Clique, independent set, and graph coloring

Jeff Pattillo and Sergiy Butenko

Abstract

This article introduces the closely related maximum clique, maximum independent set, graph color-
ing, and minimum clique partitioning problems. The survey includes some of the most important results
concerning these problems, including their computational complexity, known bounds, mathematical pro-
gramming formulations, and exact and heuristic algorithms to solve them.

1 Introduction
The maximum clique, maximum independent set, graph coloring, and minimum clique partitioning prob-
lems are classical problems in combinatorial optimization. Due to their important role in several theoretical
fields and applicability in a wide variety of practical settings, these problems have been extensively studied
from different perspectives by mathematicians, computer scientists, operations researchers, engineers, bi-
ologists, and social scientists. This chapter surveys only a fraction of these research developments with the
aim to provide a brief introduction to these problems for the operations research community. The reader is
referred to surveys [19] and [86] for far more extensive information about each problem.
According to WordNet dictionary [81], clique is defined as an exclusive circle of people with a common
purpose. Cliques, as described in the dictionary definition, represent a natural object of interest for social
and behavioral sciences. Thus, it is not surprising that the first mentioning of this term in graph-theoretic
context is attributed to researchers in social network analysis: in their 1949 paper [74], Luce and Perry
used complete subgraphs to model social cliques, which are defined as groups of people that know (are
friends of) all other people in the group. It should be noted that the complete subgraphs had been studied
by mathematicians even before the term clique was introduced to graph theory.
Graph coloring problems have been around even longer, dating back to the famous four-color conjecture
first attacked in the 19-th century [67, 36], stating that regions of any simple planar map can be colored
with four colors so that any two adjacent regions have different colors. The proof of this seemingly simple
statement required the efforts of several generations of mathematicians and involvement of a computer [106,
51].
Clique-like structures frequently arise in many other applications, where one is interested in detecting
large groups of elements that are all closely related to each other in some sense. Depending on the applica-
tion of interest, such structures are often referred to as clusters, modules, complexes or cohesive subgroups.
If the elements in the application of interest are represented as vertices (nodes) and the relationships between
the elements are represented as edges (links, arcs), then clusters can be naturally modeled as cliques in this
graph-theoretic representation. Similarly, graph coloring can be used to solve many important practical
problems arising, e.g., in scheduling, timetabling, and telecommunication networks.
1
 In this paper, we seek to give an introduction to these problems and their typical applications, as well
as give a brief summary of the most popular methods of solving the problems and the capabilities and
limitations of these methods.

2 Definitions and notations

Given a simple undirected graph G = (V, E), where V = {1, . . . , n} is the vertex set and E V V is its
edge set, we denote by G(S) = (S, E S S) the subgraph induced by a subset of vertices S, and we use
the notation G to represent the compliment graph, that is G = (V, E) where E = {(i, j)|i, j V, i = j and
(i, j)
/ E}. Vertices i and j are called adjacent if (i, j) E. The neighborhood N(i) of a vertex i is the set
of vertices adjacent to i, N(i) = { j V : (i, j) E}. By AG we denote the adjacency matrix of G, which is
an n n matrix AG = [ai j ]ni, j=1 such that ai j = 1 if (i, j) E and ai j = 0 otherwise. The degree deg(i) of i
in G is the size |N(i)| of the neighborhood of i in G. We will denote by (G) and (G) the smallest and the
largest degree of a vertex in G, respectively.
A graph G = (V, E) is called complete if all its vertices are adjacent, i.e. if i, j V, i = j, we have
(i, j) E. By definition a clique C is a subset of vertices such that G(C) is complete. An independent set
in G is a subset of vertices I such that the induced subgraph G(I) is edgeless. A clique (independent set)
is called maximal if it is not a subset of a larger clique (independent set) in G, and it is called maximum if
there is no larger clique (independent set) in the graph. Given a simple undirected graph G, the maximum
clique problem (maximum independent set problem) asks for a maximum clique (independent set) in G. The
clique number, which is traditionally denoted as (G), is the number of vertices in the largest clique in G.
The independence number (G) is defined analogously. It is easy to see that C is a clique in G if and only if
C is an independent set in G, hence, (G) = (G). Due to this close relation between the two concepts, we
will use the notions of cliques and independent sets interchangeably in this paper, since all the facts stated
for a clique in G are true for an independent set in G, and vice versa.
A proper k-coloring of the vertices of G is an assignment of colors (e.g., {1, 2, . . . , k}) to the vertices
of G so that no two adjacent vertices get the same color. A vertex k-coloring can also be thought of as a
mapping f : V {1, 2, . . . , k} such that f (vi ) = f (v j ) if (vi , v j ) E. A graph G is called k-colorable if
there exists a proper k-coloring of its vertices. The graph coloring problem is to find a proper coloring of
its vertices with the smallest possible number of colors. The chromatic number (G) of G is the smallest
integer k for which G is k-colorable.
A k-coloring partitions V into k different color classes, where each member of the class has the same
color. To have the same color, the members of each class must be pairwise non-adjacent, which by defi-
nition makes them an independent set. Similarly, one can define a k-clique partitioning of G, which is a
partitioning of the set of vertices of G into k disjoint subsets C1 , . . . ,Ck , each of which is a clique. The min-
imum clique partitioning problem asks for a k-clique partitioning of G using the smallest possible number
k of cliques, which is denoted by (G) and is called the clique partitioning number. Note that a proper
k-coloring of G is a k-clique partitioning of G, thus, (G) = (G).
The maximum clique, maximum independent set, vertex coloring and minimum clique partitioning
problems are all known to be NP-hard [48]. Moreover, these problems are known to be hard to approximate.
Arora et al. showed in [5] and [6] that the maximum clique size cannot be approximated within a factor of
n for any > 0 unless P = NP. Similarly, the graph coloring problem is not approximable within n1 for
any > 0 [45].
3 Mathematical programming formulations

3.1 The maximum clique problem

The maximum clique problem can be formulated as the following integer program:
n
max xi
i=1
(1)
s.t. xi + x j 1, (i, j) E
xi {0, 1}, i = 1, . . . , n

In this edge formulation any feasible solution x defines a clique C in G as follows: C = {i V : xi = 1}.
The linear relaxation of this formulation is significant as well. Nemhauser and Trotter [84] found that if a
variable xi in any optimal solution to the linear relaxation had the value 1, then xi = 1 in at least one optimal
solution to the above formulation. When some such variable xi = 1, this clearly helps cut down the search
space for an optimal clique.
Shor [92] modified the edge formulation to obtain an equivalent nonlinear problem:
n
max xi
i=1
(2)
s.t. xi x j = 0, (i, j) E
xi2 xi = 0, i = 1, . . . , n

He used this formulation to obtain dual estimates of good quality.

