existence of a certain subset of vertices in a graph
up vote
2
down vote
favorite
Take an undirected graph $G=(V,E)$. For any subset $Msubseteq V$, we define ${rm deg}_M(v)=|{kin M:(v,k)in E}|$, namely, the number of neighbors of $v$ in $M$.
Is it true that, there exists a subset $Msubseteq V$ such that, for every $vin M$, ${rm deg}_M(v)leq 3$, and for every $v'in Vsetminus M$, ${rm deg}_M(v')geq 4$?
Note that, some obvious cases. If nobody are friends, we can simply take $V$ to be the entire set. Similarly, if $G$ is fully connected, then any $4-$element subset work. I tried to reason in the following way, take a maximal (in the sense of cardinality) $M$, such that, for every $vin M$, ${rm deg}_M(v)leq 3$. Now, for any point outside, if it has $geq 4$ neighbors, we are done. If not, then there are points in $M$, which are neighbors of $v$, such that, their in$-M$ degree is precisely $3$, but this did not lead me to anywhere.
co.combinatorics graph-theory
add a comment |
up vote
2
down vote
favorite
Take an undirected graph $G=(V,E)$. For any subset $Msubseteq V$, we define ${rm deg}_M(v)=|{kin M:(v,k)in E}|$, namely, the number of neighbors of $v$ in $M$.
Is it true that, there exists a subset $Msubseteq V$ such that, for every $vin M$, ${rm deg}_M(v)leq 3$, and for every $v'in Vsetminus M$, ${rm deg}_M(v')geq 4$?
Note that, some obvious cases. If nobody are friends, we can simply take $V$ to be the entire set. Similarly, if $G$ is fully connected, then any $4-$element subset work. I tried to reason in the following way, take a maximal (in the sense of cardinality) $M$, such that, for every $vin M$, ${rm deg}_M(v)leq 3$. Now, for any point outside, if it has $geq 4$ neighbors, we are done. If not, then there are points in $M$, which are neighbors of $v$, such that, their in$-M$ degree is precisely $3$, but this did not lead me to anywhere.
co.combinatorics graph-theory
add a comment |
up vote
2
down vote
favorite
up vote
2
down vote
favorite
Take an undirected graph $G=(V,E)$. For any subset $Msubseteq V$, we define ${rm deg}_M(v)=|{kin M:(v,k)in E}|$, namely, the number of neighbors of $v$ in $M$.
Is it true that, there exists a subset $Msubseteq V$ such that, for every $vin M$, ${rm deg}_M(v)leq 3$, and for every $v'in Vsetminus M$, ${rm deg}_M(v')geq 4$?
Note that, some obvious cases. If nobody are friends, we can simply take $V$ to be the entire set. Similarly, if $G$ is fully connected, then any $4-$element subset work. I tried to reason in the following way, take a maximal (in the sense of cardinality) $M$, such that, for every $vin M$, ${rm deg}_M(v)leq 3$. Now, for any point outside, if it has $geq 4$ neighbors, we are done. If not, then there are points in $M$, which are neighbors of $v$, such that, their in$-M$ degree is precisely $3$, but this did not lead me to anywhere.
co.combinatorics graph-theory
Take an undirected graph $G=(V,E)$. For any subset $Msubseteq V$, we define ${rm deg}_M(v)=|{kin M:(v,k)in E}|$, namely, the number of neighbors of $v$ in $M$.
Is it true that, there exists a subset $Msubseteq V$ such that, for every $vin M$, ${rm deg}_M(v)leq 3$, and for every $v'in Vsetminus M$, ${rm deg}_M(v')geq 4$?
Note that, some obvious cases. If nobody are friends, we can simply take $V$ to be the entire set. Similarly, if $G$ is fully connected, then any $4-$element subset work. I tried to reason in the following way, take a maximal (in the sense of cardinality) $M$, such that, for every $vin M$, ${rm deg}_M(v)leq 3$. Now, for any point outside, if it has $geq 4$ neighbors, we are done. If not, then there are points in $M$, which are neighbors of $v$, such that, their in$-M$ degree is precisely $3$, but this did not lead me to anywhere.
co.combinatorics graph-theory
co.combinatorics graph-theory
asked 7 hours ago
kawa
1414
1414
add a comment |
add a comment |
1 Answer
1
active
oldest
votes
up vote
5
down vote
Let us consider all sets $M$ with $d_M(v)le 3$ for all $vin M$ (I'll write $d$ instead of $rm{deg}$) and choose the set that maximizes
$$
|M|-frac 14 E(M)
$$
where $E(M)$ is the number of edges between the vertices in $M$.
Assume that there is a vertex $w$ with $d_M(w)le 3$. We can try to add it to $M$ but it may spoil some its neighbors in $M$ (those that had degree $3$ in $M$ already). Then we may just delete the bad neighbors one by one as long as their degree is $4$ (after the first deletion we can improve other vertices too, so we may delete only part of spoiled neighbors and the rest may get their low degree recovered). If we do $k$ deletions, we get $|M|to |M|+1-k$, $E(M)to le E(M)+3-4k$, which certainly increases the functional by at least $frac 14$. Thus the trivial algorithm (add a vertex and remove the resulting conflicts, if any, one by one) works and achieves the desired result in $4|V|$ steps at the worst.
And of course the same argument shows that, for any nonnegative integer $d$ and any finite graph $G=(V,E)$, there is a set $Msubseteq V$ such that $M={xin V:|N(x)cap M|le d}$. Is this also true for infinite graphs?
– bof
1 hour ago
add a comment |
1 Answer
1
active
oldest
votes
1 Answer
1
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
up vote
5
down vote
Let us consider all sets $M$ with $d_M(v)le 3$ for all $vin M$ (I'll write $d$ instead of $rm{deg}$) and choose the set that maximizes
$$
|M|-frac 14 E(M)
$$
where $E(M)$ is the number of edges between the vertices in $M$.
