1. Introduction
In this paper,
is a simple graph with vertex set and edge set . The order of is denoted by . For every vertex , the open neighborhood is the set and
the closed neighborhood of is the set . The
degree of a vertex is . The
minimum and maximum degree of a graph are denoted by and , respectively.
Let and be the path and
cycle of order .
For a graph and a positive
integer , let be a function, and let be the
ordered partition of induced
by , where for . There is a –
correspondence between the function and the
ordered partitions of , so we will write .
The weight of is the
value
In [1], Chellali et al.
investigated the Roman -domination (called in [2] and elsewhere Italian domination)
defined as follows: a Roman -dominating function
(R-DF) on
is a function
with the
property that for every vertex there is a vertex , with
or there are two vertices with .
The Roman
-domination number is the minimum
weight of an R-DF on . Some variant of Italian domination
has been studied for example in [3, 4]. Note
that, Roman domination and its variants have many applications in the
areas such as facility location problems, planning of defence strategies
and surveillance related problems, etc. The literature on this topic has
been detailed in several papers [5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10].
A total Roman -dominating
function (total Roman -dominating function) is an
R-DF such that the set of vertices with
induces a subgraph with
no isolated vertices. The weight of a total Roman -dominating function is the
sum of its function values over all vertices, and the minimum weight of
a total Roman -dominating function of is the total Roman -domination number . Total Roman
-domination was first studied
in [11] and investigated in [12, 13].
It is observed in [11] that
for all connected graphs of order
with , and the
graphs attaining the bounds are characterized.
In this paper, we prove that for every graph of order with minimum degree at least two, .
The proof of the following results can be found in [].
2. A Preliminary Result
Here we focus to construct an upper bound for the total
Roman – domination
number of connected graphs with minimum degree at least two. We
first make a result as follows.
For positive integers and
, let the graph be obtained from a cycle
by adding a
pendant path .
Proposition 3. For positive integers and with , .
Proof. If , then
clearly .
Let . Since adding an
edge cannot increase the total Roman -domination number of the
path ,
using Proposition 2 implies that . 
Let be the
family of all connected loopless multigraphs with minimum degree
at least three and let be the family of all graphs
constructed by some graph in by subdividing
whole edges
times with . We observe that any graph in has order at
least 5.
Proposition 4. Every graph has a total
Roman -dominating
function such
that and for every vertex of
degree at least three.
Proof. Let be a graph of order . We continue the proof by
induction on . If , then is isomorphic to and clearly the result
holds. Assume that and let the result hold for
any graph of of order smaller than . Let be a graph of
order . Let
and let . By definition
we have . An -ear path in is a path of so that and the
endvertices of are adjacent to
vertices of . For each
, define is an -ear path with . Let . Observe that is a partition of . For each -ear path , let is
adjacent to a leaf of . Clearly and for each . First let there exist
an -ear path and so that . Assume that
the graph is
obtained from by
removing and adding the edge . Clearly, . By the
induction hypothesis, there exists a total Roman -dominating function of such that and . If , then the function defined by
and
otherwise, is a total Roman -dominating function of of weight and that labels
by positive values any vertex of degree at least 3. If , then the function defined by for and otherwise, is a total
Roman -dominating
function of of weight
and that
labels by positive values any vertex of degree at least 3.
Hence, we may assume that . Therefore . For each , let . Then we have that
and . First let and let if and when . If , then the function defined by
for , for each , for each and otherwise, is
a total Roman -dominating function of
of weight and that labels
by positive values any vertex of degree at least 3. Therefore assume that . If , then the function defined by
for , , for each and otherwise, is a total
Roman -dominating
function of of
weight
and that labels by positive values any vertex of degree at least
3. If , then the
function defined by for , and otherwise, is
a total Roman -dominating function of
of weight and that labels
by positive values any vertex of degree at least 3 since . If , then let and define the
function by
for and
otherwise. Clearly
is a total Roman -dominating function of of weight and that labels
by positive values any vertex of degree at least 3.
