07 Network Flow I

7.
N ETWORK F LOW I
max-flow and min-cut problems
Ford-Fulkerson algorithm
max-flow min-cut theorem
capacity-scaling algorithm
shortest augmenting paths
blocking-flow algorithm
unit-capacity simple networks
Lecture slides by Kevin Wayne
Copyright 2005 Pearson-Addison Wesley
Copyright 2013 Kevin Wayne
http://www.cs.princeton.edu/~wayne/kleinberg-tardos
Last updated on Sep 8, 2013 6:40 AM
7. N ETWORK F LOW I
SECTION 7.1
Flow network
Abstraction for material flowing through the edges.

Digraph G = (V, E) with source s V and sink t V.
Nonnegative integer capacity c(e) for each e E.
no parallel edges
no edge enters s
no edge leaves t
capacity
10
15
15
15
10
10
15
10
16
3
Minimum cut problem

Def. A st-cut (cut) is a partition (A, B) of the vertices with s A and t B.
Def. Its capacity is the sum of the capacities of the edges from A to B.
cap( A, B) =
c(e)
e out of A
10
15
capacity = 10 + 5 + 15 = 30
Minimum cut problem

cap( A, B) =
c(e)
e out of A
10
t
don't count edges
from B to A
capacity = 10 + 8 + 16 = 34
16
5
Minimum cut problem

cap( A, B) =
c(e)
e out of A
Min-cut problem. Find a cut of minimum capacity.
10
10
capacity = 10 + 8 + 10 = 28
Maximum flow problem

Def. An st-flow (flow) f is a function that satisfies:
For each e E :
For each v V {s, t} :
0 f (e) c(e)
f (e) = f (e)
e in to v
[capacity]
[flow conservation]
e out of v
capacity
flow
inflow at v = 5 + 5 + 0 = 10
outflow at v = 10 + 0
5/9
10
10
0/4
5/8
5/5
10
15
/1
5
0/4
/6
0 / 15
0 / 15
10
10 / 10
10
= 10
10
10 / 16
7

For each e E :
0 f (e) c(e)
f (e) = f (e)
e in to v
[capacity]
[flow conservation]
e out of v
f ) f=) = f (e) .
Def. The value of aflow f is:v(val(
e out of s
5/9
10
10
0/4
15
0 / 15
5/8
5/5
10
/1
5
0/4
/6
10
10 / 10
0 / 15
10
10
value = 5 + 10 + 10 = 25
10 / 16
8

For each e E :
0 f (e) c(e)
f (e) = f (e)
e in to v
[capacity]
[flow conservation]
e out of v
f ) f=) = f (e) .
Def. The value of aflow f is:v(val(
e out of s
Max-flow problem. Find a flow of maximum value.
8/9
10
10
0/4
15
0 / 15
8/8
5/5
13
/1
5
0/4
/6
10
10 / 10
0 / 15
10
10
value = 8 + 10 + 10 = 28
13 / 16
9
7. N ETWORK F LOW I
SECTION 7.1
Towards a max-flow algorithm

Greedy algorithm.
Start with f (e) = 0 for all edge e E.

Find an st path P where each edge has f (e) < c(e).
Augment flow along path P.
Repeat until you get stuck.
flow
0/4
network G
capacity
10
0 / 10
0/2
/8
0/9
0/6
10
0 / 10
value of flow
11

Greedy algorithm.

0/4
network G
8
0
10
0 / 10
0/2
/8
0/9
0/6
10
0 / 10
0 +8=8
12

Greedy algorithm.

0/4
network G
10
10
0 / 10
2
0/2
/8
0/9
0/6
10
8 / 10
8 + 2 = 10
13

Greedy algorithm.

0/4
network G
10
10
0 / 10
2/2
/8
2/9
6
0/6
10
10 / 10
10 + 6 = 16
14

Greedy algorithm.

ending flow value = 16
0/4
network G
10
10
6 / 10
2/2
/8
8/9
6/6
10
10 / 10
16
15

Greedy algorithm.

but max-flow value = 19
3/4
network G
10
10
9 / 10
0/2
/8
9/9
6/6
10
10 / 10
19
16
Residual graph
Original edge: e = (u, v) E.
Flow f (e).
Capacity c(e).
original graph G
6 / 17
u
flow
capacity
Residual edge.
"Undo" flow sent.

e = (u, v) and eR = (v, u).
Residual capacity:
c(e) f (e) if e E
c f (e) =
if e R E
f (e)
residual
capacity
residual graph Gf
11
Residual graph: Gf = (V, Ef ).
where flow on a reverse edge

Residual edges with positive residual capacity. negates
flow on a forward edge
R
Ef = {e : f (e) < c(e)} {e : f (e) > 0}.
Key property: f ' is a flow in Gf iff f + f ' is a flow in G.
17
Augmenting path
Def. An augmenting path is a simple st path P in the residual graph Gf .
Def. The bottleneck capacity of an augmenting P is the minimum
residual capacity of any edge in P.
Key property. Let f be a flow and let P be an augmenting path in Gf .
Then f ' is a flow and val( f ' ) = val( f ) + bottleneck(Gf, P).
AUGMENT (f, c, P)
________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
b bottleneck capacity of path P.

