On edge domination numbers of graphs

Let and be the signed edge domination number and signed star domination number of G, respectively. We prove that holds for all graphs G without isolated vertices, where n=|V(G)|?4 and m=|E(G)|, and pose some problems and conjectures.     

On αrγs(k)-perfect graphs

For some integer k0 and two graph parameters π and τ, a graph G is called πτ(k)-perfect, if π(H)−τ(H)k for every induced subgraph H of G. For r1 let α_r and γ_r denote the r-(distance)-independence and r-(distance)-domination number, respectively. In (J. Graph Theory 32 (1999) 303–310), I. Zverovich gave an ingenious complete characterization of α₁γ₁(k)-perfect graphs in terms of forbidden induced subgraphs. In this paper we study α_rγ_s(k)-perfect graphs for r,s1. We prove several properties of minimal α_rγ_s(k)-imperfect graphs. Generalizing Zverovich's main result in (J. Graph Theory 32 (1999) 303–310), we completely characterize α_2r−1γ_r(k)-perfect graphs for r1. Furthermore, we characterize claw-free α₂γ₂(k)-perfect graphs.     

A note on Roman domination in graphs

Let G=(V,E) be a simple graph. A subset S⊆V is a dominating set of G, if for any vertex u∈V-S, there exists a vertex v∈S such that uv∈E. The domination number of G, γ(G), equals the minimum cardinality of a dominating set. A Roman dominating function on graph G=(V,E) is a function f:V→{0,1,2} satisfying the condition that every vertex v for which f(v)=0 is adjacent to at least one vertex u for which f(u)=2. The weight of a Roman dominating function is the value f(V)=∑_v∈Vf(v). The Roman domination number of a graph G, denoted by γ_R(G), equals the minimum weight of a Roman dominating function on G. In this paper, for any integer k(2?k?γ(G)), we give a characterization of graphs for which γ_R(G)=γ(G)+k, which settles an open problem in [E.J. Cockayne, P.M. Dreyer Jr, S.M. Hedetniemi et al. On Roman domination in graphs, Discrete Math. 278 (2004) 11-22].     

Unique response Roman domination in graphs

A function f:V(G)→{0,1,2} is a Roman dominating function if every vertex u for which f(u)=0 is adjacent to at least one vertex v for which f(v)=2. A function f:V(G)→{0,1,2} with the ordered partition (V₀,V₁,V₂) of V(G), where V_i={v∈V(G)∣f(v)=i} for i=0,1,2, is a unique response Roman function if x∈V₀ implies |N(x)∩V₂|≤1 and x∈V₁∪V₂ implies that |N(x)∩V₂|=0. A function f:V(G)→{0,1,2} is a unique response Roman dominating function if it is a unique response Roman function and a Roman dominating function. The unique response Roman domination number of G, denoted by u_R(G), is the minimum weight of a unique response Roman dominating function. In this paper we study the unique response Roman domination number of graphs and present bounds for this parameter.     

A comment to: Two classes of edge domination in graphs

Let G be a graph of order n and denote the signed edge domination number of G. In [B. Xu, Two classes of edge domination in graphs, Discrete Appl. Math. 154 (2006) 1541-1546] it was proved that for any graph G of order n, . But the method given in the proof is not correct. In this paper we give an example for which the method of proof given in [1] does not work.     

A note on the signed edge domination number in graphs

Let G=(V(G),E(G)) be a graph. A function f:E(G)→{+1,−1} is called the signed edge domination function (SEDF) of G if ∑_e^′N[e]f(e^′)≥1 for every eE(G). The signed edge domination number of G is defined as is a SEDF of G}. Xu [Baogen Xu, Two classes of edge domination in graphs, Discrete Applied Mathematics 154 (2006) 1541–1546] researched on the edge domination in graphs and proved that for any graph G of order n(n≥4). In the article, he conjectured that: For any 2-connected graph G of order n(n≥2), . In this note, we present some counterexamples to the above conjecture and prove that there exists a family of k-connected graphs G_m,k with .     

Two classes of edge domination in graphs

Let (, resp.) be the number of (local) signed edge domination of a graph G [B. Xu, On signed edge domination numbers of graphs, Discrete Math. 239 (2001) 179-189]. In this paper, we prove mainly that and hold for any graph G of order n(n?4), and pose several open problems and conjectures.     

