On Vertex-Edge Resolvability for the Web Graph and Prism Related Graph

Sunny Kumar Sharma1, Vijay Kumar Bhat2
1Department of Mathematics, Manipal Institute of Technology Bengaluru, Manipal Academy of Higher Education, Manipal, Karnataka, India.
2School of Mathematics, Shri Mata Vaishno Devi University, Katra-182320, India.

Abstract

Let E(H) and V(H) denote the edge set and the vertex set of the simple connected graph H, respectively. The mixed metric dimension of the graph H is the graph invariant, which is the mixture of two important graph parameters, the edge metric dimension and the metric dimension. In this article, we compute the mixed metric dimension for the two families of the plane graphs viz., the Web graph Wn and the Prism allied graph Dnt. We show that the mixed metric dimension is non-constant unbounded for these two families of the plane graph. Moreover, for the Web graph Wn and the Prism allied graph Dnt, we unveil that the mixed metric basis set MGm is independent.

Keywords: Metric dimension, Mixed metric dimension, Independent resolving set, Connected graph

1. Introduction

The graph invariant metric dimension is among the important and highly active research topic in Graph Theory. This fundamental concept of metric dimension was founded by two groups of researchers independently viz., Slater in [1] and Harary and Melter in [2], in the late seventies. The set MG of points in the taken metric space with the property (or characteristic) that any point of the space is determined uniquely by its distances from the points of MG, is referred to as the generator (or metric generator) of the given metric space. These metric generating sets are called the locating sets by Slater in [1] and the resolving sets by Melter and Harary in [2], respectively.

After these two important initial papers [1,2], several works regarding theoretical properties, as well as applications, of this graph invariant were published. Initially, Slater considered special acknowledgment of a thief in the network, while others noticed problems in picture preparing (or image processing) and design acknowledgment (or pattern recognition) [3], applications to science are given in [4], to the route of exploring specialist (navigating agent or robots) in systems (or networks) are examined in [5], to issues of check and system revelation (or network discovery) in [6], application to combinatorial enhancement (or optimization) is yielded in [7], and for more work see [8,9,10].

Suppose E(H) and V(H) denote the edge set and the vertex set of the simple connected graph H, respectively. The distance between two vertices α,βV(H), is denoted and defined as dH(α,β)= length of the shortest possible αβ path in H and the dH(α,ε)=min{dH(α,β1),dH(α,β2)} represents the distance between an edge ε=β1β2 and the vertex α in H. If the distance between the vertex α and an element β is not equaled to the distance between the same vertex α and an element γ in H (where β,γV(H)E(H)), then one can say that the vertex α distinguish (determines or resolves) two elements β and γ in H.

A set MG consisting of the vertices of the graph H, is termed as the metric generator for H, if the vertices of MG distinguish (determines or resolves) every pair of different vertices of the connected graph H. These metric generators are called metric basis for H if it has the minimum cardinality and this cardinal number of the metric basis is referred to as the metric dimension of the graph H, denoted by β(H) or dim(H).

On the other hand, concerning the hypothetical examinations of this important topic, various perspectives of metric generators MG have been depicted in the recent literature, which has profoundly added to acquire more understanding into numerical properties of this graph invariant related with distances in networks. Several authors working on this topic have presented different varieties of metric generators like for example, independent resolving sets, resolving dominating sets, strong resolving sets, local metric sets, edge resolving sets, strong resolving partitions, mixed metric sets, etc. For these see references in [8,10,11,12,13]. A set L consisting of vertices of the graph H is said to be an independent resolving set for H, if L is both resolving (metric generator) and independent.

One can see that the metric dimension deals with the vertices of the graph by its definition, a similar concept dealing with the edges of the graph introduced by Kelenc et al. in [11], called the edge metric dimension of the graph H, which uniquely identifies the edges related to a graph H. For an edge ε=β1β2 and a vertex x the distance between them is defined as dH(x,ε)=min{dH(x,β1),dH(x,β2)}. A subset MGε is called an edge metric generator for H, if any two different edges of H are distinguish by some vertex of MGε. The edge metric generator with minimum cardinality is termed as edge metric basis and that cardinality is known as the edge metric dimension of the graph H, and which is denoted by edim(H) or βE(H). A set LE consisting of vertices of the graph H is said to be an independent edge metric generator for H, if LE is both edge metric generator and independent.

2. Mixed metric dimension:

Recently, a new kind of graph parameter was introduced by Kelenc et al. in [12], which is the composition of both, the edge metric dimension and the metric dimension and called the mixed metric dimension for a graph H. A subset MGm is called a mixed metric generator for H, if any two different elements of V(H)E(H) are distinguished by some vertex of MGm. For an ordered subset LM={ζ1,ζ2,ζ3,,ζp} of vertices of the graph H, and an element yV(H)E(H), the mixed metric codemixed metric representation of y regarding MGm is the ordered p-tuple ζM(y|MGm)=(dH(y,ζ1),dH(y,ζ2),dH(y,ζ3),,dH(y,ζp)).

If for any two distinct elements y1 and y2 of V(H)E(H), ζM(y1|MGm)ζM(y2|MGm), then MGm is said to be a mixed metric generator (or shortly, MMG) for H. The mixed metric generator with minimum cardinality is termed as the mixed metric basis, and that cardinality is known as the mixed metric dimension of the graph H, and which is denoted by mdim(H) or βM(H). For our gentle purpose, by MMG and MMD we denote mixed metric generator and mixed metric dimension, respectively. Now, like edge metric dimension and the metric dimension, for this graph invariant one can define that, set LM consisting of vertices of the graph, H is said to be an independent mixed metric generator for H, if LM is both a MMG and independent.