Motzkin and Straus [83] related (G) to the global optimal value of a certain quadratic function over
the standard simplex. Before we state this classical formulation, some additional notations are in order. For
a set of vertices S we use the notation xS to denote the characteristic vector of S, that is a vector that satisfies
xiS = 1/|S| if i S and xiS = 0 otherwise, for i {1, . . . , n}. By S we will denote the standard simplex in n :
n
S = {x n : xi = 1, xi 0, i = 1, . . . , n}.
i=1

Let AG be the adjacency matrix of a graph G, and for x n let g(x) = xT AG x. Then the global optimal
solution x to max g(x) is related to the clique number by the formula
xS

1
(G) = .
1 g(x )

The following generalization of the Motzkin-Straus theorem was intoroduced by Bomze [18] to guaran-
tee a one-to-one correspondence between maximal cliques and local maximizers of the quadratic program.
Let f (x) = xT AG x + 12 xT x.

Theorem 3.1 Let S be a subset of vertices of a graph G, and let xS be its characteristic vector. Then the
following statements hold:
 S is a maximum clique of G if and only if xS is a global maximizer of the function f over the simplex
S. In this case, (G) = 2(11f (xS )) .

S is a maximal clique of G if and only if xS is a local maximizer of f in S.

All local (and hence global) maximizers x of g over S are strict, and of the form x = xS for some
S V.

The maximum independent set problem can be equivalently formulated using the following mathemat-
ical programs over the unit hypercube in n (see, e.g., [2, 9]):

(G) = max xi
x[0,1]n iV
xi x j . (3)
(i, j)E

(G) = max xi
x[0,1]n iV
(1 x j ). (4)
jN(i)

xi
(G) = max
x[0,1]n
1+ xj
. (5)
iV
jN(i)

In each of these formulations, the feasible region can be replaced with {0, 1}n without changing the
optimal objective value. Several other similar formulations can be found in [55].
Recently, Martins [78] proposed discretized formulations for the maximum clique problem and reported
tighter upper bounds based on linear programming relaxations than those for the known formulations on
many benchmarks graphs.

3.2 Formulations of the graph coloring problem

The following is perhaps the most straightforward integer programming formulation of the graph coloring
problem.
n
min yk
k=1
n
s.t. xik = 1, i V (6)
k=1
xik + x jk 1, (i, j) E
yk xik , i V, k = 1, . . . , n
yk , xik {0, 1} i V, k = 1, . . . , n.

Any feasible solution induces a proper coloring by assigning each vertex i the unique color k for which
xik = 1. The optimal objective function value gives the chromatic number of the graph.
 Another integer programming formulation
r
min xik x jk
k=1 (i, j)E
r (7)
s.t. x jk = 1, j = 1, . . . , n
k=1
x jk {0, 1}, j, k

is quadratic in its objective value but has much simpler constraints than the previous formulation.
Probably the most noteworthy continuous optimization formulation is

min
s.t. qi j , if (i, j) E
qi j = q ji (8)
qii = 1
Q = [qi j ] 0

While this is not a semidefinite program because is on the wrong side of an inequality, many have used
relaxations of this to find the coloring number of graphs using semidefinite programs [41].

4 Bounds
Since the number of vertices in any color class defined by a proper coloring of G cannot exceed (G), we
obtain the following inequality:
|V |
(G) . (9)
(G)

The Caro-Wei bound on the independence number is expressed in terms of vertex degrees as follows [34,
102]:
1
(G) . (10)
iV deg(i) + 1
This bound is sharp if and only if each connected component of G is a clique. Note that the Caro-Wei bound
follows from formulation (5) by setting all variables to 1.
In 1967, Wilf [105] showed that
(G) (AG ) + 1, (11)
where (AG ) is the spectral radius of the adjacency matrix of G (the largest eigenvalue of AG ).
Amin and Hakimi [4] proved that

(G) N1 + 1 < n N0 + 1, (12)

where N1 is the number of eigenvalues of AG that do not exceed 1, and N0 is the number of zero eigen-
values. This bound is sharp if G is a complete multipartite graph.
 Applying a greedy coloring yields a simple upper bound on the chromatic number:

(G) (G) + 1. (13)

Brooks theorem [26] slightly improves this bound for connected graphs: for a connected, simple graph G
that is not a complete graph or an odd cycle, we have

(G) (G). (14)

Szekeres and Wilf [96] generalized bound (13) by proving that for any function (G) satisfying two
properties, (i) G G (G ) (G) and (ii) (G) (G), we have

(G) (G) + 1.

Reed [88] conjectured that for every graph G,

1
(G) ((G) + (G)) + 1. (15)
2

The clique number (G) and chromatic number (G) satisfy the inequality (G) (G), since every
vertex in the largest clique is adjacent to every other vertex in this clique, and thus requires a different
color. What is remarkable is that there exists a polynomially computable graph function (G), known as
the Lovasz -function [73], that always satisfies the sandwich theorem [69]:

(G) (G) (G) (16)

Hence, (G) provides a polynomially computable upper bound on (G) and lower bound on (G).
A graph G such that for any subset of vertices S V the corresponding induced subgraph has equal
clique and chromatic numbers, (G(S)) = (G(S)), is called perfect. Recenltly, Chudnovsky et al. [38]
proved the strong perfect graph theorem (first conjectured by Claude Birge in 1960) stating that a graph
is perfect if and only if it contains no odd hole (that is, a chordless cycle of length at least four) and
no odd antihole (a complement of a hole). Hence, checking whether a graph G is perfect can be done
in polynomial time. On the other hand, Busygin and Pasechnik [31] proved that recognizing whether
(G) (G) = 0 is NP-hard, implying that any polynomially-computable parameter that lies between
(G) and (G) will provide the provably best upper bound for the independence number in the sense
that no other polynomially computable bound can improve this bound whenever it can be improved. In
particular, the Lovasz theta is one such bound.

