Radial trees

A broadcast on a graph G is a function such that for each v∈V, f(v)≤e(v) (the eccentricity of v). The broadcast number of G is the minimum value of ∑_v∈Vf(v) among all broadcasts f for which each vertex of G is within distance f(v) from some vertex v having f(v)≥1. This number is bounded above by the radius of G as well as by its domination number. Graphs for which the broadcast number is equal to the radius are called radial; the problem of characterizing radial trees was first discussed in [J. Dunbar, D. Erwin, T. Haynes, S.M. Hedetniemi, S.T. Hedetniemi, Broadcasts in graphs, Discrete Appl. Math. (154) (2006) 59-75].We provide a characterization of radial trees as well as a geometrical interpretation of our characterization.     

On Seymour’s strengthening of Hadwiger’s conjecture for graphs with certain forbidden subgraphs

Let H be a set of graphs. A graph is called H-free if it does not contain a copy of a member of H as an induced subgraph. If H is a graph then G is called H-free if it is {H}-free. Plummer, Stiebitz, and Toft proved that, for every -free graph H on at most four vertices, every -free graph G has a collection of ⌈|V(G)|/2⌉ many pairwise adjacent vertices and edges (where a vertexvand an edgeeare adjacent if v is disjoint from the set V(e) of endvertices of e and adjacent to some vertex of V(e), and two edgeseandfare adjacent if V(e) and V(f) are disjoint and some vertex of V(e) is adjacent to some vertex of V(f)). Here we generalize this statement to -free graphs H on at most five vertices.     

Domination with exponential decay

Let G be a graph and S⊆V(G). For each vertex u∈S and for each v∈V(G)−S, we define to be the length of a shortest path in 〈V(G)−(S−{u})〉 if such a path exists, and ∞ otherwise. Let v∈V(G). We define if v⁄∈S, and w_S(v)=2 if v∈S. If, for each v∈V(G), we have w_S(v)≥1, then S is an exponential dominating set. The smallest cardinality of an exponential dominating set is the exponential domination number, γ_e(G). In this paper, we prove: (i) that if G is a connected graph of diameter d, then γ_e(G)≥(d+2)/4, and, (ii) that if G is a connected graph of order n, then .     

A better approximation algorithm for the budget prize collecting tree problem

Given an undirected graph G=(V,E), an edge cost c(e)?0 for each edge e∈E, a vertex prize p(v)?0 for each vertex v∈V, and an edge budget B. The BUDGET PRIZE COLLECTING TREE PROBLEM is to find a subtree T′=(V′,E′) that maximizes , subject to . We present a (4+ε)-approximation algorithm.     

Rainbow domination on trees

This paper studies a variation of domination in graphs called rainbow domination. For a positive integer k, a k-rainbow dominating function of a graph G is a function f from V(G) to the set of all subsets of {1,2,…,k} such that for any vertex v with f(v)=0? we have ∪_u∈NG(v)f(u)={1,2,…,k}. The 1-rainbow domination is the same as the ordinary domination. The k-rainbow domination problem is to determine the k-rainbow domination number of a graph G, that is the minimum value of ∑_v∈V(G)|f(v)| where f runs over all k-rainbow dominating functions of G. In this paper, we prove that the k-rainbow domination problem is NP-complete even when restricted to chordal graphs or bipartite graphs. We then give a linear-time algorithm for the k-rainbow domination problem on trees. For a given tree T, we also determine the smallest k such that .     

On the Roman domination number of a graph

A Roman dominating function of a graph G is a labeling f:V(G)?{0,1,2} such that every vertex with label 0 has a neighbor with label 2. The Roman domination number γ_R(G) of G is the minimum of ∑_v∈V(G)f(v) over such functions. A Roman dominating function of G of weight γ_R(G) is called a γ_R(G)-function. A Roman dominating function f:V?{0,1,2} can be represented by the ordered partition (V₀,V₁,V₂) of V, where V_i={v∈V∣f(v)=i}. Cockayne et al. [E.J. Cockayne, P.A. Dreyer, S.M. Hedetniemi, S.T. Hedetniemi, On Roman domination in graphs, Discrete Math. 278 (2004) 11-22] posed the following question: What can we say about the minimum and maximum values of |V₀|,|V₁|,|V₂| for a γ_R-function f=(V₀,V₁,V₂) of a graph G? In this paper we first show that for any connected graph G of order n≥3, , where γ(G) is the domination number of G. Also we prove that for any γ_R-function f=(V₀,V₁,V₂) of a connected graph G of order n≥3, , and .     

