The strict neighbor-distinguishing index of simple graphs with maximum degree five

Danjun Huang1, Jiayan Wang1, Weifan Wang1, Puning Jing2
1Department of Mathematics, Zhejiang Normal University, Jinhua 321004, China
2Department of School of Mathematical and Statistics, Xuzhou University of technology, Xuzhou 221018, China

Abstract

Suppose that ϕ is a proper edge-k-coloring of the graph G. For a vertex vV(G), let Cϕ(v) denote the set of colors assigned to the edges incident with v. The proper edge-k-coloring ϕ of G is strict neighbor-distinguishing if for any adjacent vertices u and v, Cϕ(u)Cϕ(v) and Cϕ(v)Cϕ(u). The strict neighbor-distinguishing index, denoted χsnd(G), is the minimum integer k such that G has a strict neighbor-distinguishing edge-k-coloring. In this paper we prove that if G is a simple graph with maximum degree five, then χsnd(G)12.

Keywords: strict neighbor-distinguishing edge coloring, local neighbor-distinguishing edge coloring, maximum degree

1. Introduction

All graphs considered in this paper are finite and simple. Let G be a graph with vertex set V(G) and edge set E(G). For a vertex vV(G), let NG(v) be the set of neighbors of v in G, and dG(v) be the degree of v in G. Then, dG(v)=|NG(v)|. Let δ(G) and Δ(G) (for short Δ) be the minimum and maximum degree of G, respectively. The girth g(G) of a graph G is the length of a shortest cycle in G. A k-vertex, a k-vertex, and a k+-vertex of G is a vertex with degree k, at most k, and at least k. Let nk(v) denote the number of k-vertices adjacent to v.

A proper edge-k-coloring of the graph G is a function ϕ:E(G){1,2,,k} such that any two adjacent edges receive different colors. The chromatic index χ(G) of G is the smallest integer k such that G has a proper edge-k-coloring. Given a proper edge-k-coloring ϕ of G, we use Cϕ(v) to denote the set of colors assigned to the edges incident with v. We say that two adjacent vertices u and v are exclusive in ϕ, if Cϕ(v)Cϕ(u) and Cϕ(u)Cϕ(v). The proper edge-k-coloring ϕ is neighbor-distinguishing if Cϕ(u)Cϕ(v) for any uvE(G). The neighbor-distinguishing index χa(G) is the smallest integer k such that G has a neighbor-distinguishing edge-k-coloring. The proper edge-k-coloring ϕ is strict neighbor-distinguishing if any two adjacent vertices are exclusive. The strict neighbor-distinguishing index χsnd(G) is the smallest integer k such that G has a strict neighbor-distinguishing edge-k-coloring. The proper edge-k-coloring ϕ is local neighbor-distinguishing (for short, k-LNDE-coloring) if any two adjacent 2+-vertices are exclusive. The local neighbor-distinguishing index χlnd(G) is the smallest integer k such that G has a local neighbor-distinguishing edge-k-coloring.

A graph G is normal if it has no isolated edges, and formal if δ(G)2. The graph G has a neighbor-distinguishing edge coloring iff G is a normal graph and G has a strict neighbor-distinguishing edge coloring iff G is a formal graph. It is evident that χsnd(G)χa(G)Δ for any formal graph G. Moreover, the following propositions hold obviously.

Proposition 1.1. If G is a formal graph, then χlnd(G)=χsnd(G).

Proposition 1.2. If G is a r(r2)-regular graph, then χlnd(G)=χsnd(G)=χa(G).

Zhang et al. [11] introduced the neighbor-distinguishing edge-coloring and proposed the following conjecture.

Conjecture 1.3. For any normal graph G, GC5, then χa(G)Δ+2.

Akbari et al. 1] proved that every normal graph G satisfies χa(G)3Δ. The upper bound was improved to 2.5Δ by Wang et al. 10], and to 2Δ+2 by Vučković 8]. In 2005, Hatami 5] showed that every normal graph G with Δ>1020 has χa(G)Δ+300. Joret and Lochet 7] improved this result to that χa(G)Δ+19 for any normal graph G with sufficiently large Δ. Huang et al. 6] showed that χa(G)Δ+2 for any normal planar graph G with Δ10. Moreover, Wang et al. 9] showed that Δχa(G)Δ+1 for any normal planar graph G with Δ14, and χa(G)=Δ+1 if and only if G contains adjacent Δ-vertices.

The strict neighbor-distinguishing edge-coloring of graphs was studied in 12] (called the smarandachely adjacent vertex edge coloring). Gu et al. 3] found a graph Hn (n2) which is a graph obtained from the bipartite graph K2,n by inserting a 2-vertex into one edge. It is easy to show that χsnd(Hn)=2n+1=2Δ(Hn)+1. Based on these facts, Gu et al. 3] proposed the following conjecture.

Conjecture 1.4. If G is a connected formal graph, different from HΔ, then χsnd(G)2Δ.

Since χsnd(K2,n)=2n=2Δ(K2,n), the upper bound 2Δ in Conjecture 1.4 is tight. Gu et al. 3] proved that the Conjecture 1.4 holds for the graphs with Δ3. Recently, Gu et al. 4] proved that the Conjecture 1.4 holds for K4-minor-free graphs. Moreover, Gu 2] proved that χsnd(G)9 for the formal graph G with Δ4.

In this paper, we show that χsnd(G)12 for a formal graph G with Δ5. That is, we show the following theorem.

Theorem 1.5. χsnd(G)12 for any formal graph G with Δ5.

Theorem 1.6. χlnd(G)12 for any formal graph G with Δ5.

2. Main results

This section is devoted to show the main result in this paper. For an LNDE-coloring ϕ, set R(v)={riCϕ(ui)Cϕ(v)|uivE(G) and dG(ui)<dG(v)}.

We introduce some useful lemmas.

Lemma 2.1. 10] If G is a normal graph with Δ5, then χa(G)10.

Lemma 2.2. Let uvE(G) with dG(u)=d3. Set NG(u)={v,u1,u2,,ud1}. If G=G{uv} admits a k-LNDE-coloring ϕ using the color set C, then uv can be colored with a color aC(Cϕ(u)R(u)) such that u and ui are exclusive for any i{1,2,,d1}.

Lemma 2.3. Let uvE(G) with dG(u)=d3. Set NG(u)={v,u1,u2,,ud1}. If G=G{uv} admits a k-LNDE-coloring ϕ using the color set C. We delete the color of uu1 and let F(u1) denote the set of forbidden colors of uu1 which makes u1 and w are exclusive for any wNG(u1){u}. If dG(u1)3, then |F(u1)|(dG(u1)1)(7dG(u1)).