5 Computing Cliques and Colorings

5.1 Exact Solutions

The early algorithms for the maximum clique problem were motivated by various applications and, because
of the nature of the considered applications, aimed to enumerate all maximal cliques in the graph rather
than just finding a single maximum clique. In 1957, Harary and Ross [56] published the first algorithm for
enumerating all cliques in a graph, which was motivated by an application in sociometry. Their method
first reduces the problem on general graphs to a special case with graphs having at most three cliques, and
then solves the problem for this special case. Many other algorithms for enumerating all maximal cliques
followed [87, 77, 22, 12].
The progress in computing technologies in 1960s motivated the development of many new enumerative
algorithms. Bron and Kerbosch [25] proposed a backtracking method that requires only polynomial storage
space and excludes of the possibility of computing the same clique twice. Various versions of this algorithm
are still used in many different applications, in particular, in computational biology, where it was found
very effective for problems related to matching 3-dimensional molecular structures [47]. Tomita et al. [100]
developed a modification of this approach that has the time complexity of O(3n/3 ). This complexity is
cannot be improved for enumerative algorithms, since there are graphs with 3n/3 maximal cliques [82].
More recently, Tomita et al. [101] presented a depth-first search algorithm for generating all maximal cliques
of an undirected graph, which uses the same pruning rules as the Bron-Kerbosch algorithm, and also has
O(3n/3 ) worst-case time complexity. They report encouraging results of computational experiments.
While the above-mentioned algorithms were designed for finding all maximal cliques in a graph, solving
the maximum clique problem requires to find only one maximum clique. Many exact algorithms for the
maximum clique and related problems have been proposed in the literature, most of which can be viewed as
variations of the branch and bound technique. Some of the algorithms were designed with worst-case time
complexity in mind, while others emphasize the practical performance. In 1977, Tarjan and Trojanowski
[97] proposed a recursive algorithm for the maximum independent set problem with the time complexity
of O(2n/3 ). Later, Robson [89] improved this result to obtain the time complexity of O(20.276n ). In 2001,
Robson [90] further brought down the best known worst-case complexity to O(2n/4 ).
As for more practical algorithms, Balas and Yu [7] used an interesting implementation of the implicit
enumeration, with which they were able to compute maximum cliques in graphs with up to 400 vertices and
30,000 edges. Carraghan and Pardalos [35] proposed an alternative, simpler approach examining vertices
in the order corresponding to the nondecreasing order of their degrees withing the implicit enumeration
framework. This method proved to be extremely efficient, especially for sparse graphs and was selected as
a benchmark for comparing different algorithms in The Second DIMACS Implementation Challenge [66].
Ostergard [85] proposed a branch-and-bound algorithm that employs a vertex ordering based on approxi-
mate coloring. This algorithm showed an excellent performance on random graphs and DIMACS bench-
mark instances and is considered the state-of-the-art general purpose exact algorithm for the maximum
clique problem by many researchers. Tomita and Kameda [98] used similar ideas in their implementation
of the so-called MCR algorithm, which also uses approximate coloring along with an appropriate sorting
of vertices. They report superior computational results on graphs with up to 15,000 vertices, including
instances arising in image processing, design of quantum circuits, and bioinformatics.
As we have seen in the previous section, the maximum clique and graph coloring problems can be
formulated as integer or continuous nonconvex programs. Modern integer programming solvers typically
combine branch-and-bound strategies with cutting plane methods, efficient preprocessing schemes, includ-
ing fast heuristics, and sophisticated decomposition techniques in order to find an exact solution, and may be
quite effective even with their default settings when used with an appropriate integer programming formu-
lation. However, the experience shows that developing specialized strategies based on a detailed polyhedral
studies of the specific problem helps to speed up the computations and tackle larger problem instances. Sev-
eral attempts of using algorithms based on the polyhedral properties of the maximum clique problem have
been reported in the literature. For example, Bourjolly et al. [23] propose a column generation algorithm for
the maximum stable set problem, and Rossi [91] reports encouraging computational results with a branch-
and-cut algorithm for the same problem. While these approaches show some promise and may still be
improved in the future, at the moment they are, generally speaking, outperformed by the above-mentioned
branch-and-bound strategies in practice.
The exact algorithms for the graph coloring follow the same general line of development as for the max-
imum clique problem. Brown [27] proposed a branch-and-bound algorithm that uses a sequential greedy
coloring heuristic described in the next section. Several improvements were suggested later [24, 66, 71].
Mehrotra and Trick [80] developed a column generation approach for graph coloring. Herrmann and
Hertz [57] attempt to compute the chromatic number of a graph G by first determining a critical subgraph,
which is the smallest induced subgraph of G that has the same chromatic number. Their method allows to
solve large instances than those reported previously. Lucet et al. [75] proposed an exact algorithm for the
graph coloring based on a linear-decomposition of the graph. This method is exponential with respect to
the linearwidth of the input graph, but only linear with respect to its number of vertices. The method was
used to successfully solve some of the problem instances for the first time.

5.2 Approximation Algorithms and Heuristics

Due to inapproximability of the maximum clique and graph coloring problems mentioned above, the ap-
proximation algorithms for these problems normally have the approximation ratio depending on the prob-
lem size and are of mostly theoretical value. For example, a greedy algorithm that that builds a maximal
independent set by recursively adding a minimum degree vertex and removing its neighbors has an ap-
proximation ratio of ((G) + 2)/3 [54]. Johnson [64] presented an algorithm for graph coloring with a
performance guarantee of O(n log n).
Heuristics for the maximum clique and graph coloring problems usually have little theoretical justifica-
tion or performance bounds. Thus evaluations of which heuristics tend to work best in which situations are
mostly based on experimentation. The heuristics listed below are among the most popular and successful.