In this study, we consider two important families of the plane graphs viz., the prism allied graph Dnt ([15], see Figure 1) and the Web graph Wn ([16], see Figure 2) and we obtain their MMD. Recently, the metric dimension and the edge metric dimension of these two families of the plane graphs were computed. For the metric dimension of these families of plane graphs we have the following results:

Theorem 1. [15] Let Dnt be the Prism allied graph on 6n edges and 4n vertices. Then, for n6, we have β(Dnt)=3.

Theorem 2. [16] Let Wn be the Web graph on 4n edges and 3n vertices. Then, for n3, we have

β(Wn)={2,if n is odd;3,otherwise

and regarding the edge metric dimension, we have

Theorem 3. [15] Let Dnt be the Prism allied graph on 6n edges and 4n vertices. Then, for n3, we have βE(Dnt)={4,if n=3,4,;n2+1,otherwise.

Theorem 4. [16] Let Wn be the Web graph on 4n edges and 3n vertices. Then, for n3, we have βE(Wn)=3.

Throughout this article, all vertex indices are taken to be modulo n. The present paper is organized as follows:

In section 2, we study the MMD of the Prism allied graph Dnt, when the MMG MGm is independent (see Figure 1). In section 3, we study the MMD of the Web graph Wn, when the MMG MGm is independent (see Figure 2), and in our last section, we conclude our results and findings regarding these two important families of the plane graphs.

3. Mixed Resolvability of the Prism Allied Graph Dnt

The Prism allied graph Dnt [15] has vertex set of cardinality 4n and an edge set of cardinality 6n, indicated by V(Dnt) and E(Dnt) respectively, where V(Dnt)={pη,qη,rη,sη|1ηn} and E(Dnt)={pηqη,pηpη+1,qηqη+1,rηqη,rηqη+1,rηsη|1ηn}. It comprises of n 3-sided faces, n pendant edges, n 4-sided faces, and an n-sided face (see Figure 1). The graph Dnt is allied to the Prism graph Dn in the sense that, it can be acquired from the Prism graph by including new vertices {rη,sη|1ηn} and edges {rηqη,rηqη+1,rηsη|1ηn} in Dn as follows:

  • Placing new vertices rη, between the edges qηqη+1 (1ηn).

  • Again join the vertices qη and qη+1.

  • Join the vertices rη and sη, in order to obtain the n pendant edges.

For our smooth purpose, we refer to the cycle brought forth by the arrangement of vertices {qη:1ηn} and {pη:1ηn} in the graph, Dnt as the q and p-cycle respectively, the arrangement of vertices {rη:1ηn} and {sη:1ηn}, in the graph, Dnt as the set of outer and pendant vertices respectively. For our convenience, we consider s1=sn+1, r1=rn+1, q1=qn+1, and p1=pn+1. In the present working section, we obtain that the least possible cardinality for the MMG MGm of the Prism allied graph Dnt is n+1. We also find that the MMG MGm for the Prism allied graph Dnt is independent. Now, in order to get the exact MMD of graph Dnt, we need the following three Lemmas:

Lemma 1. The set of outer vertices {sη|1ηn}MGm, where MGm is a MMG for the Prism allied graph Dnt.

Proof. For the inconsistency, we suppose that the MMG MGm, does not contain at least one vertex from the set {sη|1ηn}. Without loss of generality, we suppose that sηMGm, for any η. At that point, we have M(rη|MGm)=M(rηsη|MGm), M(qη|MGm)=M(rηqη|MGm), and M(qη+1|MGm)=M(rηqη+1|MGm), a contradiction. 

Lemma 2. Let P={pη|1ηn} and MGm be any mixed resolving generator for the Prism allied graph Dnt. Then, PMGm.

Proof. Suppose on the contrary that PMGm= i.e., for any η, pηMGm. Then, we have M(qη|MGm)=M(pηqη|MGm), a contradiction. 

In the accompanying Lemma, we show that the cardinality of any mixed resolving generator for the Prism allied graph Dnt is greater than or equals to n+1 i.e., |MGm|n+1.

Lemma 3. For the Prism allied graph Dnt and n4, we have mdim(Dnt)n+1.

Proof. On contrary, we suppose that the cardinality of the mixed resolving generator MGm of the Prism allied graph Dnt is equals to n i.e., βM(Dnt)=n. Then, on combining Lemma 1 and 2, we get contradiction as the cardinality of the set {sη|1ηn} is n. So, we must have βM(Dnt)n+1

Now, we are ready to obtain the exact mixed metric dimension for the Prism allied graph Dnt. For this, we have the following important result:

Theorem 5. For the Prism allied graph Dnt, we have mdim(Dnt)=n+1, n4.

Proof. By Lemma 3, we have mdim(Dnt)n+1. Now, in order to complete the proof of the theorem, we have to show that mdim(Dnt)n+1. For this, suppose MGm={p1,s1,s2,,sn1,sn}V(Dnt) (for the location of these vertices, see Figure 1 (vertices in green color)). We will show that MGm is the MMG for the Prism allied graph Dnt. By total enumeration, it can be easily checked that the set MGm is the MMG for the Prism allied graph Dnt, when n=4,5. Now, for n6, we consider the following two cases regarding the positive integer n (i.e., when n0(modn) and n1(mod2)).

Case-1 n0(mod2).
In this case, n can be written as n=2α, where αN and α3. Let MG={p1,s1,s2,sα+1,sα+2}V(Dnt). Now, to figure out that MG is the MMG for the Prism allied graph Dnt, we consign the mixed metric codes for each vertex and each edge of the graph Dnt regarding MG (b=α in Figures 1 and 2).
Now, the mixed metric codes for the vertices {υ=pη,qη,rη,sη|η=1,2,3,,n} regarding the set MG are shown below in the following four tables respectively.