FOREACH edge e P
IF (e E ) f (e) f (e) + b.
ELSE
f (eR) f (eR) b.
RETURN f.
________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
18
Ford-Fulkerson augmenting path algorithm.

Find an augmenting path P in the residual graph Gf .
FORD-FULKERSON (G, s, t, c)
_________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
FOREACH edge e E : f (e) 0.

Gf residual graph.
WHILE (there exists an augmenting path P in Gf )
f AUGMENT (f, c, P).
Update Gf.
RETURN f.
}
_________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
19
Ford-Fulkerson algorithm demo

flow
network G
capacity
0/4
10
0/2
0 / 10
/8
0/6
10
0 / 10
0/9
value of flow
residual graph Gf
4
residual capacity
10
10
10
10
t
20

network G
0/4
8
0
10
0/2
0 / 10
/8
0/6
10
0 / 10
0/9
0 +8=8
residual graph Gf
4
10
10
10
10
t
21

network G
0/4
10
10
2
0/2
/8
0/6
10
8 / 10
0/9
0 / 10
8 + 2 = 10
residual graph Gf
4
10
10
2
8
t
22

network G
0/4
6
10
10
2/2
0 / 10
/8
6
0/6
2/9
10
10 / 10
10 + 6 = 16
residual graph Gf
4
10
10
7
2
10
10
t
23

network G
2
0/4
8
10
10
0
2/2
6 / 10
/8
6/6
10
10 / 10
8/9
16 + 2 = 18
residual graph Gf
4
6
10
10
t
24

network G
3
2/4
10
10
0/2
8 / 10
/8
6/6
8/9
10
10 / 10
18 + 1 = 19
residual graph Gf
2
8
10
10
t
25

network G
3/4
min cut
10
10
0/2
9 / 10
/8
6/6
max flow
10
10 / 10
9/9
19
residual graph Gf
1
9
nodes reachable from s

10
1
9
10
t
26
7. N ETWORK F LOW I
SECTION 7.2
Relationship between flows and cuts

Flow value lemma. Let f be any flow and let (A, B) be any cut. Then, the net
flow across (A, B) equals the value of f.
f (e) f (e) = v( f )
e out of A
e in to A
net flow across cut = 5 + 10 + 10 = 25
5/9
10
10
0/4
15
0 / 15
5/8
5/5
10
/1
5
0/4
/6
10
10 / 10
0 / 15
10
value of flow = 25
10
10 / 16
28

f (e) f (e) = v( f )
e out of A
e in to A
net flow across cut = 10 + 5 + 10 = 25
5/9
10
10
0/4
15
0 / 15
5/8
5/5
10
/1
5
0/4
/6
10
10 / 10
0 / 15
10
value of flow = 25
10
10 / 16
29

f (e) f (e) = v( f )
e out of A
e in to A
net flow across cut = (10 + 10 + 5 + 10 + 0 + 0) (5 + 5 + 0 + 0) = 25
5/9
edges from B to A
10
10
0/4
15
0 / 15
5/8
5/5
10
/1
5
0/4
/6
10
10 / 10
0 / 15
10
value of flow = 25
10
10 / 16
30

f (e) f (e) = v( f )
e out of A
Pf.
e in to A
v( f ) =
v( f ) =
f (e)
of ssf (e)
ee out
out of
e out of s
by flow conservation, all terms

except v = s are 0
=
=
f
(e)
f
(e)

f
(e)
f
(e)
of vv
to vv
ee out
vv
ee in
A
A
out of
in to
v A e out of v
e in to v
=
=
f (e) f (e).
of AAf (e) ee in
to AAf (e).
ee out
out of
in to
e out of A
e in to A
31

Weak duality. Let f be any flow and (A, B) be any cut. Then, v( f ) cap(A, B).
v(
ff ))
v(
v(
v( ff ))
Pf.
flow-value
lemma
ff (e)
ff (e)
(e)
(e)
f
(e)
(e)
e out
of Af (e) e in
to Aff (e)
ee out
of
A
ee in
to
A
out
of
A
in
to
A
e out of A
e in to A
f
(e)
f (e)
(e)
e out
of Aff (e)
ee out
of
A
e out
out of
of A
A
c(e)
c(e)
c(e)
c(e)
e out
of A
ee out
of
A
out
of
A
e out of A
cap(A,
B)
cap(A,
cap(A,
B)
cap(A, B)
B)
=
=
=
=
=
=
=
=
8/9
2
10
10
0/4
15
0 / 15
0/4
/6
10
9 / 10
7/8
5/5
12
/1
0 / 15
10
10
s
10
15
12 / 16
value of flow = 27
capacity of cut = 30
32
Max-flow min-cut theorem

Augmenting path theorem. A flow f is a max-flow iff no augmenting paths.
Max-flow min-cut theorem. Value of the max-flow = capacity of min-cut.
Pf. The following three conditions are equivalent for any flow f :
i. There exists a cut (A, B) such that cap(A, B) = val(f ).
ii. f is a max-flow.
iii. There is no augmenting path with respect to f.
[i
ii ]
Suppose that (A, B) is a cut such that cap(A, B) = val(f ).