5.2.1 Greedy Construction Heuristics

Greedy heuristics for the maximum clique problem typically work in one of two ways: either adding in
vertices into a partial clique until no more can be inserted or deleting vertices from a set of vertices that is
not a clique until it induces a complete subgraph. The rule governing which vertex to add or delete next is
usually based upon simple local information, such as the degree of the vertex. Heuristics such as this tend
to run extremely fast. For examples of greedy heuristics, see [63, 70, 99].
The most commonly implemented greedy heuristic for the coloring problem is called the sequential
greedy coloring heuristic (SGCH). The first step of this algorithm is to order the vertices. After that each
vertex is colored in the specified order in a greedy method, using the smallest feasible color. There will
always be an ordering that will lead to an optimal coloring. To see this, suppose the color classes from an
optimal coloring are {S1 , . . . , Sk }. If SGCH is applied to an ordering where all of S1 is colored, then all
of S2 , then all of S3 , and so on, it is easy to see that, while the same exact coloring may not be obtained,
it will certainly not use more than k colors. Because of this fact, heuristics with greedy coloring tend to
concentrate heavily on the order the vertices are to be colored in.
Ordering schemes such as largest first in [103], smallest last in [79], and dynamic ordering schemes
that do not pre-order as in [24] and [72] have all been well studied. For research into how one can move
gradually from an initial ordering to an optimal ordering, see, e.g., [14, 37, 104].
5.2.2 Local Search Heuristics

Local search methods work by finding an initial solution to a problem and then searching neighbors of
this solution in the space of all solutions looking for a better answer. Local search methods will vary on
how they define the neighborhood of a solution as well as how they perform the search itself. The most
basic local search methods are based on one of the two common rules for determining the next move:
the best improvement strategy chooses the best neighbor, while the first improvement strategy accepts the
first better solution found while searching the neighborhood of the current solution. The definition of the
neighborhood is a critical element of a local search algorithm. The most common neighborhoods for the
maximum clique and the graph coloring problems are the so-called exchange neighborhoods. An exchange
neighborhood for the maximum clique problem is defined as follows: given a clique representing the current
solution, its neighbors are obtained by removing one or more vertices from the clique and adding at least as
many new vertices to the clique whenever possible. For graph coloring the exchange is typically performed
between different color classes. Namely, given a proper coloring, its neighbors are obtained by moving a
certain number of vertices from one color class to another in an attempt to eventually reduce some of the
color classes to empty set, thus obtaining a better coloring. Oftentimes exchanges resulting in infeasible
solutions are allowed with a penalty added to the objective for the infeasibility. This is done to diversify the
search to increase the chances of hitting a high quality solution.
In [39], an alternative iterative improvement heuristic for the coloring problem is proposed. The paper
notes that if you take a coloring {S1 , . . . , Sr }, where the Si s are the color classes, then coloring an ordering
of the form (Si1 , . . . , Sir ) by a greedy heuristic, that is an ordering where each color class is colored entirely
before the next class, can only improve upon the previous coloring. This observation is independent on the
ordering of the vertices within each class, as well as the order in which the classes appear, so in [39] various
ordering schemes of the classes are explored. Typically a mixture of the schemes is best because it allows
the algorithm to search a larger neighborhood of potential solutions.
While traditional local search methods are typically capable of improving on the solutions generated by
construction heuristics, they are known for their tendency to often getting trapped in local optima of rather
poor quality. Several strategies commonly used to overcome this drawback are briefly reviewed in the next
subsection. Various other heuristics can be found in, e.g., [66, 33].

5.2.3 Metaheuristics

Metaheuristic strategies were designed to allow a traditional local search algorithm to escape poor local
optimums that a search might get bogged down in because of a poor initial solution. While many meta-
heuristic strategies, such as neural networks, genetic algorithms, and genetic computing have been applied
to the maximum clique and graph coloring problems, few offer very good results. For a discussion of this
on the clique problem specifically, see [19]. Both problems do, however, surrender good results to the
same two local search methods: simulated annealing & tabu search. These methods specify unique ways of
performing a search through the solution set.
In simulated annealing, after an initial solution has been created, the algorithm chooses a neighbor of it
to potentially accept as the next solution. If the neighbor improves the current solution, it is automatically
accepted. If it is not an improvement, the neighbor is accepted with a probability that gets lower and lower as
the annealing process proceeds. The rate at which the probability of acceptance decreases, called the cooling
schedule, depends on a parameter called temperature, which highly determines the runtime of the simulated
annealing process. While the exact solution can be guaranteed with a logarithmic cooling schedule, faster
cooling schedules are often used so that the algorithm does not take exponential time to finish. For different
implementations of simulated annealing to solve the clique problem, see [1] and [60]. It is interesting to note
that it has been shown in [62] that, theoretically, simulated annealing should perform poorly for the clique
problem, but the results in [60] conclude just the opposite. Simulated annealing actually outperforms most
other heuristics on the clique problem in experiments in that paper. Pure versions of simulated annealing
for the coloring problem, along with implementations where it is combined with greedy heuristics, exist in
[37] and [65]. It seems to outperform most greedy heuristics both in time and quality of the solution on
random graphs of up to 1000 vertices.
Like simulated annealing, tabu search was designed to keep an algorithm from always ending up at the
same answers as it searches solution space, but it goes about this in a different way. Essentially this method
keeps a tabu list, a list of aspiration criterion, and a list of neighbors for the current solution. The algorithm
chooses a neighbor and checks it against the tabu list. The tabu list keeps track of which vertices are illegal
to visit, unless they meet an aspiration criterion. If the chosen vertex is not on the tabu list, it is visited.
In this way the solutions searched is very much diversified. The implementations of tabu search that have
performed well for the maximum clique problem can be found in [11, 49, 94, 93]. For implementations
of tabu search for the graph coloring problem, see [40, 58, 59]. For results comparing not only simulated
annealing and tabu search but also greedy heuristics on random graphs of up to 500 vertices and varying
densities, see [68].

