval graphs, and graph planarity using PQ-tree algorithms. J. Comput. Syst. Sci., 13(3):335-379, 1976. Google Scholar
  5. Samir Datta, Chetan Gupta, Rahul Jain, Anish Mukherjee, Vimal Raj Sharma, and Raghunath Tewari. Dynamic meta-theorems for distance and matching. In Mikolaj Bojanczyk, Emanuela Merelli, and David P. Woodruff, editors, 49th International Colloquium on Automata, Languages, and Programming, ICALP 2022, July 4-8, 2022, Paris, France, volume 229 of LIPIcs, pages 118:1-118:20. Schloss Dagstuhl - Leibniz-Zentrum für Informatik, 2022. Google Scholar
  6. Samir Datta, William Hesse, and Raghav Kulkarni. Dynamic complexity of directed reachability and other problems. In Javier Esparza, Pierre Fraigniaud, Thore Husfeldt, and Elias Koutsoupias, editors, Automata, Languages, and Programming - 41st International Colloquium, ICALP 2014, Copenhagen, Denmark, July 8-11, 2014, Proceedings, Part I, volume 8572 of Lecture Notes in Computer Science, pages 356-367. Springer, 2014. Google Scholar
  7. Samir Datta, Asif Khan, and Anish Mukherjee. Dynamic planar embedding is in DynFO, 2023. URL: https://arxiv.org/abs/2307.09473.
  8. Samir Datta, Raghav Kulkarni, Anish Mukherjee, Thomas Schwentick, and Thomas Zeume. Reachability is in DynFO. J. ACM, 65(5):33:1-33:24, 2018. Google Scholar
  9. Samir Datta, Pankaj Kumar, Anish Mukherjee, Anuj Tawari, Nils Vortmeier, and Thomas Zeume. Dynamic complexity of reachability: How many changes can we handle? In Artur Czumaj, Anuj Dawar, and Emanuela Merelli, editors, 47th International Colloquium on Automata, Languages, and Programming, ICALP 2020, July 8-11, 2020, Saarbrücken, Germany (Virtual Conference), volume 168 of LIPIcs, pages 122:1-122:19. Schloss Dagstuhl - Leibniz-Zentrum für Informatik, 2020. Google Scholar
  10. Samir Datta, Nutan Limaye, Prajakta Nimbhorkar, Thomas Thierauf, and Fabian Wagner. Planar graph isomorphism is in Log-space. ACM Trans. Comput. Theory, 14(2):8:1-8:33, 2022. Google Scholar
  11. Samir Datta, Anish Mukherjee, Thomas Schwentick, Nils Vortmeier, and Thomas Zeume. A strategy for dynamic programs: Start over and muddle through. Log. Methods Comput. Sci., 15(2), 2019. Google Scholar
  12. Samir Datta, Anish Mukherjee, Nils Vortmeier, and Thomas Zeume. Reachability and distances under multiple changes. In 45th International Colloquium on Automata, Languages, and Programming, ICALP 2018, July 9-13, Prague, Czech Republic, pages 120:1-120:14, 2018. Google Scholar
  13. Samir Datta and Gautam Prakriya. Planarity testing revisited. In Theory and Applications of Models of Computation - 8th Annual Conference, TAMC 2011, Tokyo, Japan, May 23-25, 2011. Proceedings, pages 540-551, 2011. Google Scholar
  14. Reinhard Diestel. Graph Theory. Springer Publishing Company, Inc., 5th edition, 2017. Google Scholar
  15. Hristo N. Djidjev. On drawing a graph convexly in the plane (extended abstract). In Roberto Tamassia and Ioannis G. Tollis, editors, Graph Drawing, pages 76-83, Berlin, Heidelberg, 1995. Springer Berlin Heidelberg. Google Scholar
  16. Guozhu Dong, Jianwen Su, and Rodney W. Topor. Nonrecursive incremental evaluation of datalog queries. Ann. Math. Artif. Intell., 14(2-4):187-223, 1995. Google Scholar
  17. David Eppstein, Zvi Galil, Giuseppe F. Italiano, and Thomas H. Spencer. Separator based sparsification. I. planary testing and minimum spanning trees. J. Comput. Syst. Sci., 52(1):3-27, 1996. Google Scholar
  18. Shimon Even and Robert Endre Tarjan. Computing an st -numbering. Theor. Comput. Sci., 2(3):339-344, 1976. Google Scholar
  19. F. Harary. Graph Theory. Addison-Wesley, Reading, MA, 1969. Google Scholar