M(υ|MG) MG={p1,s1,s2,sα+1,sα+2}
M(pη|MG):(η=1) (η1,3,4,α+2,α+1)
M(pη|MG):(η=2) (η1,η+1,3,αη+4,α+2)
M(pη|MG):(3ηα+1) (η1,η+1,η,αη+4,αη+5)
M(pη|MG):(η=α+2) (2αη+1,2αη+4,η,ηα+1,αη+5)
M(pη|MG):(α+3η2α) (2αη+1,2αη+4,2αη+5,ηα+1,ηα)
M(υ|MG) MG={p1,s1,s2,sα+1,sα+2}
M(qη|MG):(η=1) (η,2,3,α+1,α)
M(qη|MG):(η=2) (η,η,2,αη+3,α+1)
M(qη|MG):(3ηα+1) (η,η,η1,αη+3,αη+4)
M(qη|MG):(η=α+2) (2αη+2,2αη+3,η1,ηα,αη+4)
M(qη|MG):(α+3η2α) (2αη+2,2αη+3,2αη+4,ηα,ηα1)

M(υ|MG) & MG={p1,s1,s2,sα+1,sα+2}
M(rη|MG): (η=1) & (η+1,1,3,αη+3,α+1)
M(rη|MG): (η=2) & (η+1,η+1,1,αη+3,αη+4)
M(rη|MG): (3ηα) & (η+1,η+1,η,αη+3,αη+4)
M(rη|MG): (η=α+1) & (2αη+2,η+1,η,1,αη+4)
M(rη|MG): (η=α+2) & (2αη+2,2αη+3,η,ηα+1,1)
M(rη|MG): (α+3η2α) & (2αη+2,2αη+3,2αη+4,ηα+1,ηα)

M(υ|MG) & MG={p1,s1,s2,sα+1,sα+2}
M(sη|MG): (η=1) & (η+2,0,4,αη+4,α+2)
M(sη|MG): (η=2) & (η+2,η+2,0,αη+4,αη+5)
M(sη|MG): (3ηα) & (η+2,η+2,η+1,αη+4,αη+5)
M(sη|MG): (η=α+1) & (2αη+3,2αη+4,η+1,0,αη+5)
M(sη|MG): (η=α+2) & (2αη+3,2αη+4,2αη+5,ηα+2,0)
M(sη|MG): (α+3η2α) & (2αη+3,2αη+4,2αη+5,ηα+2,ηα+1)

and the mixed metric codes for the edges {ϵ=pηpη+1,pηqη,qηqη+1,qηrη,rηqη+1,rηsη|η=1,2,3,,n} regarding the set MG are shown in the tables below, respectively.

M(ϵ|MG) & MG={p1,s1,s2,sα+1,sα+2}
M(pηpη+1|MG): (η=1) & (η1,3,3,αη+3,α+1)
M(pηpη+1|MG): (η=2) & (η1,η+1,3,αη+3,αη+4)
M(pηpη+1|MG): (3ηα) & (η1,η+1,η,αη+3,αη+4)
M(pηpη+1|MG): (η=α+1) & (2αη,2αη+3,η,3,αη+4)
M(pηpη+1|MG): (η=α+2) & (2αη,2αη+3,2αη+4,ηα+1,3)
M(pηpη+1|MG): (α+3η2α) & (2αη,2αη+3,2αη+4,ηα+1,ηα)

M(ϵ|MG) & MG={p1,s1,s2,sα+1,sα+2}
M(pηqη|MG): (η=1) & (η1,2,3,α+1,α)
M(pηqη|MG): (η=2) & (η1,η,2,αη+3,α+1)
M(pηqη|MG): (3ηα+1) & (η1,η,η1,αη+3,αη+4)
M(pηqη|MG): (η=α+2) & (2αη+1,2αη+3,η1,ηα,αη+4)
M(pηqη|MG): (α+3η2α) & (2αη+1,2αη+3,2αη+4,ηα,ηα1)

M(ϵ|MG) & MG={p1,s1,s2,sα+1,sα+2}
M(qηqη+1|MG): (η=1) & (η,2,2,αη+2,α)
M(qηqη+1|MG): (η=2) & (η,η,2,αη+2,αη+3)
M(qηqη+1|MG): (3ηα) & (η,η,η1,αη+2,αη+3)
M(qηqη+1|MG): (η=α+1) & (2αη+1,2αη+2,η1,2,αη+3)
M(qηqη+1|MG): (η=α+2) & (2αη+1,2αη+2,2αη+3,ηα,2)
M(qηqη+1|MG): (α+3η2α) & (2αη+1,2αη+2,2αη+3,ηα,ηα1)

M(ϵ|MG) & MG={p1,s1,s2,sα+1,sα+2}
M(qηrη|MG): (η=1) & (η,1,3,α+1,α)
M(qηrη|MG): (η=2) & (η,η,3,αη+2,αη+4)
M(qηrη|MG): (3ηα) & (η,η,η1,αη+3,αη+4)
M(qηrη|MG): (η=α+1) & (η,η,η1,1,αη+4)
M(qηrη|MG): (η=α+2) & (2αη+2,2αη+3,η1,ηα,1)
M(qηrη|MG): (α+3η2α) & (2αη+2,2αη+3,2αη+4,ηα,ηα1)

