A class of antimagic join graphs

A labeling f of a graph G is a bijection from its edge set E(G) to the set {1, 2, . . . , |E(G)|}, which is antimagic if for any distinct vertices x and y, the sum of the labels on edges incident to x is different from the sum of the labels on edges incident to y. A graph G is antimagic if G has an f which is antimagic. Hartsfield and Ringel conjectured in 1990 that every connected graph other than K 2 is antimagic. In this paper, we show that if G 1 is an n-vertex graph with minimum degree at least r, and G 2 is an m-vertex graph with maximum degree at most 2r-1 (m ≥ n), then G1 ∨ G2 is antimagic.     

On antimagic directed graphs

An antimagic labeling of an undirected graph G with n vertices and m edges is a bijection from the set of edges of G to the integers {1, …, m} such that all n vertex sums are pairwise distinct, where a vertex sum is the sum of labels of all edges incident with that vertex. A graph is called antimagic if it admits an antimagic labeling. In (N. Hartsfield and G. Ringel, Pearls in Graph Theory, Academic Press, Boston, 1990, pp. 108–109), Hartsfield and Ringel conjectured that every simple connected graph, other than K₂, is antimagic. Despite considerable effort in recent years, this conjecture is still open. In this article we study a natural variation; namely, we consider antimagic labelings of directed graphs. In particular, we prove that every directed graph whose underlying undirected graph is “dense” is antimagic, and that almost every undirected d‐regular graph admits an orientation which is antimagic. © 2009 Wiley Periodicals, Inc. J Graph Theory 64: 219–232, 2010     

Antimagic labeling of generalized pyramid graphs

An antimagic labeling of a graph withq edges is a bijection from the set of edges to the set of positive integers{1,2,...,q}such that all vertex weights are pairwise distinct,where the vertex weight of a vertex is the sum of the labels of all edges incident with that vertex.A graph is antimagic if it has an antimagic labeling.In this paper,we provide antimagic labelings for a family of generalized pyramid graphs.     

Anti‐magic graphs via the Combinatorial NullStellenSatz

An antimagic labeling of a graph with m edges and n vertices is a bijection from the set of edges to the integers 1,…,m such that all n vertex sums are pairwise distinct, where a vertex sum is the sum of labels of all edges incident with that vertex. A graph is called antimagic if it has an antimagic labeling. In [ 10 ], Ringel conjectured that every simple connected graph, other than K₂, is antimagic. We prove several special cases and variants of this conjecture. Our main tool is the Combinatorial NullStellenSatz (cf. [ 1 ]). © 2005 Wiley Periodicals, Inc. J Graph Theory     

An application of the combinatorial Nullstellensatz to a graph labelling problem

An antimagic labelling of a graph G with m edges and n vertices is a bijection from the set of edges of G to the set of integers {1,…,m}, such that all n vertex sums are pairwise distinct, where a vertex sum is the sum of labels of all edges incident with that vertex. A graph is called antimagic if it admits an antimagic labelling. In N. Hartsfield and G. Ringle, Pearls in Graph Theory, Academic Press, Inc., Boston, 1990, Ringel has conjectured that every simple connected graph, other than K₂, is antimagic. In this article, we prove a special case of this conjecture. Namely, we prove that if G is a graph on n=p^k vertices, where p is an odd prime and k is a positive integer that admits a C_p‐factor, then it is antimagic. The case p=3 was proved in D. Hefetz, J Graph Theory 50 (2005), 263–272. Our main tool is the combinatorial Nullstellensatz [N. Alon, Combin Probab Comput 8(1–2) (1999), 7–29]. © 2009 Wiley Periodicals, Inc. J Graph Theory 65: 70–82, 2010.     

Antimagic labelling of vertex weighted graphs

Suppose G is a graph, k is a non‐negative integer. We say G is k‐antimagic if there is an injection f: E→{1, 2, …, |E| + k} such that for any two distinct vertices u and v, . We say G is weighted‐k‐antimagic if for any vertex weight function w: V→?, there is an injection f: E→{1, 2, …, |E| + k} such that for any two distinct vertices u and v, . A well‐known conjecture asserts that every connected graph G≠K₂ is 0‐antimagic. On the other hand, there are connected graphs G≠K₂ which are not weighted‐1‐antimagic. It is unknown whether every connected graph G≠K₂ is weighted‐2‐antimagic. In this paper, we prove that if G has a universal vertex, then G is weighted‐2‐antimagic. If G has a prime number of vertices and has a Hamiltonian path, then G is weighted‐1‐antimagic. We also prove that every connected graph G≠K₂ on n vertices is weighted‐ ?3n/2?‐antimagic. Copyright © 2011 Wiley Periodicals, Inc. J Graph Theory     

On integral sum graphs

A graph G is said to be an integral sum graph if its nodes can be given a labeling f with distinct integers, so that for any two distinct nodes u and v of G, uv is an edge of G if and only if f(u)+f(v)=f(w) for some node w in G. A node of G is called a saturated node if it is adjacent to every other node of G. We show that any integral sum graph which is not K₃ has at most two saturated nodes. We determine the structure for all integral sum graphs with exactly two saturated nodes, and give an upper bound for the number of edges of a connected integral sum graph with no saturated nodes. We introduce a method of identification on constructing new connected integral sum graphs from given integral sum graphs with a saturated node. Moreover, we show that every graph is an induced subgraph of a connected integral sum graph. Miscellaneous related results are also presented.     

