Minimum Maximum Spanning Tree Weighting Ratio in Chordal

Graph
zxm

Abstract

1 Introduction
In a graph with weighting function G(V, E, ω), where ω : E(G) → R \ R− is a map from the edge
set of G to non-negative real number, we can easily find the maximum weight spanning tree of G
P
denoted by Tω . Then define the weighting sum of a graph as ω(G) := e∈E(G) ω(e). Sometimes we
are interesting about the weighting ratio of the maximum spanning tree and the total graph, denoted
as tω (G) := ω(Tω)
ω(G) .
A natural idea is that the maximum spanning tree can find the edge with larger weight and
put this edge into the maximum spanning tree. Thus the maximum spanning tree may be larger
than the uniform weight ratio of entire graph. When we refer to uniform weight ratio, we mean the
weighting ratio of maximum spanning tree when all edges are weighted 1, i.e. a weighting function
ω 1 (Tω1 )
ω 1 : E(G) → 1, and uniform weight ratio of G denoted as u(G) := ω1 (G) = |V|E(G)|
(G)|−1
.
But the fact is the weighting ratio can be much smaller than the uniform weight ratio, and we
have the follow theorem.
tω (G)
Theorem 1. For any ϵ > 0, there exist a graph G and ω, such that u(G) <ϵ

Proof. Consider a graph G constructed by a complete graph Kk and a tree T joined by a vertex with
|T | = t + 1, t ≥ 1. Then we weight edges in Kk 1, and edges in T 0. And in this weighting function
ω, we have:
2
(k − 1)/ k2 2 k 2−k + t


tω (G)
= = · (1)
u(G) (k + t − 1)/( k + t) k k−1+t


2

Let t = k3 , and when k is large enough, then

2
2 k 2−k + t 2 1
· ≤ ·2= (2)
k k−1+t k k
tω (G)
So when k > 1ϵ , then u(G) < ϵ.

1
 Figure 1: A complete graph Kk and a tree T joined by a vertex

As we have already seen, fixing a graph and its weighting function, we can have the tω (G). Next
we have to consider, when a graph is fixed, how to choose a weighting function, to minimum tω (G).
We denote all the weighting function of G as W , and then we want to get inf ω∈W tω (G).

2 0-1 Weighting Function Lemma

Before stating the theorems in this section, we now introduce few lemmas.
x1 x2 x3 xn
Lemma 2. Assume that y1 ≤ y2 ≤ y3 ≤ ··· ≤ yn , where xi ≥ 0, and yi > 0. Then
x1 x1 + x2 + · · · + xn xn
≤ ≤ (3)
y1 y1 + y2 + · · · + yn yn
x1 x2
Proof. Let’s prove the left part of the inequality. By induction on n, when n = 2, we have y1 ≤ y2 ,
then x1 y2 − x2 y1 ≤ 0. So
x1 x1 + x2 x 1 y2 − x 2 y1
− = ≤0 (4)
y1 y1 + y2 y1 (y1 + y2 )
So suppose that n-1 is established, then we have:
x1 x2 x2 + x3 + · · · + xn
≤ ≤ (5)
y1 y2 y2 + y3 + · · · + yn
Then by the inequality on n=2, we have that:
x1 x1 + x2 + · · · + xn
≤ (6)
y1 y1 + y2 + · · · + yn
x1 x2 x2 −x1 x2
From the proof we can also have that if y1 ≤ y2 and x2 ≥ x1 , y2 ≥ y1 , then y2 −y1 ≥ y2 .

a1 +b1 x
Lemma 3. If a1 , a2 , b1 , b2 all positive, f (x) = a2 +b2 x . If
b1
≥ f (x)
b2
for all x ≥ 0, then f ′ (x) ≥ 0.

2
Proof. This can be proved easily by derivative with respect to f (x).

Now consider the problem of minimizing Tω (G) when fixed the graph G. Since the map from
E(G) → R \ R− is infinite, it’s not possible to find the minimum Tω (G) from the infinite choices. But
the following lemma makes it possible.