M(ϵ|MG) & MG={p1,s1,s2,sα+1,sα+2}
M(rηqη+1|MG): (η=1) & (η+1,1,2,αη+2,α+1)
M(rηqη+1|MG): (η=2) & (η+1,η+1,1,αη+2,αη+3)
M(rηqη+1|MG): (3ηα) & (η+1,η+1,η,αη+2,αη+3)
M(rηqη+1|MG): (η=α+1) & (2αη+1,2αη+2,η,1,αη+3)
M(rηqη+1|MG): (η=α+2) & (2αη+1,2αη+2,2αη+3,ηα+1,1)
M(rηqη+1|MG): (α+3η2α) & (2αη+1,2αη+2,2αη+3,ηα+1,ηα)

M(ϵ|MG) & MG={p1,s1,s2,sα+1,sα+2}
M(rηsη|MG): (η=1) & (η+1,0,3,αη+3,α+1)
M(rηsη|MG): (η=2) & (η+1,η+1,0,αη+3,αη+4)
M(rηsη|MG): (3ηα) & (η+1,η+1,η,αη+3,αη+4)
M(rηsη|MG): (η=α+1) & (2αη+2,2αη+3,η,0,αη+4)
M(rηsη|MG): (η=α+2) & (2αη+2,2αη+3,2αη+4,ηα+1,0)
M(rηsη|MG): (α+3η2α) & (2αη+2,2αη+3,2αη+4,ηα+1,ηα)

Now, from these mixed metric codes of the edges and the vertices of the Prism allied graph Dnt concerning the set MG, we ascertain that for 1ηn and η1,2,α+1,α+2, M(qη|MG)=M(rηqη|MG), M(qη+1|MG)=M(rηqη+1|MG), and M(rη|MG)=M(rηsη|MG). For the remaining mixed metric edges and vertices codes in Dnt, we find no two vertices or edges with the same mixed metric codes. For η=3,4,,α1,α,α+2,α+3,,n, we see that M(qη|MG{sη})M(rηqη|MG{sη}), M(qη+1|MG{sη})M(rηqη+1|MG{sη}), and M(rη|MG{sη})M(rηsη|MG{sη}). From this, we obtain M(qη|MGm)M(rηqη|MGm), M(qη+1|MGm)M(rηqη+1|MGm), and M(rη|MGm)M(rηsη|MGm), for any 1ηn and so |MGm|n+1, suggesting that mdim(Dnt)=n+1 in this case.

Case-2 n1(mod2).
In this case, n can be written as n=2α+1, where αN and α3. Let MG={p1,s1,s2,sα+1,sα+2}V(Dnt). Now, to figure out that MG is the MMG for the Prism allied graph Dnt, we consign the mixed metric codes for each vertex and each edge of the graph Dnt regarding MG.
Now, the mixed metric codes for the vertices {υ=pη,qη,rη,sη|η=1,2,3,,n} regarding the set MG are shown below in the following four tables respectively.

M(υ|MG) & MG={p1,s1,s2,sα+1,sα+2}
M(pη|MG): (η=1) & (η1,3,4,αη+4,α+2)
M(pη|MG): (η=2) & (η1,η+1,3,αη+4,αη+5)
M(pη|MG): (3ηα+1)& (η1,η+1,η,αη+4,αη+5)
M(pη|MG): (η=α+2) & (2αη+2,2αη+5,η,ηα+1,αη+5)
M(pη|MG):(α+3η2α+1) & (2αη+2,2αη+5,2αη+6,ηα+1,ηα)

M(υ|MG) & MG={p1,s1,s2,sα+1,sα+2}
M(qη|MG): (η=1) & (η,2,3,αη+3,α+1)
M(qη|MG): (η=2) & (η,η,2,αη+3,αη+4)
M(qη|MG): (3ηα+1) & (η,η,η1,αη+3,αη+4)
M(qη|MG): (η=α+2) & (2αη+3,2αη+4,η1,ηα,αη+4)
M(qη|MG): (α+3η2α+1) & (2αη+3,2αη+4,2αη+5,ηα,ηα1)

M(υ|MG) & MG={p1,s1,s2,sα+1,sα+2}
M(rη|MG): (η=1) & (η+1,1,3,αη+3,α+2)
M(rη|MG): (η=2) & (η+1,η+1,1,αη+3,αη+4)
M(rη|MG): (3ηα) & (η+1,η+1,η,αη+3,αη+4)
M(rη|MG): (η=α+1) & (η+1,η+1,η,1,αη+4)
M(rη|MG): (η=α+2) & (2αη+3,2αη+4,η,ηα+1,1)
M(rη|MG): (α+3η2α+1) & (2αη+3,2αη+4,2αη+5,ηα+1,ηα)

M(υ|MG) & MG={p1,s1,s2,sα+1,sα+2}
M(sη|MG): (η=1) & (η+2,0,4,αη+4,α+3)
M(sη|MG): (η=2) & (η+2,η+2,0,αη+4,αη+5)
M(sη|MG): (3ηα) & (η+2,η+2,η+1,αη+4,αη+5)
M(sη|MG): (η=α+1) & (η+2,η+2,η+1,0,αη+5)
M(sη|MG): (η=α+2) & (2αη+4,2αη+5,η+1,ηα+2,0)
M(sη|MG): (α+3η2α+1) & (2αη+4,2αη+5,2αη+6,ηα+2,ηα+1)

and the mixed metric codes for the edges {ϵ=pηpη+1,pηqη,qηqη+1,qηrη,rηqη+1,rηsη|η=1,2,3,,n} regarding the set MG are shown in the tables below, respectively.