Construction of Antimagic Labeling for the Cartesian Product of Regular Graphs

An antimagic labeling of a graph with p vertices and q edges is a bijection from the set of edges to the set of integers {1, 2, . . . , q} such that all vertex weights are pairwise distinct, where a vertex weight is the sum of labels of all edges incident with the vertex. A graph is antimagic if it has an antimagic labeling. In 1990, Hartsfield and Ringel conjectured that that every connected graph, except K ₂, is antimagic. Recently, using completely separating systems, Phanalasy et al. showed that for each k 3 2, q 3 \binomk+12{k\geq 2,\,q\geq\binom{k+1}{2}} with k|2q, there exists an antimagic k-regular graph with q edges and p = 2q/k vertices. In this paper we prove constructively that certain families of Cartesian products of regular graphs are antimagic.     

Antimagic orientations of even regular graphs

A labeling of a digraph D with m arcs is a bijection from the set of arcs of D to . A labeling of D is antimagic if no two vertices in D have the same vertex-sum, where the vertex-sum of a vertex for a labeling is the sum of labels of all arcs entering u minus the sum of labels of all arcs leaving u. Motivated by the conjecture of Hartsfield and Ringel from 1990 on antimagic labelings of graphs, Hefetz, Mütze, and Schwartz [On antimagic directed graphs, J. Graph Theory 64 (2010) 219–232] initiated the study of antimagic labelings of digraphs, and conjectured that every connected graph admits an antimagic orientation, where an orientation D of a graph G is antimagic if D has an antimagic labeling. It remained unknown whether every disjoint union of cycles admits an antimagic orientation. In this article, we first answer this question in the positive by proving that every 2-regular graph has an antimagic orientation. We then show that for any integer , every connected, 2d-regular graph has an antimagic orientation. Our technique is new.     

A new class of antimagic Cartesian product graphs

An antimagic labeling of a finite undirected simple graph with m edges and n vertices is a bijection from the set of edges to the integers 1,…,m such that all n-vertex sums are pairwise distinct, where a vertex sum is the sum of labels of all edges incident with the same vertex. A graph is called antimagic if it has an antimagic labeling. In 1990, Hartsfield and Ringel [N. Hartsfield, G. Ringel, Pearls in Graph Theory, Academic Press, INC., Boston, 1990, pp. 108-109, Revised version, 1994] conjectured that every simple connected graph, except K₂, is antimagic. In this article, we prove that a new class of Cartesian product graphs are antimagic. In particular, by combining this result and the antimagicness result on toroidal grids (Cartesian products of two cycles) in [Tao-Ming Wang, Toroidal grids are anti-magic, in: Proc. 11th Annual International Computing and Combinatorics Conference COCOON’2005, in: LNCS, vol. 3595, Springer, 2005, pp. 671-679], all Cartesian products of two or more regular graphs of positive degree can be proved to be antimagic.     

Every 4-connected line graph of a quasi claw-free graph is hamiltonian connected

Let G be a graph. For u,vV(G) with dist_G(u,v)=2, denote J_G(u,v)={wN_G(u)∩N_G(v)|N_G(w)N_G(u)N_G(v){u,v}}. A graph G is called quasi claw-free if J_G(u,v)≠ for any u,vV(G) with dist_G(u,v)=2. In 1986, Thomassen conjectured that every 4-connected line graph is hamiltonian. In this paper we show that every 4-connected line graph of a quasi claw-free graph is hamiltonian connected.     

Transformation graph

The transformation graph G^-+- of a graph G is the graph with vertex set V(G)E(G), in which two vertices u and v are joined by an edge if one of the following conditions holds: (i) u,vV(G) and they are not adjacent in G, (ii) u,vE(G) and they are adjacent in G, (iii) one of u and v is in V(G) while the other is in E(G), and they are not incident in G. In this paper, for any graph G, we determine the connectivity and the independence number of G^-+-. Furthermore, for a graph G of order n4, we show that G^-+- is hamiltonian if and only if G is not isomorphic to any graph in {2K₁+K₂,K₁+K₃}{K_1,n-1,K_1,n-1+e,K_1,n-2+K₁}.     