Proof. Let wNG(u1){u}. Since w and u1 are exclusive in ϕ, there exists a color αCϕ(w)Cϕ(u1). Suppose that uu1 can be recolored with a color x. Then xCϕ(u1){ϕ(uu1)}. If Cϕ(u1){x}Cϕ(w), then xCϕ(w)(Cϕ(u1){ϕ(uu1)}). If Cϕ(u1){ϕ(uu1)}Cϕ(w), then xα. Therefore, |F(u1)|wNG(u1){u}max{dG(w)(dG(u1)1),1}+(dG(u1)1)=(dG(u1)1)(7dG(u1)). ◻

Now we are ready to prove Theorem 1.6. Let G be a counterexample of Theorem 1.6 with minimum number of edges. Then χlnd(G)13. But for each graph G with |E(G)|<|E(G)| and Δ(G)5, we have χlnd(G)12.

Assume that δ(G)=1. Let uvE(G) with dG(u)=1. By the minimality of G, G=G{u} has a 12-LNDE-coloring ϕ using the color set C. Suppose that dG(v)=2. Let v be the second neighbor of v other than u. Then we can color uv with a color aCCϕ(v) to derive a 12-LNDE-coloring of G, a contradiction. Suppose that dG(v)3. Then we can color uv with a color bC(Cϕ(v)R(v)). Since |C(Cϕ(v)R(v))|1244=4, we can obtain a 12-LNDE-coloring of G, a contradiction. So we can assume that δ(G)2 in the following discussion.

To complete the proof, we have to establish a series of auxiliary claims.

Claim 1. Let uV(G) with dG(u)4, then n4(u)=0.

Proof. Assume to the contrary that there exists a 4-vertex u adjacent to a 4-vertex v. Without loss of generality, assume that dG(u)dG(v). Let dG(u)=d and dG(v)=t. Set NG(u)={v,u1,,ud1} and NG(v)={u,v1,,vt1}.

Case 1. d=2.

By the minimality of G, G=G{u} has a 12-LNDE-coloring ϕ using the color set C.

Suppose that t=2. If dG(u1)=2 with NG(u1)={u,x}, then color uu1 with a color aC(Cϕ(x)Cϕ(v)) and color uv with a color bC(Cϕ(v1){ϕ(u1x),a}) to derive a 12-LNDE-coloring of G, a contradiction. If dG(u1)3, then color uu1 with a color aC(Cϕ(u1)R(u1){ϕ(vv1)}) and color uv with a color bC(Cϕ(v1)Cϕ(u1){a}) to derive a 12-LNDE-coloring of G, a contradiction.

Suppose that 3t4. If dG(u1)=2 with NG(u1)={u,x}, then color uu1 with a color aC(Cϕ(x)Cϕ(v)) and color uv with a color bC(Cϕ(v)R(v){ϕ(u1x),a}) to derive a 12-LNDE-coloring of G, a contradiction. If dG(u1)3, then color uu1 with a color aC(Cϕ(u1)R(u1)Cϕ(v)) and color uv with a color bC(Cϕ(v)R(v)Cϕ(u1){a}). Since |C(Cϕ(u1)R(u1)Cϕ(v))|12443=1 and |C(Cϕ(v)R(v)Cϕ(u1){a})|123341=1, we can obtain a 12-LNDE-coloring of G, a contradiction.

Case 2. d=t=3.

By Case 1, dG(ui)3 and dG(vi)3 for all i{1,2}. By the minimality of G, G=G{uv} has a 12-LNDE-coloring ϕ using the color set C. Suppose that ϕ(uui)=i and ϕ(vvi)=ai, i{1,2}. Suppose that {a1,a2}={1,2}. By Lemma 2.3, |F(v1)|(dG(v1)1)(7dG(v1))9. Note that a2Cϕ(v1), dG(vi)dG(v) and dG(ui)dG(u). We recolor vv1 with a color xC({1,2}F(v1)). If xCϕ(v2), then we color uv with a color yC({1,2}Cϕ(v2)) to derive a 12-LNDE-coloring of G, a contradiction. If xCϕ(v2), then we color uv with a color yC{1,2,x} to derive a 12-LNDE-coloring of G, a contradiction. Now, suppose that {a1,a2}{1,2}. Note that dG(vi)dG(v) and dG(ui)dG(u). Then R(u)=R(v)=. Then we color uv with a color yC(Cϕ(u)R(u)Cϕ(v))R(v) to derive a 12-LNDE-coloring of G by Lemma 2.2, a contradiction.

Case 3. d=3 and t=4.

By Case 1 and Case 2, dG(ui)4 for all i{1,2} and dG(vi)3 for all j{1,2,3}.

Subcase 3.1. n4(u)2, say dG(u1)=4.

By the minimality of G, G=G{u} has a 12-LNDE-coloring ϕ using the color set C. Since |C(Cϕ(u2)R(u2)Cϕ(v))|12443=1, we can color uu2 with a color b1C(Cϕ(u2)R(u2)Cϕ(v)). Since |C(Cϕ(u1)R(u1)Cϕ(u2){b1})|123341=1, we can color uu1 with a color b2C(Cϕ(u1)R(u1)Cϕ(u2){b1}). Since |C(Cϕ(v)R(v)Cϕ(u1){b1,b2})|123332=1, we can color uv with a color b3C(Cϕ(v)R(v)Cϕ(u1){b1,b2}). It is easy to check that the obtained coloring is a 12-LNDE-coloring of G, a contradiction.

Subcase 3.2. n4(u)1.

Then dG(u1)=dG(u2)=5. By the minimality of G, G=G{uv} has a 12-LNDE-coloring ϕ using the color set C. First, suppose that Cϕ(u)Cϕ(v). By Lemma 2.3, |F(u1)|(dG(u1)1)(7dG(u1))=8. We recolor uu1 with a color xC(Cϕ(v)F(u1)). Note that ϕ(uu2)Cϕ(u1). If xCϕ(u2), we can color uv with a color yC(Cϕ(v)R(v)Cϕ(u2)) to derive a 12-LNDE-coloring of G, a contradiction. If xCϕ(u2), then we can color uv with a color yC(Cϕ(v)R(v){x}) to derive a 12-LNDE-coloring of G, a contradiction. Then suppose that Cϕ(u)Cϕ(v). Note that R(u)=. By Lemma 2.2, we can color uv with a color bC(Cϕ(u)R(u)Cϕ(v)R(v)) to derive a 12-LNDE-coloring of G, a contradiction.

Case 4. d=t=4.

By Case 1-3, dG(ui)4 and dG(vi)4 for all i{1,2,3}.

Subcase 4.1. n4(u)=4.