|m16.5em|m21.5em| M(ϵ|MG) & MG={p1,s1,s2,sα+1,sα+2}
M(pηpη+1|MG): (η=1) & (η1,3,3,αη+3,α+2)
M(pηpη+1|MG): (η=2) & (η1,η+1,3,αη+3,αη+4)
M(pηpη+1|MG): (3ηα) & (η1,η+1,η,αη+3,αη+4)
M(pηpη+1|MG): (η=α+1) & (2αη+1,η+1,η,3,αη+4)
M(pηpη+1|MG): (η=α+2) & (2αη+1,2αη+4,η,ηα+1,3)
M(pηpη+1|MG):(α+3η2α+1) & (2αη+1,2αη+4,2αη+5,ηα+1,ηα)

M(ϵ|MG) & MG={p1,s1,s2,sα+1,sα+2}
M(pηqη|MG): (η=1) & (η1,2,3,αη+3,α+1)
M(pηqη|MG): (η=2) & (η1,η,2,αη+3,αη+4)
M(pηqη|MG): (3ηα+1) & (η1,η,η1,αη+3,αη+4)
M(pηqη|MG): (η=α+2) & (2αη+2,2αη+4,η1,ηα,αη+4)
M(pηqη|MG): (α+3η2α+1) & (2αη+2,2αη+4,2αη+5,ηα,ηα1)

|m16.5em|m21.5em| M(ϵ|MG) & MG={p1,s1,s2,sα+1,sα+2}
M(qηqη+1|MG): (η=1) & (η,2,2,αη+2,α+1)
M(qηqη+1|MG): (η=2) & (η,η,2,αη+2,αη+3)
M(qηqη+1|MG): (3ηα) & (η,η,η1,αη+2,αη+3)
M(qηqη+1|MG): (η=α+1) & (2αη+2,η,η1,2,αη+3)
M(qηqη+1|MG): (η=α+2) & (2αη+2,2αη+3,η1,ηα,2)
M(qηqη+1|MG):(α+3η2α+1) & (2αη+2,2αη+3,2αη+4,ηα,ηα1)

M(ϵ|MG) & MG={p1,s1,s2,sα+1,sα+2}
M(qηrη|MG): (η=1) & (η,1,3,αη+3,α+1)
M(qηrη|MG): (η=2) & (η,η,1,αη+3,αη+4)
M(qηrη|MG): (3ηα) & (η,η,η1,αη+3,αη+4)
M(qηrη|MG): (η=α+1) & (η,η,η1,1,αη+4)
M(qηrη|MG): (η=α+2) & (2αη+3,2αη+4,η1,ηα,1)
M(qηrη|MG): (α+3η2α+1) & (2αη+3,2αη+4,2αη+5,ηα,ηα1)

|m16.5em|m21.5em| M(ϵ|MG) & MG={p1,s1,s2,sα+1,sα+2}
M(rηqη+1|MG): (η=1) & (η+1,1,2,αη+2,αη+3)
M(rηqη+1|MG): (η=2) & (η+1,η+1,1,αη+2,αη+3)
M(rηqη+1|MG): (3ηα) & (η+1,η+1,η,αη+2,αη+3)
M(rηqη+1|MG): (η=α+1) & (2αη+2,2αη+3,η,1,αη+3)
M(rηqη+1|MG): (η=α+2) & (2αη+2,2αη+3,2αη+4,ηα+1,1)
M(rηqη+1|MG):(α+3η2α+1) & (2αη+2,2αη+3,2αη+4,ηα+1,ηα)

M(ϵ|MG) & MG={p1,s1,s2,sα+1,sα+2}
M(rηsη|MG): (η=1) & (η+1,0,3,αη+3,α+2)
M(rηsη|MG): (η=2) & (η+1,η+1,0,αη+3,αη+4)
M(rηsη|MG): (3ηα) & (η+1,η+1,η,αη+3,αη+4)
M(rηsη|MG): (η=α+1) & (η+1,η+1,η,0,αη+4)
M(rηsη|MG): (η=α+2) & (2αη+3,2αη+4,η,ηα+1,0)
M(rηsη|MG): (α+3η2α+1) & (2αη+3,2αη+4,2αη+5,ηα+1,ηα)

Now, from these mixed metric codes of the edges and the vertices of the Prism allied graph Dnt concerning the set MG, we ascertain that for 1ηn and η1,2,α+1,α+2, M(qη|MG)=M(rηqη|MG), M(qη+1|MG)=M(rηqη+1|MG), and M(rη|MG)=M(rηsη|MG). For the remaining mixed metric edges and vertices codes in Dnt, we find no two vertices or edges with the same mixed metric codes. For η=3,4,,α1,α,α+2,α+3,,n, we see that M(qη|MG{sη})M(rηqη|MG{sη}), M(qη+1|MG{sη})M(rηqη+1|MG{sη}), and M(rη|MG{sη})M(rηsη|MG{sη}). From this, we obtain M(qη|MGm)M(rηqη|MGm), M(qη+1|MGm)M(rηqη+1|MGm), and M(rη|MGm)M(rηsη|MGm), for any 1ηn and so |MG|n+1, suggesting that mdim(Dnt)=n+1 in this case also, which concludes the theorem. 

Theorem 6. The independent mixed metric number for the Prism allied graph Dnt, for n4 is n+1.

Proof. For proof, refer to Theorem 5

4. Mixed Resolvability of the Web Graph Wn

The Web graph Wn [16] has a vertex set of cardinality 3n and an edge set of cardinality 4n, indicated by V(Wn) and E(Wn) respectively, where V(Wn)={pη,qη,rη|1ηn} and E(Wn)={pηqη,pηpη+1,qηqη+1,rηqη|1ηn}. It comprises of n 4-sided faces, n pendant edges, and an n-sided face (see Figure 2). The Web graph Wn can also be obtained from the Prism graph Dn by simply including n new pendant edges qηrη (1ηn).