Total restrained bondage in graphs

A subset S of vertices of a graph G with no isolated vertex is a total restrained dominating set if every vertex is adjacent to a vertex in S and every vertex in V (G) S is also adjacent to a vertex in V (G) S. The total restrained domination number of G is the minimum cardinality of a total restrained dominating set of G. In this paper we initiate the study of total restrained bondage in graphs. The total restrained bondage number in a graph G with no isolated vertex, is the minimum cardinality of a subset of edges E such that G E has no isolated vertex and the total restrained domination number of G E is greater than the total restrained domination number of G. We obtain several properties, exact values and bounds for the total restrained bondage number of a graph.     

A note on total reinforcement in graphs

In this note we prove a conjecture and improve some results presented in a recent paper of Sridharan et al. [N. Sridharan, M.D. Elias, V.S.A. Subramanian, Total reinforcement number of a graph, AKCE Int. J. Graphs Comb. 4 (2) (2007) 197-202].     

Disjoint dominating and total dominating sets in graphs

It has been shown [M.A. Henning, J. Southey, A note on graphs with disjoint dominating and total dominating sets, Ars Combin. 89 (2008) 159-162] that every connected graph with minimum degree at least two that is not a cycle on five vertices has a dominating set D and a total dominating set T which are disjoint. We characterize such graphs for which D∪T necessarily contains all vertices of the graph and that have no induced cycle on five vertices.     

Total domination dot-stable graphs

A set S of vertices in a graph G is a total dominating set if every vertex of G is adjacent to some vertex in S. The minimum cardinality of a total dominating set of G is the total domination number of G. Two vertices of G are said to be dotted (identified) if they are combined to form one vertex whose open neighborhood is the union of their neighborhoods minus themselves. We note that dotting any pair of vertices cannot increase the total domination number. Further we show it can decrease the total domination number by at most 2. A graph is total domination dot-stable if dotting any pair of adjacent vertices leaves the total domination number unchanged. We characterize the total domination dot-stable graphs and give a sharp upper bound on their total domination number. We also characterize the graphs attaining this bound.     

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.     

Total minus domination in k-partite graphs

A function f defined on the vertices of a graph G=(V,E),f:V→{-1,0,1} is a total minus dominating function (TMDF) if the sum of its values over any open neighborhood is at least one. The weight of a TMDF is the sum of its function values over all vertices. The total minus domination number, denoted by , of G is the minimum weight of a TMDF on G. In this paper, a sharp lower bound on of k-partite graphs is given.     

On global domination critical graphs

A dominating set of a graph G=(V,E) is a subset S⊆V such that every vertex not in S is adjacent to at least one vertex of S. The domination number of G is the cardinality of a smallest dominating set. The global domination number, γ_g(G), is the cardinality of a smallest set S that is simultaneously a dominating set of both G and its complement . Graphs for which γ_g(G−e)>γ_g(G) for all edges e∈E are characterized, as are graphs for which γ_g(G−e)<γ_g(G) for all edges e∈E whenever is disconnected. Progress is reported in the latter case when is connected.     

Domination dot-critical graphs

A graph G is dot-critical if contracting any edge decreases the domination number. It is totally dot-critical if identifying any two vertices decreases the domination number. We show that the totally dot-critical graphs essentially include the much-studied domination vertex-critical and edge-critical graphs as special cases. We investigate these properties, and provide a characterization of dot-critical and totally dot-critical graphs with domination number 2. We also consider the question of when a dot-critical graph contains a critical vertex.     

Broadcasts in graphs

We say that a function f:V→{0,1,…,diam(G)} is a broadcast if for every vertex v∈V, f(v)?e(v), where diam(G) denotes the diameter of G and e(v) denotes the eccentricity of v. The cost of a broadcast is the value . In this paper we introduce and study the minimum and maximum costs of several types of broadcasts in graphs, including dominating, independent and efficient broadcasts.     

Domination versus total domination in claw-free cubic graphs

A set S of vertices in a graph G is a dominating set if every vertex not in S is adjacent to a vertex in S. If, in addition, every vertex in S is adjacent to some other vertex in S, then S is a total dominating set. The domination number $\gamma (G)$ of G is the minimum cardinality of a dominating set in G, while the total domination number ${\gamma }_t(G)$ of G is the minimum cardinality of total dominating set in G. A claw-free graph is a graph that does not contain $K_{1,3}$ as an induced subgraph. Let G be a connected, claw-free, cubic graph of order n. We show that if we exclude two graphs, then $\frac{{\gamma }_t(G)}{\gamma (G)}\le \frac{12}{7}$, and this bound is best possible. In order to prove this result, we prove that if we exclude four graphs, then ${\gamma }_t(G)\le \frac{3}{7}n$, and this bound is best possible. These bounds improve previously best known results due to Favaron and Henning (2008) [7], Southey and Henning (2010) [19].