Assume that there is a vertex $w$ with $d_M(w)le 3$. We can try to add it to $M$ but it may spoil some its neighbors in $M$ (those that had degree $3$ in $M$ already). Then we may just delete the bad neighbors one by one as long as their degree is $4$ (after the first deletion we can improve other vertices too, so we may delete only part of spoiled neighbors and the rest may get their low degree recovered). If we do $k$ deletions, we get $|M|to |M|+1-k$, $E(M)to le E(M)+3-4k$, which certainly increases the functional by at least $frac 14$. Thus the trivial algorithm (add a vertex and remove the resulting conflicts, if any, one by one) works and achieves the desired result in $4|V|$ steps at the worst.
And of course the same argument shows that, for any nonnegative integer $d$ and any finite graph $G=(V,E)$, there is a set $Msubseteq V$ such that $M={xin V:|N(x)cap M|le d}$. Is this also true for infinite graphs?
– bof
1 hour ago
add a comment |
up vote
5
down vote
Let us consider all sets $M$ with $d_M(v)le 3$ for all $vin M$ (I'll write $d$ instead of $rm{deg}$) and choose the set that maximizes
$$
|M|-frac 14 E(M)
$$
where $E(M)$ is the number of edges between the vertices in $M$.
Assume that there is a vertex $w$ with $d_M(w)le 3$. We can try to add it to $M$ but it may spoil some its neighbors in $M$ (those that had degree $3$ in $M$ already). Then we may just delete the bad neighbors one by one as long as their degree is $4$ (after the first deletion we can improve other vertices too, so we may delete only part of spoiled neighbors and the rest may get their low degree recovered). If we do $k$ deletions, we get $|M|to |M|+1-k$, $E(M)to le E(M)+3-4k$, which certainly increases the functional by at least $frac 14$. Thus the trivial algorithm (add a vertex and remove the resulting conflicts, if any, one by one) works and achieves the desired result in $4|V|$ steps at the worst.
And of course the same argument shows that, for any nonnegative integer $d$ and any finite graph $G=(V,E)$, there is a set $Msubseteq V$ such that $M={xin V:|N(x)cap M|le d}$. Is this also true for infinite graphs?
– bof
1 hour ago
add a comment |
up vote
5
down vote
up vote
5
down vote
Let us consider all sets $M$ with $d_M(v)le 3$ for all $vin M$ (I'll write $d$ instead of $rm{deg}$) and choose the set that maximizes
$$
|M|-frac 14 E(M)
$$
where $E(M)$ is the number of edges between the vertices in $M$.
Assume that there is a vertex $w$ with $d_M(w)le 3$. We can try to add it to $M$ but it may spoil some its neighbors in $M$ (those that had degree $3$ in $M$ already). Then we may just delete the bad neighbors one by one as long as their degree is $4$ (after the first deletion we can improve other vertices too, so we may delete only part of spoiled neighbors and the rest may get their low degree recovered). If we do $k$ deletions, we get $|M|to |M|+1-k$, $E(M)to le E(M)+3-4k$, which certainly increases the functional by at least $frac 14$. Thus the trivial algorithm (add a vertex and remove the resulting conflicts, if any, one by one) works and achieves the desired result in $4|V|$ steps at the worst.
Let us consider all sets $M$ with $d_M(v)le 3$ for all $vin M$ (I'll write $d$ instead of $rm{deg}$) and choose the set that maximizes
$$
|M|-frac 14 E(M)
$$
where $E(M)$ is the number of edges between the vertices in $M$.
Assume that there is a vertex $w$ with $d_M(w)le 3$. We can try to add it to $M$ but it may spoil some its neighbors in $M$ (those that had degree $3$ in $M$ already). Then we may just delete the bad neighbors one by one as long as their degree is $4$ (after the first deletion we can improve other vertices too, so we may delete only part of spoiled neighbors and the rest may get their low degree recovered). If we do $k$ deletions, we get $|M|to |M|+1-k$, $E(M)to le E(M)+3-4k$, which certainly increases the functional by at least $frac 14$. Thus the trivial algorithm (add a vertex and remove the resulting conflicts, if any, one by one) works and achieves the desired result in $4|V|$ steps at the worst.
answered 4 hours ago
fedja
36.8k7106201
36.8k7106201
And of course the same argument shows that, for any nonnegative integer $d$ and any finite graph $G=(V,E)$, there is a set $Msubseteq V$ such that $M={xin V:|N(x)cap M|le d}$. Is this also true for infinite graphs?
– bof
1 hour ago
add a comment |
And of course the same argument shows that, for any nonnegative integer $d$ and any finite graph $G=(V,E)$, there is a set $Msubseteq V$ such that $M={xin V:|N(x)cap M|le d}$. Is this also true for infinite graphs?
– bof
1 hour ago
And of course the same argument shows that, for any nonnegative integer $d$ and any finite graph $G=(V,E)$, there is a set $Msubseteq V$ such that $M={xin V:|N(x)cap M|le d}$. Is this also true for infinite graphs?
– bof
1 hour ago
And of course the same argument shows that, for any nonnegative integer $d$ and any finite graph $G=(V,E)$, there is a set $Msubseteq V$ such that $M={xin V:|N(x)cap M|le d}$. Is this also true for infinite graphs?
– bof
1 hour ago
add a comment |
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
StackExchange.ready(
function () {
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fmathoverflow.net%2fquestions%2f315994%2fexistence-of-a-certain-subset-of-vertices-in-a-graph%23new-answer', 'question_page');
}
);
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown