For a graph
Let
Very few results on the local antimagic chromatic number of regular
graphs are known (see [1,3]). Throughout this paper, we let
cIn [2], the
author proved that all connected graphs without a
For
i | 1 | 2 | 3 |
|
k-1 | k | k+1 |
|
k+2+ | k+3 + | k+4+ |
|
2k+ | 2k+1+ | 1+ |
n(8k+4) | n(8k+4) | n(8k+4) | n(8k+4) | n(8k+4) | n(8k+4) | ||
|
-2k-2+ | -2k-4 + | -2k-6+ |
|
-4k+2+ | -4k | – 2k-1+ |
n(8k+4) | n(8k+4) | n(8k+4) | n(8k+4) | n(8k+4) | n(8k+4) | ||
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
9k+6+ | 9k+7+ | 9k+8+ |
|
10k+4+ | 10k+5+ | 8k+5+ |
(n-j)(8k+4) | (n-j)(8k+4) | (n-j)(8k+4) | (n-j)(8k+4) | (n-j)(8k+4) | (n-j)(8k+4) | ||
|
5k+2+ | 5k+1+ | 5k+ |
|
4k+4+ | 4k+3+ | 6k+3+ |
(n-j)(8k+4) | (n-j)(8k+4) | (n-j)(8k+4) | (n-j)(8k+4) | (n-j)(8k+4) | (n-j)(8k+4) | ||
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1 | 2 | 3 |
|
k-1 | k | k+1 |
|
3k+2 | 3k+3 | 3k+4 |
|
4k | 4k+1 | 4k+2 |
|
8k+4 | 8k+2 | 8k |
|
6k+8 | 6k+6 | 6k+4 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
-5k-2+ | -5k-1+ | -5k+ |
|
-4k-4+ | -4k-3+ | -4k-2 + |
j(8k+4) | j(8k+4) | j(8k+4) | j(8k+4) | j(8k+4) | j(8k+4) | ||
|
-k+ | -k-1+ | -k-2+ |
|
-2k+3+ | -2k+1+ | -2k+ |
j(8k+4) | j(8k+4) | j(8k+4) | j(8k+4) | j(8k+4) | j(8k+4) | ||
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
i | k+1 | k+2 | k+3 |
|
2k-1 | 2k | 2k+1 |
|
1+ | 2+ | 3+ |
|
k-1+ | k+ | k+1+ |
n(8k+4) | n(8k+4) | n(8k+4) | n(8k+4) | n(8k+4) | n(8k+4) | ||
|
-2k-1+ | -2k-3+ | -2k-5+ |
|
-4k+3+ | -4k+1+ | -4k-1+ |
n(8k+4) | n(8k+4) | n(8k+4) | n(8k+4) | n(8k+4) | n(8k+4) | ||
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
8k+5+ | 8k+6+ | 8k+7+ |
|
9k+3+ | 9k+4+ | 9k+5+ |
(n-j)(8k+4) | (n-j)(8k+4) | (n-j)(8k+4) | (n-j)(8k+4) | (n-j)(8k+4) | (n-j)(8k+4) | ||
|
6k+3+ | 6k+2+ | 6k+1+ |
|
5k+5+ | 5k+4+ | 5k+3+ |
(n-j)(8k+4) | (n-j)(8k+4) | (n-j)(8k+4) | (n-j)(8k+4) | (n-j)(8k+4) | (n-j)(8k+4) | ||
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
k+1 | k+2 | k+3 |
|
2k-1 | 2k | 2k+1 |
|
4k+2 | 2k+2 | 2k+3 |
|
3k-1 | 3k | 3k+1 |
|
6k+4 | 8k+3 | 8k+1 |
|
6k+9 | 6k+7 | 6k+5 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
-4k-2+ | -6k-2+ | -6k-1+ |
|
-5k-5+ | -5k-4+ | -5k-3+ |
j(8k+4) | j(8k+4) | j(8k+4) | j(8k+4) | j(8k+4) | j(8k+4) | ||
|
-2k+ | 0+ | -1+ |
|
-k+3+ | -k+2+ | -k+1+ |
j(8k+4) | j(8k+4) | j(8k+4) | j(8k+4) | j(8k+4) | j(8k+4) | ||
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Let us list the range of entries for each row of the above matrix:
where
We now have the following observations.