Lemma 4 (0-1 Weighting Function Lemma). Define that W 0−1 is the set of all maps from E(G) →
{0, 1}. Then inf ω∈W tω (G) = minω0−1 ∈W 0−1 tω0−1 (G).

Proof. Suppose that ω ∈ W is the weighting function to obtain the infimum, and 0 ≤ a1 < a2 < · · · <
as ≤ 1 is all the value that ω can get. We may assume that they all lie in [0, 1], because we can times
a positive real number to make them arbitrary small and the spanning tree Tω will stay the same.
We define that
A0i : All edges weighted ai and not in the Tω .
A1i : All edges weighted ai and in the Tω .
Ai : All edges weighted ai , with Ai = A1i ∪ A0i .
Next we want to proof that the ω which achieve the infimum and with the least different kinds of
weighting value (denoted as s), must be a 2-value map, i.e. in this map, s = 2.
By contradiction, if ω is the map to achieve the infimum with the least kinds of different values
s ≥ 3, which are 0 ≤ a1 < a2 < · · · < as ≤ 1, so there exist i, 2 ≤ i ≤ s − 1. Then let a′i such that
ai−1 ≤ a′i ≤ ai+1 , and to replace ai with a′i , and the new weighting function denoted as ω ′ , Tω′ is the
maximum spanning tree about ω ′ . Then we proof that we may assume Tω = Tω′ :
Suppose Alg1 is the process of finding the maximum spanning tree with ω as weighting function,
and Tk is the tree in k-th step;
Suppose Alg2 is the process of finding the maximum spanning tree with ω ′ as weighting function,
and Tk′ is the tree in k-th step;
We want to prove that Tk = Tk′ , k = 1, 2, . . . n. By induction, when k=1, because ai < as and
a′i < as , so the first edge we choose is the edge weighted as , so we can let T1 = T1′ . Now we suppose
that Tk = Tk′ , k ≥ 1, and we want to prove that Tk+1 = Tk+1 ′ . Denote the edge we add to Tk in
k+1-th step is e, then consider the weight of ω(e) = aj :
Case 1. aj ≥ ai+1 : Since there is no edge weighted larger than aj and can be added into Tk
without producing circles and Tk = Tk′ , so does in Tk′ , so e is the weighting largest edge can be put in
Tk′ , so Tk+1
′ = Tk+1
Case 2. aj ≤ ai : We can analyze similarly to the case1, so we have Tk+1 = Tk+1 ′ too.
Case 3. aj = ai : Then we can find that when putting any edge weighted larger than ai+1 will
produce circles in Tk and so does in Tk+1 . So e is the weighting largest edge we can put in Tk+1 .
Since ω ′ (e) = a′i ≥ ai−1 , so e is also the largest weighting edge can be added in Tk′ , so Tk+1 = TK+1
′ .
So we can find that Tω = Tω′ , i.e. we can change weight of all edges weighting ai in the interval
[ai−1 , ai+1 ] and won’t change the maximum spanning tree.