By Case 1-3, every vertex in NG(ui) for i{1,2,3} is a 4+-vertex. By the minimality of G, G=G{u} has a 12-LNDE-coloring ϕ using the color set C. Note that R(ui)= for each i{1,2,3} and R(v)=. We can color uu1 with a color b1C(Cϕ(u1)R(u1)Cϕ(u2)), uu2 with a color b2C(Cϕ(u2)R(u2)Cϕ(u3){b1}), uu3 with a color b3C(Cϕ(u3)R(u3)Cϕ(v){b1,b2}), and uv with a color b4C(Cϕ(v)R(v)Cϕ(u1){b1,b2,b3}) to derive a 12-LNDE-coloring of G, a contradiction.

Subcase 4.2. n4(u)3.

Without loss of generality, suppose that dG(u1)=5. By the minimality of G, G=G{uv} has a 12-LNDE-coloring ϕ using the color set C. First, suppose that Cϕ(u)=Cϕ(v). By Lemma 2.3, |F(u1)|(dG(u1)1)(7dG(u1))=8. We recolor uu1 with a color xC(Cϕ(v)F(u1)). Set C(u)=(Cϕ(u){x}){ϕ(uu1)}. If C(u)Cϕ(ui), then let R¯(ui)=Cϕ(ui)C(u); otherwise, let R¯(ui)=. then C(u)Cϕ(ui), so |R¯(ui)|2. Then we color uv with a color yC(Cϕ(v)R(v)R¯(u2)R¯(u3){x}) to get a 12-LNDE-coloring of G, a contradiction. Now, suppose that Cϕ(u)Cϕ(v). Then R(u)= and R(v)=. By Lemma 2.2, we can color uv with a color yC(Cϕ(u)R(u)Cϕ(v)R(v)) to derive a 12-LNDE-coloring of G, a contradiction. ◻

Claim 2. G does not contain a 5-cycle C5=v1v2v3v4v5v1 with dG(v1)=dG(v3)=dG(v5)=5 and dG(v2)=dG(v4)=2.

Proof. Assume to the contrary that such a 5-cycle C5 exists. Let u1,u2,u3 be the neighbor of v3 other than v2,v4.

Case 1. n5(v3)2.

By the minimality of G, G=G{v2,v4} has a 12-LNDE-coloring ϕ using the color set C. Then |R(v3)|1. We can color v1v2 with a color aC(Cϕ(v1)R(v1)Cϕ(v3)), color v4v5 with a color bC(Cϕ(v5)R(v5)Cϕ(v3)), color v2v3 with a color cC(Cϕ(v3)R(v3)Cϕ(v1){a,b}), and color v3v4 with a color dC(Cϕ(v3)R(v3)Cϕ(v5){a,b,c}) to derive a 12-LNDE-coloring of G, a contradiction.

Case 2. n5(v3)=1, say dG(u3)=5.

By the minimality of G, G=G{v2,v4} has a 12-LNDE-coloring ϕ using the color set C. Let ϕ(v3ui)=i (i{1,2,3}), aCϕ(u1)Cϕ(v3) and bCϕ(u2)Cϕ(v3). Without loss of generality, assume that a=4 and b=5. Note that v1 and v5 are exclusive in G, |R(v1)|3 and |R(v5)|3. Let iCϕ(v1)Cϕ(v5) and jCϕ(v5)Cϕ(v1).

Subcase 2.1. i,j{1,2,,5}.

We can color v2v3 with j, color v3v4 with i, color v1v2 with a color cC(Cϕ(v1)R(v1){1,2,3,j}), and color v4v5 with a color dC(Cϕ(v5)R(v5){1,2,3,i}) to derive a 12-LNDE-coloring of G, a contradiction.

Subcase 2.2. i{1,2,,5} and j{1,2,,5}.

We color v2v3 with j, color v1v2 with a color a1C(Cϕ(v1)R(v1){1,2,3,j}), color v4v5 with a color a2C(Cϕ(v5)R(v5){1,2,3,i}), and color v3v4 with a color a3C(Cϕ(v5){1,2,3,4,5,a1,a2}) to derive a 12-LNDE-coloring of G, a contradiction.

Subcase 2.3. i,j{1,2,,5}.

Note that iCϕ(v1){1,2,,5}. We color v1v2 with a color a1C(Cϕ(v1)R(v1){1,2,3,j}), color v4v5 with a color a2C(Cϕ(v5)R(v5){1,2,3,i}), color v3v4 with a color a3C(Cϕ(v5){1,2,3,4,5,a1,a2}), and color v2v3 with a color a4C(Cϕ(v1){1,2,3,4,5,a1,a2,a3}) to derive a 12-LNDE-coloring of G, a contradiction.

Case 3. n5(v3)=0.

Then 2dG(ui)4 for every i{1,2,3}. By Claim 1, all the neighbors of ui are 5-vertices. Let Cϕ(ui)=Cϕ(ui) when dG(ui)=3, and Cϕ(ui)=, when dG(ui)=4, where i{1,2,3}.

Subcase 3.1. n2(v3)=2.

Then 3dG(ui)4 for each i{1,2,3}. By the minimality of G, G=G{v2,v3,v4} has a 12-LNDE-coloring ϕ using color set C. Hence R(ui)=. We color v3v4 with a color iC(Cϕ(u1)Cϕ(u2)Cϕ(u3)Cϕ(v5)) and color v2v3 with a color jC(Cϕ(v1){i}). Note that iCϕ(ui) when dG(ui)=3. So there exist a color aiCϕ(ui){i,j} for any i{1,2,3}. Then we color v1v2 with a color aC(Cϕ(v1)R(v1){i,j}), color v4v5 with a color bC(Cϕ(v5)R(v5){i,j}), color v3u1 with a color c1C(Cϕ(u1)R(u1){a2,a3,a,b,i,j}), color v3u2 with a color c2C(Cϕ(u2)R(u2){a1,a3,a,b,i,j,c1}), and color v3u3 with a color c3C(Cϕ(u3)R(u3){a1,a2,a,b,i,j,c1,c2}) to derive a 12-LNDE-coloring of G, a contradiction.

Subcase 3.2. n2(v3)=3, say dG(u1)=2.

Let u1 be the second neighbor of u1 other than v3. Suppose that G=G{v2,v3,v4,u1}. By the minimality of G, G has a 12-LNDE-coloring ϕ using the color set C. Then R(u2)=R(u3)= by Claim 1. We color v2v3 with a color iC(Cϕ(u2)Cϕ(u3)Cϕ(v1)) and color v3v4 with a color jC(Cϕ(v5){i}). Note that iCϕ(ui) when dG(ui)=3 for each i{2,3}. So there exists a color aiCϕ(ui){i,j}. Color v1v2 with a color aC(Cϕ(v1)R(v1){i,j}), color v4v5 with a color bC(Cϕ(v5)R(v5){i,j}), color u1u1 with a color cC(Cϕ(u1)R(u1){i,j}), color v3u1 with a color c1C(Cϕ(u1){a2,a3,c,a,b,i,j}), color v3u2 with a color c2C(Cϕ(u2)R(u2){a3,c,a,b,i,j,c1}), and color v3u3 with a color c3C(Cϕ(u3)R(u3){a2,c,a,b,i,j,c1,c2}) to derive a 12-LNDE-coloring of G, a contradiction.