For our smooth purpose, we refer to the cycle brought forth by the arrangement of vertices {qη:1ηn} and {pη:1ηn} in the graph, Wn as the q and p-cycle respectively, the arrangement of vertices {rη:1ηn}, in the graph, Wn as the set of pendant vertices respectively. For our convenience, we consider r1=rn+1, q1=qn+1, and p1=pn+1. In this working section, we obtain that the least possible cardinality for the MMG MGm of the Web graph Wn is n+1. For this, we also see that the MMG MGm for the Web graph Wn is independent. Now, in order to get the exact MMD of graph Wn, we need the following Lemmas:

Lemma 4. The set of outer vertices {rη|1ηn}MGm, where MGm is a MMG for the Web graph Wn.

Proof. For the inconsistency, we suppose that the MMG MGm, does not contain at least one vertex from the set {rη|1ηn}. Without loss of generality, we suppose that rηMGm, for any η. At that point, we have M(rη|MGm)=M(rηqη|MGm), a contradiction. 

Lemma 5. Let P={pη|1ηn} and MGm be any MMG for the Web graph Wn. Then, PMGm.

Proof. Suppose on the contrary that PMGm= i.e., for any η, pηMGm. Then, we have M(qη|MGm)=M(pηqη|MGm), a contradiction. 

In the accompanying Lemma, we show that the cardinality of any MMG for the Web graph Wn is greater than or equals to n+1 i.e., |MGm|n+1.

Lemma 6. For the Web graph Wn and n4, we have mdim(Wn)n+1.

Proof. On contrary, we suppose that the cardinality of the MMG MGm of the Web graph Wn is equals n i.e., βM(Wn)=n. Then, on combining Lemma 4 and 5, we get contradiction as the cardinality of the set {rη|1ηn} is n. So, we must have βM(Wn)n+1

Now, for the Web graph Wn, we have the following important result regarding its MMD:

Theorem 7. For the Web graph Wn, we have mdim(Wn)=n+1, n4.

Proof. By Lemma 6, we have mdim(Wn)n+1. Now, in order to complete the proof of the theorem, we have to show that mdim(Wn)n+1. For this, suppose MGm={p1,r1,r2,,rn1,rn}V(Wn) (for the location of these vertices, see Figure 2 (vertices in purple color)). We will show that MGm is the mixed metric basis set for the Web graph Wn. By total enumeration, it can be easily checked that the set MGm is the mixed metric basis set for the Web graph Wn, when n=4,5. Now, for n6, we consider the following two cases regarding the positive integer n (i.e., when n0(modn) and n1(mod2)).

Case-1 n0(mod2).
In this case, n can be written as n=2α, where αN and α3. Let MG={p1,r1,r2,rα+1,rα+2}V(Wn). Now, to figure out that MG is the MMG for the Web graph Wn, we consign the mixed metric codes for each vertex and each edge of the graph Wn regarding MG.
Now, the mixed metric codes for the vertices {υ=pη,qη,rη|η=1,2,3,,n} regarding the set MG are shown below in the following three tables respectively.

M(υ|MG) & MG={p1,r1,r2,rα+1,rα+2}
M(pη|MG): (η=1) & (η1,η+1,3,αη+3,α+1)
M(pη|MG): (2ηα+1) & (η1,η+1,η,αη+3,αη+4)
M(pη|MG): (η=α+2) & (2αη+1,2αη+3,η,ηα+1,αη+4)
M(pη|MG): (α+3η2α) & (2αη+1,2αη+3,2αη+4,ηα+1,ηα)

M(υ|MG) & MG={p1,r1,r2,rα+1,rα+2}
M(qη|MG): (η=1) & (η,η,2,αη+2,α)
M(qη|MG): (2ηα+1) & (η,η,η1,αη+2,αη+3)
M(qη|MG): (η=α+2) & (2αη+2,2αη+2,η1,ηα,αη+3)
M(qη|MG): (α+3η2α) & (2αη+2,2αη+2,2αη+3,ηα,ηα1)

M(υ|MG) & MG={p1,r1,r2,rα+1,rα+2}
M(rη|MG): (η=1) & (η+1,0,3,αη+3,α+1)
M(rη|MG): (η=2) & (η+1,η+1,0,αη+3,αη+4)
M(rη|MG): (3ηα) & (η+1,η+1,η,αη+3,αη+4)
M(rη|MG): (η=α+1) & (η+1,η+1,η,0,αη+4)
M(rη|MG): (η=α+2) & (2αη+3,2αη+3,η,ηα+1,0)
M(rη|MG): (α+3η2α) & (2αη+3,2αη+3,2αη+4,ηα+1,ηα)

and the mixed metric codes for the edges {ϵ=pηpη+1,pηqη,qηqη+1,qηrη|η=1,2,3,,n} regarding the set MG are shown in the tables below, respectively.

M(ϵ|MG) & MG={p1,r1,r2,rα+1,rα+2}
M(pηpη+1|MG): (η=1) & (η1,η+1,2,αη+2,α+1)
M(pηpη+1|MG): (2ηα) & (η1,η+1,η,αη+2,αη+3)
M(pηpη+1|MG): (η=α+1) & (2αη,2αη+2,η,ηα+1,αη+3)
M(pηpη+1|MG): (α+2η2α) & (2αη,2αη+2,2αη+3,ηα+1,ηα)

M(ϵ|MG) & MG={p1,r1,r2,rα+1,rα+2}
M(pηqη|MG): (η=1) & (η1,η,2,αη+2,α)
M(pηqη|MG): (3ηα+1) & (η1,η,η1,αη+2,αη+3)
M(pηqη|MG): (η=α+2) & (2αη+1,2αη+2,η1,ηα,αη+3)
M(pηqη|MG): (α+3η2α) & (2αη+1,2αη+2,2αη+3,ηα,ηα1)