Upper signed domination number

Let G=(V,E) be a graph. A signed dominating function on G is a function f:V→{-1,1} such that for each v∈V, where N[v] is the closed neighborhood of v. The weight of a signed dominating function f is . A signed dominating function f is minimal if there exists no signed dominating function g such that g≠f and g(v)?f(v) for each v∈V. The upper signed domination number of a graph G, denoted by Γ_s(G), equals the maximum weight of a minimal signed dominating function of G. In this paper, we establish an tight upper bound for Γ_s(G) in terms of minimum degree and maximum degree. Our result is a generalization of those for regular graphs and nearly regular graphs obtained in [O. Favaron, Signed domination in regular graphs, Discrete Math. 158 (1996) 287-293] and [C.X. Wang, J.Z. Mao, Some more remarks on domination in cubic graphs, Discrete Math. 237 (2001) 193-197], respectively.     

The signed star domination numbers of the Cartesian product graphs

Let G be a graph with vertex set V(G) and edge set E(G). A function f:E(G)→{-1,1} is said to be a signed star dominating function of G if for every v∈V(G), where E_G(v)={uv∈E(G)|u∈V(G)}. The minimum of the values of , taken over all signed star dominating functions f on G, is called the signed star domination number of G and is denoted by γ_SS(G). In this paper, a sharp upper bound of γ_SS(G×H) is presented.     

Inverse degree and edge-connectivity

Let G be a connected graph with vertex set V(G), order n=|V(G)|, minimum degree δ and edge-connectivity λ. Define the inverse degree of G as , where d(v) denotes the degree of the vertex v. We show that if

     

Signed star domatic number of a graph

Let G be a simple graph without isolated vertices with vertex set V(G) and edge set E(G). A function f:E(G)?{−1,1} is said to be a signed star dominating function on G if ∑_e∈E(v)f(e)≥1 for every vertex v of G, where E(v)={uv∈E(G)∣u∈N(v)}. A set {f₁,f₂,…,f_d} of signed star dominating functions on G with the property that for each e∈E(G), is called a signed star dominating family (of functions) on G. The maximum number of functions in a signed star dominating family on G is the signed star domatic number of G, denoted by d_SS(G).In this paper we study the properties of the signed star domatic number d_SS(G). In particular, we determine the signed domatic number of some classes of graphs.     

The ω-limit set of a graph map

Let G be a graph and be continuous. Denote by P(f), , ω(f) and Ω(f) the set of periodic points, the closure of the set of periodic points, ω-limit set and non-wandering set of f, respectively. In this paper we show that: (1) v∈ω(f) if and only if v∈P(f) or there exists an open arc L=(v,w) contained in some edge of G such that every open arc U=(v,c)⊂L contains at least 2 points of some trajectory; (2) v∈ω(f) if and only if every open neighborhood of v contains at least r+1 points of some trajectory, where r is the valence of v; (3) ; (4) if , then x has an infinite orbit.     

Covering line graphs with equivalence relations

An equivalence graph is a disjoint union of cliques, and the equivalence number of a graph G is the minimum number of equivalence subgraphs needed to cover the edges of G. We consider the equivalence number of a line graph, giving improved upper and lower bounds: . This disproves a recent conjecture that is at most three for triangle-free G; indeed it can be arbitrarily large.To bound we bound the closely related invariant σ(G), which is the minimum number of orientations of G such that for any two edges e,f incident to some vertex v, both e and f are oriented out of v in some orientation. When G is triangle-free, . We prove that even when G is triangle-free, it is NP-complete to decide whether or not σ(G)≤3.     

On signed cycle domination in graphs

Let G=(V,E) be a graph, a function f:E→{−1,1} is said to be an signed cycle dominating function (SCDF) of G if ∑_e∈E(C)f(e)≥1 holds for any induced cycle C of G. The signed cycle domination number of G is defined as is an SCDF of G}. In this paper, we obtain bounds on , characterize all connected graphs G with , and determine the exact value of for some special classes of graphs G. In addition, we pose some open problems and conjectures.     

The signed domatic number of some regular graphs

Let G be a finite and simple graph with vertex set V(G), and let f:V(G)→{−1,1} be a two-valued function. If ∑_x∈N[v]f(x)≥1 for each v∈V(G), where N[v] is the closed neighborhood of v, then f is a signed dominating function on G. A set {f₁,f₂,…,f_d} of signed dominating functions on G with the property that for each x∈V(G), is called a signed dominating family (of functions) on G. The maximum number of functions in a signed dominating family on G is the signed domatic number on G. In this paper, we investigate the signed domatic number of some circulant graphs and of the torus C_p×C_q.     

Sum choice numbers of some graphs

Let f be a function assigning list sizes to the vertices of a graph G. The sum choice number of G is the minimum ∑_v∈V(G)f(v) such that for every assignment of lists to the vertices of G, with list sizes given by f, there exists proper coloring of G from the lists. We answer a few questions raised in a paper of Berliner, Bostelmann, Brualdi, and Deaett. Namely, we determine the sum choice number of the Petersen graph, the cartesian product of paths , and the complete bipartite graph K_3,n.     