Then, for any flow f ', val(f ') cap(A, B) = val(f ).
Thus, f is a max-flow.
weak duality
by assumption
33

Augmenting path theorem. A flow f is a max-flow iff no augmenting paths.
Max-flow min-cut theorem. Value of the max-flow = capacity of min-cut.
Pf. The following three conditions are equivalent for any flow f :
i. There exists a cut (A, B) such that cap(A, B) = val(f ).
ii. f is a max-flow.
iii. There is no augmenting path with respect to f.
[ ii
iii ] We prove contrapositive: ~iii
~ii.
Suppose that there is an augmenting path with respect to f.

Can improve flow f by sending flow along this path.
Thus, f is not a max-flow.
34

[ iii
i]
Let f be a flow with no augmenting paths.

Let A be set of nodes reachable from s in residual graph Gf.
By definition of cut A, s A.
By definition of flow f, t A.
edge e = (v, w) with v B, w A
must have f(e) = 0
original network G
v( f ) =
f (e) f (e)
v( f ) = e outof Af (e) e into Af (e)
v( f ) = e outof Af (e) e into Af (e)
= e outof Ac(e) e in to A
flow-value
= e outof Ac(e)
lemma
= e outof Ac(e)
= cap(A,
e out of A B)
= cap(A, B)
= cap(A, B)
edge e = (v, w) with v A, w B

must have f(e) = c(e)
35
7. N ETWORK F LOW I
SECTION 7.3
Running time
Assumption. Capacities are integers between 1 and C.
Integrality invariant. Throughout the algorithm, the flow values f (e)
and the residual capacities cf (e) are integers.
Theorem. The algorithm terminates in at most val (f *) n C iterations.
Pf. Each augmentation increases the value by at least 1.
Corollary. The running time of Ford-Fulkerson is O(m n C).
Corollary. If C = 1, the running time of Ford-Fulkerson is O(m n).
Integrality theorem. Then exists a max-flow f * for which every
flow value f *(e) is an integer.
Pf. Since algorithm terminates, theorem follows from invariant.
37
Bad case for Ford-Fulkerson

Q. Is generic Ford-Fulkerson algorithm poly-time in input size?
m, n, and log C
A. No. If max capacity is C, then algorithm can take C iterations.
svwt
swvt
svwt
swvt
svwt
swvt
each augmenting path

sends only 1 unit of flow
(# augmenting paths = 2C)
38
Choosing good augmenting paths

Use care when selecting augmenting paths.
Some choices lead to exponential algorithms.

Clever choices lead to polynomial algorithms.
If capacities are irrational, algorithm not guaranteed to terminate!
Goal. Choose augmenting paths so that:
Can find augmenting paths efficiently.

Few iterations.
39
Choosing good augmenting paths

Choose augmenting paths with:
Max bottleneck capacity.

Sufficiently large bottleneck capacity.
Fewest number of edges.
Theoretical Improvements in Algorithmic Efficiency

for Network Flow Problems
JACK EDMONDS
University of Waterloo, Waterloo, Ontario, Canada

AND
RICHARD
M. K A R P
University of California, Berkeley, California

ABSTRACT. This paper presents new algorithms for t h e m a x i m u m flow problem, the Hitchcock
t r a n s p o r t a t i o n problem, and t h e general m i n i m u m - c o s t flow problem. U p p e r bounds on the
numbers of steps in these algorithms are derived, and are shown to compale favorably with
upper bounds on t h e numbers of steps required by earlier algorithms.
First, the paper states the m a x i m u m flow problem, gives the F o r d - F u l k e r s o n labeling method
for its solution, and points out t h a t an improper choice of flow a u g m e n t i n g p a t h s can lead to
severe c o m p u t a t i o n a l difficulties. T h e n rules of choice t h a t avoid these difficulties are given.
We show t h a t , if each flow a u g m e n t a t i o n is made along an a u g m e n t i n g p a t h h a v i n g a minimum
n u m b e r of arcs, t h e n a m a x i m u m flow in an n-node network will be o b t a i n e d a f t e r no more t h a n
~(n a - n) a u g m e n t a t i o n s ; and t h e n we show t h a t if each flow change is chosen to produce a
m a x i m u m increase in the flow value then, provided the capacities are integral, a m a x i m u m flow
will be d e t e r m i n e d within at most 1 + logM/(M--1) if(t, S) a u g m e n t a t i o n s , wheref*(t, s) is the
value of the maximum flow and M is the m a x i m u m n u m b e r of arcs across a cut.
Next a new algorithm is given for the m i n i m u m - c o s t flow problem, in which all s h o r t e s t - p a t h
c o m p u t a t i o n s are performed on networks with all weights nonnegative. In particular, this
a l g o r i t h m solves the n X n assigmnent problem in O(n3) steps. Following t h a t we explore a
" s c a l i n g " technique for solving a minimum-cost flow problem by t r e a t i n g a sequence of derived
problems w i t h "scaled d o w n " capacities. It is shown t h a t , using this technique, the solution of
a I i i t c h c o c k t r a n s p o r t a t i o n problem w i t h m sources and n sinks, m ~ n, and m a x i m u m flow B,
requires at most (n + 2) log2 (B/n) flow a u g m e n t a t i o n s . Similar results are also given for the
general minimum-cost flow problem.
An a b s t r a c t s t a t i n g the main results of the present paper was presented at the Calgary
I n t e r n a t i o n a l Conference on C o m b i n a t o r i a l Structures and T h e i r Applications, J u n e 1969.
In a paper b y l)inic (1970) a result closely related to the main result of Section 1.2 is obtained.
Edmonds-Karp 1972 (USA)
Dinic 1970 (Soviet Union)
40
Capacity-scaling algorithm
Intuition. Choose augmenting path with highest bottleneck capacity:
it increases flow by max possible amount in given iteration.
Don't worry about finding exact highest bottleneck path.