(a) For
(b) Similar to (a), for
(c) For each
(d) We may write down the expression for each
For
(e) Suppose
Thus, for each
Consider
Now, for each
Theorem 2.1. For
Proof. By definition,
Example 2.2. Consider
|
1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 |
|
78 | 79 | 80 | 81 | 73 | 74 | 75 | 76 | 77 |
|
62 | 60 | 58 | 56 | 63 | 61 | 59 | 57 | 55 |
|
42 | 43 | 44 | 45 | 37 | 38 | 39 | 40 | 41 |
|
22 | 21 | 20 | 19 | 27 | 26 | 25 | 24 | 23 |
|
1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 |
|
14 | 15 | 16 | 17 | 18 | 10 | 11 | 12 | 13 |
|
36 | 34 | 32 | 30 | 28 | 35 | 33 | 31 | 29 |
|
50 | 51 | 52 | 53 | 54 | 46 | 47 | 48 | 49 |
|
68 | 67 | 66 | 65 | 64 | 72 | 71 | 70 | 69 |
By the construction above Theorem 2.1, we have the graph
We may make use of Observation (e) to construct a new graph with
local antimagic chromatic number 3 from
Example 2.3. Consider
For each
Suppose
Theorem 2.4. For
Proof. By definition,
Otherwise,
If
In what follows, we refer to the following
i | 1 | 2 | 3 |
|
2k | 2k+1 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
10k+5 + | 10k+4 + | 10k+3 |
|
8k+6 + | 8k+5 + |
(2n-j)(4k+2) | (2n-j)(4k+2) | (2n-j)(4k+2) | (2n-j)(4k+2) | (2n-j)(4k+2) | ||
|
6k+4 + | 6k+5 + | 6k+6 + |
|
8k+3 + | 8k+4 + |
(2n-j)(4k+2) | (2n-j)(4k+2) | (2n-j)(4k+2) | (2n-j)(4k+2) | (2n-j)(4k+2) | ||
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2k+1 + | 2k+ | (2k-1)+ |
|
2 + | 1 + |
(n+1)(4k+2) | (n+1)(4k+2) | (n+1)(4k+2) | (n+1)(4k+2) | (n+1)(4k+2) | ||
|
1 | 2 | 3 |
|
2k | 2k+1 |
|
4k+2 | 4k+1 | 4k |
|
2k+3 | 2k+2 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
4k+3 + | 4k+4 + | 4k+5 + |
|
6k+2 + | 6k+3 + |
(j-1)(4k+2) | (j-1)(4k+2) | (j-1)(4k+2) | (j-1)(4k+2) | (j-1)(4k+2) | ||
|
8k + 4 + | 8k+3 + | 8k+2 + |
|
6k+5 + | 6k+4 + |
(j-1)(4k+2) | (j-1)(4k+2) | (j-1)(4k+2) | (j-1)(4k+2) | (j-1)(4k+2) | ||
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Let us list the range of entries for each row of the above matrix:
where
By a similar argument for Observations (a) to (e) in Section 2, we have the following observations.
(1) For each column, the sum of the first
(2) For each column, the sum of the last
(3) For each
(4) Suppose
Similar to graph
Theorem 3.1. For
Proof. By definition,
For
Theorem 3.2.
For
Proof. Similar to the proof of Theorem 2.4, we know
Now,
Example 3.3. Take
|
1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 |
|
99 | 98 | 97 | 96 | 95 | 94 | 93 | 92 | 91 |
|
82 | 83 | 84 | 85 | 86 | 87 | 88 | 89 | 90 |
|
81 | 80 | 79 | 78 | 77 | 76 | 75 | 74 | 73 |
|
64 | 65 | 66 | 67 | 68 | 69 | 70 | 71 | 72 |
|
63 | 62 | 61 | 60 | 59 | 58 | 57 | 56 | 55 |
|
1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 |
|
18 | 17 | 16 | 15 | 14 | 13 | 12 | 11 | 10 |
|
19 | 20 | 21 | 22 | 23 | 24 | 25 | 26 | 27 |
|
36 | 35 | 34 | 33 | 32 | 31 | 30 | 29 | 28 |
|
37 | 38 | 39 | 40 | 41 | 42 | 43 | 44 | 45 |
|
54 | 53 | 52 | 51 | 50 | 49 | 48 | 47 | 46 |
If we take
Note that we may also apply the delete-add process that gives us
Theorem 2.6 in [4]
to the graphs
Corollary 3.4. For
In this paper, we constructed several families of infinitely many
tripartite graphs of size
1970-2025 CP (Manitoba, Canada) unless otherwise stated.