Factors and vertex-deleted subgraphs

A relationship is considered between an f-factor of a graph and that of its vertex-deleted subgraphs. Katerinis [Some results on the existence of 2n-factors in terms of vertex-deleted subgraphs, Ars Combin. 16 (1983) 271-277] proved that for even integer k, if G-x has a k-factor for each x∈V(G), then G has a k-factor. Enomoto and Tokuda [Complete-factors and f-factors, Discrete Math. 220 (2000) 239-242] generalized Katerinis’ result to f-factors, and proved that if G-x has an f-factor for each x∈V(G), then G has an f-factor for an integer-valued function f defined on V(G) with even. In this paper, we consider a similar problem to that of Enomoto and Tokuda, where for several vertices x we do not have to know whether G-x has an f-factor. Let G be a graph, X be a set of vertices, and let f be an integer-valued function defined on V(G) with even, |V(G)-X|?2. We prove that if and if G-x has an f-factor for each x∈V(G)-X, then G has an f-factor. Moreover, if G excludes an isolated vertex, then we can replace the condition with . Furthermore the condition will be when |X|=1.     

Roman domination in regular graphs

A Roman domination function on a graph G=(V(G),E(G)) is a function f:V(G)→{0,1,2} satisfying the condition that every vertex u for which f(u)=0 is adjacent to at least one vertex v for which f(v)=2. The weight of a Roman dominating function is the value f(V(G))=∑_u∈V(G)f(u). The minimum weight of a Roman dominating function on a graph G is called the Roman domination number of G. Cockayne et al. [E. J. Cockayne et al. Roman domination in graphs, Discrete Mathematics 278 (2004) 11-22] showed that γ(G)≤γ_R(G)≤2γ(G) and defined a graph G to be Roman if γ_R(G)=2γ(G). In this article, the authors gave several classes of Roman graphs: P_3k,P_3k+2,C_3k,C_3k+2 for k≥1, K_m,n for min{m,n}≠2, and any graph G with γ(G)=1; In this paper, we research on regular Roman graphs and prove that: (1) the circulant graphs and , n⁄≡1 (mod (2k+1)), (n≠2k) are Roman graphs, (2) the generalized Petersen graphs P(n,2k+1)( (mod 4) and ), P(n,1) (n⁄≡2 (mod 4)), P(n,3) ( (mod 4)) and P(11,3) are Roman graphs, and (3) the Cartesian product graphs are Roman graphs.     

On the degree distance of a graph

If G is a connected graph with vertex set V, then the degree distance of G, D^′(G), is defined as , where degw is the degree of vertex w, and d(u,v) denotes the distance between u and v. We prove the asymptotically sharp upper bound for graphs of order n and diameter d. As a corollary we obtain the bound for graphs of order n. This essentially proves a conjecture by Tomescu [I. Tomescu, Some extremal properties of the degree distance of a graph, Discrete Appl. Math. (98) (1999) 159-163].     

Bounds on isoperimetric values of trees

Let G=(V,E) be a finite, simple and undirected graph. For S⊆V, let δ(S,G)={(u,v)∈E:u∈S and v∈V−S} be the edge boundary of S. Given an integer i, 1≤i≤|V|, let the edge isoperimetric value of G at i be defined as b_e(i,G)=min_S⊆V;|S|=i|δ(S,G)|. The edge isoperimetric peak of G is defined as b_e(G)=max_1≤j≤|V|b_e(j,G). Let b_v(G) denote the vertex isoperimetric peak defined in a corresponding way. The problem of determining a lower bound for the vertex isoperimetric peak in complete t-ary trees was recently considered in [Y. Otachi, K. Yamazaki, A lower bound for the vertex boundary-width of complete k-ary trees, Discrete Mathematics, in press (doi:10.1016/j.disc.2007.05.014)]. In this paper we provide bounds which improve those in the above cited paper. Our results can be generalized to arbitrary (rooted) trees.The depth d of a tree is the number of nodes on the longest path starting from the root and ending at a leaf. In this paper we show that for a complete binary tree of depth d (denoted as ), and where c₁, c₂ are constants. For a complete t-ary tree of depth d (denoted as ) and d≥clogt where c is a constant, we show that and where c₁, c₂ are constants. At the heart of our proof we have the following theorem which works for an arbitrary rooted tree and not just for a complete t-ary tree. Let T=(V,E,r) be a finite, connected and rooted tree — the root being the vertex r. Define a weight function w:V→N where the weight w(u) of a vertex u is the number of its successors (including itself) and let the weight index η(T) be defined as the number of distinct weights in the tree, i.e η(T)=|{w(u):u∈V}|. For a positive integer k, let ?(k)=|{i∈N:1≤i≤|V|,b_e(i,G)≤k}|. We show that .