Maintain scaling parameter .
Let Gf () be the subgraph of the residual graph consisting only of
arcs with capacity .
s
0
11
11
2
10
2
10
0
17
17
Gf
12
2
12
Gf (), = 100
41
Capacity-scaling algorithm
CAPACITY-SCALING(G, s, t, c)
__________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
FOREACH edge e E : f (e) 0.

largest power of 2 C.
WHILE ( 1)
Gf () -residual graph.
WHILE (there exists an augmenting path P in Gf ())
Update Gf ().
/ 2.
RETURN f.
__________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
42
Capacity-scaling algorithm: proof of correctness

Assumption. All edge capacities are integers between 1 and C.
Integrality invariant. All flow and residual capacity values are integral.
Theorem. If capacity-scaling algorithm terminates, then f is a max-flow.
Pf.
By integrality invariant, when = 1 Gf () = Gf .

Upon termination of = 1 phase, there are no augmenting paths.
43
Capacity-scaling algorithm: analysis of running time

Lemma 1. The outer while loop repeats 1 + log2 C times.
Pf. Initially C / 2 < C; decreases by a factor of 2 in each iteration.
Lemma 2. Let f be the flow at the end of a -scaling phase. Then,
the value of the max-flow val( f ) + m .
proof on next slide
Lemma 3. There are at most 2m augmentations per scaling phase.

Pf.
Let f be the flow at the end of the previous scaling phase.

LEMMA 2 val( f *) val( f ) + 2 m .
Each augmentation in a -phase increases val( f ) by at least .
Theorem. The scaling max-flow algorithm finds a max flow in O(m log C)
augmentations. It can be implemented to run in O(m2 log C) time.
Pf. Follows from LEMMA 1 and LEMMA 3.
44
Capacity-scaling algorithm: analysis of running time

Lemma 2. Let f be the flow at the end of a -scaling phase. Then,
the value of the max-flow val( f ) + m .
Pf.
We show there exists a cut (A, B) such that cap(A, B) val( f ) + m .

Choose A to be the set of nodes reachable from s in Gf ().
By definition of cut A, s A.
edge e = (v, w) with v B, w A
By definition of flow f, t A.
must have f(e)
original network
val(
v( ff )) =
v( f )
v( f )
v( f )
=
=
=
=
f (e) f (e)
e out
of A f (e) e in
to A f (e)
e out
of A f (e) e in
to A f (e)
(c(e)
e out
of A f (e) e in
to A f (e)
e out
of A(c(e) ) e in
to A
e out of A
e in to A
e out
of A(c(e) ) e in
to A
c(e)
e out
of A(c(e) ) e in
to A
e out
of Ac(e) e out
of Ae intoeAinto A
e out of A
e out
of Ac(e) e out
of A e into A
cap(A,
B)
m
c(e)
of A e into A
e out
of A
e out
cap(A,
B)
m
e out of A
e out of A
e in to A
cap(A, B) - m
cap(A, B) - m
edge e = (v, w) with v A, w B

must have f(e) c(e)
45
7. N ETWORK F LOW I
SECTION 17.2
Shortest augmenting path

Q. Which augmenting path?
A. The one with the fewest number of edges.
can find via BFS
SHORTEST-AUGMENTING-PATH(G, s, t, c)
_________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
FOREACH e E : f (e) 0.
Gf residual graph.
WHILE (there exists an augmenting path in Gf )
P BREADTH-FIRST-SEARCH (Gf, s, t).
Update Gf.
RETURN f.
_________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
47
Shortest augmenting path: overview of analysis

L1. Throughout the algorithm, length of the shortest path never decreases.
L2. After at most m shortest path augmentations, the length of the shortest
augmenting path strictly increases.
Theorem. The shortest augmenting path algorithm runs in O(m2 n) time.
Pf.
O(m + n) time to find shortest augmenting path via BFS.

