Counting spanning trees

Question Given a graph G, how many spanning trees does G have?

⌧ (G) = number of distinct spanning trees of G

Definition If G = (V, E) is a multigraph with e 2 E, then G · e (said

“G contract e”) is the graph obtained from G by contracting/shrinking
the edge e until its endpoints are a single vertex.

Examples
e
e
G G･e

G G･e
e
G G･e

Theorem (Deletion/contraction formula). Let G be a multigraph, and

let e be a (non-loop) edge of G. Then
⌧ (G) = ⌧ (G e) + ⌧ (G · e).
| {z } | {z }
# of spanning trees # of spanning trees
that do not use e that use edge e

This is the first example of a graph invariant that can be expressed using a
recurrence formula involving deletions and/or contractions. More to come
down the road...

Math 104 - Prof. Kindred - Lecture 5 Page 1

Comment on proof Need to show a one-to-one correspondence between
spanning trees of G that include e and spanning trees of G · e.
spanning tree T of G that uses e ! T · e, a spanning tree of G · e

Example Use deletion-contraction formula to compute ⌧ (K4).

Should get ⌧ (K4) = 16.

Deletion/contraction formula is beautiful but not practically useful (grows

exponentially with the size of the graph – may be as many as 2|E(G)| terms).
We consider an alternate computation.
Theorem (matrix-tree thm, also called Kirchho↵’s matrix-tree thm). Let
G be a graph. Then
⌧ (G) = ( 1)i+j det Qij ,
where Qij is the submatrix obtained by removing the ith row and jth
column of the Laplacian matrix Q of G.

Note that determinants of n ⇥ n matrices can be computed using fewer

than n3 operations.

Math 104 - Prof. Kindred - Lecture 5 Page 2

Remark Alternatively, we can express the matrix-tree theorem as
1
⌧ (G) = 1 2··· n 1
n
where 1, . . . , n 1 are n 1 largest eigenvalues of Laplacian matrix of G.

This calculation was first devised by Gustav Kircho↵ in 1847 as a way of

obtaining values of current flow in electrical networks. (Matrices were first
emerging as a powerful mathematical tool about the same time.)

Theorem (Cayley1, 1889).

⌧ (Kn) = nn 2.

Proof. We prove as a special case of the matrix-tree theorem. Let A be

the adjacency matrix of Kn. Then
2 3

A=4
0
6 0 .. 7
5= J I,
1
.
0
0 1
where J is the n ⇥ n matrix of all ones and I is the identity matrix. The
Laplacian matrix, Q, of Kn is
2 3
n 1
6
6 n 1 -1 7
7
Q=D A = (n 1)I (J I) = nI J = 666 ..
.
7
7
7
4
-1 n 1
n 1
5

Note that the vector of all ones is an eigenvector of Q for = 0, and

213 203 203
1 1 0
6 0 7 6 17 6 .. 7
6 0 7,6 0 7,··· ,6 . 7
4.5 4.5 4 0 5,
.. .. 1
0 0 1
1
Cayley was interested in representing hydrocarbons by graphs, and in particular, by trees.

Math 104 - Prof. Kindred - Lecture 5 Page 3

are linearly independent eigenvectors for = n. Thus,
1 n 1
⌧ (Kn) = (n ) = nn 2.
n
⌅

Remark Cayley’s formula may also be viewed as the number of possible

trees on the vertex set [n] = {1, 2, . . . , n}, i.e., the # of labelled trees on
n vtcs.

We have now answered the following question:

n
Of the 2(2) simple graphs with vertex set {1, 2, . . . , n}, how many
are trees?

? Book gives a proof of Cayley’s theorem using Prüfer codes (unique se-
quence of length n 2 assigned to a tree on n vtcs).

Math 104 - Prof. Kindred - Lecture 5 Page 4

Minimum spanning trees
Definition A weighted graph is a graph G = (V, E) with weight func-
tion w : E ! R.

Weights usually represent costs, distances, etc.

Minimum spanning tree problem – given a weighted con-

nected graph, find a spanning tree T with minimum
weight X
w(T ) = w(e).
e2E(T )

We may see later that one application of minimum spanning trees is for an
approximation algorithm for the Traveling Salesman Problem (TSP).

Brute-force: construct all possible spanning trees and find one with mini-
mum weight.

Greedy algorithm =) any algorithm that makes a locally optimal

choice at each step with the aim of finding the
global optimum

(Downfall – can get locked into certain choices too early which prevent them
from finding the best overall solution later.)

Kruskal’s algorithm (greedy algorithm)

1. Order edges e1, . . . , em so that w(ei)  w(ej ) for any i < j.
2. T ;.
3. For k = 1 to m, if T + ek is acyclic, then T T + ek .
4. Output T .