5.2.4 Heuristics Based on Continuous Optimization

The Motzkin-Straus formulation yields another potential way of solving the max clique problem, shifting
it from a discrete to a continuous setting. Gibbons, Hearn, and Pardalos in [50] relaxed the Motzkin-Straus
formulation to where it became a problem of optimizing a quadratic over a sphere, which is solvable in
polynomial time. The drawback is that solutions may become infeasible for the original problem and hence
have to be rounded. Their algorithm performed well on DIMACS benchmark graphs, as recorded in [50].
Others have taken advantage of the fact that the Motzkin-Straus formulation happens to be a replicator
equation. A replicator equation, appropriately named because it behaves like the fitness of a population as it
replicates, is an equation that as each new solution is plugged in recursively, always increases. With enough
starts in random locations, one hopes that recursively plugging in solutions to the replicator equation will
end in discovering the global optimum. For discussion on algorithms to take advantage of the Motzkin-
Straus formulation as a replicator equation, including how to remove the need for iteration in the procedure
and empirical analysis, see [20, 21]. Results on benchmark graphs are reported in [66].
Burer et al. [28] studied rank-one and rank-two relaxations of the Lovasz semidefinite program [53]
and obtained two continuous formulations for the maximum independent set problem. They used these
formulations to develop new heuristics for finding large independent sets. Several other heuristics for the
maximum independent set problem based on continuous optimization techniques have been proposed in the
literature [2, 30, 10, 29].
As for the graph coloring problem, Dukanovic and Rendl [41] use information provided by near-optimal
solutions of a semidefinite programming formulation for the Lovasz -function to generate heuristic solu-
tions for the graph coloring problem. Based on the results of numerical experiments, they suggest that this
approach could be useful for coloring medium-sized instances.
6 Applications
The clique and coloring problems share more than just theoretical connections. They tend to show up in the
similar applications, as ways of dealing with conflicts/errors that are expected. The coloring problem tends
to appear in applications where you simply wish to detect issues. The solution gives classes that are not in
conflict with each other but if an error occurs, the whole thing tends to be scrapped. The clique problem
tends to appear in applications where issues need to be corrected. To pinpoint the location of the error
with high likelihood, information from as many sources as possible are needed. The largest clique tends
to give the most information from which the location of an error can be deduced. The reader is referred
to [32] for a survey of applications of clique-detection models in biochemistry and genomics. Applications
of cliques and coloring in telecommunications are discussed in [8]. Some other applications are briefly
reviewed below.
One of the best known applications of the clique problem is in coding theory. Suppose we have a code
made up of binary vectors of size n. Two vectors u = (u1 , . . . , un ) and v = (v1 , . . . , vn ) are said to have
Hamming Distance d if ui = vi in at least d slots. If all vectors in a code have hamming distance d, then
it is well known the code can correct up to d1 2 errors due to transmission by rounding to the nearest
codeword. What would be helpful to know is how many codewords of Hamming distance d can exist for a
set of binary vectors of length n. If a graph is made with all binary vectors of length n as vertices, and edges
between all vertices that have at least hamming distance d so that they can be put in the same code, then the
clique number of this graph is precisely how many codewords can exist in a binary code of length n. No
formula exists in general for this value. If one wants to build a code able to correct up to d1 2 errors with
a desired number of codewords in mind, the clique problem must be solved to have the most efficient code.
Another application that involves solving the clique problem is fault diagnosis in multiprocessor sys-
tems. Pinpointing the faulty system or systems requires lots of information and in [13] a method is created
that pinpoints the system with probability at least 1 n1 . A major portion of the algorithm, to pinpoint
the correct system, is being able to determine the largest clique, which has information from which many
deductions can be made.
Some of the most obvious applications of the coloring problem occur in scheduling where there is
limited resources. Whether this be timetable scheduling to minimize the number of rooms needed for an
event, allocation of variables to registers in a way that minimizes the number of wasted calls to memory
because the frequently used variables are the ones being overwritten, or assignment of frequencies to users
in a way that minimizes interference due to proximity, the coloring problem typically appears where many
pieces must share resources. A plan where not everything fits is usually scrapped. For instance, if the
classes that need to run in school do not fit in the set of available rooms with one schedule, a new schedule
is sought.
Another application of the coloring problem is in circuit board( ) testing. To test for shorts, one could
test the nets of a circuit board pairwise. If n nets exist, this is n2 tests to be sure a circuit board is sound.
However, if the nets that cannot have shorts between them are all yoked together as a( color ) class, one can
simply test to see if shorts exist between the k color classes pairwise. This takes only 2k tests to determine
is a circuit board is sound. While the exact location of the short cannot be determined, which might allow
one to fix the board, this allows one to detect an error much quicker. Thus, assuming the board will be
scrapped if an error has occurred, the solution to the coloring problem tremendously speeds up the testing
process.
6.1 Clique and chromatic numbers in uniform random graphs

In this section we provide some results concerning the asymptotic behavior of clique and chromatic numbers
in random graphs. Erdos and Renyi [42, 43, 44] founded the random graph theory by introducing several
models of uniform random graphs. Two of the most popular such models are G(n, m) and G (n, p) [15], the
first of which assigns the same probability to all graphs with n vertices and m edges, while in the second
model each pair of vertices is connected by an edge randomly and independently with probability p.
Studying the asymptotic behavior of various graph properties may provide reasonable theoretical esti-
mates of graph invariants for massive graph instances that cannot be tackled by a computer. We say that
almost every (a.e.) graph has property Q, or the property Q holds asymptotically almost surely (a.a.s.), if
the probability that a random graph on n vertices has property Q tends to 1 as n . Erdos and Renyi
observed that many graph properties either hold or do not hold for almost every graph.

6.2 Clique number

Assume that 0 < p < 1 is fixed. Then instead of the sequence of spaces {G (n, p), n 1} one can work
with the single probability space G (N, p) containing graphs on N with the edges chosen independently with
probability p. For a graph G G (N, p) we denote by Gn the subgraph of G induced by the first n vertices
{1, 2, . . . , n}. Then the sequence (Gn ) appears to be almost completely determined for a.e. G G (N, p).
Bollobas and Erdos [17] proved that if p = p(n) satisfies n < p c for every and some c < 1, then
there exists a function cl : N N such that a.a.s.
cl(n) (Gn ) cl(n) + 1,
i.e. the clique number is asymptotically distributed on at most two values. The sequence cl(n) appears to
be close to l0 (n) = 2 log1/p n + O(log log n): for a.e. G G (N, p) if n is large enough then
l0 (n) 2 log log n/ log n (Gn ) l0 (n) + 2 log log n/ log n
and   3
 
(Gn ) 2 log1/p n + 2 log1/p log1/p n 2 log1/p (e/2) 1 < .
2
Frieze [46] and Janson et al. [61] extended these results by showing that for > 0 there exists a constant c ,
such that for cn p(n) log2 n a.a.s.
2 log1/p n 2 log1/p log1/p n + 2 log1/p (e/2) + 1 /p (Gn )

2 log1/p n 2 log1/p log1/p n + 2 log1/p (e/2) + 1 + /p.