O(m) augmentations for paths of length k.
If there is an augmenting path, there is a simple one.
1 k < n
O(m n) augmentations.
48
Shortest augmenting path: analysis

Def. Given a digraph G = (V, E) with source s, its level graph is defined by:
(v) = number of edges in shortest path from s to v.
LG = (V, EG) is the subgraph of G that contains only those edges (v,w) E
with (w) = (v) + 1.
graph G
level graph LG
= 0
= 1
= 2
= 3
49

Def. Given a digraph G = (V, E) with source s, its level graph is defined by:
(v) = number of edges in shortest path from s to v.
LG = (V, EG) is the subgraph of G that contains only those edges (v,w) E
with (w) = (v) + 1.
Property. Can compute level graph in O(m + n) time.
Pf. Run BFS; delete back and side edges.
Key property. P is a shortest sv path in G iff P is an sv path LG.
level graph LG
= 0
= 1
= 2
= 3
50

Let f and f ' be flow before and after a shortest path augmentation.
Let L and L' be level graphs of Gf and Gf ' .
Only back edges added to Gf '
(any path with a back edge is longer than previous length)
level graph L
= 0
= 1
= 2
= 3
level graph L'
51

The bottleneck edge(s) is deleted from L after each augmentation.

No new edge added to L until length of shortest path strictly increases.
level graph L
= 0
= 1
= 2
= 3
level graph L'
52
Shortest augmenting path: review of analysis

Theorem. The shortest augmenting path algorithm runs in O(m2 n) time.
Pf.
O(m + n) time to find shortest augmenting path via BFS.

O(m) augmentations for paths of exactly k edges.
O(m n) augmentations.
53
Shortest augmenting path: improving the running time

Note. (m n) augmentations necessary on some networks.
Try to decrease time per augmentation instead.

Simple idea O(m n2 )

[Dinic 1970]
Dynamic trees O(m n log n) [Sleator-Tarjan 1983]
JOURNAL
OF COMPUTER
AND
SYSTEM
26, 362-391
SCIENCES
A Data Structure
DANIEL
(1983)
for Dynamic Trees
D. SLEATOR AND ROBERT ENDRE TARJAN
Bell Laboratories,
Received
Murray
May
8, 1982;
Hill,
revised
New Jersey
October
07974
18, 1982
A data structure
is proposed
to maintain
a collection
of vertex-disjoint
trees under a
sequence
of two kinds of operations:
a link operation
that combines
two trees into one by
adding an edge, and a cut operation
that divides one tree into two by deleting an edge. Each
operation
requires
O(log n) time. Using this data structure,
new fast algorithms
are obtained
for the following
problems:
(1)
Computing
(2)
Solving
flows, and acyclic
nearest
various
flows.
(3)
Computing
(4)
Implementing
The most
maximum
algorithm
common
network
certain
kinds
the network
ancestors.
flow
problems
of constrained
simplex
including
minimum
algorithm
finding
maximum
spanning
for minimum-cost
flows,
blocking
trees.
flows.
significant
application
is (2); an O(mn log n)-time
algorithm
is obtained
to find a
flow in a network
of n vertices and m edges, beating by a factor of log n the fastest
previously
known for sparse graphs.
1. INTR~DIJCTI~N
In this paper we consider the following
problem: We are given a collection of
54
7. N ETWORK F LOW I
SECTION 18.1
Blocking-flow algorithm
Two types of augmentations.
Normal: length of shortest path does not change.

Special: length of shortest path strictly increases.
Phase of normal augmentations.
Explicitly maintain level graph LG.

Start at s, advance along an edge in LG until reach t or get stuck.
If reach t, augment and and update LG.
If get stuck, delete node from LG and go to previous node.
t
level graph LG
56


advance
t
level graph LG
57


augment
t
level graph LG
58


advance
t
level graph LG
59


retreat
t
level graph LG
60


advance
t
level graph LG
61


augment
t
level graph LG
62


advance
t
level graph LG
63


retreat
t
level graph LG
64


retreat
t
level graph LG
65


end of phase
t
level graph LG
66
INITIALIZE(G, s, t, f, c)
ADVANCE(v)
_______________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
LG level-graph of Gf.
IF
(v = t)
P .
AUGMENT(P).
GOTO ADVANCE(s).
Remove saturated edges from LG.
_______________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
P .
GOTO ADVANCE(s).
RETREAT(v)
_______________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
IF (there exists edge (v, w) LG)
IF (v = s) STOP.
Add edge (v, w) to P.
ELSE
GOTO ADVANCE(w).
Delete v (and all incident edges) from LG.

Remove last edge (u, v) from P.
ELSE GOTO RETREAT(v).
GOTO ADVANCE(u).
________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
_______________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
67
Blocking-flow algorithm: analysis

Lemma. A phase can be implemented in O(m n) time.
Pf.
Initialization happens once per phase.

At most m augmentations per phase.
O(m) using BFS

O(mn) per phase
(because an augmentation deletes at least one edge from LG)
At most n retreats per phase.
O(m + n) per phase
(because a retreat deletes one node from LG)
At most m n advances per phase.
O(mn) per phase
(because at most n advances before retreat or augmentation)

Theorem. [Dinic 1970] The blocking-flow algorithm runs in O(mn2) time.
Pf.
By lemma, O(mn) time per phase.