Henceforth, we may assume that . First let there are two vertices such that and there
is an -ear path in . Let and . By assumption we have
and . By the
induction hypothesis on , it has a total Roman
-dominating function
such that . If , then can be extended to a total Roman
-dominating function of
by labeling a 0
to , if , then can be extended to a total Roman
-dominating function of
by labeling a 0
to and 1 to , and if , then can be extended to a total Roman
-dominating function of
by labeling a 0
to and 1 to . In either case we
obtain a total Roman -dominating function of with weight at most with desired property. Thus
we may assume that there is no -ear path such that . We
distinguish two cases.
Case 1. .
Let
and be a path in where . By assumption, we may assume without loss generality
that .
We distinguish the following situations.
Subcase 1.1.
is joined to three -ear paths in
.
Let and be two -ear paths in different from , such that .
Suppose that the graph is obtained from
by joining ,
and to , and , respectively. Clearly, . By the
induction hypothesis, there exists a total Roman -dominating function of of weight and that
labels by positive values any vertex of degree at least 3.
In particular, . To total dominate , we can suppose that
. Define by ,
and
otherwise. Clearly, is a total Roman -dominating function of
of weight and that labels by positive
values any vertex of degree at least 3.
Subcase 1.2. is adjacent to two -ear paths in and to an -ear path in .
Let
be the other -ear paths in and such that . {Assume that
{, and} let {the graph be obtained from
{{by joining , and to , and , respectively}. Clearly,
. By the induction hypothesis, there exists a {total Roman -dominating function} of {of weight and that labels by positive values any vertex of degree at least 3.
In particular, . To total dominate
, we can suppose that . Define by , and {} otherwise. Clearly
is a {total Roman -dominating function} {of
of weight and that labels by positive values any vertex of degree at
least 3.
Subcase 1.3. is adjacent to two
-ear paths in and to a -ear path in .
Let
be the other -ear paths in and such that
. First let be the
set of all vertices of degree at least three and
independent in . First let . Suppose that
the graph is
obtained from by
joining and to and , respectively.
Clearly, . By the induction hypothesis, there exists a
total Roman -dominating
function of such that assigns a positive
value for any vertex of degree at least three,
and .
If , then
the function define by , and
otherwise, is a total Roman -dominating function of
of weight and that labels by positive values any
vertex of degree at least 3.
If , then the
function by , and
otherwise, is a total Roman -dominating function of
of weight and that labels by positive values any vertex of
degree at least 3.
For the next, we can assume that . Suppose
that and (the case and is similar).
Suppose that the graph is obtained from
by joining and to and , respectively. Clearly, . By the
induction hypothesis, there exists a total Roman -dominating function of of weight and that
labels by positive values any vertex of degree at least 3.
If (the case
is similar),
then the function by ,
and
otherwise, is a total Roman -dominating function of of weight and that labels by positive values any vertex of
degree at least 3.
Assume that .
Then the function by , and
otherwise,
is a total Roman -dominating function of of weight and that labels by positive values any vertex of
degree at least 3.
Next assume that and . Suppose that the
graph is obtained
from
by joining to and . A method similar to that
described above we can see that .
Finally suppose that . Suppose that the
graph is obtained
from
by joining to and . Clearly,
. By the
induction hypothesis, there exists a total Roman -dominating function of such that labels a positive
value for any vertex of degree at least three
and . Then . If , the
function by ,
and
otherwise,
is a total Roman -dominating
function of such that labels a positive value for
any vertex of degree at least three, and we have . Assume that . Then , and the
function
defined by , and
otherwise,
is a total Roman -dominating function of of weight and that labels by positive values any vertex of
degree at least 3.
Subcase 1.4. is adjacent to an -ear path in and is
adjacent to two -ear paths
in .
Let for such
that . Let the graph
be obtained from by joining
to for .
Clearly, . By the induction hypothesis, there exists a
total Roman -dominating
function of of weight and that
labels by positive values any vertex of degree at least 3.
In particular, . Also
to totally dominate we
must have . If ,
then the function by , and
otherwise, is a total Roman -dominating function of of weight and that labels by positive values any vertex of
degree at least 3. If (the case
is similar), then the function by , and otherwise,
is a total Roman -dominating function of of weight and that
labels by positive values any vertex of degree at least 3.
Subcase 1.5. is adjacent to an -ear path in , an -ear path in and an -ear path in .
