Professional Documents
Culture Documents
Studies in Graph Theory-Distance Related Concepts in Graphs PDF
Studies in Graph Theory-Distance Related Concepts in Graphs PDF
CONCEPTS IN GRAPHS
A THESIS
Submitted by
R. ANANTHA KUMAR
(Reg. No. 200813107)
of
DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY
SEPTEMBER 2013
CERTIFICATE
This is to certify that all the corrections/suggestions pointed out by the examiners
BONAFIDE CERTIFICATE
supervision. Certified further that to the best of my knowledge the work reported
herein does not form part of any other thesis or dissertation on the basis of which
candidate.
SIGNATURE
Dr. S. ARUMUGAM
SUPERVISOR
Senior Professor (Research)
National Centre for Advanced Research in
Discrete Mathematics (n-CARDMATH)
Kalasalingam University
(Kalasalingam Academy of Research and Education)
Anand Nagar, Krishnankoil – 626 126, Tamil Nadu, INDIA.
ABSTRACT
iv
wise distance similar set in G is called the pairwise distance similar
number of G and is denoted by Φ(G). The minimum cardinality
of a maximal pairwise distance similar set in G is called the lower
pairwise distance similar number of G and is denoted by Φ− (G).
v
lower and upper bounds of Φ(G) for product graphs. Further we
characterize graphs with Φ(G) = n − 2 and Φ(G) = n − 3.
vi
Let M be a nonempty subset of V (G) and let u ∈ V (G).
The distance pattern of u with respect to M is given by fM (u) =
{d(u, v) : v ∈ M }. If fM is an injective function on V, then the set M
is called a distance pattern distinguishing set (DP D-set) of G. If G
admits a DP D-set, then G is called a DP D-graph. The minimum
cardinality of a DP D-set in a DP D-graph G is the DP D-number
of G and is denoted by %(G).
vii
nonempty subset S of U. We introduce the concept of nondeficient
number of G. The nondeficient number nd(G) of a graph G is defined
to be the maximum cardinality of a nondeficient set of G. Any
nondeficient set U of G with |U | = nd(G) is called a nd-set of G.
viii
ACKNOWLEDGEMENT
R.ANANTHA KUMAR
ix
TABLE OF CONTENTS
x
TITLE PAGE NO.
CHAPTER 3. PAIRWISE DISTANCE SIMILAR 39
SETS IN GRAPHS
3.1 INTRODUCTION 39
3.2 BASIC RESULTS 40
3.3 CONCLUSION AND SCOPE 48
CHAPTER 4. DISTANCE PATTERN 49
DISTINGUISHING SETS IN GRAPHS
4.1 INTRODUCTION 49
4.2 BASIC RESULTS 50
4.3 DP D-NUMBER OF GRAPHS 56
4.4 METRIC DIMENSION AND DP D-NUMBER 64
4.5 EMBEDDING A GRAPH INTO A DP D-GRAPH 70
4.6 LOCAL DP D-SETS 72
4.7 LDP D-GRAPHS AND UNIVERSAL VERTICES 82
4.8 CONCLUSION AND SCOPE 90
CHAPTER 5. NONDEFICIENT SETS IN GRAPHS 92
5.1 INTRODUCTION 92
5.2 BASIC RESULTS 93
5.3 BOUNDS 101
5.4 NONDEFICIENT SETS AND GRAPH
OPERATIONS 106
5.5 CONCLUSION AND SCOPE 112
REFERENCES 113
LIST OF PUBLICATIONS 117
VITAE 118
xi
LIST OF FIGURES
xii
LIST OF SYMBOLS
ω clique number
α0 critical independence number
deg(v) or d(v) degree of v
d(G) or diam(G) diameter
dim(G) dimension of G
%(G) distance pattern distinguishing number of G
ds(G) distance similar number of G
β1 edge independence number
g girth
β0 or α independence number
l(P ) length of the path P
ds− (G) lower distance similar number of G
Φ− (G) lower pairwise distance similar number of G
∆ maximum degree
δ minimum degree
µ(G) Mycielskian of a graph G
nd(G) nondeficient number of G
η(G) nullity of G
Φ(G) pairwise distance similar number of G
r radius
rank(G) rank of G
Tk (G) trestled graph of G of index k
xiii
CHAPTER 1
PRELIMINARIES
1.1 INTRODUCTION
In this chapter we collect some basic definitions and
theorems on graphs which are needed for the subsequent chapters.
For graph theoretic terminology, we refer to Chartrand and Lesniak
[7].
2
Definition 1.2.4. A walk W in a graph G is an alternating se-
quence u0 , e1 , u1 , . . . , uk−1 , ek , uk of vertices and edges of G, begin-
ning and ending with vertices, such that ei = ui−1 ui , for 1 ≤ i ≤ k.
The vertices u0 and uk are called the origin and terminus of W re-
spectively and W is called a u0 -uk walk. The walk W is also denoted
by (u0 , u1 , u2 , . . . , uk−1 , uk ). If u0 = uk , the walk is closed and open
otherwise. The number of edges in a walk is called the length of the
walk. A path P of length k (denoted by Pk ) is a walk (u0 , u1 , u2 ,
. . . , uk−1 , uk ) in which all the vertices u0 , u1 , u2 , . . . , uk−1 , uk are
distinct.
3
Definition 1.2.7. A graph G is complete if every pair of distinct
vertices of G are adjacent in G. A complete graph on n vertices is
denoted by Kn .
4
For a set S of vertices of G, the induced subgraph denoted
by hSi or by G[S], is the maximal subgraph of G with vertex set S.
Thus two vertices of S are adjacent in hSi if and only if they are
adjacent in G.
5
Definition 1.2.14. A k-partite graph G is a graph whose vertex
set V can be partitioned into k nonempty subsets V1 , V2 , . . . , Vk such
that no edge has both ends in any one subset Vi . If further G contains
every edge uv where u ∈ Vi , v ∈ Vj , i 6= j, then G is called a complete
k-partite graph and is denoted by Kn1 ,n2 ,...,nk where |V1 | = n1 , |V2 | =
n2 , . . . , |Vk | = nk .
6
2. The join G = G1 + G2 has V (G) = V (G1 ) ∪ V (G2 ) and E(G) =
E(G1 ) ∪ E(G2 ) ∪ {uv : u ∈ V (G1 ), v ∈ V (G2 )}.
7
adjacent if and only if they differ in exactly one coordinate. Alter-
natively, Qn is K2 if n = 1, while for n ≥ 2, Qn = Qn−1 K2 .
8
1.3 DISTANCE RELATED CONCEPTS
9
Definition 1.3.2. Let G be a connected graph. By an ordered
set of vertices we mean a subset W = {w1 , w2 , . . . , wk } ⊆ V (G) on
which the ordering (w1 , w2 , . . . , wk ) has been imposed. For an or-
dered subset W ⊆ V (G), we refer to the k-vector (ordered k-tuple)
r(v|W ) = (d(v, w1 ), d(v, w2 ), . . . , d(v, wk )) as the metric represen-
tation of v with respect to W. The set W is called a resolving set for
G if r(u|W ) = r(v|W ) implies that u = v for all u, v ∈ V (G). Hence
if W is a resolving set of cardinality k for a graph G of order n,
then the set {r(v|W ) : v ∈ V (G)} consists of n distinct k-vectors.
A resolving set of minimum cardinality for a graph G is called a
basis for G.
10
The metric dimension of some standard graphs are listed below.
11
Proposition 1.3.9. [25] If U is a distance similar equivalence class
of a connected graph G, then U is either independent in G or in G.
12
M and not in M. An M -augmenting path is an M -alternating path
both of whose end vertices are M vertices.
13
similar number Φ(G) of a graph. We obtain a characterization of
graphs with Φ(G) = ∆(G), Φ− (G) = ∆(G), Φ(G) = n − 2 and
Φ(G) = n − 3. We obtain bounds for the pairwise distance similar
number of product graphs.
14
CHAPTER 2
2.1 INTRODUCTION
Saenpholphat and Zhang [25] introduced the concept of
connected resolving set and in this context they introduced the
concept of distance similar vertices and obtained several basic
results. Two vertices u and v of a connected graph G are defined
to be distance similar if d(u, x) = d(v, x) for all x ∈ V (G) − {u, v}.
Thus u and v are distance similar if and only if either uv ∈
/ E(G)
and N (u) = N (v) or uv ∈ E(G) and N [u] = N [v]. Distance simi-
larity in a connected graph G is an equivalence relation on V (G).
If U is a distance similar equivalence class of a connected graph G,
then U is either independent in G or in G.
∗
The content of this chapter has been accepted for publication in Utilitas Mathematica.
We observe that if U is a distance similar equivalence class
of G, then |{d(x, v) : v ∈ U }| = 1 for all x ∈ V − U. Motivated by
this observation we introduce the concept distance similar set and
distance similar number ds(G) of G and initiate a study of this
parameter.
16
We start with an example to illustrate the concept of dis-
tance similar set and distance similar number.
Example 2.2.2.
s s s s sx
JJ
s
J
J sc
J
Js
d
G1
(2) Let T be a tree. For any support vertex v, let l(v) denote the
number of leaves adjacent to v. Then ds(T ) = max{l(v) : v is
a support vertex of T }. In particular for the path Pn , we have
ds(Pn ) = ds− (Pn ) = 1 for all n ≥ 4.
17
Observation 2.2.3.
18
if S is independent and d(x, v) = d(x, w) = 1 if S is a clique. Thus v
and w are distance similar vertices and hence w ∈ U. Hence S ⊆ U.
Thus U is a distance similar set and since S is a maximal distance
similar set, S = U.
19
Proposition 2.2.9. Let S be any distance similar set of G with
|S| ≥ 3 and let v ∈ S. Then S − {v} is a distance similar set if and
only if dhSi (v) = 0 or |S| − 1.
20
vr2 vr7
v8
v1 r r r r r rv11
v3 v5 v6
r rv
9
v4
r
v10
G2
21
Algorithm 2.3.1.
0 0
Proof. Clearly N (u) = Sk ∪ Sk−1 ∪ Sk−2 ∪ · · · ∪ S10 , where the sets
0 0
Sk , Sk−1 , Sk−2 , . . . , S10 are mutually disjoint. Clearly v ∈ Sk and
Sk ⊆ N (u). Now let y ∈ V − Sk . If y ∈
/ N (u), then it follows from
the definition of S1 that |{d(y, z) : z ∈ S1 }| = 1. Since Sk ⊆ S1 we
have |{d(y, z) : z ∈ Sk }| = 1. If y ∈ N (u), then y ∈ Si0 for some
i, 1 ≤ i ≤ k − 1. We claim that y is adjacent to all the vertices of
Si+1 or to no vertex of Si+1 . If Siv = ∅, then Si+1 = Si − (N (Si0 ) ∩ Si ),
and in this case y is adjacent to no vertex of Si+1 . If Siv 6= ∅, then
22
!
(N (x) ∩ Si ) −N (Si0 −Siv ). If y ∈ Siv , then y is adjacent
T
Si+1 =
x∈Siv
to all the vertices of Si+1 , and if y ∈ Si − Siv , then y is adjacent to
no vertex of Si+1 . Since y ∈ N (u), it follows that either d(y, z) = 1
for all z ∈ Si+1 or d(y, z) = 2 for all z ∈ Si+1 . Also Sk ⊆ Si+1 and
hence |{d(y, z) : z ∈ Sk }| = 1. Thus Sk is a distance similar set of
G.
23
is the output of Algorithm 2.3.1 and is a maximal distance similar
set containing v.
vr
v1r
v2
u r r r r
v5 v6
r v3
rv4
G3
24
2.4 GRAPHS WITH ds(G) = 1
25
Now, since δ(G) ≥ 2, there exists a vertex v ∈ N (S) − S with
v 6= u and both u and v are adjacent to all the vertices in S. Thus
G contains a cycle C4 , a contradiction. Hence ds(G) = 1.
26
2.5 DISTANCE SIMILAR SETS AND RESOLVING SETS
k
X
dim(G) ≥ (dim(hSi i + K1 ) − 1).
i=1
27
Corollary 2.5.3. Let S1 , S2 , . . . , Sk be disjoint maximal distance
similar sets of G with |Si | ≥ 2 and each Si is an independent set or
k
P
a clique. Then dim(G) ≥ (|Si | − 1).
i=1
28
Proof. Suppose ds(G) = ∆(G). Let S be a ds-set of G. Then S =
N (u) where u ∈ V (G) − S and d(u) = ∆(G). Now let v ∈ V − S
and let d(v, S) = t. Let P = (v = v0 , v1 , v2 , . . . , vt ) where vt ∈ S
be a shortest path. Now vt−1 is adjacent to vt in S and since S is
a ds-set, vt−1 is adjacent to all vertices in S. Thus d(vt−1 ) = ∆(G)
and t = 1. Thus every vertex in V − S is adjacent to every vertex
in S and V − S is an independent set in G. Hence G is isomorphic
to hSi + Kn−∆(G) . Further S and V − S are distance similar sets in
G and hence ∆(G) ≥ |V − S|, so that ∆(G) ≥ n2 .
29
(i) The graph obtained from any graph H of order n − 3 and the
path P3 by joining exactly one pendent vertex of P3 to all the
vertices of H.
(ii) The graph obtained from any graph H of order n−3 and K2 ∪K1
by joining exactly one vertex of K2 and the vertex of K1 to all
the vertices of H.
Case 1. ∆(G) = n − 3.
Case 2. ∆(G) = n − 2.
30
V1 ∪ (V − S) is a distance similar set of G of cardinality n − 2, which
is a contradiction. Hence G is isomorphic to the graph given in (iii).
If h{u, v, w}i ∼
= P3 = (u, v, w), then v is nonadjacent to the vertices
of S since ∆(G) = n − 2. Also if w is adjacent to all the vertices
of S, then S ∪ {v} is a distance similar set of cardinality n − 2, a
contradiction. Hence G is isomorphic to the graph given in (i). Now
we assume that h{u, v, w}i ∼
= K2 ∪K1 . Without loss of generality let
K2 ∪K1 = (u, v)∪{w}. Since G is connected, w is adjacent to all the
vertices of S. Now v is either adjacent to u only or adjacent to all
the vertices of S. If v is adjacent to u only, then G is isomorphic to
the graph given in (ii). Now suppose v is adjacent to all the vertices
of S. If hSi contains a subgraph K2,n−5 and V1 is a partite set of
K2,n−5 with |V1 | = n − 5, then V1 ∪ (V − S) is a distance similar
set of G of cardinality n − 2, which is a contradiction. Hence G is
isomorphic to the graph given in (iii).
31
(ii) If d = 2 and ∆(G) < n − 1, then ds(G) ≤ n − d and ds(G) =
n − d if and only if G = H + 2K1 where H is any graph of
order n − 2 with ∆(H) < n − 3.
32
2.7 DISTANCE SIMILAR SETS AND GRAPH
OPERATIONS
33
have d(z, x) = 1 and d(z, y) ≥ 2. If uz ∈ E(GH), then d(z 0 , y) = 1
and d(z 0 , x) ≥ 2, where z 0 = (vj , um ). Thus in all cases we get a
contradiction. Hence ds(GH) = 1.
34
Observation 2.7.4. The bounds given in Theorem 2.7.3 are
sharp. If G1 = P5 , and H1 = P4 , then V (G1 ) and V (H1 ) are the only
maximal distance similar sets of G1 + H1 , and hence ds(G1 + H1 ) =
5 = max{|V (G1 )|, |V (H1 )|}. If G2 = K3,3 with bipartition V1 , V2
and H2 = P5 , then V1 ∪ V (H2 ) and V2 ∪ V (H2 ) are the maxi-
mal distance similar sets of G2 + H2 . Hence ds(G2 + H2 ) = 8 =
max{|V (G2 )| + ds(H2 ), |V (H2 )| + ds(G2 )}.
Observation 2.7.5.
35
corresponding to vi . Then for any two distinct vertices (vi , ur ), (vj , us )
in G ∗ H, we have
dG (vi , vj ) if i 6= j
dG∗H ((vi , ur ), (vj , us )) = 1 if i = j and ur us ∈ E(H)
2
otherwise.
Hence if S is a ds-set of G, then S 0 =
S
V (Hi ) is a distance
vi ∈S
0
similar set of G ∗ H. Hence ds(G ∗ H) ≥ |S | = ds(G)n2 . Now sup-
pose ds(G ∗ H) > ds(G)n2 . Let S1 be any ds-set of G ∗ H and let
S1 ⊆ NG∗H ((vi , ur )). Let T = {vj : V (Hj ) ∩ S1 6= ∅ and j 6= i}.
Then T is a distance similar set of G and hence |T | ≤ ds(G). If
|T | < ds(G), then |S1 | < ds(G)n2 , which is a contradiction. Hence
S
|T | = ds(G) and V (Hj ) ⊆ S1 . Since |S1 | > ds(G)n2 , it follows
vj ∈T
that V (Hi ) ∩ S1 6= ∅.
36
Now let (vi , ur ) ∈ V (Hi ) − S1 . Since d((vi , ur ), (vj , us )) = 1 for all
vj ∈ T and s = 1, 2, . . . , n2 , it follows that
Theorem 2.7.7.
Let G be a nontrivial connected graph. Then
1 if δ(G) ≥ 2 or k ≥ 2
ds(Tk (G)) =
2 if δ(G) = k = 1.
37
Thus |V (G) ∩ S| ≤ 1. If S contains two distinct vertices x, y of
V (Tk (G)) − V (G), then u = vl for some vl ∈ V (G), and x = vlr
where 1 ≤ r ≤ k. Now d(vtr , vlr ) = 1 and d(vtr , y) ≥ 3, a contradic-
tion. Thus |(V (Tk (G)) − V (G)) ∩ S| ≤ 1. Hence |S| ≤ 2, so that
ds(Tk (G)) ≤ 2. Also if |S| = 2, we may assume that S = {vi , vp1 }
where vi vp ∈ E(G). However such a set S is not a distance sim-
ilar set of Tk (G) if either δ(G) ≥ 2 or k ≥ 2. Hence in this case
ds(Tk (G)) = 1.
38
CHAPTER 3
3.1 INTRODUCTION
In this chapter we initiate a study of pairwise distance
similar number of a graph, which arises naturally from the concept
of distance similar equivalence class. Two vertices u and v of a
connected graph G are distance similar if d(u, x) = d(v, x) for all
x ∈ V (G) − {u, v}.
40
Clearly the equivalence classes v1∗ , v2∗ , . . . , vk∗ with respect to
the distance similarly relation ≡ are precisely the set of all maximal
pds-sets of a graph G. Also G = G0 [hv1∗ i, hv2∗ i, . . . , hvk∗ i] where G0 is
the graph obtained from G by contracting each equivalence class vi∗
as a single vertex. The graph G0 is called the twin graph of G. Hence
Φ(G) = max |vi∗ | and Φ− (G) = min |vi∗ |. Hence it follows that both
1≤i≤k 1≤i≤k
−
Φ(G) and Φ (G) can be computed with complexity O(n2 ).
G1
41
v1 r vr4 vr6 vr8 vr1 vr3 vr5
v2 r
r r r r r r
v5 v7 v9 v2 v4 v6
v3 r G2 G3
Figure 3.2: Graphs with unequal and equal Φ and Φ− .
Observation 3.2.4.
(4) Let T be any tree. Then Φ(T ∗ ) = 1 where T ∗ is the twin graph
of T.
42
Corollary 3.2.6. Let G be any connected graph which is not com-
plete. Let S be any pds-set of G. Then S ⊆ N (u) for any vertex u
in N (S) − S. Hence 1 ≤ Φ− (G) ≤ Φ(G) ≤ ∆(G).
a
r
rb
r r
r
x z
y
r
c
r
d
G4
Observation 3.2.8.
43
3 if n = 3
(3) For the cycle Cn , we have Φ(Cn ) = Φ− (Cn ) = 2 if n = 4
1 if n ≥ 5.
44
Theorem 3.2.11. Let G be a graph of order n with ∆(G) > 0.
Then Φ(G) = ∆(G) if and only if G is isomorphic to the complete
bipartite graph Kn1 ,n2 where max{n1 , n2 } = ∆.
Proof. Let S be any Φ-set of G with |S| = ∆(G) and let S = N (u)
for some u ∈ V (G). If hSi is complete, then H = hS ∪ {u}i = K∆+1 .
Hence it follows that G = H and Φ(G) = ∆(G) + 1, a contradiction.
Hence hSi is independent. Now, let v ∈ V (G) − N [u]. If d(v, S) =
k ≥ 2, let P = (v, v1 , . . . , vt ) be a geodesic joining v and S. Then
vt−1 is adjacent to all the vertices of S and also to vt−2 . Hence
deg(vt−1 ) ≥ ∆(G) + 1, a contradiction. Hence d(v, S) = 1 for all
v ∈ V (G) − N [u]. Also since deg(v) = ∆(G) for all v ∈ V (G) − S,
it follows that V (G) − S is independent. Hence G is isomorphic to
the complete bipartite graph with bipartition S, V (G) − S.
45
G = P3 [Kn−2 , K1 , K1 ] and if G∗ = P2 , then G = P2 [Kn−2 , K2 ] or
P2 [Kn−2 , 2K1 ] or P2 [Kn−2 , 2K1 ]. Hence it follows that G is isomor-
phic to one of the graphs given in the theorem.
s s s
v1 v3 v4
G1
46
vertex v ∗ of G∗ corresponding to S is either v1∗ or v2∗ . If v = v2∗ , then
G is isomorphic to P3 [K1 , H, K2 ]. If v ∗ = v1∗ , then G is isomorphic to
one of the graphs P3 [H, K2 , K1 ], P3 [H, K1 , K2 ], P3 [Kn−3 , K1 , 2K1 ]
or P3 [Kn−3 , 2K1 , K1 ].
47
Corollary 3.2.16. Let G and H be any two nontrivial connected
graphs. Then max{Φ(G), Φ(H)} ≤ Φ(G + H) ≤ Φ(G) + Φ(H).
48
CHAPTER 4
4.1 INTRODUCTION
The concept of metric dimension was independently dis-
covered by Slater [29] and Harary and Melter [16]. By an ordered
set of vertices we mean a set W = {w1 , w2 , · · · , wk } on which the
ordering (w1 , w2 , · · · , wk ) has been imposed. For an ordered subset
W = {w1 , w2 , · · · , wk } of V (G), we refer to the k-vector (ordered
k-tuple) r(v|W ) = (d(v, w1 ), d(v, w2 ), · · · , d(v, wk )) as the (metric)
representation of v with respect to W. The set W is called a resolv-
ing set for G if r(u|W ) = r(v|W ) implies u = v for all u, v ∈ V (G).
Hence if W is a resolving set of cardinality k for a graph G of order
n, then the set {r(v|W ) : v ∈ V (G)} consists of n distinct k-vectors.
A resolving set of minimum cardinality is called a basis for G and
the metric dimension of G is defined to be the cardinality of a basis
of G and is denoted by dim(G). Slater used the terms locating set
and locating number for resolving set and metric dimension.
∗
A part of this chapter has been published in Adv. Stud. Contemp. Math. (Kyungshang),
21 (2011), 107–114.
Applications of resolving sets arise in various areas
including coin weighing problem [28], drug discovery [10], robot
navigation [19], network discovery and verification [2], connected
joins in graphs [27] and strategies for the mastermind game [11].
For a survey of results in metric dimension we refer to Chartrand
and Ping [8].
50
(DP D-set) of G. If G admits a DP D-set, then G is called a DP D-
graph. The minimum cardinality of a DP D-set in a DP D-graph G
is the DP D-number of G and it is denoted by %(G).
s s s s s
v1 v2 v3 v4 v5
G
51
Theorem 4.2.5. For any connected graph G = (V, E), there ex-
ists no DP D-set of cardinality two.
Proof. Let M = {x, y} ⊆ V (G). Then fM (x) = fM (y) = {0, d(x, y)}
and hence M is not a DP D-set.
52
distance pattern. Hence M is not a DP D-set of G, which is a
contradiction. Hence v is adjacent to at most two pendant vertices.
53
Proof. Suppose there exist two distance similar vertices x, y ∈
V (G). By Theorem 4.2.9 exactly one of x, y in M . Suppose x ∈ M ,
y∈
/ M . Then M1 = (M − {x}) ∪ {y} is also a DP D-set of G which
is a contradiction.
54
Proof. If G is isomorphic to K1 , then G + G is isomorphic to K2 ,
which is a DP D-graph. Conversely, suppose G + G is a DP D-
graph. Now diam(G + G) ≤ 2 and it follows from Theorem 4.2.13
that diam(G + G) 6= 2, so that diam(G + G) = 1. Hence G + G
is complete and it follows from Theorem 4.2.4 that G is isomorphic
to K1 .
55
Proof. Let (A, B) be the bipartition of Kr,s with |A| = r and
|B| = s. If r + s = 2 or 3, then Kr,s has a DP D-set M with
|M | = 1. Suppose r + s ≥ 4. Then G has no DP D-set M with
|M | = 1. If Kr,s has a DP D-set M with |M | ≥ 3, then by Theorem
4.2.15 M ⊆ A or M ⊆ B. Hence fM (x) = fM (y) = {0, 2}, for all
x, y ∈ M which is a contradiction.
56
Proof. Let Cn = (v1 , v2 , . . . , vn , v1 ) with n ≥ 7 and let M =
{v1 , v2 , v4 }. We claim that M is a DP D-set. The distance pat-
tern of vertices in Cn with respect to M are fM (v1 ) = {0, 1, 3},
fM (v2 ) = {0, 1, 2}, fM (v3 ) = {1, 2} and fM (v4 ) = {0, 2, 3}. If
4 < t ≤ n+2
n+2
2 , then f (v
M t ) = f (v
M 4 )+(t−4). If 2 +3 ≤ t ≤ n,
then fM (vt ) = fM (v1 ) + (n − t + 1). If t = n+2
2 + 1, then
n+2 n+2
fM (vt ) = { 2 − 1, 2 − 3} when n is odd and fM (vt ) =
{n − n+2
n+2 n+2 n+2
2 , 2 − 1, 2 − 3} when n is even. If t = 2 + 2,
then fM (vt ) = { n+2
n+2
2 − 2, n − 2 } when n is odd and fM (vt ) =
n+2 n+2
{n − ( 2 + 1), 2 − 2} when n is even. Since all these sets are
distinct, M is a DP D-set.
If n = 5, then |M | = 3 and hM i ∼
= K2 ∪K1 . Without loss of
generality let M = {v1 , v2 , v4 }. Then fM (v1 ) = fM (v2 ) = {0, 1, 2}.
Hence C5 is not a DP D-graph.
If n = 6, then 3 ≤ |M | ≤ 4. If |M | = 3 then hM i ∼=
K2 ∪ K1 or hM i ∼
= 3K1 . When hM i ∼= K2 ∪ K1 , without loss of
generality let M = {v1 , v2 , v4 }. Then fM (v3 ) = fM (v6 ) = {1, 2}.
When hM i ∼ = 3K1 , fM (x) = fM (y) = {0, 2} for all x, y ∈ M . If
|M | = 4, then hM i ∼
= P3 ∪K1 or hM i ∼ = 2K2 . When hM i ∼ = P3 ∪K1 ,
without loss of generality let M = {v1 , v2 , v3 , v5 }. Then fM (v1 ) =
fM (v3 ) = {0, 1, 2}. When hM i ∼= 2K2 , fM (x) = fM (y) = {0, 2}
57
for all x, y ∈ M . Hence Cn , n ≤ 6, is not a DP D-graph. Also by
Theorem 4.2.5 and Theorem 4.2.6, we have %(G) = 3.
58
fM (v2 ) = {0, 1, 2} respectively. Hence we may assume that v1 ∈ M
and v2 ∈
/ M . Since |M ∩V (H1 )| = |M ∩V (H2 )| = 1, we may assume
that M = {v1 , u1i , u2j }. If there exist u1j , u1l adjacent to u1i , then
fM (u1j ) = fM (u1l ) = {1, 3}. If there exists a vertex u1j which is not
adjacent to u1i , then fM (u1j ) = fM (u2l ) = {1, 2, 3} where u2l is any
vertex of H2 which is adjacent to u2j . Hence M is not a DP D-set.
Conversely if G = H = K2 , then M = {u12 , v1 , u21 } is a DP D-set
of G ◦ H.
59
Case 2. x = vli , y = vki and l < k.
60
the eccentricity of any vertex in K is at most two it follows that
the distance pattern of vertices in K ∩ M is {0, 1} or {0, 1, 2} hence
|K ∩ M | ≤ 2.
61
Theorem 4.3.6. Let T be any caterpillar which is not a path in
which every support vertex has exactly one leaf adjacent to it. Then
%(T ) = 3.
Case 1. x, y ∈ V (P ).
Case 2. x ∈ V (P ) and y ∈
/ V (P ).
62
Case 3. x, y ∈
/ V (P ).
(i) P4 . (ii) P6 .
63
then max fM (vi ) 6= max fM (vj ). If d(vi , vd n e ) = d(vj , vd n e ), then
2 2
d(vi , vn−1 ) ∈
/ fM (vi ) and d(vi , vn−1 ) = d(vj , v2 ) ∈ fM (vj ). Hence
fM (vi ) 6= fM (vj ) for all vi , vj ∈ M. Therefore M is a DP D-set
of T.
Case 1. x, y ∈ M.
64
Case 2. x, y ∈ V − M.
If d(x, v) < d(y, v), let t1 = d(x, v) and t = d(y, v)−d(x, v).
Then fM (x) = {l1 + t1 , l2 + t1 , . . . , li − t1 , li+1 + t1 , . . . , lk + t1 } and
fM (y) = {l1 +t1 +t, l2 +t1 +t, . . . , li +t1 +t, . . . , lj −(t1 +t), . . . , lk +t1 +
t}. Since the sum of all the integers in the sets fM (x) and fM (y) are
65
! !
k
P k
P
(ln + t1 ) + li − t1 and (ln + t1 + t) + lj − (t1 + t)
n=1,n6=i n=1,n6=j
respectively and these two are unequal, fM (x) 6= fM (y).
where t = d(y, v) − d(x, v). Clearly the sum of all the integers in the
sets fM (x) and fM (y) are unequal and hence fM (x) 6= fM (y).
66
Proof. Case 1. k = 1.
Case 2. k = 2.
67
Case 3. k ≥ 3.
Since fMi (x) ∩ (fM −Mi (x) ∪ fM −Mi (y)) = ∅ for all x, y ∈
V (Ti ) and Mi is a DP D-set in Ti , it follows that fM (x) 6= fM (y)
for all x, y ∈ V (Ti ). Let vt = cen(P1+5(k−2) ). Assume x ∈ V (Ti ), y ∈
V (Tj ) with i < j. Then max fM (x) 6= max fM (y) if d(x, vt ) 6= d(y, vt )
and d(y, v2 ) ∈
/ fM (x) if d(x, vt ) = d(y, vt ). Hence fM (x) 6= fM (y).
When x = v2 , y ∈ Mi we have 2 = d(x, a1 ) ∈
/ fM (y) if i > 1
otherwise max fM (x) < max fM (y). Hence fM (x) 6= fM (y). When
x = v3 and y ∈ V (Ti ) − Mi , 5 ∈ fM (v3 ) but 5 ∈
/ fM (y) and therefore
fM (x) 6= fM (y). When x = vi ∈ V (P1+5(k−2) ) − {v2 , v3 }, y ∈ V (Ti ) −
00 00 00
M = {bi , ai , bi }, we have {2, 3, 4} ⊆ fM (bi ), {1, 3} ⊆ fM (bi ) and
00
{1, 4} ⊆ fM (ai ) but none of these sets is contained in fM (x). Hence
fM (x) 6= fM (y). Therefore M is a DP D-set of cardinality 3k − 2.
Also for any DP D-set M of T , we have |V (Ti ) ∩ M | ≥ 3 for all i =
k−2
S
1, 6, 11, . . . , 1+(k−2)5. Hence |M | ≥ 3(k−1) and M = Mi is not
i=1
a DP D-set, for fM (a001 ) = fM (a001+(k−2)5 ). Hence %(T ) = 3k − 2. Now
by Theorem 1.3.4, dim(T ) = 2(k − 1) and hence %(T ) − dim(T ) =
(3k − 2) − 2(k − 1) = k.
68
We now present two families of graphs not having a
DP D-set.
69
4.5 EMBEDDING A GRAPH INTO A DP D-GRAPH
0
Since diam(T ) is even, T 0 has a unique central vertex v. Choose
one pendant vertex adjacent to each support vertex of T 0 and let
M1 denote the resulting set of pendant vertices. We claim that
0
M = M1 ∪ {z} is a DP D-set of T , where z is a vertex adjacent to
a0 . Let x, y ∈ V (T 0 ).
0 0
First we assume that x, y ∈
/ {a , b , z}. If d(x, v) 6= d(y, v),
then max fM (x) 6= max fM (y). Let T1 and T2 be the branches of v
70
0 0
that contains a and b respectively. If d(x, v) = d(y, v), then one of
the following holds; (i). x, y ∈ V (T1 ), (ii). x, y ∈ V (T2 ) and (iii).
x ∈ V (T1 ), y ∈ V (T2 ). In case (i) and (ii) without loss of generality
we assume that y is a leaf. If either (i) or (ii) or (iii) holds, then
0 0
{d(y, z), d(y, a )} * fM (x) or d(y, b ) ∈
/ fM (x) or d(y, z) ∈
/ fM (x)
respectively. Hence fM (x) 6= fM (y).
0 0 0 0
If x, y ∈ {a , b , z}, then 1 ∈ fM (a ) ∩ fM (z) but 1 ∈
/ fM (b ),
0
and max fM (a ) > max fM (z). Hence fM (x) 6= fM (y) and M is a
DP D-set of T 0 .
Case 1. x, y ∈ V (Kn ).
71
Let x = vi . Then
n + 1 if i 6= n
max fM (vi ) =
n if i = n
and
2 if i 6= 1
min fM (vi ) =
1 if i = 1
72
code of a vertex v of G with respect to W is the k-vector code(v) =
(d(v, w1 ), d(v, w2 ), . . . , d(v, wk )). The set W is a local metric set of
G if code(u) 6= code(v) for every pair u, v of adjacent vertices of G.
The minimum cardinality of a local metric set of G is called the
local metric dimension lmd(G) of G. In this section we introduce
the concept of local distance pattern distinguishing set (LDP D-set)
and initiate a study of LDP D-number of graphs.
Observation 4.6.2.
(2) Every LDP D-set is a local metric set hence, we have lmd(G) ≤
%0 (G).
73
(3) Let G be any nontrivial graph. Then V (G) is a LDP D-set of
G if and only if for every edge uv ∈ E(G), e(u) 6= e(v). For
example for the graphs G1 = P2n+1 and G2 = P2n+1 ◦ K1 , the
sets V (G1 ) and V (G2 ) are LDP D-sets.
G:
s s s
v4 v5 v6
Proof. Let G be any bipartite graph and let v ∈ V (G). Then Ni (v)
is an independent set for each i, i = 1, 2, . . . , e(v) hence {v} is a
LDP D-set of G and %0 (G) = 1.
74
Corollary 4.6.5. For the n-dimensional hypercube Qn , n ≥ 3,
%0 (Qn ) = 1.
76
if uv ∈ E(G) − E(C2k+1 ), then fW2 (u) = fW2 (v) + 1 or fW2 (v) =
fW2 (u) + 1. Hence W2 is a LDP D-set of G and %0 (G) = 2.
k
S
Proof. Let V (G) = Vi (K2 ), where Vi (K2 ) = {ui , vi }, 1 ≤ i ≤ k.
i=1
Let W be any LDP D-set of G if it exists. Then |Vi (K2 ) ∩ W | = 1
for all i = 1, 2, . . . , k by (4) of Observation 4.6.2. Hence with-
out loss of generality we assume that W = {u1 , u2 , . . . , uk }. Sup-
pose k is odd. Then fW (ui ) = fW (uk+1−i ) = {0, 1, 2, . . . , k − i}
for all i = 1, 2, . . . , k2 , fW (ub k c+1 ) = {0, 1, 2, . . . , k2 }, fW (vi ) =
2
77
Proof. Since core(G) = H, G can be decomposed into subgraphs
H, T1 , T2 , . . . , Tt where each Ti is tree with exactly one vertex of Ti
identified to ui ∈ V (H) for all i = 1, 2, . . . , t. Since %0 (H) = k,
there exists a LDP D-set W ⊆ V (H) of cardinality k. Now we
prove that W is a LDPD-set of G also. Since W is a LDP D-
set of H and dG (x, y) = dH (x, y) for all x, y ∈ V (H), we have
fW (u) 6= fW (v) for all uv ∈ E(H). Let uv ∈ E(G)−E(H). Without
loss of generality assume that uv ∈ E(Ti ) for some i, 1 ≤ i ≤ t and
d(v, ui ) = d(u, ui ) + 1. Then fW (u) = fW (v) + 1. Hence W is a
LDP D-set of G and %0 (G) ≤ k.
78
Proof. Let V (G) = {v1 , v2 , . . . , vn } and let e1i = vi1 vt1 , e2i = vi2 vt2 , . . . ,
eki = vik vtk be the edges of Tk (G) corresponding to the edge ei =
vi vt ∈ E(G), i = 1, 2, . . . , m. Let W be any LDP D-set of G and let
x ∈ W. Since d(vij , x) = d(vi , x) + 1, we have fW (vij ) = fW (vi ) + 1.
Also fW (vi ) 6= fW (vj ) for all vi vj ∈ E(G). Hence fW (vij ) 6= fw (vtj )
for all j ∈ {1, 2, . . . , k} and ei = vi vt ∈ E(G). Hence W is a LDP D-
set of Tk (G). Therefore %0 (Tk (G)) ≤ %0 (G).
79
distance similar vertices in G, exactly one of ui or vi say ui for each
i = 1, 2, . . . , k belongs to every LDP D-set and local metric set of G.
Let W = {u1 , u2 , . . . , uk }. Then fW (ui ) = {0, 2}, fW (vi ) = {1, 2} for
all i = 1, 2, . . . , k, fW (x) = {1} and {u1 , u2 , . . . , uk }, {v1 , v2 , . . . , vk }
are independent sets. Hence W is a LDP D-set. Therefore %0 (G) =
lmd(G) = k.
80
Now, let W = {bi , ei , zi : i = 1, 3, 5, . . . , 2k − 1} and let
xy ∈ E(G). If {x, y} ∈ {{vi , ci }, {vi , yi }, {vi , wi }, {ui , fi }, {ui , wi }},
then max fW (x) 6= max fW (y). If x = vi and y = ui , then 3 =
/ fW1 (x) hence fW (x) 6= fW (y). Let x = wi0 ,
d(ui , zi ) ∈ fW1 (y) but 3 ∈
0
y = wi+1 . Without loss of generality we assume that i is odd. Then
2 ∈ fW (wi0 ) but 2 ∈ 0
/ fW (wi+1 ) and W is an independent set. Hence
W is a LDP D-set of G. Therefore %0 (G) ≤ 3k. Hence %0 (G) = 3k.
i = 1, 2, 4 . . . , 2 + 1, . . . , k2 + 1} by identifying a vertex xi of
i
81
Observation 4.6.2 exactly one of ui or wi say ui , i = 1, 2, 4, . . . , 2i +
Let x = vi , y = vj or x = wi , y = wj or x = ui , y = uj
with i < j. If d(x, cen(G)) 6= d(y, cen(G)), then max fW (x) 6=
max fW (y). If d(x, cen(G)) = d(y, cen(G)), then {d(y, u1 ), d(y, u2 )} ⊆
fW (y) but {d(y, u1 ), d(y, u2 )} * fW (x). Hence fW (x) 6= fW (y).
Now, let x = vi , y = wj . If i = j, then max fW (x) < fW (y). If
i 6= j, then 1 ∈ fW (y) but 1 ∈
/ fW (x) when x 6= v1 and y 6= w2
and {1, 3} ⊆ fW (y) but {1, 3} * fW (x) in other case. Hence
fW (x) 6= fW (y). Thus W is a DP D-set and hence %(G) = k. Now
W1 = {u1 , u2 , u4 , . . . , u(k)+1 } is a DP D-set of G, W1 is a LDP D-set
2
0
of G and hence % (G) = k.
82
Proof. Let W be any LDP D-set of G. If x, y ∈ W ∩S or x, y ∈ W −
S, then fW (x) = fW (y) since d(x, v) = d(y, v) for all v ∈ V − {x, y}.
Hence |S| = 2 and |S ∩ W | = 1.
Theorem 4.7.3. Let G be any graph of order at least five and having
exactly two universal vertices. Then G is a LDP D-graph if and only
if G is isomorphic to K2 + H, where H is a bipartite graph with
bipartition A, B such that every vertex of A has a non-neighbor in
B and |B| ≥ 2.
83
fW (x) = {1, 2} for all x ∈ A and fW (y) = {0, 1, 2} for all y ∈ B.
Hence the vertices in A have the same distance pattern and the
vertices in B have the same distance pattern. Hence A and B are
independent sets. Further G is isomorphic to K2 + H, where H is
a bipartite graph with bipartition A, B such that every vertex of A
has a non-neighbor in B and |B| ≥ 2.
84
(iii). G = K1 + H3 , where H3 is a tripartite graph with partite sets
A, B, C where hB ∪ Ci is isomorphic to K|B|,|C| and each vertex
of A has a nonneighbor in B and |B| ≥ 2.
Case 2. u ∈
/ W.
85
pattern of vertices in V2 are {2} and {1, 2} only since d(G) = 2 and
fW (u) = {1}. Let A = {y ∈ V2 : fW (y) = {1, 2}}, B = W and
C = {y ∈ V2 : fW (y) = {2}}. Then B ∪ C is an independent set,
and each vertex of A has a neighbor and a nonneighbor in B. Hence
in this case G is isomorphic to a graph given in (i).
86
Conversely, assume that G is isomorphic to one of the
graphs (i),(ii) and (iii) given in the theorem. Let V (G) = V (K1 ) ∪
V (H) and where V (K1 ) = {u} is the universal vertex of G. Suppose
G is isomorphic to a graph given in (i) or (ii) in the theorem. Let
W = B. Then the distance pattern of vertices in G with respect to
W are
{0, 2} if x ∈ W
{1, 2} if x ∈ A
fW (x) =
{2} if x ∈ C
{1}
if x = u
or
{0, 1, 2} if x ∈ W
{1, 2} if x ∈ A
fW (x) = {2} if x ∈ C
{1} if x = u
{0, 1}
if x = w.
87
Theorem 4.7.5. Let G be any bipartite graph and let H be any
LDP D-graph. Then GH is a LDP D-graph and %0 (GH) ≤
%0 (H).
88
G ∗ H, we have
dG (vi , vj ) if i 6= j
dG∗H ((vi , ur ), (vj , us )) = 1 if i = j and ur us ∈ E(H)
2
otherwise.
89
i = j and ur us ∈ E(H). Then without loss of generality assume that
ur ∈ A and us ∈ B. Hence 0 ∈ fW 0 ((vi , ur )) but 0 ∈
/ fW 0 ((vi , us )).
Therefore W 0 is a LDP D-set of G ∗ H.
90
pattern distinguishing number of a graph. The following are some
interesting problems for further investigation.
91
CHAPTER 5
5.1 INTRODUCTION
Maximum matchings in bipartite graphs have interesting
applications. Let G = (V, E) be a bipartite graph with bipartition
V1 and V2 , with |V1 | ≤ |V2 |. The following theorem of Hall [15] gives
a necessary and sufficient condition for the existence of a matching
M in G such that every vertex of V1 is matched to a vertex of V2
under M. There exists a matching M in G such that V1 is matched
to a subset of V2 under M if and only if |N (S)| ≥ |S| for all S ⊆ V1 .