Subcase 3.3. n2(v3)=4, say dG(u1)=dG(u2)=2.

Let ui be the second neighbor of ui other than v3 for each i{1,2}. Let G=G{v2,v3,v4,u1,u2}. By the minimality of G, G has a 12-LNDE-coloring ϕ using the color set C. Since v1v5E(G), there exists a color iCϕ(v1)Cϕ(v5) and jCϕ(v5)Cϕ(v1). Note that |R(v1)|3 and |R(v5)|3. Color v2v3 with a color j and color v3v4 with a color i.

Suppose that dG(u3)=4. Then there exists a color xCϕ(u3){i,j}, say x=1. Note that R(u3)= by Claim 1. We color u1u1 with a color a1C(Cϕ(u1))R(u1){i,j}, color u2u2 with a color a2C(Cϕ(u2)R(u2){i,j}), color v3u1 with a color b1C(Cϕ(u1){a1,a2,1,i,j}), color v3u2 with a color b2C(Cϕ(u2){a1,a2,1,i,j,b1}), color v3u3 with a color b3C(Cϕ(u3)R(u3){a1,a2,i,j,b1,b2}), color v1v2 with a color aC(Cϕ(v1)R(v1){b1,b2,b3,j}), and color v4v5 with a color bC(Cϕ(v5)R(v5){b1,b2,b3,i}) to derive a 12-LNDE-coloring of G, a contradiction.

Suppose that dG(u3)=3. Let u3, u3 be the neighbors of u3 other than v3. Let ϕ(u3u3)=1 and ϕ(u3u3)=2. First assume that {1,2}{i,j}, say 1{i,j}. With the same coloring as dG(u3)=4, we can obtain a 12-LNDE-coloring of G, a contradiction. So assume that {1,2}={i,j}. By Lemma 2.3, |F(u3)|(dG(u3)1)(7dG(u3))=8. Note that 2Cϕ(u3). We recolor u3u3 with a color xC(F(u3){i,j}), color u1u1 with a color a1C(Cϕ(u1)R(u1){i,j}), color u2u2 with a color a2C(Cϕ(u2)R(u2){i,j}), color v3u3 with a color b3C(Cϕ(u3){i,j,x,a1,a2}), color v3u1 with a color b1C(Cϕ(u1){a1,a2,x,i,j,b3}), color v3u2 with a color b2C(Cϕ(u2){a1,a2,x,i,j,b1,b3}), color v1v2 with a color aC(Cϕ(v1)R(v1){b1,b2,b3,j}), and color v4v5 with a color bC(Cϕ(v5)R(v5){b1,b2,b3,i}) to derive a 12-LNDE-coloring of G, a contradiction.

Subcase 3.4. n2(v3)=5, say dG(u1)=dG(u2)=dG(u3)=2.

Let ui be the neighbors of ui other than u for each i{1,2,3}. Let G=G{v2,v3,v4,u1, u2,u3}. By the minimality of G, G has a 12-LNDE-coloring ϕ using the color set C. Since v1v5E(G), there exists a color iCϕ(v1)Cϕ(v5) and jCϕ(v5)Cϕ(v1). Note that |R(v1)|3 and |R(v5)|3. We color v2v3 with j, color v3v4 with i, color uiui with a color aiC(Cϕ(ui)R(ui){i,j}) for each i{1,2,3}, color v3u1 with a color b1C(Cϕ(u1){a1,a2,a3,i,j}), color v3u2 with a color b2C(Cϕ(u2){a1,a2,a3,i,j,b1}), color v3u3 with a color b3C(Cϕ(u3){a1,a2,a3,i,j,b1,b2}), color v1v2 with a color aC(Cϕ(v1)R(v1){b1,b2,b3,j}), and color v4v5 with a color bC(Cϕ(v5)R(v5){b1,b2,b3,i}) to derive a 12-LNDE-coloring of G, a contradiction. ◻

Claim 3. G does not contain a path P3=uvw such that dG(u)=3, dG(v)=5 and 3dG(w)4.

Proof. Assume to the contrary that such a path P3=uvw exists. By Claim 1, uwE(G). Suppose that dG(w)=k. Let u1,u2 be the neighbors of u not in P3, w1,,wk1 be the neighbors of w not in P3, and v1,v2,v3 be the neighbors of v not in P3.

Case 1. n5(v)=0.

By the minimality of G, G=Gv has a 12-LNDE-coloring ϕ using the color set C. Let a1Cϕ(u), a2Cϕ(w), ai+2Cϕ(vi), where i{1,2,3}. By Claim 1, R(u)= and R(w)=. Moreover, if 3dG(vi)4, R(vi)= by Claim 1. For each i{1,2,3}, let F(vi)=Cϕ(vi) when dG(vi)=2 with the second neighbor vi other than v, and F(vi)=Cϕ(vi)R(vi)=Cϕ(vi) when 3dG(vi)4. Then we can color vvi with a color in CF(vi) such that vi and its neighbors are exclusive. We color vv1 with a color b1C(F(v1){a1,a2,a4,a5}), color vv2 with a color b2C(F(v2){a1,a2,a3,a5,b1}), color vv3 with a color b3C(F(v3){a1,a2,a3,a4,b1,b2}), color uv with a color b4C(Cϕ(u)R(u){a2,a3,a4,a5,b1,b2,b3}), and color wv with a color b5C(Cϕ(w)R(w){a1,a3,a4,a5,b1,b2,b3,b4}) to derive a 12-LNDE-coloring of G, a contradiction.

Case 2. n5(v)1.

By the minimality of G, G=G{uv,vw} has a 12-LNDE-coloring ϕ using the color set C. Then |R(v)|2. Without loss of generality, suppose that ϕ(vvj)=j for j{1,2,3}, ϕ(uui)=ai for i{1,2}, and ϕ(wwl)=bl for l{1,,k1}.

Subcase 2.1. Cϕ(u)Cϕ(v), Cϕ(w)Cϕ(v).

Suppose that dG(w)=3. By Lemma 2.3, |F(u1)|(dG(u1)1)(7dG(u1))=(51)(75)=8 and |F(w1)|8. We recolor uu1 with a color xC(F(u1)Cϕ(v)), recolor ww1 with a color yC(F(w1)Cϕ(v)). Note that a2Cϕ(u1). So u and u1 are exclusive. Similarly, w and w1 are exclusive. If xCϕ(u2), then we color uv with a color c1C(Cϕ(v)R(v){x,y}); otherwise, we color uv with a color c1C(Cϕ(v)R(v)Cϕ(u2){y}). If yCϕ(w2), then we color wv with a color c2C(Cϕ(v)R(v){x,y,c1}); otherwise, we color wv with a color c2C(Cϕ(v)R(v)Cϕ(w2){x,c1}). Note that b2Cϕ(w2)Cϕ(w)Cϕ(v). Then |C(Cϕ(v)R(v)Cϕ(w2){x,c1})|123252+1=1. Hence, the obtained coloring is the 12-LNDE-coloring of G, a contradiction.