At most n phases (as in shortest augment path analysis).
68
Choosing good augmenting paths: summary

Assumption. Integer capacities between 1 and C.
method
# augmentations
running time
augmenting path
nC
O(m n C)
fattest augmenting path
m log (mC)
O(m2 log n log (mC))
capacity scaling
m log C
O(m2 log C)
improved capacity scaling
m log C
O(m n log C)
shortest augmenting path
mn
O(m2 n)
improved shortest augmenting path
mn
O(m n2 )
dynamic trees
mn
O(m n log n )
69
Maximum flow algorithms: theory
year
method
worst case
discovered by
1951
simplex
O(m3 C)
Dantzig
1955
augmenting path
O(m2 C)
Ford-Fulkerson
1970
shortest augmenting path
O(m3)
Dinic, Edmonds-Karp
1970
fattest augmenting path
O(m2 log m log( m C ))
Dinic, Edmonds-Karp
1977
blocking flow
O(m 5/2)
Cherkasky
1978
blocking flow
O(m 7/3)
Galil
1983
dynamic trees
O(m2 log m)
Sleator-Tarjan
1985
capacity scaling
O(m2 log C)
Gabow
1997
length function
O(m3/2 log m log C)
Goldberg-Rao
2012
compact network
O(m2 / log m)
Orlin
O(m)
max-flow algorithms for sparse digraphs with m edges, integer capacities between 1 and C
70
Maximum flow algorithms: practice

Push-relabel algorithm (SECTION 7.4). [Goldberg-Tarjan 1988]
Increases flow one edge at a time instead of one augmenting path at a time.
A New Approach to the Maximum-Flow Problem

ANDREW V. GOLDBERG
Massachusetts
Institute of Technology, Cambridge,
Massachusetts
AND
ROBERT E. TARJAN
Princeton University,
Princeton, New Jersey, and AT&T
Bell Laboratories,
Murray
Hill, New Jersey
Abstract. All previously known efftcient maximum-flow algorithms work by finding augmenting paths,
either one path at a time (as in the original Ford and Fulkerson algorithm) or all shortest-length
augmenting paths at once (using the layered network approach of Dinic). An alternative method based
on the preflow concept of Karzanov is introduced. A preflow is like a flow, except that the total amount
flowing into a vertex is allowed to exceed the total amount flowing out. The method maintains a preflow
in the original network and pushes local flow excess toward the sink along what are estimated to be
shortest paths. The algorithm and its analysis are simple and intuitive, yet the algorithm runs as fast as
any other known method on dense.graphs, achieving an O(n)) time bound on an n-vertex graph. By
incorporating the dynamic tree data structure of Sleator and Tarjan, we obtain a version of the algorithm
running in O(nm log(n/m)) time on an n-vertex, m-edge graph. This is as fast as any known method
for any graph density and faster on graphs of moderate density. The algorithm also admits efticient
distributed and parallel implementations. A parallel implementation running in O(nlog n) time using
n processors and O(m) space is obtained. This time bound matches that of the Shiloach-Vishkin
algorithm, which also uses n processors but requires O(n) space.
Categories and Subject Descriptors: F.2.2 [Analysis of Algorithms and Problem Complexity]: Nonnumerical Algorithms and Problems; G.2.2 [Discrete Mathematics]: Graph Theory-graph algorithms;
network problems
General Terms: Algorithms, Design, Theory, Verification
71

Warning. Worst-case running time is generally not useful for predicting or
comparing max-flow algorithm performance in practice.
Best in practice. Push-relabel method with gap relabeling: O(m 3/2).
On I m p l e m e n t i n g P u s h - R e l a b e l M e t h o d
for the M a x i m u m Flow P r o b l e m
EUROPEAN
JOURNAL
OF OPERATIONAL
RESEARCH
Boris V. Cherkassky 1 and Andrew V. Goldberg 2

1 Central Institute for Economics and Mathematics,
Krasikova St. 32, 117418, Moscow, Russia
ELSEVIER
European Journal of Operational Research 97 (1997) 509-542
cher@eemi.msk.su
2 Computer Science Department, Stanford University
Stanford, CA 94305, USA
goldberg~cs. stanford, edu
Theory and Methodology
Computational investigations of maximum flow algorithms

Ravindra
A b s t r a c t . We study efficient implementations of the push-relabel method

for the maximum flow problem. The resulting codes are faster than the
previous codes, and much faster on some problem families. The speedup
is due to the combination of heuristics used in our implementations. We
also exhibit a family of problems for which the running time of all known
methods seem to have a roughly quadratic growth rate.
K . A h u j a a, M u r a l i K o d i a l a m
b, A j a y K . M i s h r a c, J a m e s B . O r l i n d,.
Department t~'lndustrial and Management Engineering. Indian Institute of Technology. Kanpur, 208 016, India
b AT& T Bell Laboratories, Holmdel, NJ 07733, USA
c KA'F-ZGraduate School of Business, University of Pittsburgh, Pittsburgh, PA 15260, USA
d Sloun School of Management, Massachusetts Institute of Technology. Cambridge. MA 02139. USA
Received 30 August 1995; accepted 27 June 1996
Abstract
Introduction
The rnaximum flow problem is a classical combinatorial problem that comes up