Characterizing subgraphs of Hamming graphs

Cartesian products of complete graphs are known as Hamming graphs. Using embeddings into Cartesian products of quotient graphs we characterize subgraphs, induced subgraphs, and isometric subgraphs of Hamming graphs. For instance, a graph G is an induced subgraph of a Hamming graph if and only if there exists a labeling of E(G) fulfilling the following two conditions: (i) edges of a triangle receive the same label; (ii) for any vertices u and v at distance at least two, there exist two labels which both appear on any induced u, υ‐path. © 2005 Wiley Periodicals, Inc. J Graph Theory 49: 302–312, 2005     

On Integral Sum Graphs

A graph G is said to be an integral sum graph if its nodes can be given a labeling f with distinct integers, so that for any two distinct nodes u and v of G, uv is an edge of G if and only if f(u)+f(v) = f(w) for some node w in G. A node of G is called a saturated node if it is adjacent to every other node of G. We show that any integral sum graph which is not K₃ has at most two saturated nodes. We determine the structure for all integral sum graphs with exactly two saturated nodes, and give an upper bound for the number of edges of a connected integral sum graph with no saturated nodes. We introduce a method of identification on constructing new connected integral sum graphs from given integral sum graphs with a saturated node. Moreover, we show that every graph is an induced subgraph of a connected integral sum graph. Miscellaneous relative results are also presented.     

Subdivided trees are integral sum graphs

A graph G=(V,E) is an integral sum graph (ISG) if there exists a labeling S(G)⊂Z such that V=S(G) and for every pair of distinct vertices u,v∈V, uv is an edge if and only if u+v∈V. A vertex in a graph is called a fork if its degree is not 2. In 1998, Chen proved that every tree whose forks are at distance at least 4 from each other is an ISG. In 2004, He et al. reduced the distance to 3. In this paper we reduce the distance further to 2, i.e. we prove that every tree whose forks are at least distance 2 apart is an ISG.     

Neighbor sum distinguishing edge coloring of subcubic graphs

A proper edge-k-coloring of a graph G is a mapping from E(G) to {1, 2,..., k} such that no two adjacent edges receive the same color. A proper edge-k-coloring of G is called neighbor sum distinguishing if for each edge uv ∈ E(G), the sum of colors taken on the edges incident to u is different from the sum of colors taken on the edges incident to v. Let χ_Σ'(G) denote the smallest value k in such a coloring of G. This parameter makes sense for graphs containing no isolated edges(we call such graphs normal). The maximum average degree mad(G) of G is the maximum of the average degrees of its non-empty subgraphs. In this paper, we prove that if G is a normal subcubic graph with mad(G) 5/2,then χ_Σ'(G) ≤ 5. We also prove that if G is a normal subcubic graph with at least two 2-vertices, 6 colors are enough for a neighbor sum distinguishing edge coloring of G, which holds for the list version as well.     

On conservative and supermagic graphs

A graph is called supermagic if it admits a labelling of the edges by pairwise different consecutive positive integers such that the sum of the labels of the edges incident with a vertex is independent of the particular vertex. A graph G is called conservative if it admits an orientation and a labelling of the edges by integers {1,…,|E(G)|} such that at each vertex the sum of the labels on the incoming edges is equal to the sum of the labels on the outgoing edges. In this paper we deal with conservative graphs and their connection with the supermagic graphs. We introduce a new method to construct supermagic graphs using conservative graphs. Inter alia we show that the union of some circulant graphs and regular complete multipartite graphs are supermagic.     

On the adjacent vertex-distinguishing acyclic edge coloring of some graphs

A proper edge coloring of a graph G is called adjacent vertex-distinguishing acyclic edge coloring if there is no 2-colored cycle in G and the coloring set of edges incident with u is not equal to the coloring set of edges incident with v, where uv ∈ E(G). The adjacent vertex distinguishing acyclic edge chromatic number of G, denoted by x′ _Aa (G), is the minimal number of colors in an adjacent vertex distinguishing acyclic edge coloring of G. If a graph G has an adjacent vertex distinguishing acyclic edge coloring, then G is called adjacent vertex distinguishing acyclic. In this paper, we obtain adjacent vertex-distinguishing acyclic edge coloring of some graphs and put forward some conjectures.     

Sum List Coloring Graphs

Let G=(V,E) be a graph with n vertices and e edges. The sum choice number of G is the smallest integer p such that there exist list sizes (f(v):v ∈ V) whose sum is p for which G has a proper coloring no matter which color lists of size f(v) are assigned to the vertices v. The sum choice number is bounded above by n+e. If the sum choice number of G equals n+e, then G is sum choice greedy. Complete graphs K_n are sum choice greedy as are trees. Based on a simple, but powerful, lemma we show that a graph each of whose blocks is sum choice greedy is also sum choice greedy. We also determine the sum choice number of K_2,n, and we show that every tree on n vertices can be obtained from K_n by consecutively deleting single edges where all intermediate graphs are sc-greedy.     

Antimagic Labeling of Cubic Graphs

An antimagic labeling of a graph G is a one‐to‐one correspondence between and such that the sum of the labels assigned to edges incident to distinct vertices are different. If G has an antimagic labeling, then we say G is antimagic. This article proves that cubic graphs are antimagic.