  20. Jacob Holm, Giuseppe F. Italiano, Adam Karczmarz, Jakub Lacki, and Eva Rotenberg. Decremental SPQR-trees for planar graphs. In Yossi Azar, Hannah Bast, and Grzegorz Herman, editors, 26th Annual European Symposium on Algorithms, ESA 2018, August 20-22, 2018, Helsinki, Finland, volume 112 of LIPIcs, pages 46:1-46:16. Schloss Dagstuhl - Leibniz-Zentrum für Informatik, 2018. Google Scholar
  21. Jacob Holm and Eva Rotenberg. Fully-dynamic planarity testing in polylogarithmic time. In Proccedings of the 52nd Annual ACM SIGACT Symposium on Theory of Computing, STOC 2020, Chicago, IL, USA, June 22-26, 2020, pages 167-180, 2020. Google Scholar
  22. Jacob Holm and Eva Rotenberg. Worst-case polylog incremental spqr-trees: Embeddings, planarity, and triconnectivity. In Proceedings of the 2020 ACM-SIAM Symposium on Discrete Algorithms, SODA 2020, Salt Lake City, UT, USA, January 5-8, 2020, pages 2378-2397, 2020. Google Scholar
  23. J. E. Hopcroft and R. E. Tarjan. Dividing a graph into triconnected components. SIAM Journal on Computing, 2(3):135-158, 1973. Google Scholar
  24. John E. Hopcroft and Robert Endre Tarjan. Efficient planarity testing. J. ACM, 21(4):549-568, 1974. Google Scholar
  25. Giuseppe F. Italiano, Johannes A. La Poutré, and Monika Rauch. Fully dynamic planarity testing in planar embedded graphs (extended abstract). In Algorithms - ESA '93, First Annual European Symposium, Bad Honnef, Germany, September 30 - October 2, 1993, Proceedings, pages 212-223, 1993. Google Scholar
  26. Casimir Kuratowski. Sur le problème des courbes gauches en topologie. Fundamenta Mathematicae, 15(1):271-283, 1930. Google Scholar
  27. Saunders Mac Lane. A structural characterization of planar combinatorial graphs. Duke Mathematical Journal, 3(3):460-472, 1937. Google Scholar
  28. A. Lempel, S. Even, and I. Cederbaum. An algorithm for planarity testing of graphs. Theory of Graphs, International Syposium, Rome, July 1966, Rosenstiel, P. edit., 1967. Google Scholar
  29. Jenish C. Mehta. Dynamic complexity of planar 3-connected graph isomorphism. In Edward A. Hirsch, Sergei O. Kuznetsov, Jean-Éric Pin, and Nikolay K. Vereshchagin, editors, Computer Science - Theory and Applications - 9th International Computer Science Symposium in Russia, CSR 2014, Moscow, Russia, June 7-11, 2014. Proceedings, volume 8476 of Lecture Notes in Computer Science, pages 273-286. Springer, 2014. Google Scholar
  30. Anish Mukherjee. Static and Dynamic Complexity of Reachability, Matching and Related Problems. PhD thesis, CMI, 2019. Google Scholar
  31. Sushant Patnaik and Neil Immerman. Dyn-FO: A parallel, dynamic complexity class. J. Comput. Syst. Sci., 55(2):199-209, 1997. Google Scholar
  32. Johannes A. La Poutré. Alpha-algorithms for incremental planarity testing (preliminary version). In Proceedings of the Twenty-Sixth Annual ACM Symposium on Theory of Computing, 23-25 May 1994, Montréal, Québec, Canada, pages 706-715, 1994. Google Scholar
  33. Vijaya Ramachandran and John H. Reif. Planarity testing in parallel. J. Comput. Syst. Sci., 49(3):517-561, 1994. Google Scholar
  34. Jeffery R. Westbrook. Fast incremental planarity testing. In Automata, Languages and Programming, 19th International Colloquium, ICALP92, Vienna, Austria, July 13-17, 1992, Proceedings, pages 342-353, 1992. Google Scholar
  35. Hassler Whitney. Congruent graphs and the connectivity of graphs. American Journal of Mathematics, 54(1):150-168, 1932. Google Scholar
Questions / Remarks / Feedback

Feedback for Dagstuhl Publishing

Thanks for your feedback!

Feedback submitted

Could not send message

Please try again later or send an E-mail