M(ϵ|MG) & MG={p1,r1,r2,rα+1,rα+2}
M(qηqη+1|MG): (η=1) & (η,η,1,αη+1,α)
M(qηqη+1|MG): (2ηα) & (η,η,η1,αη+1,αη+2)
M(qηqη+1|MG): (η=α+1) & (2αη+1,2αη+1,η1,ηα,αη+2)
M(qηqη+1|MG): (α+2η2α) & (2αη+1,2αη+1,2αη+2,ηα,ηα1)

M(ϵ|MG) & MG={p1,r1,r2,rα+1,rα+2}
M(qηrη|MG): (η=1) & (η,0,2,αη+2,α)
M(qηrη|MG): (η=2) & (η,η,0,αη+2,αη+3)
M(qηrη|MG): (3ηα) & (η,η,η1,αη+2,αη+3)
M(qηrη|MG): (η=α+1) & (η,η,η1,0,αη+3)
M(qηrη|MG): (η=α+2) & (2αη+2,2αη+2,η1,ηα,0)
M(qηrη|MG): (α+3η2α) & (2αη+2,2αη+2,2αη+3,ηα,ηα1)

Now, from these mixed metric codes of the edges and the vertices of the Web graph Wn concerning the set MG, we ascertain that for 1ηn and η1,2,α+1,α+2, M(qη|MG)=M(rηqη|MG). For the remaining mixed metric edges and vertices codes in Wn, we find no two vertices or edges with the same mixed metric codes. For η=3,4,,α1,α,α+2,α+3,,n, we see that M(qη|MG{rη})M(rηqη|MG{rη}). From this, we obtain M(qη|MGm)M(rηqη|MGm), for any 1ηn and so |MGm|n+1, suggesting that mdim(Wn)=n+1 in this case.

Case-2 n1(mod2).
In this case, n can be written as n=2α+1, where αN and α3. Let MG={p1,r1,r2,rα+1,rα+2}V(Wn). Now, to figure out that MG is the MMG for the Web graph Wn, we consign the mixed metric codes for each vertex and each edge of the graph Wn regarding MG.
Now, the mixed metric codes for the vertices {υ=pη,qη,rη|η=1,2,3,,n} regarding the set MG are shown below in the following three tables respectively.

M(υ|MG) & MG={p1,r1,r2,rα+1,rα+2}
M(pη|MG): (η=1) & (η1,η+1,3,αη+3,α+2)
M(pη|MG): (2ηα+1)& (η1,η+1,η,αη+3,αη+4)
M(pη|MG): (η=α+2) & (2αη+2,2αη+4,η,ηα+1,αη+4)
M(pη|MG): (α+3η2α+1) & (2αη+2,2αη+4,2αη+5,ηα+1,ηα)

M(υ|MG) & MG={p1,r1,r2,rα+1,rα+2}
M(qη|MG): (η=1) & (η,η,2,αη+2,α+1)
M(qη|MG): (2ηα+1) & (η,η,η1,αη+2,αη+3)
M(qη|MG): (η=α+2) & (2αη+3,2αη+3,η1,ηα,αη+3)
M(qη|MG): (α+3η2α+1) & (2αη+3,2αη+3,2αη+4,ηα,ηα1)

M(υ|MG) & MG={p1,r1,r2,rα+1,rα+2}
M(rη|MG): (η=1) & (η+1,0,3,αη+3,α+2)
M(rη|MG): (η=2) & (η+1,η+1,0,αη+3,αη+4)
M(rη|MG): (3ηα) & (η+1,η+1,η,αη+3,αη+4)
M(rη|MG): (η=α+1) & (η+1,η+1,η,0,αη+4)
M(rη|MG): (η=α+2) & (2αη+4,2αη+4,η,ηα+1,0)
M(rη|MG): (α+3η2α+1) & (2αη+4,2αη+4,2αη+5,ηα+1,ηα)

and the mixed metric codes for the edges {ϵ=pηpη+1,pηqη,qηqη+1,qηrη|η=1,2,3,,n} regarding the set MG are shown in the tables below, respectively.

|m16.5em|m21.5em| M(ϵ|MG) & MG={p1,r1,r2,rα+1,rα+2}
M(pηpη+1|MG): (η=1) & (η1,η+1,2,αη+2,αη+3)
M(pηpη+1|MG): (2ηα) & (η1,η+1,η,αη+2,αη+3)
M(pηpη+1|MG): (η=α+1) & (η1,η+1,η,ηα+1,αη+3)
M(pηpη+1|MG): (η=α+2) & (2αη+1,2αη+3,η,ηα+1,ηα)
M(pηpη+1|MG):(α+3η2α+1) & (2αη+1,2αη+3,2αη+4,ηα+1,ηα)

M(ϵ|MG) & MG={p1,r1,r2,rα+1,rα+2}
M(pηqη|MG): (η=1) & (η1,η,2,αη+2,α+1)
M(pηqη|MG): (2ηα+1) & (η1,η,η1,αη+2,αη+3)
M(pηqη|MG): (η=α+2) & (2αη+2,2αη+3,η1,ηα,αη+3)
M(pηqη|MG): (α+3η2α+1) & (2αη+2,2αη+3,2αη+4,ηα,ηα1)

|m16.5em|m21.5em| M(ϵ|MG) & MG={p1,r1,r2,rα+1,rα+2}
M(qηqη+1|MG): (η=1) & (η,η,1,αη+1,αη+2)
M(qηqη+1|MG): (2ηα) & (η,η,η1,αη+1,αη+2)
M(qηqη+1|MG): (η=α+1) & (η,η,η1,ηα,αη+2)
M(qηqη+1|MG): (η=α+2) & (2αη+2,2αη+2,η1,ηα,ηα1)
M(qηqη+1|MG):(α+3η2α+1) & (2αη+2,2αη+2,2αη+3,ηα,ηα1)