Let
and such that and . We
consider the following situations.
(a) .
Suppose that the graph is obtained from by joining
and to and , respectively. Clearly and by the
induction hypothesis, has
a total Roman -dominating function of weight and that labels by positive values any vertex
of degree at least 3. If , then the
function defined by , and
otherwise, is a total Roman -dominating function of of weight and that labels by positive values any vertex of
degree at least 3. If , then the function defined by , ,
and
otherwise, is a total Roman -dominating function of of weight and that labels by positive values any vertex of
degree at least 3. If , then the function defined by , and
otherwise, is a total Roman -dominating function of of weight and that labels by positive values any vertex of
degree at least 3.
(b) and .
Suppose that the graph is obtained from by joining
to and . Clearly and by the induction hypothesis, has a total Roman -dominating function of weight and that labels by positive values any vertex
of degree at least 3. Define by , and
otherwise, is a total Roman -dominating function of of weight and that labels by positive values any vertex of
degree at least 3.
(c) and .
Suppose that the graph is obtained from by
joining to and . Clearly, . By the
induction hypothesis, there exists a total Roman -dominating function of of weight and that labels by positive values any vertex
of degree at least 3. Define by , and
otherwise, if , by , and
otherwise, if , and by , and
otherwise, when . Clearly
is a total Roman -dominating function of of weight
and that labels by positive values any vertex of degree at least
3.
(d) and .
Suppose that the graph is obtained from by joining
to and . Clearly,
. By the
induction hypothesis, there exists a total Roman -dominating function of of weight and that labels by positive values any vertex
of degree at least 3. Define by , and
otherwise, if , by , and
otherwise, if , and by , and
otherwise, when . Clearly
is a total Roman -dominating function of of weight
and that labels by positive values any vertex of degree at least
3.
(e) .
Suppose that the graph is obtained from by joining to and . Clearly,
. By the
induction hypothesis, there exists a total Roman -dominating function of such that of weight and that labels by positive values any vertex
of degree at least 3. Then , and without loss of
generality, . Now
the function defined by ,
and
otherwise, is a total Roman -dominating function of of weight
and that labels by positive values any vertex of degree at least
3.
Subcase 1.6. is adjacent to an -ear path in and is
adjacent to two -ear paths
in .
Let such that .
Consider the following situations.
.
Suppose that the graph is obtained from by joining to and . Clearly, . By the
induction hypothesis, there exists a total Roman -dominating function of of weight and that labels by positive values any vertex
of degree at least 3. Then the function defined by , and otherwise,
is a total Roman -dominating function of of weight
and that labels by positive values any vertex of degree at least
3.
and .
Assume that is
obtained from
by joining to and . Clearly, and by the
induction hypothesis, there exists a total Roman -dominating function of of weight and that labels by positive values any vertex
of degree at least 3. Define by , and otherwise,
if , by , and otherwise,
if , and by , and
otherwise, when . Clearly
is a total Roman -dominating function of of weight
and that labels by positive values any vertex of degree at least
3.
Assume that is
obtained from by
joining to and . Clearly, and by the
induction hypothesis, there exists a total Roman -dominating function of of weight and that labels by positive values any vertex
of degree at least 3. Then 1, and without loss of
generality, .
Define by , and otherwise.
Clearly is a
total Roman -dominating
function of of
weight and that labels by positive values any vertex of
degree at least 3.
Considering Case 1, we may assume that .
Case 2. .
Let
and be a path
in . Suppose, without loss of
generality, that . Consider the
following subcases.
Subcase 2.1. is adjacent to three
-ear paths in .
Let and be the other -ear paths in such that
and let where . First let and let
without loss of generality that . {Assume that is obtained from
and by joining to and {}. Clearly,
and by the induction hypothesis, there exists a {total Roman -dominating function}
of {of weight and that labels by positive values any vertex of degree at least 3. Define the function by {},
and {}
{otherwise}, when {}, by {},
and {}
{otherwise}, when , and by {},
and {}
{otherwise}, when {.} Clearly is a {total Roman -dominating function} of of weight and that
labels by positive values any vertex of degree at least 3.}
Now let .
Suppose that the graph is obtained from and by
joining to and .
