14
We give a near-linear time 4-coloring algorithm for planar graphs, improving on the previous quadratic time algorithm by Robertson et al. from 1996. Such an algorithm cannot be achieved by the known proofs of the Four Color Theorem (4CT). Technically speaking, we show the following significant generalization of the 4CT: every planar triangulation contains linearly many pairwise non-touching reducible configurations or pairwise non-crossing obstructing cycles of length at most 5 (which all allow for making effective 4-coloring reductions).
The known proofs of the 4CT only show the existence of a single reducible configuration or obstructing cycle in the above statement. The existence is proved using the discharging method based on combinatorial curvature. It identifies reducible configurations in parts where the local neighborhood has positive combinatorial curvature. Our result significantly strengthens the known proofs of 4CT, showing that we can also find reductions in large ``flat" parts where the curvature is zero, and moreover, we can make reductions almost anywhere in a given planar graph. An interesting aspect of this is that such large flat parts are also found in large triangulations of any fixed surface.
From a computational perspective, the old proofs allowed us to apply induction on a problem that is smaller by some additive constant. The inductive step took linear time, resulting in a quadratic total time. With our linear number of reducible configurations or obstructing cycles, we can reduce the problem size by a constant factor. Our inductive step takes $O(n\log n)$ time, yielding a 4-coloring in $O(n\log n)$ total time.
In order to efficiently handle a linear number of reducible configurations, we need them to have certain robustness that could also be useful in other applications. All our reducible configurations are what is known as D-reducible.



OK
Out of all 96 pages, I only see monochrome wireframe graphs. Okay sure a couple pages used some light blue lines, but holy fuck, out of 96 pages regarding the 4 color theorem and not a single page even has 4 colors?
Like fucking hell, all that effort to write a lengthy paper on 4 colors yet can’t even be bothered to make a proper visual representation?
Seems closer to trying to teach painting to a color blind person 🤦♂️
They literally invented a whole new linear algorithm when the best possible approach before was quadratic. And here’s you claiming that it doesn’t warrant 96 pages. Incredible stuff. Maybe just stick to coloring with crayons instead of attempting to discuss serious papers. Just a thought.
If your entire paper is focused on color study, and you have the technology at your disposal to render over 16 million colors, then is it too much to ask to have an actual visual color representation of what the paper is about? 4 colors, that’s all.
Jebus H Christ, is this an April Fool’s post or something?
Fuck, I study and program photochromatography, at least I have example works to show in full color.
I get a distinct impression that you don’t even understand the significance of the paper. The entire paper is focused on the novel algorithm they came up with which turns O(n^2) operation into O(nlogn). That’s a huge finding. If you have no appreciation for math, what are you even doing trolling around this community?
I’m not even trolling, I’m saying there are much better ways to represent mathematical algorithms than Greek letters and monochrome graphics, especially when the subject matter involves multiple colors.
I am no troll, I learned the basics of Calculus and Trigonometry at age 10, and went on to pursue 3D graphics and photochromatography by age 17.
I’m 43 now for reference. I’m also not dismissing their works at all, I’m just disappointed that they couldn’t be bothered to add another 4 pages of actual full color graphs to literally show what they’re talking about.
The things you keep complaining about are standard practice in scientific writing. It’s absolutely surreal to see somebody start ranting on the use of Greek letters in a mathematics paper. This isn’t a pop sci communication for lay people, this is research meant for other mathematicians to read. They don’t need pretty pictures to understand what the paper says, this isn’t written for toddlers.
Why the gatekeeping of the nature of mathematical writing then? Writing about a 4 color system, yet across 96 pages, not a single page even uses 4 colors?
They actually did bother to make graphs, but not a single page even demonstrates 4 colors on any page simultaneously?
Come on, there should be better standards than that these days…
I’ve already explained to you why every professional discipline uses domain specific terminology. I get the impression this is the first time you’ve seen a scientific paper in your entire life. Why would they bother make a graph of 4 colors on a page, what the fuck would that even illustrate? The 4 color theorem itself isn’t what’s being discussed. It’s the algorithm that’s novel. You just have to accept the fact that this is serious research, and you’re not the target audience for it.
The algorithm can’t be discussed along with at least a few planar graphs in full color?
I never said anything against their studies, just their publication. They could have easily rounded that up to 100 pages with 4 extra pages in full color.