
<script type="text/javascript">
<!--
document.write('<div id="oa_widget"></div>');
document.write('<script type="text/javascript" src="https://www.openaire.eu/index.php?option=com_openaire&view=widget&format=raw&projectId=undefined&type=result"></script>');
-->
</script>
L(2,1)-labeling is a graph coloring model inspired by a frequency assignment in telecommunication. It asks for such a labeling of vertices with nonnegative integers that adjacent vertices get labels that differ by at least 2 and vertices in distance 2 get different labels. It is known that for any k >= 4 it is NP-complete to determine if a graph has a L(2,1)-labeling with no label greater than k. In this paper we present a new bound on complexity of an algorithm for finding an optimal L(2,1)-labeling (i.e. an L(2,1)-labeling in which the largest label is the least possible). We improve the upper complexity bound of the algorithm from O^@?(3.5616^n) to O^@?(3.2361^n). Moreover, we establish a lower complexity bound of the presented algorithm, which is @W^@?(3.0739^n).
citations This is an alternative to the "Influence" indicator, which also reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically). | 6 | |
popularity This indicator reflects the "current" impact/attention (the "hype") of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network. | Average | |
influence This indicator reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically). | Average | |
impulse This indicator reflects the initial momentum of an article directly after its publication, based on the underlying citation network. | Top 10% |
views | 38 | |
downloads | 13 |