6.3 Chromatic number

The problem of coloring random graphs has been studied by several researchers [16, 3, 52, 95, 76]. uczak [76]
improved the previous results about the concentration of (G(n, p)), proving that for every sequence p =
p(n) such that p n6/7 there is a function ch(n) such that a.a.s.
ch(n) (G(n, p)) ch(n) + 1.
Alon and Krivelevich [3] have shown that for any positive constant the chromatic number of a uniform
random graph G(n, p), where p = n 2 , is a.a.s. distributed among two consecutive values. Moreover,
1

a proper choice of p(n) may result in a one-point distribution. The function ch(n) is difficult to find in
general, however it can be characterized in some cases. In particular, Janson et al. [61] proved that there
exists a constant c0 such that for any p = p(n) satisfying cn0 p log7 n a.a.s.
np np
(G(n, p)) .
2 log np 2 log log np + 1 2 log np 40 log log np
If p is constant, we have the following estimate:
n
(G(n, p)) = ,
2 logb n 2 logb logb n + Oc (1)

where b = 1/(1 p).

References
[1] E. Aarts and J. Korst. Simulated Annealing and Boltzmann Machines. John Wiley & Sons Incorpo-
rated, Chichester, UK, 1989.

[2] J. Abello, S. Butenko, P. Pardalos, and M. Resende. Finding independent sets in a graph using
continuous multivariable polynomial formulations. Journal of Global Optimization, 21:111137,
2001.

[3] N. Alon and M. Krivelevich. The concentration of the chromatic number of random graphs. Combi-
natorica, 17:303313, 1997.

[4] A. T. Amin and S. L. Hakimi. Upper bounds on the order of a clique of a graph. SIAM J. Appl. Math.,
22:569573, 1972.

[5] S. Arora, C. Lund, R. Motwani, and M. Szegedy. Proof verification and hardness of approximation
problems. Journal of the ACM, 45:501555, 1998.

[6] S. Arora and S. Safra. Probabilistic checking of proofs: a new characterization of NP. Journal of the
ACM, 45(1):70122, 1998.

[7] E. Balas and C. Yu. Finding a maximum clique in an arbitrary graph. SIAM Journal of Computing,
15:10541068, 1986.

[8] B. Balasundaram and S. Butenko. Graph domination, coloring and cliques in telecommunications.
In M. G. C. Resende and P. M. Pardalos, editors, Handbook of Optimization in Telecommunications,
pages 865890. Spinger Science + Business Media, New York, 2006.

[9] B. Balasundaram and S. Butenko. On a polynomial fractional formulation for independence number
of a graph. Journal of Global Optimization, 35:405421, 2006.

[10] B. Balasundaram and S. Butenko. On a polynomial fractional formulation for independence number
of a graph. Journal of Global Optimization, 35(3):405421, 2006.
[11] R. Battiti and M. Protasi. Reactive local search for the maximum clique problem. Algorithmica,
29:610637, 2001.

[12] A. R. Bednarek and O. E. Taulbee. On maximal chains. Roum. Math. Pres et Appl., 11:2325, 1966.

[13] P. Berman and A. Pelc. Distributed fault diagnosis for multiprocessor systems. In Proceedings of
the 20th Annual International Symposium on Fault-Tolerant Computing, pages 340346, Newcastle,
UK, 1990.

[14] N. Biggs. Some heuristics for graph coloring. In R. Nelson and R. Wilson, editors, Graph Colorings,
Pitman Research Notes in Mathematics, pages 8796. Wiley, 1990.

[15] B. Bollobas. Random Graphs. Academic Press, New York, 1985.

[16] B. Bollobas. The chromatic number of random graphs. Combinatorica, 8:4956, 1988.

[17] B. Bollobas and P. Erdos. Cliques in random graphs. Math. Proc. Camb. Phil. Soc., 80:419427,
1976.

[18] I. M. Bomze. Evolution towards the maximum clique. Journal of Global Optimization, 10:143164,
1997.

[19] I. M. Bomze, M. Budinich, P. M. Pardalos, and M. Pelillo. The maximum clique problem. In D.-Z.
Du and P. M. Pardalos, editors, Handbook of Combinatorial Optimization, pages 174, Dordrecht,
The Netherlands, 1999. Kluwer Academic Publishers.

[20] I. M. Bomze, M. Pelillo, and R. Giacomini. Evolutionary approach to the maximum clique problem:
empirical evidence on a larger scale. In I. M. Bomze, T. Csendes, R. Horst, and P. M. Pardalos, edi-
tors, Developments of Global Optimization, pages 95108. Kluwer Academic Publishers, Dordrecht,
The Netherlands, 1997.

[21] I.M. Bomze and V. Stix. Genetical engineering via negative fitness: Evolutionary dynamics for
global optimization. Ann. Oper. Res., 89:279318, 1999.

[22] R. E. Bonner. On some clustering techniques. IBM J. Res. Develop., 8:2232, 1964.

[23] J.-M. Bourjolly, G. Laporte, and H. Mercure. A combinatorial column generation algorithm for the
maximum stable set problem. Operations Research Letters, 20(1):21 29, 1997.

[24] D. Brelaz. New methods to color the vertices of a graph. Communications of the ACM, 22(4):251
256, 1979.

[25] C. Bron and J. Kerbosch. Algorithm 457: Finding all cliques on an undirected graph. Communica-
tions of ACM, 16:575577, 1973.

[26] R. L. Brooks. On coloring the nodes of a network. Proc. Cambridge Philos. Soc., 37:194197, 1941.

[27] J.R. Brown. Chromatic scheduling and the chromatic number problem. Management Science,
19:456463, 1972.

[28] S. Burer, R. D. C. Monteiro, and Y. Zhang. Maximum stable set formulations and heuristics based
on continuous optimization. Mathematical Programming, 94:137166, 2002.
[29] S. Busygin. A new trust region technique for the maximum weight clique problem. Discrete Applied
Mathematics, 154:20802096, 2006.