in a wide variety of applications. In this paper we study implementations of the
push-rdabel [13, 17] method for the problem.
The basic methods for the maximum flow problem include the network simplex method of Dantzig [6, 7], the augmenting path method of Ford and F~lker-
The maximum flow algorithm is distinguished by the long line of successive contributions researchers have made in
obtaining algorithms with incrementally better worst-case complexity. Some, but not all, of these theoretical improvements
have produced improvements in practice. The purpose of this paper is to test some of the major algorithmic ideas developed
in the recent years and to assess their utility on the empirical front. However, our study differs from previous studies in
several ways. Whereas previous studies focus primarily on CPU time analysis, our analysis goes further and provides
detailed insight into algorithmic behavior. It not only observes how algorithms behave but also tries to explain why
algorithms behave that way. We have limited our study to the best previous maximum flow algorithms and some of the
recent algorithms that are likely to be efficient in practice. Our study encompasses ten maximum flow algorithms and five
72

Computer vision. Different algorithms work better for some dense
problems that arise in applications to computer vision.
p.1
In IEEE Transactions on PAMI, Vol. 26, No. 9, pp. 1124-1137, Sept. 2004
An Experimental Comparison of
Min-Cut/Max-Flow Algorithms for
Energy Minimization in Vision
Yuri Boykov and Vladimir Kolmogorov
Abstract
After [15, 31, 19, 8, 25, 5] minimum cut/maximum flow algorithms on graphs emerged as
an increasingly useful tool for exact or approximate energy minimization in low-level vision.
The combinatorial optimization literature provides many min-cut/max-flow algorithms with
different polynomial time complexity. Their practical efficiency, however, has to date been
VERMA, BATRA: MAXFLOW REVISITED
MaxFlow Revisited:
An Empirical Comparison of Maxflow
Algorithms for Dense Vision Problems
Tanmay Verma
tanmay08054@iiitd.ac.in
Dhruv Batra
dbatra@ttic.edu
IIIT-Delhi
Delhi, India
TTI-Chicago
Chicago, USA
studied mainly outside the scope of computer vision. The goal of this paper is to provide an
experimental comparison of the efficiency of min-cut/max flow algorithms for applications
Abstract
in vision. We compare the running times of several standard algorithms, as well as a
Algorithms for finding the maximum amount of flow possible in a network (or maxflow) play a central role in computer vision problems. We present an empirical comparison of different max-flow algorithms on modern problems. Our problem instances arise
from energy minimization problems in Object Category Segmentation, Image Deconvolution, Super Resolution, Texture Restoration, Character Completion and 3D Segmentation. We compare 14 different implementations and find that the most popularly used
implementation of Kolmogorov [5] is no longer the fastest algorithm available, especially
for dense graphs.
new algorithm that we have recently developed. The algorithms we study include both
Goldberg-Tarjan style push-relabel methods and algorithms based on Ford-Fulkerson
style augmenting paths. We benchmark these algorithms on a number of typical graphs
in the contexts of image restoration, stereo, and segmentation. In many cases our new
algorithm works several times faster than any of the other methods making near real-time
performance possible. An implementation of our max-flow/min-cut algorithm is available
upon request for research purposes.
Index Terms Energy minimization, graph algorithms, minimum cut, maximum
flow, image restoration, segmentation, stereo, multi-camera scene reconstruction.
Yuri Boykov is with the Computer Science Department at the University of Western Ontario, Canada,
yuri@csd.uwo.ca. Vladimir Kolmogorov is with Microsoft Research, Cambridge, England, vnk@microsoft.com.
This work was mainly done while the authors were with Siemens Corp. Research, Princeton, NJ.
Introduction
Over the past two decades, algorithms for finding the maximum amount of flow possible in
a network (or max-flow) have become the workhorses of modern computer vision and machine learning from optimal (or provably-approximate) inference in sophisticated discrete
models [6, 11, 27, 30, 32] to enabling real-time image processing [38, 39].
73
7. N ETWORK F LOW I
Bipartite matching
Q. Which max-flow algorithm to use for bipartite matching?
Generic augmenting path: O( m | f * | ) = O(m n).

Capacity scaling: O(m2 log U) = O(m2).
Shortest augmenting path: O(m n2).
Q. Suggests "more clever" algorithms are not as good as we first thought?
A. No, just need more clever analysis!
Next. We prove that shortest augmenting path algorithm can be
implemented
inJ. CoMavx.
O(m n1/2) time.
SIAM
Vol. 4, No. 4, December 1975
NETWORK FLOW AND TESTING GRAPH CONNECTIVITY*

SHIMON
EVEN"
AND
R. ENDRE
TARJAN:I:
Abstract. An algorithm of Dinic for finding the maximum flow in a network is described. It is
then shown that if the vertex capacities are all equal to one, the algorithm requires at most O(IV[ 1/2 IEI)
time, and if the edge capacities are all equal to one, the algorithm requires at most O(I VI 2/3. IEI) time.
Also, these bounds are tight for Dinics algorithm.
These results are used to test the vertex connectivity of a graph in O(IVI 1/z. IEI 2) time and the
edge connectivity in O(I V[ 5/3. IEI) time.
Key words. Dinics algorithm, maximum flow, connectivity, vertex connectivity, edge connectivity
flow. Let
be a
75
Unit-capacity simple networks

Def. A network is a unit-capacity simple network if:
Every edge capacity is 1.