Math 104 - Prof. Kindred - Lecture 5 Page 5

In implementation on a computer, we check if T + ek is acyclic by checking
if edge ek has endpoints in two di↵erent components of T .
Comparison sort to sort edges: O(m log m) = O(m log n).

Surprise! =) This greedy algorithm gives an optimal solution.

Before we prove this, we mention one more result on tree characterizations.

Theorem. For a graph G, the following are equivalent:

(1) G is a tree.
(2) G is a minimal connected graph (that is, G is connected and if
uv 2 E(G), then G uv is disconnected).
(3) G is a maximal acyclic graph (that is, G is acyclic and if u, v are
nonadjacent vtcs in G, then G + uv contains a cycle.

Theorem. The output of Kruskal’s algorithm is a minimum weight

spanning tree.

Proof. Let T ⇤ be the output of Kruskal’s algorithm applied to a connected

graph G with n vtcs.
• Claim: T ⇤ is a spanning tree.
Since T ⇤ is a maximal acyclic subgraph of G, by our previous theorem,
T ⇤ must be a tree, and hence, a spanning tree of G.
• Claim: T ⇤ is optimal.
Suppose not. Let T be a min spanning tree with the maximum # of
edges in common with T ⇤ (i.e., |E(T ⇤) \ E(T )| as large as possible).
Note that w(T ) < w(T ⇤).
Also, note that T and T ⇤ both have n 1 edges.

Math 104 - Prof. Kindred - Lecture 5 Page 6

 Suppose E(T ⇤) = {e1, e2, . . . , en 1} where
w(e1)  w(e2)  · · ·  w(en 1).
Let i = min{k : ek 2 E(T ⇤) E(T )} (so ei is first edge in T ⇤ that is
not in T ). Then T + ei has a cycle. 9 edge e in this cycle that is not
in T ⇤ since T ⇤ is acyclic. Now T + ei e is a spanning tree (connected
and has n 1 edges) with more edges in common with T ⇤ than T .

We also know that w(ei)  w(e); otherwise, if w(ei) > w(e), then we
should have chosen e1, . . . , ei 1, e to be in T ⇤ during Kruskal’s algo-
rithm. (These edges do not have a cycle as they are all in T .)

Therefore,
w(T + ei e) = w(T ) + w(ei) w(e)  w(T ).
| {z }
0

So T + ei e is a min spanning tree with one more edge in common

with T ⇤ than T . )( Thus, T ⇤ is optimal.
⌅

Math 104 - Prof. Kindred - Lecture 5 Page 7

 Counting spanning trees

v1 v2
degree matrix D adjacency matrix A
⇥ ⇥
2 0 0 0 0 1 1 0
Spanning trees v3 v4
⇧0
D=⇧
⇤0
3
0
0
3
0⌃
⌃
0⌅
⇧1
A=⇧
⇤1
0
1
1
0
1⌃
1⌅
⌃

0 0 0 2 0 1 1 0
Math 104, Graph Theory
compute the difference D - A
Tuesday, February 5, 2013
⇥
2 1 1 0
Laplacian matrix ⇧ 1 3 1 1⌃
=) D A=⇧ ⌃
of the graph ⇤ 1 1 3 1⌅
0 1 1 2

Counting spanning trees Counting spanning trees

⇥ ⇥
v1 v2 2 1 1 0 v1 v2 2 1 1 0
⇧ 1 3 1 1⌃ ⇧ 1 3 1 1⌃
D A=⇧
⇤ 1
⌃ D A=⇧ ⌃
1 3 1⌅ ⇤ 1 1 3 1⌅
compute
0 1 1 2 0 1 1 2
v3 v4 (2, 2)-cofactor of v3 v4 (2, 2)-cofactor of
matrix D - A matrix D - A
= 8
h i
(i, j)-cofactor = ( 1)i+j det of (n 1)⇥(n 1) matrix
obtained by removing row i and col j Fact: Every cofactor of this matrix is 8!!
2 1 0
3 1 1 1 What does 8
( 1)2+2 1 3 1 =2 ( 1)
0 1 2
1 2 0 2 have to do with
spanning trees of
= 2(6 1) + ( 2 0) = 8 this graph?
Counting spanning trees Kirchhoff’s matrix-tree theorem
v1 v2

8 distinct spanning
trees of given graph Theorem: Let G be a graph. Then
v3 v4
# of distinct the value of any cofactor
v1 v2 v1 v2 v1 v2 v1 v2
spanning trees = of the matrix D - A,
of G the Laplacian matrix of G
v3 v4 v3 v4 v3 v4 v3 v4
v1 v2 v1 v2 v1 v2 v1 v2

v3 v4 v3 v4 v3 v4 v3 v4

Kruskal’s algorithm

a 7 8 c
b

5 9 7 5
15
d e

6 8
9
f
11 g