[30] S. Busygin, S. Butenko, and P. M. Pardalos. A heuristic for the maximum independent set problem
based on optimization of a quadratic over a sphere. Journal of Combinatorial Optimization, 6:287
297, 2002.

[31] S. Busygin and D.V. Pasechnik. On NP-hardness of the clique partition independence number gap
recognition and related problems. Discrete Mathematics, 304:460463, 2006.

[32] S. Butenko and W. Wilhelm. Clique-detection models in computational biochemistry and genomics.
European Journal of Operational Research, 173:117, 2006.

[33] M. Caramia and P. DellOlmo. Coloring graphs by iterated local search traversing feasible and
infeasible solutions. Discrete Appl. Math., 156(2):201217, 2008.

[34] Y. Caro. New results on the independence number. Technical report, Tel-Aviv University, Israel,
1979.

[35] R. Carraghan and P. Pardalos. An exact algorithm for the maximum clique problem. Operations
Research Letters, 9:375382, 1990.

[36] A. Cayley. On the colourings of maps. Proc. Royal Geographical Society, 1:259261, 1879.

[37] M. Chams, A. Hertz, and D. de Werra. Some experiments with simulated annealing for coloring
graphs. European Journal of Operational Research, 32:260266, 1987.

[38] M. Chudnovsky, N. Robertson, P.D. Seymour, and R.Thomas. The strong perfect graph theorem.
Ann. Math., 164:51229, 2006.

[39] J.C. Culberson. Iterated greedy graph coloring and the difficulty landscape. Technical Report TR
92-07, University of Alberta Dept of Computer Science, Edmonton, Alberta, Canada, 1992.

[40] D. de Werra. Heuristics for graph coloring. Computing, 7:191208, 1990.

[41] I. Dukanovic and F. Rendl. A semidefinite programming-based heuristic for graph coloring. Discrete
Appl. Math., 156(2):180189, 2008.

[42] P. Erdos and A. Renyi. On random graphs. Publicationes Mathematicae, 6:290297, 1959.

[43] P. Erdos and A. Renyi. On the evolution of random graphs. Publ. Math. Inst. Hungar. Acad. Sci.,
5:1761, 1960.

[44] P. Erdos and A. Renyi. On the strength of connectedness of a random graph. Acta Math. Acad. Sci.
Hungar., 12:261267, 1961.

[45] U. Feige and J. Kilian. Zero knowledge and the chromatic number. Journal of Computer and System
Sciences, 57:187199, 1998.

[46] A. Frieze. On the independence number of random graphs. Disctere Mathematics, 81:171175,
1990.
[47] E. J. Gardiner, P. J. Artymiuk, and P. Willett. Clique-detection algorithms for matching tree-
dimensional molecular structures. Journal of Molecular Graphics and Modeling, 15:245253, 1998.

[48] M. R. Garey and D. S. Johnson. Computers and Intractability: A Guide to the Theory of NP-
completeness. W.H. Freeman and Company, New York, 1979.

[49] A. Gendreau, L. Salvail, and P. Soriano. Solving the maximum clique problem using a tabu search
approach. Ann. Oper. Res., 41:385403, 1993.

[50] L. E. Gibbons, D. W. Hearn, and P. M. Pardalos. A continuous based heuristic for the maximum
clique problem. In D. S. Johnson and M. A. Trick, editors, Cliques, Coloring, and Satisfiability:
Second DIMACS Challenge, DIMACS Series in Discrete Mathematics and Theoretical Computer
Science 26, pages 103124. American Mathematical Society, Providence, RI, 1996.

[51] G. Gonthier. Formal proofthe four-color theorem. Notices of the American Mathematical Society,
55:13821393, 2008.

[52] G. R. Grimmett and C. J. H. McDiarmid. On coloring random graphs. Mathematical Proceedings of

Cambridge Phil. Society, 77:313324, 1975.

[53] M. Grotschel, L. Lovasz, and A. Schrijver. Geometric Algorithms and Combinatorial Optimization.
Springer-Verlag, Berlin, 2nd edition, 1993.

[54] M. M. Halldorsson and J. Radhakrishnan. Greed is good: Approximating independent sets in sparse
and bounded-degree graphs. Algorithmica, 18:145163, 1997.

[55] J. Harant. Some news about the independence number of a graph. Discussiones Mathematicae Graph
Theory, 20:7179, 2000.

[56] F. Harary and I. C. Ross. A procedure for clique detection using the group matrix. Sociometry,
20:205215, 1957.

[57] F. Herrmann and A. Hertz. Finding the chromatic number by means of critical graphs. J. Exp.
Algorithmics, 7:10, 2002.

[58] A. Hertz. Cosine: A new graph coloring algorithm. Operations Research Letters, 10:411415, 1991.

[59] A. Hertz and D. de Werra. Using tabu search techniques for graph coloring. Computing, 39:345351,
1987.

[60] S. Homer and M. Peinado. Experiments with polynomial-time clique approximation algorithms on
very large graphs. In [66], pages 147167. 1996.

[61] S. Janson, T. uczak, and A. Rucinski. Random Graphs. John Wiley & Sons Incorporated, New
York, 2000.

[62] M. Jerrum. Large cliques elude the metropolis process. Random Structures and Algorithms, 3:347
359, 1992.

[63] D. S. Johnson. Approximation algorithms for combinatorial problems. J. Comput. Syst. Sci., 9:256
278, 1974.
[64] D.S. Johnson. Worst-case behavior of graph-coloring algorithms. In Proceedings of 5th Southeastern
Conference on Combinatorics, Graph Theory and Computing, pages 513528, Winnipeg, 1974.

[65] D.S. Johnson, C.R. Aragon, L.A. McGeoh, and C. Schevon. Optimization by simulated annealing:
An experimental evaluation, part ii, graph coloring and number partitioning. Operations Research,
39:378406, 1991.

[66] D.S. Johnson and M.A. Trick, editors. Cliques, Coloring, and Satisfiablility: Second D IMACS Im-
plementation Challenge, volume 26 of DIMACS Series in Discrete Mathematics and Theoretical
Computer Science. American Mathematical Society, Providence, RI, 1996.