Every node (other than s or t) has either (i) at most one entering edge
or (ii) at most one leaving edge.
Property. Let G be a simple unit-capacity network and let f be a 0-1 flow,
then Gf is a unit-capacity simple network.
Ex. Bipartite matching.
1
76

Shortest augmenting path algorithm.
Normal augmentation: length of shortest path does not change.

Special augmentation: length of shortest path strictly increases.
Theorem. [Even-Tarjan 1975] In unit-capacity simple networks, the shortest
augmenting path algorithm computes a maximum flow in O(m n1/2) time.
Pf.
L1.
L2.
L3.
Each phase of normal augmentations takes O(m) time.

After at most n1/2 phases, | f | | f *| n1/2.
After at most n1/2 additional augmentations, flow is optimal.
77


delete all edges in augmenting path from L
advance
level graph LG
78


augment
level graph LG
79


advance
level graph LG
80


retreat
level graph LG
81


advance
level graph LG
82


augment
level graph LG
83


end of phase
level graph LG
84
Unit-capacity simple networks: analysis


LEMMA 1. A phase of normal augmentations takes O(m) time.
Pf.
O(m) to create level graph LG.

O(1) per edge since each edge traversed and deleted at most once.
O(1) per node since each node deleted at most once.
85

LEMMA 2. After at most n1/2 phases, | f | | f *| n1/2.
After n1/2 phases, length of shortest augmenting path is > n1/2.

Level graph has more than n1/2 levels.
Let 1 h n1/2 be layer with min number of nodes: | Vh | n1/2.
level graph LG for flow f
V0
V1
Vh
Vn1/2
86

LEMMA 2. After at most n1/2 phases, | f | | f *| n1/2.
After n1/2 phases, length of shortest augmenting path is > n1/2.

Level graph has more than n1/2 levels.
Let 1 h n1/2 be layer with min number of nodes: | Vh | n1/2.
Let A = {v : (v) < h} {v : (v) = h and v has 1 outgoing residual edge}.
capf (A, B) | Vh | n1/2 | f | | f *| n1/2.
residual graph Gf
residual edges
V0
V1
Vh
Vn1/2
87

07 Network Flow I

Transféré par

Informations du document

Titre original

Copyright

Formats disponibles

Partager ce document

Partager ou intégrer le document

Options de partage

Avez-vous trouvé ce document utile ?

Ce contenu est-il inapproprié ?

Droits d'auteur :

Formats disponibles

07 Network Flow I

Transféré par

Droits d'auteur :

Formats disponibles

7.

Last updated on Sep 8, 2013 6:40 AM

unit-capacity simple networks

Abstraction for material flowing through the edges.

Minimum cut problem

Minimum cut problem

Minimum cut problem

Min-cut problem. Find a cut of minimum capacity.

Maximum flow problem

Maximum flow problem

Maximum flow problem

Max-flow problem. Find a flow of maximum value.

unit-capacity simple networks

Towards a max-flow algorithm

Start with f (e) = 0 for all edge e E.

Towards a max-flow algorithm

Start with f (e) = 0 for all edge e E.

Towards a max-flow algorithm

Start with f (e) = 0 for all edge e E.

Towards a max-flow algorithm

Start with f (e) = 0 for all edge e E.

Towards a max-flow algorithm

Start with f (e) = 0 for all edge e E.

Towards a max-flow algorithm

Start with f (e) = 0 for all edge e E.

"Undo" flow sent.

Residual graph: Gf = (V, Ef ).

where flow on a reverse edge

b bottleneck capacity of path P.

Start with f (e) = 0 for all edge e E.

FOREACH edge e E : f (e) 0.

Ford-Fulkerson algorithm demo

Ford-Fulkerson algorithm demo

Ford-Fulkerson algorithm demo

Ford-Fulkerson algorithm demo

Ford-Fulkerson algorithm demo

Ford-Fulkerson algorithm demo

Ford-Fulkerson algorithm demo

nodes reachable from s

unit-capacity simple networks

Relationship between flows and cuts

net flow across cut = 5 + 10 + 10 = 25

Relationship between flows and cuts

net flow across cut = 10 + 5 + 10 = 25

Relationship between flows and cuts

net flow across cut = (10 + 10 + 5 + 10 + 0 + 0) (5 + 5 + 0 + 0) = 25

Relationship between flows and cuts

by flow conservation, all terms

Relationship between flows and cuts

Max-flow min-cut theorem

Suppose that (A, B) is a cut such that cap(A, B) = val(f ).

Max-flow min-cut theorem

iii ] We prove contrapositive: ~iii

Suppose that there is an augmenting path with respect to f.

Max-flow min-cut theorem

Let f be a flow with no augmenting paths.

edge e = (v, w) with v A, w B

unit-capacity simple networks

Bad case for Ford-Fulkerson

A. No. If max capacity is C, then algorithm can take C iterations.

each augmenting path

Choosing good augmenting paths

Some choices lead to exponential algorithms.