3
 And we have that:
ω(Tω ) |A1 |a1 + · · · + |A1i |ai + · · · + |A1s |as
= 1 (7)
ω(G) |A1 |a1 + · · · + |A1 |ai + · · · + |As |as
|A1 |
So when |Aii | ≥ ω(T ω) ′
ω(G) , we assume ω changes the edges weighted ai re-weight as ai−1 , and by above
analysis, Tω = Tω′ . So
ω(Tω′ ) |A11 |a1 + · · · + |A1i |ai−1 + · · · + |A1s |as
=
ω ′ (G) |A1 |a1 + · · · + |A1 |ai−1 + · · · + |As |as
|A1 |a1 + · · · + |A1i |ai + · · · + |A1s |as
≤ 1 (8)
|A1 |a1 + · · · + |A1 |ai + · · · + |As |as
ω(Tω )
=
ω(G)
The inequality is by lemma 3. So we find ω ′ is also the weighting function that minimize the weight
ratio but with s − 1 kinds of value, which is a contradiction about the definition of .
|A1 | ω(Tω′ )
Similarly, if |Aii | ≤ ω′ (G) , we can let ω ′ change all edges weighting ai re-weight ai+1 , then we can
ω(T )
ω′
also have ω′ (G) ≤ ω(Tω) ′
ω(G) , and ω has s − 1 kinds of value, which is a contradiction about the definition
of too. So s = 2.
|A11 |a1 +|A12 |a2 |A11 |
Now 0 ≤ a1 < a2 ≤ 1 is two different value of ω, with ω(T ω)
(G) = |A1 |a1 +|A2 |a2 . If ω(Tω )
|A1 | ≤ ω(G) , then
|A1 |
we can let a1 = 0 and get |A22 | ≤ ω(T ω) 1
ω(G) , then we multiply all weighting of edges by a2 , which doesn’t
change the ratio and the inequatlity is by lemma 3 .We finally get a 0-1 weighting function.
|A1 | |A11 |+|A12 |
If |A11 | < ω(Tω)
ω(G) , then let a1 = a2 , and get ω(Tω )
|A1 |+|A2 | ≤ ω(G) , then we multiply all weighting of edges
by a12 . We also get a 0-1 weighting function.

3 The minimum weighting ratio of chordal graph

The 0-1 weighting function lemma tells us when choosing weighting function to minimize the weighting
ratio ω(Tω)
ω(G) , we can just choose which edges weighted 1 and other edges weighted 0. Then suppose
that F is the set of edges weighted 1, S is the set of vertices adjacent to the edges of F, H = G[F ],
|S|−o(G[S])
then we have ω(T ω)
ω(G) = e(G[F ]) , where o(S) is the number of components of G. This is because when
we find a maximum spanning tree of a 0-1 weighting function, we all actually find a spanning forest
of G[F] and then add few edges weighted 0.
So to minimize the ratio, we can maximize the denominator of the ratio keeping molecular be
P
|S| − o(G[S]). Since e(G[F ]) ≤ e(G[Si ]), where Si is the components of F, so the ratio can
|S|−o(G[S])
be written as P e(G[Si ]) . Later, we will proof that if F is the 1-weighted edges of minimum ratio
weighting function, we may assume F is connected. As the case, we’ve changed the question of finding
a weighting function to minimize the weighting ratio into finding a vertices subset to minimize the
ratio of vertices number minus components number and the edges number of the subgraph induced
by them.
ω(Tω ) |S|−o(G[S])
Theorem 5. inf ω∈W ω(G) = minS⊆V (G) e(G[S])

4
 Now we find the weighting function of minimize the ratio of any chordal graph.

3.1 The weighting function to minimize weighting ratio of a complete graph

We begin with a special chordal, the complete graph. Suppose that G = Kk , then we have that:
ω(Tω ) 2
Theorem 6. If G = Kk , then inf ωinW ω(G) = k

Proof. By induction on k, when k=3, we assume that a1 , a2 , a3 i is the weight of the three edges, we
may assume that a1 ≤ a2 ≤ a3 , and then ω(T ω) a2 +a3 2
ω(G) = a1 +a2 +a+3 ≤ 3 , established. Then when k ≤ 4, we
P
suppose that the V (G) = {v1 , v2 , . . . , vk }, and Ωi = j̸=i ω(vi vj ), i.e. the sum of all edges adjacent
to vertex vi . We may assume that Ω1 ≤ Ω2 ≤ · · · ≤ Ωk
Denote G′ = G \ v1 , G′ = Kk−1 , and

2ω(Kk−1 ) = Ω2 + Ω3 + ... + Ωk − Ω1 ≥ (k − 2)Ω1 . (9)

2ω(K )
So we have that Ω1 ≤ k−2 k−1
. Suppose that a∗ is the maximum weighted edge adjacent to v1 , T is
ω(T ′ ) 2
the maximum spanning tree of G while T’ is the maximum spanning tree of G’ with ω(K k−1
≥ k−1 .
∗ Ω1 ′ ∗
Obviously, a ≥ k−1 , ω(Kk ) = ω(Kk−1 ) + Ω1 . So ω(T ) ≥ ω(T ) + a .
ω(Kk−1 )
Case 1. a∗ ≥ k−1 : We have
( 2 )