Suppose that dG(w)=4. By Lemma 2.3. |F(u1)|(dG(u1)1)(7dG(u1))=8 and |F(w1)|8. We recolor uu1 with a color xC(F(u1)Cϕ(v)) and recolor ww1 with a color yC(F(w1)Cϕ(v)). For i{2,3}, if {y,b2,b3}Cϕ(wi), let R¯(wi)=Cϕ(wi){y,b2,b3}; otherwise, let R¯(wi)=. Note that Cϕ(w)=Cϕ(v). We color wv with a color c1C(Cϕ(v)R(v)R¯(w2)R¯(w3){x,y}). If xCϕ(u2), we color uv with a color c2C(Cϕ(v)R(v){x,c1,y}); otherwise, we color uv with a color c2C(Cϕ(v)R(v)Cϕ(u2){c1,y}). Note that a2Cϕ(u2)Cϕ(u)Cϕ(v). Then |C(Cϕ(v)R(v)Cϕ(u2){c1,y})|123252+1=1. Hence, the obtained coloring is the 12-LNDE-coloring of G, a contradiction.

Subcase 2.2. Cϕ(u)Cϕ(v), Cϕ(w)Cϕ(v).

Let αCϕ(w)Cϕ(v). By Lemma 2.3, |F(u1)|8. We recolor uu1 with a color xC(F(u1)Cϕ(v)). If xCϕ(u2), then we color uv with a color c1C(Cϕ(v)R(v){x,α}); otherwise, we color uv with a color c1C(Cϕ(v)R(v)Cϕ(u2){α}). Then we color wv with a color c2C(Cϕ(v)R(v)Cϕ(w){x,c1}) to derive a 12-LNDE-coloring of G, a contradiction.

Subcase 2.3. Cϕ(u)Cϕ(v), Cϕ(w)Cϕ(v).

If dG(w)=3, then the proof is the same as Subcase 2.2. So suppose that dG(w)=4. Let αCϕ(u)Cϕ(v). By Lemma 2.3, |F(w1)|8. We recolor ww1 with a color yC(F(w1)Cϕ(v)). For i{2,3}, if {y,b2,b3}Cϕ(wi), then let R¯(wi)=Cϕ(wi){y,b2,b3}, otherwise, let R¯(wi)=. Note that Cϕ(w)=Cϕ(v). We color wv with a color c1C(Cϕ(v)R(v)R¯(w2)R¯(w3){α,y}), and color uv with a color c2C(Cϕ(u)Cϕ(v)R(v){c1,y}) to derive a 12-LNDE-coloring of G, a contradiction.

Subcase 2.4. Cϕ(u)Cϕ(v), Cϕ(w)Cϕ(v).

Let αCϕ(u)Cϕ(v) and βCϕ(w)Cϕ(v). We color uv with a color c1C(Cϕ(v)R(v)Cϕ(u){β}), and color wv with a color c2C(Cϕ(v)R(v)Cϕ(w){α,c1}) to derive a 12-LNDE-coloring of G, a contradiction. ◻

Claim 4. G does not contain a path P3=uvw such that dG(u)=4, dG(v)=5 and dG(w)=4.

Proof. Assume to the contrary that such a path P3=uvw exists. By Claim 1, uwE(G). Let u1,u2,u3 be the neighbors of u not in P3, w1,w2,w3 be the neighbors of w not in P3, and v1,v2,v3 be the neighbors of v not in P3. By Claim 1, R(u)=R(w)=. If n5(v)=0, then the proof is the same as Case 1 of Claim 3. So suppose that n5(v)1, say dG(v1)=5. Then, |R(v)|2. By Lemma 2.3, |F(v1)|8. By the minimality of G, G=G{uv,vw} has a 12-LNDE-coloring ϕ using the color set C.

Case 1. Cϕ(u)=Cϕ(v)=Cϕ(w).

Suppose that n2(v)=0. By Claim 3, dG(v2)=dG(v3)4. Note that v and v1 are exclusive in G. We recolor vv1 with a color xC(F(v1)Cϕ(v)). Then there exists a color aiCϕ(vi)((Cϕ(v){ϕ(vv1)}){x}) for each i{2,3}. Color uv with a color b1C(Cϕ(u)R(u){x,a2,a3}), and color wv with a color b2C(Cϕ(w)R(w){x,b1,a2,a3}) to derive a 12-LNDE-coloring of G, a contradiction.

Suppose that n2(v)=1, say dG(v2)=2. Let v2 be the second neighbor of v2 other than v. By Claim 3, dG(v3)4. We recolor vv2 with a color xC(Cϕ(v2)Cϕ(v)). Then there exists a color aiCϕ(vi)((Cϕ(v){ϕ(vv2)}){x}) for each i{1,3}. We color uv with a color b1C(Cϕ(u)R(u)Cϕ(v2){x,a1,a3}), and color wv with a color b2C(Cϕ(w)R(w)Cϕ(v2){b1,x,a1,a3}) to derive a 12-LNDE-coloring of G, a contradiction.

Suppose that n2(v)=2, say dG(v2)=dG(v3)=2. Let vi be the second neighbor of vi other than v for each i{2,3}. We recolor vv2 with a color xC(Cϕ(v2)Cϕ(v)Cϕ(v3)). Then there exists a color a1Cϕ(v1)(Cϕ(v){x}). We color uv with a color b1C(Cϕ(u)R(u){a1,ϕ(v2v2),ϕ(v3v3),x}), and color wv with a color b2C(Cϕ(w)R(w){a1,ϕ(v2v2),ϕ(v3v3),x,b1}) to derive a 12-LNDE-coloring of G, a contradiction.

Case 2. Cϕ(u)Cϕ(v), Cϕ(w)=Cϕ(v).

Let αCϕ(u)Cϕ(v). By Lemma 2.3, |F(w1)|8. Let ϕ(wwi)=bi for i{1,2,3}. We recolor ww1 with a color yC(F(w1)Cϕ(v)). For each i{2,3}, if {y,b2,b3}Cϕ(wi), let R¯(wi)=Cϕ(wi)Cϕ(w); otherwise, let R¯(wi)=. We color wv with a color a1C(Cϕ(v)R(v)R¯(w2)R¯(w3){α,y}), and color uv with a color a2C(Cϕ(u)R(u)Cϕ(v)R(v){a1,y}) to derive a 12-LNDE-coloring of G, a contradiction.

