On a conjecture of the Randi? index

The Randi? index of a graph G is defined as , where d(u) is the degree of vertex u and the summation goes over all pairs of adjacent vertices u, v. A conjecture on R(G) for connected graph G is as follows: R(G)≥r(G)−1, where r(G) denotes the radius of G. We proved that the conjecture is true for biregular graphs, connected graphs with order n≤10 and tricyclic graphs.     

On a conjecture of the Randić index and the minimum degree of graphs

The Randi? index $R\left(G\right)$ of a graph $G$ is defined by $R\left(G\right)={\sum }_{uv}\frac{1}{\sqrt{d\left(u\right)d\left(v\right)}}$, where $d\left(u\right)$ is the degree of a vertex $u$ and the summation extends over all edges $uv$ of $G$. Delorme et al. (2002)  [6] put forward a conjecture concerning the minimum Randi? index among all$n$-vertex connected graphs with the minimum degree at least $k$. In this work, we show that the conjecture is true given the graph contains $k$ vertices of degree $n?1$. Further, it is true among $k$-trees.     

The Randi? index and the diameter of graphs

The Randi? indexR(G) of a graph G is defined as the sum of over all edges uv of G, where d_u and d_v are the degrees of vertices u and v, respectively. Let D(G) be the diameter of G when G is connected. Aouchiche et al. (2007) [1] conjectured that among all connected graphs G on n vertices the path P_n achieves the minimum values for both R(G)/D(G) and R(G)−D(G). We prove this conjecture completely. In fact, we prove a stronger theorem: If G is a connected graph, then , with equality if and only if G is a path with at least three vertices.     

Comment on “Complete solution to a conjecture on Randić index”

In this paper we will show that the proof of Theorem 2.1 from “Complete solution to a conjecture on Randi? index”, by Xueliang Li, Bolian Liu and Jianxi Liu, European Journal of Operational Research 200, Issue 1, (2010), 9–13, is not correct. They tried to prove the conjecture given by M. Aouchiche, P. Hansen in “On a conjecture about the Randi? index” (Discrete Mathematics, 307 (2), 2007, 262–265), but they failed in it. The mathematical model given by them is a problem of quadratic programming which they tried to solve by wrong use of linear programming. This error invalidates all further work.