M(ϵ|MG) & MG={p1,r1,r2,rα+1,rα+2}
M(qηrη|MG): (η=1) & (η,0,2,αη+2,α+1)
M(qηrη|MG): (η=2) & (η,η,0,αη+2,αη+3)
M(qηrη|MG): (3ηα) & (η,η,η1,αη+2,αη+3)
M(qηrη|MG): (η=α+1) & (η,η,η1,0,αη+3)
M(qηrη|MG): (η=α+2) & (2αη+3,2αη+3,η1,ηα,0)
M(qηrη|MG): (α+3η2α+1) & (2αη+3,2αη+3,2αη+4,ηα,ηα1)

Now, from these mixed metric codes of the edges and the vertices of the Web graph Wn concerning the set MG, we ascertain that for 1ηn and η1,2,α+1,α+2, M(qη|MG)=M(rηqη|MG). For the remaining mixed metric edges and vertices codes in Wn, we find no two vertices or edges with the same mixed metric codes. For η=3,4,,α1,α,α+2,α+3,,n, we see that M(qη|MG{rη})M(rηqη|MG{rη}). From this, we obtain M(qη|MGm)M(rηqη|MGm), for any 1ηn and so |MGm|n+1, suggesting that mdim(Wn)=n+1 in this case also, which concludes the theorem. 

Theorem 8. The independent mixed metric number for the Web graph Wn, for n4 is n+1.

Proof. For proof, refer to Theorem 7

5. Conclusion

In this examination, we determined the MMD for the two important families of the plane graphs viz., the Web graph Wn ([16], see Figure 2) and the Prism allied graph Dnt ([15], see Figure 1), and which was found to be non-constant unbounded for these two families of the plane graph. Moreover, for the Web graph Wn and the Prism allied graph Dnt, we unveil that the mixed metric basis set MGm is independent. From preliminaries and these results, for these two families of plane graphs H=Dnt and H=Wn, we determined that β(H)<βE(H)<βM(H), for every n5.

Conflict of Interest

The authors declare no conflict of interests.

References:

  1. Slater, P.J., 1975. Leaves of trees. Congressus Numerantium, 14, pp.549-559.[Google Scholor]
  2. Harary, F. and Melter, R.A., 1976. On the metric dimension of a graph. Ars Combinatoria, 2, pp.191-195.[Google Scholor]
  3. Melter, R.A. and Tomescu, I., 1984. Metric bases in digital geometry. Computer vision, graphics, and image Processing, 25(1), pp.113-121.[Google Scholor]
  4. Chartrand, G., Eroh, L., Johnson, M.A. and Oellermann, O.R., 2000. Resolvability in graphs and the metric dimension of a graph. Discrete Applied Mathematics, 105(1-3), pp.99-113.[Google Scholor]
  5. Khuller, S., Raghavachari, B. and Rosenfeld, A., 1996. Landmarks in graphs. Discrete applied mathematics, 70(3), pp.217-229.[Google Scholor]
  6. Beerliova, Z., Eberhard, F., Erlebach, T., Hall, A., Hoffmann, M., Mihal’ak, M. and Ram, L.S., 2006. Network discovery and verification. IEEE Journal on selected areas in communications, 24(12), pp.2168-2181.[Google Scholor]
  7. Sebo, A. and Tannier, E., 2004. On metric generators of graphs. Mathematics of Operations Research, 29(2), pp.383-393.[Google Scholor]
  8. Sharma, S.K. and Bhat, V.K., 2021. Metric dimension of heptagonal circular ladder. Discrete Mathematics, Algorithms and Applications, 13(01), p.2050095.[Google Scholor]
  9. Sharma, S.K. and Bhat, V.K., 2022. Fault-tolerant metric dimension of two-fold heptagonal-nonagonal circular ladder. Discrete Mathematics, Algorithms and Applications, 14(03), p.2150132.[Google Scholor]
  10. Tomescu, I. and Imran, M., 2011. Metric dimension and R-sets of connected graphs. Graphs and Combinatorics, 27(4), pp.585-591.[Google Scholor]
  11. Kelenc, A., Tratnik, N. and Yero, I.G., 2018. Uniquely identifying the edges of a graph: the edge metric dimension. Discrete Applied Mathematics, 251, pp.204-220.[Google Scholor]
  12. Kelenc, A., Kuziak, D., Taranenko, A. and Yero, I.G., 2017. Mixed metric dimension of graphs. Applied Mathematics and Computation, 314, pp.429-438.[Google Scholor]
  13. Sharma, S.K. and Bhat, V.K., 2021. On some plane graphs and their metric dimension. International Journal of Applied and Computational Mathematics, 7, pp.1-15.[Google Scholor]
  14. Xing, B.H., Sharma, S.K., Bhat, V.K., Raza, H. and Liu, J.B., 2021. The vertex-edge resolvability of some wheel-related graphs. Journal of Mathematics, 2021, pp.1-16.[Google Scholor]
  15. Ahsan, M., Zahid, Z., Zafar, S., Rafiq, A., Sindhu, M.S. and Umar, M., 2021. Computing the edge metric dimension of convex polytopes related graphs. Journal of Mathematics and Computer Science, 22, pp.174-188.[Google Scholor]
  16. Zhang, Y. and Gao, S., 2020. On the edge metric dimension of convex polytopes and its related graphs. Journal of Combinatorial Optimization, 39(2), pp.334-350.[Google Scholor]