Clearly, and by the induction hypothesis, there exists a
total Roman -dominating
function of of weight and that labels by positive values any vertex
of degree at least 3.
Then and . Define by ,
and
otherwise, is a total Roman -dominating function of of weight
and that labels by positive values any vertex of degree at least
3.
Subcase 2.2. is adjacent to two
-ear paths in and adjacent
to an -ear path in .
Let be another -ear path in and be a -ear path in such that . Suppose
where . We consider
the following.
.
Suppose that the graph is obtained from and by joining
to and . Clearly,
and by
the induction hypothesis, there exists a total Roman -dominating function of of weight and that labels by positive values any vertex
of degree at least 3. Define by , and otherwise,
if , by
, and otherwise,
if , and by , and otherwise,
when .
Clearly is a
total Roman -dominating
function of of
weight and that labels by positive values any vertex of
degree at least 3.
and .
Suppose that the graph is obtained from by
adding the edges and . Clearly, and by the
induction hypothesis, there exists a total Roman -dominating function of of weight and that labels by positive values any vertex
of degree at least 3. Define by , and otherwise,
if , by , and
otherwise, when (the case is
similar). Clearly is
a total Roman -dominating function of of weight
and that labels by positive values any vertex of degree at least
3.
and .
Suppose that the graph is obtained from by
adding the edges and
. Clearly, and by the
induction hypothesis, there exists a total Roman -dominating function of of weight and that labels by positive values any vertex
of degree at least 3. Define by , and otherwise,
if , by
, and otherwise,
if , and by , and
otherwise, when . Clearly
is a total Roman -dominating function of of weight
and that labels by positive values any vertex of degree at least
3.
.
Let and
be a neighbor of in . Suppose that the graph is obtained from by
adding the edges and
. Clearly,
and by
the induction hypothesis, there exists a total Roman -dominating function of of weight and that labels by positive values any vertex
of degree at least 3. Define by , and otherwise,
if , and by
,
, and
otherwise, if .
Clearly, is a
total Roman -dominating
function of of
weight and that labels by positive values any vertex of
degree at least 3.
Subcase 2.3. The other neighbor of belong to -ear paths in . Considering above cases
and subcases, we can suppose that any vertex of is adjacent to at most
one vertex in . Then is a
graph obtained from a loopless multigraph by subdividing each edge of
at most twice such that
the set of edges of
subdivided twice forms a matching in . Note that
because for any . Let
be set of edges of
subdivided twice and let the edge be replaced by
for . For each vertex in , let be one of its neighbors in . Define the function
by
for , for , and otherwise. Clearly, is a total Roman -dominating function of of weight and
that labels by positive values any vertex of degree at least 3.
3. Main Result
In this section we prove our main result.
Theorem 1. If is a -vertex graph with ,
Proof. The proof is by induction on . If , then for any vertex with minimum degree, the
function defined by
and otherwise, is
a total Roman -dominating function of of weight and so . Assume that and that the result
holds for all graph of order less than with . Let be a graph of order with . Since for
every , we can assume
that is as small as
possible. If , then
is a disjoint union
of cycles and the result follows by Proposition 2. Hence
assume that . Let and . By our choice of ,
is an independent set. Consider the -ear paths and associated notations
defined in proof of Proposition 4. Note that is a partition of and for each . Assume first
there exists an -ear
path for which
. This implies
that and since is simple we have . Suppose that and . Then there
exists a unique -ear path for which is a leaf of . Let . Then and by the
induction hypothesis . On the other hand, since , we
have , by Proposition 3. If
is a function and is a -function,
then the function
defined on by for and for , is a
total Roman -dominating
function of of
weight at most .
Suppose that for each -ear path . It follows that for each -ear path . First let . Suppose and . By
Proposition 1 and the induction hypothesis we
have and . If is a -function and is a -function, then
the function defined
on by for and for , is a
total Roman -dominating
function of and hence
. Let . Then and the result
follows from Proposition 4. This completes the proof. 
Acknowledgments
The authors are deeply thankful to the reviewer for his/her valuable suggestions to improve the quality of this manuscript. H. Abdollahzadeh Ahangar was supported by the Babol Noshirvani University of
Technology under research grant number BNUT/385001/00.