Case 3. Cϕ(u)Cϕ(v), Cϕ(w)Cϕ(v).

Let αCϕ(u)Cϕ(v) and βCϕ(w)Cϕ(v). Then we color wv with a color a1C(Cϕ(v)R(v)Cϕ(w)R(w){α}), and color uv with a color a2C(Cϕ(v)R(v)Cϕ(u)R(u){a1,β}) to derive a 12-LNDE-coloring of G, a contradiction. ◻

Claim 5. Let vV(G) with dG(v)=5. If n3(v)1, then n4(v)3.

Proof. Assume to the contrary that n4(v)4. Then n5(v)1. Let v1,v2,,v5 be the neighbors of v with dG(v1)=3. Let u1 and u2 be the neighbors of v1 other than v. Then R(v1)= by Claim 1.

Case 1. n5(v)=1, say dG(v5)=5.

By Claim 3, dG(vi)=2 for each i{2,3,4}. Let vi be the neighbors of vi other than v for i{2,3,4}. By the minimality of G, G=G{vv1} has a 12-LNDE-coloring ϕ using the color set C.

Suppose that Cϕ(v1)Cϕ(v). Note that n5(v)=1 and |Cϕ(v1)|=2. Then {ϕ(vv2),ϕ(vv3), ϕ(vv4)}Cϕ(v1), say ϕ(vv2)Cϕ(v1). We recolor vv2 with a color xC(Cϕ(v2)Cϕ(v)R(v)). Let αCϕ(v5)((Cϕ(v){ϕ(vv2)}){x}). Then we color vv1 with a color yC(Cϕ(v)R(v)Cϕ(v1){x,α}) to derive a 12-LNDE-coloring of G, a contradiction. If Cϕ(v1)Cϕ(v). Then we color vv1 with a color yC(Cϕ(v1)R(v1)Cϕ(v)R(v)) to derive a 12-LNDE-coloring of G, a contradiction.

Case 2. n5(v)=0.

By Claim 3, dG(vi)=2 for each i{2,3,4,5}. Let vi be the neighbors of vi other than v for i{2,3,4,5}.

Suppose that v2=v3. By the minimality of G, G=G{v} has a 12-LNDE-coloring ϕ using the color set C. Let ϕ(vivi)=ai for i{2,3,4,5}. Then we color vv4 with a color b4C(Cϕ(v4)Cϕ(v1){a2,a3,a5}), color vv5 with a color b5C(Cϕ(v5)Cϕ(v1){a2,a3,a4,b4}), color vv3 with a color b3C(Cϕ(v3)Cϕ(v1){a4,a5,b4,b5}), color vv2 with a color b2C(Cϕ(v2){a4,a5,b3,b4,b5}), and color vv1 with a color b1C(Cϕ(v1)R(v1){a2,a3,a4,a5,b2,b3,b4,b5}) to derive a 12-LNDE-coloring of G, a contradiction.

Suppose that v2v3. By Claim 2, v2v3E(G). Let G=G{v,v2,v3,v4,v5}+{v2v3}. By the minimality of G, G has a 12-LNDE-coloring ϕ using the color set C. Let ϕ(v2v3)=a1. Note that a1Cϕ(v2)Cϕ(v3). We color v2v2 and v3v3 with the color a1. Then we color v4v4 with a color a4C(Cϕ(v4)R(v4){a1}), color v5v5 with a color a5C(Cϕ(v5)R(v5){a1}), color vv4 with a color b4C(Cϕ(v4)Cϕ(v1){a1,a5}), color vv5 with a color b5C(Cϕ(v5)Cϕ(v1){a1,a4,b4}), color vv3 with a color b3C(Cϕ(v3)Cϕ(v1){a4,a5,b4,b5}), color vv2 with a color b2C(Cϕ(v2){a4,a5,b3,b4,b5}), and color vv1 with a color b1C(Cϕ(v1)R(v1){a1,a4,a5,b2,b3,b4,b5}) to derive a 12-LNDE-coloring of G, a contradiction. ◻

Claim 6. G does not contain any vertex of degree 3.

Proof. Assume to the contrary that G contain a 3-vertex v. Let v1,v2,v3 be the neighbors of v. By Claim 1 and Claim 5, dG(vi)=5 and n4(vi)3 for each i{1,2,3}. By the minimality of G, G=G{v} has a 12-LNDE-coloring ϕ using the color set C. Then |R(vi)|2. Suppose that Cϕ(v1)Cϕ(v2). Then we color vv2 with a color bC(Cϕ(v2)R(v2)Cϕ(v3)), color vv3 with a color cC(Cϕ(v3)R(v3)Cϕ(v1){b}), and color vv1 with a color aC(Cϕ(v1)R(v1)Cϕ(v2){b,c}) to derive a 12-LNDE-coloring of G, a contradiction. So suppose that Cϕ(v1)Cϕ(v2)=. By symmetry, Cϕ(v2)Cϕ(v3)= and Cϕ(v1)Cϕ(v3)=. That is Cϕ(v1)={a1,a2,a3,a4}, Cϕ(v2)={a5,a6,a7,a8} and Cϕ(v3)={a9,a10,a11,a12}. Obviously R(v1)Cϕ(v2) or R(v1)Cϕ(v3), say R(v1)Cϕ(v2). Then we color vv2 with a color bC(Cϕ(v2)R(v2)Cϕ(v3)), color vv3 with a color cC(Cϕ(v3)R(v3)Cϕ(v1){b}), and color vv1 with a color aC(Cϕ(v1)R(v1)Cϕ(v2){b,c}) to derive a 12-LNDE-coloring of G, a contradiction. ◻

Claim 7. Let vV(G) with dG(v)=5. If n4(v)1, then n4(v)2.

Proof. Assume to the contrary that n4(v)3 then n5(v)2. Let v1,v2,,v5 be the neighbors of v with dG(v1)=4. Let u1,u2,u3 be the neighbors of v1 other than v. Then R(v1)= by Claim 1.

Case 1. n5(v)1, say dG(v5)=5.

By Claim 4 and Claim 6, n2(v)2. Let dG(vi)=2 and vi be the second neighbor of vi other than v for i{2,3}. By the minimality of G, G=G{vv1} has a 12-LNDE-coloring ϕ using the color set C.

Suppose that Cϕ(v1)Cϕ(v). Note that n5(v)2 and |Cϕ(v1)|=3. Then {ϕ(vv2),ϕ(vv3)} Cϕ(v1), say ϕ(vv2)Cϕ(v1). We recolor vv2 with a color xC(Cϕ(v2)R(v)Cϕ(v)). Let αiCϕ(vi)((Cϕ(v){ϕ(vv2)}){x}), when dG(vi)=5. If dG(v4)=5, then we color vv1 with a color yC(Cϕ(v){x,α4,α5,ϕ(v3v3),ϕ(v2v2)}) to derive a 12-LNDE-coloring of G, a contradiction. If dG(v4)4, by Claim 4 and Claim 6, we have dG(v4)=2. Let v4 be the second neighbor of v4 other than v. Then we color vv1 with a color yC(Cϕ(v){x,α5,ϕ(v2v2),ϕ(v3v3),ϕ(v4v4)}) to derive a 12-LNDE-coloring of G, a contradiction. If Cϕ(v1)Cϕ(v). We color vv1 with a color yC(Cϕ(v1)R(v1)Cϕ(v)R(v)) to derive a 12-LNDE-coloring of G, a contradiction.