Proof. Let U be any nondeficient set of G and let Ω denote the fam-
ily of all open neighborhoods N (u) where u ∈ U (The members in
93
Ω are not necessarily distinct subsets of V ). Since |N (S)| ≥ |S|
for all S ⊆ U, it follows that the union of any k subsets in Ω
contains at least k elements. Hence by Theorem 1.3.12, the fam-
ily Ω has an SDR which we denote by {f (u) : u ∈ U }, where
f (u) ∈ N (u). Clearly f (u) 6= u and u is adjacent to f (u). Let
U1 = {u ∈ U : f (u) ∈ U }. Then α : U1 → U1 defined by α(u) = f (u)
is a permutation of U1 with α(u) 6= u. Hence α can be expressed as
a product of disjoint cyclic permutations, say α = α1 α2 · · · αr . The
cyclic permutation αi represents an edge in G if it is a transposi-
tion and a cycle in G otherwise. Now, let H be the edge induced
subgraph of G induced by the edges and cycles determined by the
αi ’s and the set of edges {{u, f (u)} : u ∈ U − U1 }. Clearly H is an
elementary subgraph of G and U ⊆ V (H).
94
Corollary 5.2.8. Let G be any connected bipartite graph of order
n. Then nd(G) = 2β1 (G). In particular, nd(G) = n if and only if G
has a perfect matching.
95
Then clearly G hEf 0 i is a fractional 1-factor of G. Conversely, assume
that G has a fractional 1-factor G hEf i . Then by integrality theorem
for network flows, there exists a fractional 1-factor G hEg i such that
1
or 1. Let H = H1 ∪ H2 , where
for each edge e of G, g(e) is 0 or 2
96
Proof. Let S be any nd-set of G.
97
(i) Every component of H is either an edge or an odd cycle.
98
Lemma 5.2.16. Let H be an elementary subgraph of G of order
nd(G) and having maximum number of components. Then β1 (H) =
β1 (G).
r
S
Proof. Let H = Cni ∪ M1 , where M1 = {e1 , e2 , . . . , es }, ei =
i=1
xi yi and each Cni is an odd cycle. Let S = V (G) − V (H). Let M
be a maximum matching of G. Suppose there exists v ∈ S which
is M -saturated. Then by (ii) and (iii) of Remark 5.2.14, we may
assume that vx1 ∈ M. If y1 is not M -saturated, we replace H by
(H − {x1 y1 }) ∪ {vx1 }. If y1 is M -saturated, then by (iv) of Remark
5.2.14, we may assume that y1 y2 ∈ M. Continuing this process we
obtain a v-w path P whose edges are alternatively in M and M1 , w
is M -unsaturated and |E(P ) ∩ M | = |E(P ) ∩ M1 |. We now replace
H by [H − (E(P ) ∩ M1 )] ∪ (E(P ) ∩ M ). By repeating this process
we obtain an elementary subgraph H of G such that no vertex of S
is M -saturated. Hence it follows that β1 (H) = β1 (G).
99
denote the set of all edges with one end in A and the other end
in B. Let hCi denote the subgraph induced by C, where C is any
nonempty subset of V (G) or E(G).
Proof. Let M be any matching in the edge induced subgraph h[K, I]i
with |M | = β1 (h[K, I]i). Let K 0 = {v ∈ K : v is M -unsaturated}.
If K 0 = ∅, let H = M. If |K 0 | ≥ 2, let H = M ∪ H 0 , where H 0 is a
spanning elementary subgraph of hK 0 i . If K 0 = {v} and deg(v) ≥
|K|, let H = (M − {e}) ∪ K3 where e is an edge of M incident with
a neighbor of v in I and K3 is the triangle formed by v and e. In
all the cases H is an elementary subgraph of G of order x, so that
nd(G) ≥ x. Further if H is any elementary subgraph of G, then
|V (H) ∩ I| ≤ β1 (h[K, I]i) and |V (H) ∩ K| ≤ |K|. Thus |V (H)| ≤ x.
Hence nd(G) = x.
100
5.3 BOUNDS
101
Theorem 5.3.3. Given three positive integers a, b, c with 2a ≤
b ≤ c, a ≥ 2 and b ≤ 3a − 1, there exists a connected graph G with
β1 (G) = a, nd(G) = b and |V (G)| = c.
102
Now, we present a lower bound for nd(G) in terms of
rank(G).
Definition 5.3.6. [5] The rank and the nullity of a graph G, de-
noted by rank(G) and η(G) respectively, are defined to be the rank
and nullity of the adjacency matrix of G.
103
Now we derive an efficient formula for finding nondeficient
number of a graph G in terms of critical independence number of
G.
(i) α(G) = α(G hXi) + α(G hX c i) where α(G) is the vertex inde-
pendent number of G,
104
Lemma 5.3.13. For any graph G, let X c ⊆ V (G) be a subset of
V satisfying the condition of Theorem 5.3.12. Then for any subset
S ⊆ X c , S has more than |S| neighbors in X c .
105
So U is nondeficient and nd(G) ≥ |U |.
s
v2 s s s v7
v4 v5
s T s
v3 v8
106
Lemma 5.4.1. Let G be any connected graph of order n greater
than or equal tothree. Then
nd(G) + 1 if nd(G) = n
nd(G + K1 ) =
nd(G) + 2 if nd(G) < n.
107
Now we find the exact formula for nondeficient number of
corona of two graphs.
108
subgraph of G1 G2 and hence nd(G1 G2 ) ≥ nd(G1 )n2 + (n1 −
nd(G1 ))nd(G2 ). Similarly
s s s s
109
In the following theorem we present the nondeficient num-
ber of trestled graph of any nontrivial graph.
110
Theorem 5.4.7. Let G be any graph with nd(G) = |V (G)|. Then
nd(µ(G)) = |V (µ(G))|, where µ(G) is the Myceilskian graph of G.
Further if nd(G) < |V (G)|, then nd(µ(G)) ≥ 2nd(G) + 2 and the
bound is sharp.
111
The bound nd(µ(G)) ≥ 2nd(G) + 2 is sharp. For the
star G = K1,n , n ≥ 2, we have nd(G) = 2 and nd(µ(G)) = 6 =
2nd(G) + 2.
112
References
(2006), 2168–2181.
CA, 1990.
47–68.
[9] G. Chartrand and P. Zhang, Chromatic Graph Theory, Chap-
[14] J. L. Gross and Jay Yellen, Hand book of Graph Theory, CRC
(1935), 26–30.
114
[18] C. Hernando, M. Mora, I. M. Pelayo and C. Seara, Extremal
294–300.
(1955), 161–162.
115
[27] A. Sebö and E. Tannier, On metric generators of graphs, Math.
559.
116
LIST OF PUBLICATIONS
117
VITAE
118