ω(T ) ω(T ′ ) + a∗
2
ω(Kk−1 ) + a∗
≥ ≥ k−1
ω(Kk ) ω(Kk−1 ) + Ω1 ω(Kk−1 ) + Ω1
2 ∗
k−1 ω(Kk−1 ) + a
≥ 2
ω(Kk−1 ) + k−1 ω(Kk−1 ) (10)
2(k − 2) (k − 2)a∗ 2(k − 2) k − 2 ω(Kk−1 )
= + ≥ + k−1

ω(Kk−1 )
k(k − 1) kω(Kk−1 ) k(k − 1) k 2
2
=
k
ω(Kk−1 )
Case 2. a∗ < :
(k−1
2 )
We have:
ω(T ) ω(T ′ ) + a∗
2
ω(Kk−1 ) + a∗
≥ ≥ k−1 (11)
ω(Kk ) ω(Kk−1 + Ω1 ω(Kk−1 ) + (k − 1)a∗
To prove the left part ≥ k2 , equally to proof

2k
2ω(Kk−1 ) + 2(k − 1)a∗ ≤ ω(Kk−1 ) + ka∗ (12)
k−1
ω(Kk−1 )
Which is equal to proof a∗ ≤ . By assumption we know its correct.
(k−1
2 )

As analyzed above, we can find a much more simple proof of theorem 6 by theorem 5.

5
 |S|−o(S)
Proof. Since G in complete graph, any subset S of V (G), G[S] is also complete. Thus e(G[s]) =
|S|−1 2
= |s| .
(|S|
2 )
ω(Tω ) 2 2
So inf ω∈W ω(G) = minS⊆V (G) s = k

Now we can describe the 0-1 weighting function minimize the weighting ratio of any chordal.
Chordal graph has good properties, the following one is useful.

Lemma 7. G is a chordal with C1 , C2 , . . . , Ck are its maximal cliques, for any clique Ci , there exist
an ordering σ of {1, 2, . . . , k} such that σ(1) = i and Cσ(t) ∩ (∪s<t Cσ(s) ) is a clique.

3.2 The weighting function to minimize weighting ratio of any chordal graph
Then we have the following descriptions about the weighting function of chordal graph that minimize
the weighting ratio.
Before that, we define a clique graph of any graph:

Algorithm 8. For any graph, we can make a clique graph by following algorithm:
For any connected graph G, and G′ = ∅, T = ∅.
1. Choose any maximal clique C, C ̸⊂ G′ .
2.Assume that C joint G’ at few maximal cliques: S1 , S2 , . . . , Sk , and for any Si , there exist Ci
which is the maximal clique of G’ such that Si ⊆ Ci .
3.G′ = G′ ∪ C, T = T ∪ {vc }, there vc is a vertex respect clique C in graph T, and adjacent vc
with the vertices representing C1 , . . . , Ck .
Denote H(G)
e := T .

We can define a weighting function on the vertices and edges of H(G):

e For any e = vc1 vc2 ,
ω(e) = |C1 ∩ C2 |, and ω(vC ) = |C|. Then we have the following theorem:
ω(v) ω(e)
P
P

Theorem 9. |E(G)| = v∈H(G)
e 2 − e∈H(G)
e 2 .
P P
|V (G)| = v∈H(G)
e ω(v) − e∈H(G)
e ω(e).

Theorem 10. G is chordal graph ⇐⇒ there exist H(G)

e of G which is a tree.