Case 2. n5(v)=0.

By Claim 4 and Claim 6, dG(vi)=2 for i{2,3,4,5}, let vi be the second neighbor of vi other than v.

Suppose that v2=v3. By the minimality of G, G=G{v} has a 12-LNDE-coloring ϕ using the color set C. Let ϕ(vivi)=ai for i{2,3,4,5}. Then we color vv2 with a color b2C(Cϕ(v2)Cϕ(v1){a4,a5}), color vv3 with a color b3C(Cϕ(v3)Cϕ(v1){a4,a5,b2}), color vv4 with a color b4C(Cϕ(v4){a2,a3,a5,b2,b3}), color vv5 with a color b5C(Cϕ(v5){a2,a3,a4,b2,b3,b4}), and color vv1 with a color b1C(Cϕ(v1)R(v1){a2,a3,a4,a5,b2,b3,b4,b5}). Note that {b2,b3}Cϕ(v1), then Cϕ(v1)Cϕ(v). Hence, the obtained coloring is the 12-LNDE-coloring of G, a contradiction.

Suppose that v2v3. By Claim 2, v2v3E(G). Let G=G{v,v2,v3,v4,v5}+{v2v3}. By the minimality of G, G has a 12-LNDE-coloring ϕ using the color set C. Let ϕ(v1v2)=a1. Note that a1Cϕ(v2)Cϕ(v3). Then we color v2v2 and v3v3 with the color a1. Now, we color v4v4 with a color a4C(Cϕ(v4)R(v4){a1}), color v5v5 with a color a5C(Cϕ(v5)R(v5){a1}), color vv2 with a color b2C(Cϕ(v2)Cϕ(v1){a4,a5}), color vv3 with a color b3C(Cϕ(v3)Cϕ(v1){a4,a5,b2}), color vv4 with a color b4C(Cϕ(v4){a1,a5,b2,b3}), color vv5 with a color b5C(Cϕ(v5){a1,a4,b2,b3,b4}), and color vv1 with a color b1C(Cϕ(v1){a1,a4,a5,b2,b3,b4,b5}). Note that {b2,b3}Cϕ(v1), then Cϕ(v1)Cϕ(v). Hence, the obtained coloring is the 12-LNDE-coloring of G, a contradiction. ◻

Claim 8. G does not contain any vertex of degree 4.

Proof. Assume to the contrary that G contain a 4-vertex v. Let v1,v2,v3,v4 be the neighbors of v. By Claim 1 and Claim 7, dG(vi)=5 and n4(vi)2 for i{1,2,3,4}. By the minimality of G, G=G{v} has a 12-LNDE-coloring ϕ using the color set C. Then |R(vi)|1. Note that |Cϕ(vi)|=4 for each i{1,2,3,4}. Then there exist colors i,j{1,2,3,4} such that Cϕ(vi)Cϕ(vj), say Cϕ(v1)Cϕ(v2). Now, we color vv2 with a color bC(Cϕ(v2)R(v2)Cϕ(v3)), color vv3 with a color cC(Cϕ(v3)R(v3)Cϕ(v4){b}), color vv4 with a color dC(Cϕ(v4)R(v4)Cϕ(v1){b,c}), and color vv1 with a color aC(Cϕ(v1)R(v1)Cϕ(v2){b,c,d}). Note that Cϕ(v1)Cϕ(v2)ϕ, then |C(Cϕ(v1)R(v1)Cϕ(v2){b,c,d})|124143+1=1. Hence, the obtained coloring is the 12-LNDE-coloring of G, a contradiction. ◻

Claim 9. G does not contain a 4-cycle C4=v1v2v3v4v1 with dG(v1)=dG(v3)=2 and dG(v2)=dG(v4)=5.

Proof. Assume to the contrary that such a 4-cycle C4 exists. Let u1,u2,u3 be the neighbors of v2 not in C4 and w1,w2,w3 be the neighbors of v4 not in C4.

Case 1. n5(v2)1 or n5(v4)1, say n5(v2)1.

By the minimality of G, G=G{v1,v3} has a 12-LNDE-coloring ϕ using the color set C. Then |R(v2)|2. We color v1v4 with a color aC(Cϕ(v4)R(v4)Cϕ(v2)), color v3v4 with a color bC(Cϕ(v4)R(v4)Cϕ(v2){a}), color v2v3 with a color cC(Cϕ(v4)Cϕ(v2)R(v2){a,b}), and color v1v2 with a color dC(Cϕ(v4)Cϕ(v2)R(v2){a,b,c}) to derive a 12-LNDE-coloring of G, a contradiction.

Case 2. n5(v2)=n5(v4)=0.

By Claim 6 and Claim 8, dG(ui)=2. For each i{1,2,3}, let ui be the second neighbor of ui other than v2, and wi be the second neighbor of wi other than v4. For each i{1,2,3}, if ui=wi, then GK2,n and G has a 12-LNDE-coloring, a contradiction. So we may suppose that u1w1. By Claim 2, u1w1E(G). Let G=G{v1,v2,v3,v4}. By the minimality of G, G has a 12-LNDE-coloring ϕ using the color set C. Let ϕ(uiui)=ai and ϕ(wiwi)=bi for i{1,2,3}. Then we color v2u1 and v4w1 with a color αC(Cϕ(u1)Cϕ(w1)), Color v4w2 with a color c1C(Cϕ(w2){α,b1,b3}), v4w3 with a color c2C(Cϕ(w3){α,b1,b2,c1}), color v2u2 with a color c3C(Cϕ(u2){α,a1,a3,c1,c2}), color v2u3 with a color c4C(Cϕ(u3){α,a1,a2,c1,c2,c3}), color v1v4 with a color d1C{α,c1,c2,c3,c4,b1,b2,b3}, color v3v4 with a color d2C{α,c1,c2,c3,c4,b1,b2,b3,d1}, color v1v2 with a color d3C{α,c1,c2,c3,c4,a1,a2,a3,d1,d2}, and color v2v3 with a color d4C{α,c1,c2,c3,c4,a1,a2,a3,d1,d2,d3} to derive a 12-LNDE-coloring of G, a contradiction. ◻

Claim 10. G does not contain a path P5=v1v2v3v4v5 with dG(v1)=dG(v3)=dG(v5)=5 and dG(v2)=dG(v4)=2.