[67] A.B. Kempe. On the geographical problem of four colors. Amer. J. Math., 2:193200, 1879.

[68] D. Klimowicz and M. Kubale. Graph coloring by tabu search and simulated annealing. Archives of
Control Sciences, 2:4154, 1993.

[69] D. E. Knuth. The sandwich theorem. Electronic Journal of Combinatorics, 1:A1, 1994. Accessed
April 2010.

[70] R. Kopf and G. Ruhe. A computational study of the weighted independent set problem for general
graphs. Found. Control Engin., 12:167180, 1987.

[71] S. M. Korman. The graph-colouring problem. In N. Christofides, A. Mingozzi, P. Toth, and C. Sandi,
editors, Combinatorial Optimization, pages 211235, New York, 1979. Wiley.

[72] F.T. Leighton. A graph colouring algorithm for large scheduling problems. J. Res. Nat. Bur. Stand.,
84:489496, 1979.

[73] L. Lovasz. On the shannon capacity of a graph. IEEE Trans. Inform. Theory, 25:17, 1979.

[74] R.D. Luce and A.D. Perry. A method of matrix analysis of group structure. Psychometrika, 14:95
116, 1949.

[75] C. Lucet, F. Mendes, and A. Moukrim. An exact method for graph coloring. Comput. Oper. Res.,
33(8):21892207, 2006.

[76] T. uczak. A note on the sharp concentration of the chromatic number of random graphs. Combina-
torica, 11:295297, 1991.

[77] P. M. Marcus. Derivation of maximal compatibles using Boolean algebra. IBM J. Res. Develop.,
8:537538, 1964.

[78] P. Martins. Extended and discretized formulations for the maximum clique problem. Computers and
Operations Research, 37:13481358, 2010.

[79] D.W. Matula, G. Marble, and J.D. Isaacson. Graph coloring algorithms. In Graph Theory and
Computing, pages 109122. Academic Press, Inc., 1972.

[80] A. Mehrotra and M. A. Trick. A column generation approach for graph coloring. INFORMS Journal
on Computing, 8(4):344354, 1996.

[81] G. A. Miller. WordNet, Princeton University. http://wordnet.princeton.edu, 2009.

[82] J. W. Moon and L. Moser. On cliques in graphs. Israel Journal of Mathematics, 3:2328, 1965.

[83] T. S. Motzkin and E. G. Straus. Maxima for graphs and a new proof of a theorem of Turan. Canad.
J. Math., 17:533540, 1965.

[84] G. L. Nemhauser and L. E. Trotter. Vertex packing: structural properties and algorithms. Mathemat-
ical Programming, 8:232248, 1975.

[85] P. R. J. Ostergard. A fast algorithm for the maximum clique problem. Discrete Applied Mathematics,
120:197207, 2002.

[86] P.M. Pardalos, T. Mavridou, and J. Xue. The graph coloring problem: A bibliographic survey. In
D.-Z. Du and P.M. Pardalos, editors, Handbook of Combinatorial Optimization, volume 2, pages
331395. Kluwer Academic Publishers, Dodrecht, The Netherlands, 1998.

[87] M. C. Paull and S. H. Unger. Minimizing the number of states in incompletely specified sequential
switching functions. IRE Transactions Electr. Comput., EC-8:356367, 1959.

[88] B. Reed. , , and . Journal of Graph Theory, 27:177212, 1998.

[89] J. M. Robson. Algorithms for maximum independent sets. Journal of Algorithms, 7:425440, 1986.

[90] J. M. Robson. Finding a maximum independent set in time o(2n/4 ). Technical Report 1251-01,
LaBRI, Universite Bordeaux, 2001.

[91] F. Rossi and S. Smriglio. A branch-and-cut algorithm for the maximum cardinality stable set prob-
lem. Operations Research Letters, 28(2):63 74, 2001.

[92] N. Z. Shor. Dual quadratic estimates in polynomial and Boolean programming. Annals of Operations
Research, 25:163168, 1990.

[93] P. Soriano and M. Gendreau. Diversification strategies in tabu search algorithms for the maximum
clique problem. Ann. Oper. Res., 63:189207, 1996.

[94] P. Soriano and M. Gendreau. Tabu search algorithms for the maximum clique problem. In [66],
pages 221242. 1996.

[95] V. T. Sos and E. G. Straus. Extremal of functions on graphs with applications to graphs and hyper-
graphs. J. Combin. Theory B, 32:246257, 1982.

[96] G. Szekeres and H. S. Wilf. An inequality for the chromatic number of a graph. Journal of Combi-
natorial Theory, 4:13, 1968.

[97] R. E. Tarjan and A. E. Trojanowski. Finding a maximum independent set. SIAM Journal of Comput-
ing, 6:537546, 1977.

[98] E. Tomita and T. Kameda. An efficient branch-and-bound algorithm for finding a maximum clique
with computational experiments. J. of Global Optimization, 37(1):95111, 2007.

[99] E. Tomita, A. Tanaka, and H. Takahashi. Two algorithms for finding a near-maximum clique. Tech-
nical Report UEC-TR-C1, University of Electro-Communications, Tokyo, Japan, 1988.
[100] E. Tomita, A. Tanaka, and H. Takahashi. The worst-time complexity for finding all the cliques.
Technical Report UEC-TR-C5, University of Electro-Communications, Tokyo, Japan, 1988.

[101] E. Tomita, A. Tanaka, and H. Takahashi. The worst-case time complexity for generating all maximal
cliques and computational experiments. Theor. Comput. Sci., 363(1):2842, 2006.

[102] V. K. Wei. A lower bound on the stability number of a simple graph. Technical Report TM 81-
11217-9, Bell Laboratories, Murray Hill, NJ, 1981.

[103] D.J.A. Welsh and M.B. Powell. An upper bound for the chromatic number of a graph and its appli-
cations to timetabling problems. The Computer Journal, 10:8586, 1967.

[104] A. T. White. Graphs, Groups and Surfaces. Elsevier Science Publishers B.V., Amsterdam, 1984.

[105] H. S. Wilf. The eigenvalues of a graph and its chromatic number. J. London Math. Soc., 42:330332,
1967.

[106] R. Wilson. Four Colours Suffice. Allen Lane Science, 2002.