Theorem 11. If G is a chordal graph induced by C1 , C2 , . . . , Ck which are maximal cliques satisfying
Ci ∩ (∪j<i Cj ) is a clique, s is the size of maximum clique. Suppose that w∗ ∈ arg minω∈W0−1 ω(T ω)
ω(G) ,
F is the graph induced by edges that weighted 1. Then F satisfying following properties:
1): F is chordal graph and H(F e ) is the clique graph of F, then H(F
e ) is a tree, with all the leaves
of H(F
e ) is the maximal clique of G.
2): dF (V ) ≥ 2s .
1
3): s−1 ≤ tω (G) ≤ 2s

6
Proof. By induction on the number of maximal cliques k. When k = 1, it has been proved in theorem
6. Now we assume that it’s established when G has k maximal cliques, which also means given any
graph with t maximal cliques denoted Ft with t < k, there exist s, s < t connected maximal cliques
included in Ft satisfying the above properties denoted as Fs ⊆ Ft , with v(F s )−1 v(Ft )−1
e(Fs ) ≤ e(Ft ) . We need
to proof that given any subset S of V(G), there exist t connected cliques denoted as F such that
v(F )−1 |S|−o(S)
e(F ) ≤ e(G[S]) and these t cliques also satisfying above properties.
Given any induced subgraph F with D1 , D2 , . . . , Dr are its maximal cliques , and di := |Di |. In
which {Dj }j∈J are the maximal cliques which are leaves in the clique graph. If r ≤ k − 1, we may
assume that Di ⊆ Ci , and F ′ = ∪ri=1 Ci . By induction hypothesis there exist r′ ≤ r connected cliques
|S|−o(S) v(F ′ )−o(F ′ )
{Ci }i∈I construct H, |I| = r′ and I ′ ⊆ [r] such that v(H)−1
e(H) = minS⊆V (F ′ ) e(G[S]) ≤ e(F ) , and
H satisfying above properties, established. We may assume that Di ∩ (∪j<i Dj ) is a clique. So suppose
Pi = Di ∩ (∪j<i Dj ),and pj = |Pj |. Now we have:
ω(Tω ) d1 + · · · + dk − p2 − · · · − pk
= d1
(13)
ω(G) + · · · + d2k − p22 − · · · − p2k





2
If a vertex v of Ci also included in another maximal clique, we call v is in the public part of Ci , while
if it isn’t included in any other maximal cliques, we call it in the non-public part. When add vertices
to any clique in {Dj }j∈J (for example D1 in one of them) in non-public part, the ratio becomes:
ω ′ (Tω′ ) d1 + · · · + dk − p2 − · · · − pk + 1
= (14)
ω ′ (G) d1
+ · · · + d2k − p22 − · · · − p2k + d1





2
ω ′ (Tω′ )
So the molecular of ω(T ω) d1 dk


p2
pk


ω(G) − ω ′ (G) is d1 (d1 +· · ·+dk −p2 −· · ·−pk )−( 2 +· · ·+ 2 − 2 −· · ·− 2 ),
which is monotonically increasing with respect to d1 , so when d1 is large enough, adding vertex in
non-public part of D1 , the ratio will decrease and with adding vertices it will keep decreasing, while
it will increase when d1 in small and deleting the vertices will keep decreasing the ratio. So adding all
non-public vertices of Ci to Di or delete all non-public vertices of Ci from Di will meets the smallest
ratio about changing the non-public part.
So if there exist a clique Di ∈ {Dj }j∈J such that delete all its non-public part will meet the
smallest ratio, then we will find ∪j̸=i Dj achieve smaller ratio will k − 1 maximal cliques, then by
inductive hypothesis as mentioned above, we have find what we want.
Then if any clique Di ∈ {Dj }j∈J is large enough and adding vertices in non-public part achieve
′ ′
the smallest ratio, then from lemma 2 we can have that d1j < dj1−1 ≤ ωω′(T ω)
(G) for any {Dj }j∈J , otherwise
we can delete a vertex in non-public part to achieve a smaller ratio.
Next we consider the public part of {Dj }j∈J . When adding a vertex in public part, for example
in ∩i∈I Di (∩i∈I Di ̸= ∅), now we may assume that 1 ∈ I. Then denote ai := |Di | − |Pi |, then the ratio
becomes:
ω ′ (Tω′ ) d1 + · · · + dk − p2 − · · · − pk + 1
′
= d1
dk p2 pk
(15)
ω (G)