Proof. Assume to the contrary that such a path P5=v1v2v3v4v5 exists. Let u1,u2,u3 be the neighbors of v3 not in P5. Then v1v5E(G) by Claim 2.

Case 1. n5(v3)2.

By the minimality of G, G=G{v2,v4} has a 12-LNDE-coloring ϕ using the color set C. Then |R(v3)|1. We color v1v2 with a color aC(Cϕ(v1)R(v1)Cϕ(v3)), color v4v5 with a color bC(Cϕ(v5)R(v5)Cϕ(v3)), color v2v3 with a color cC(Cϕ(v1)Cϕ(v3)R(v3){a,b}), and color v3v4 with a color dC(Cϕ(v5)Cϕ(v3)R(v3){a,b,c}) to derive a 12-LNDE-coloring of G, a contradiction.

Case 2. n5(v3)=1, say dG(u3)=5.

By Claim 6 and Claim 8, dG(u1)=dG(u2)=2. Let ui be the second neighbor of ui other than v3 for each i{1,2}. Let G=G{v2,v3,v4,u1,u2}+v1v5. By the minimality of G, G has a 12-LNDE-coloring ϕ using the color set C. Let ϕ(v1v5)=α. We color v1v2 and v4v5 with the color α, color v3u1 with a color a1C(Cϕ(u1)Cϕ(u3){α}), color v3u3 with a color a3C(Cϕ(u3)R(u3){α,a1}), color v3u2 with a color a2C(Cϕ(u2){α,a1,a3}), color u1u1 with a color b1C(Cϕ(u1)R(u1){a1,a2,a3}), color u2u2 with a color b2C(Cϕ(u2)R(u2){a1,a2,a3}), color v3v2 with a color a4C(Cϕ(v1){α,a1,a2,a3,b1,b2}), and color v3v4 with a color a5C(Cϕ(v5){α,a1,a2,a3,a4,b1,b2}) to derive a 12-LNDE-coloring of G, a contradiction.

Case 3. n5(v3)=0.

By Claim 6 and Claim 8, dG(u1)=dG(u2)=dG(u3)=2. For each i{1,2,3}, let ui be the second neighbor of ui other than v3. By Claim 2 and Claim 9, u1u2E(G) and u1u2. Let G=G{v2,v3,v4,u1,u2,u3}+{v1v5,u1u2}. By the minimality of G, G has a 12-LNDE-coloring ϕ using the color set C. Let ϕ(v1v5)=α and ϕ(u1u2)=β. We color v1v2 and v4v5 with the color α, color u1u1 and u2u2 with the color β, color u3u3 with a color γC(Cϕ(u3)R(u3)), color v3u1 with a color a1C(Cϕ(u1){α,β,γ}), color v3u2 with a color a2C(Cϕ(u2){α,β,γ,a1}), color v3u3 with a color a3C(Cϕ(u3){α,β,γ,a1,a2}), color v3v2 with a color a4C(Cϕ(v1){α,β,γ,a1,a2,a3}), and color v3v4 with a color a5C(Cϕ(v5){α,β,γ,a1,a2,a3,a4}) to derive a 12-LNDE-coloring of G, a contradiction. ◻

Claim 11. G does not contain any vertex of degree 2.

Proof. Assume to the contrary that G contain a 2-vertex v. Let v1,v2 be the neighbors of v. By Claim 1 dG(v1)=dG(v2)=5. By Claim 6 and Claim 8-10, n4(v1)=n4(v2)=0. By the minimality of G, G=G{v} has a 12-LNDE-coloring ϕ using the color set C. Then R(v1)=R(v2)=. We color vv1 with a color aC(Cϕ(v1)R(v1)Cϕ(v2)), and color vv2 with a color bC(Cϕ(v1)Cϕ(v2)R(v2){a}) to derive a 12-LNDE-coloring of G, a contradiction. ◻

Now it follows from Claim 1-11 that G is 5-regular. But, by Lemma 2.1 and Proposition 1, G is 10-LNDE-colorable, a contradiction. So we complete the proof of Theorem 1.6.

Funding

The first author’s research is supported by NSFC (No. 12171436, 12371360) and Natural Science Foundation of Zhejiang Province (No. LZ23A010004); The third author’s research is supported by NSFC (No. 12031018).

References:

  1. S. Akbari, H. Bidkhori, and N. Nosrati. R-strong edge colorings of graphs. Discrete Mathematics, 306(23):3005–3010, 2006. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.disc.2004.12.027.
  2. J. Gu. Strict neighbor-distinguishing edge-coloring of graphs, (in Chinese). Zhejiang Normal University, 2021.
  3. J. Gu, W. Wang, Y. Wang, and Y. Wang. Strict neighbor-distinguishing index of subcubic graphs. Graphs and Combinatorics, 37:355–368, 2021. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00373-020-02246-w.
  4. J. Gu, Y. Wang, W. Wang, and L. Zheng. Strict neighbor-distinguishing index of k4-minor-free graphs. Discrete Applied Mathematics, 329:87–95, 2023. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.dam.2023.01.017.
  5. H. Hatami. Δ + 300 is a bound on the adjacent vertex distinguishing edge chromatic number. Journal of Combinatorial Theory, Series B, 95(2):246–256, 2005. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jctb.2005.04.002.
  6. D. Huang, H. Cai, W. Wang, and J. Huo. Neighbor-distinguishing indices of planar graphs with maximum degree ten. Discrete Applied Mathematics, 329:49–60, 2023. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.dam.2022.12.023.
  1. G. Joret and W. Lochet. Progress on the adjacent vertex distinguishing edge coloring conjecture. SIAM Journal on Discrete Mathematics, 34(4):2221–2238, 2020. https://doi.org/10.1137/18M1200427.
  2. B. Vučković. Edge-partitions of graphs and their neighbor-distinguishing index. Discrete Mathematics, 340(12):3092–3096, 2017. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.disc.2017.07.005.
  3. W. Wang, W. Xia, J. Huo, and Y. Wang. On the neighbor-distinguishing indices of planar graphs. Bulletin of the Malaysian Mathematical Sciences Society, 45(2):677–696, 2022. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40840-021-01213-9.
  4. Y. Wang, W. Wang, and J. Huo. Some bounds on the neighbor-distinguishing index of graphs. Discrete Mathematics, 338(11):2006–2013, 2015. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.disc.2015.05.007.
  5. Z. Zhang, L. Liu, and J. Wang. Adjacent strong edge coloring of graphs. Applied Mathematics Letters, 15(5):623–626, 2002. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0893-9659(02)80015-5.
  6. E. Zhu, Z. Wang, and Z. Zhang. On the smarandachely-adjacent-vertex edge coloring of some double graphs. Shandong University (Natural Science), 44:12, 2009.