P
2 + · · · + 2 − 2 − · · · − 2 + d1 + i∈I\{1} ai
′ ′
For d1j < ω(Tω) P 1 ω(Tω ) ω (Tω ) ω(Tω )
ω(G) , so d1 + i∈I\{1} ai < ω(G) , from lemma 2 we can know that ω ′ (G) ≤ ω(G) . So in this
case, adding vertices in public part will decrease the ratio. So in this way we will have k maximal

7
cliques. If these k maximal cliques in not connected, and L1 , . . . , Lq are its component, so

ω ′ (Tω′ ) v(L1 ) − 1 + · · · + v(Lq ) − 1

= (16)
ω ′ (G) e(L1 ) + · · · + e(Lq )

We may assume that:

v(L1 ) − 1 v(Lq ) − 1
≤ ··· ≤ (17)
e(L1 ) e(Lq )
′ ′
So again by lemma 2, we have that v(L 1 )−1 ω (Tω )
e(L1 ) ≤ ω ′ (G) . So all these {Dj }j∈J must be maximal cliques
in G. Then in F , if there exist a vertices that dF (v) < 2s ≤ tω (F1 1
) , i.e. dF (v) ≥ tω (G), then by lemma
2, we know that deleting vertex v will decrease the ratio, which is a contradiction.
1
What’s more, if tω (G) < s−1 , since clique of F is a tree which must exist two leaves, and the these
cliques represented as leaves must have non-public part. When deleting a vertex of these clique, the
1
molecular will minus 1 and the denominator will minus dj − 1 ≤ s − 1, so since tω (G) < s−1 , deleting
the vertex will decrease the ratio, which also a contradiction. For certainty, we can make all edges
in a maximum clique weighted 1, and the ratio 2s can’t be smaller than tω (G). So we’ve finished the
proof.

We can find a theorem about the maximal chordal subgraph of a graph.

Theorem 12. If G is a graph with n vertices and m edges such that tk (n) + 1 ≤ m ≤ tk+1 (n), k ≥ 2.
Suppose that F is the maximum chordal subgraph of G, when n is large enough, there must be a k + 1
clique in F.

Proof. Assume that F has no k + 1 clique, then the maximum clique of F denoted as s is at most k.
1
Then from the theorem 11, we know that tw (F ) ≥ s−1 . Since tω (G) is the minimum weighting ratio,
then when all edges in F weighted 1, the ratio can’t be smaller than tω (F ). So

1 1 v(F ) − 1 n−1
≤ ≤ tω (F ) ≤ = (18)
k−1 s−1 e(F ) e(F )

So we have that:
e(F ) ≤ (k − 1)(n − 1) (19)

But in the paper of Sudakov, we know that:

√
 
1 p k+1
e(F ) ≥ (k − )n + 2(k + 1)a/k − − O( n) (20)
k 2

where a := m − tk (n). When n is large enough,

√
 
1 p k+1
(k − )n + 2(k + 1)a/k − − O( n) ≥ (k − 1)(n − 1) (21)
k 2

which is a contradiction. So there exist a clique with at least k + 1 vertices in F.

8
4 Some explorations on chordal graph
Theorem 13. If G is a chordal graph, and G is not a complete graph, then there exist two vertices
u, v ∈ V (G), and N (u), V (v) are both clique.

Theorem 14. If H1 , H2 are both chordal graph, and H1 ⊂ H2 , there exist H1 = G1 ⊆ G2 ⊆ · · · ⊆

G2 = H2 , satisfying Gi is chordal graph and V (Gi ) = V (Gi+1 ), e((Gi ) = 1 + e(Gi+1 ), i.e. we can
keep the chordality and add edge one by one and change it to H2 .

Corollary 15. If H is chordal graph and not complete, then there exist e1 ∈ E(H), but e2 ∈
/ E(H),
and H − e1 + e2 is chordal graph.

Theorem 16. If H is chordal graph, G1 = H + e1 , e1 ∈ / H, H1 is the minimal chordal graph of G1 ,

and G2 = H + e2 , e2 ∈ ̸ e2 , then H1 ̸= H2 .
/ H, H2 is the minimal chordal graph of G2 . If e1 =

References