For any positive integer , a graph is said to be -magic if there exists a labeling such that the induced vertex set labeling defined by
is a constant map. The integer-magic spectrum of a graph , denoted by , is the set of all for which is -magic. So far, only the integer-magic spectra of trees of diameter at most five have been determined. In this paper, we determine the integer-magic spectra of trees of diameter six and higher.
Keywords: Integer-magic spectrum, Tree diameter, Magic labeling
1. Introduction
In this paper all graphs are connected, finite, simple, and
undirected. For graph theory notations and terminology not described in
this paper, we refer the readers to [1]. Let be a graph. For an abelian group written additively, any mapping is called a
labeling. Given an edge labeling , we can define a labeling of the
vertices
such that that is, is
the sum of the labels of all the edges incident with . If there is a labeling such that is constant, then we say is an -magic graph and we call an -magic labeling. If is not -magic for every abelian group , then we say is non-magic. On the other
hand, if is -magic for every abelian group , we say that is fully magic.
For convenience and to follow convention, we will use the notation
-magic, where , to indicate -magic. Similarly, if is a -magic labeling, we say is an -magic labeling. It is pertinent to
mention that there is another definition of an -magic graph [2]; this one is a different generalization of
magic graphs and so it does not relate to the topics covered in this
paper.
Definition 1. For a graph G, let the
integer-magic spectrum of ,
denoted by , be the set of all
integers for which is -magic.
The integer-magic spectra of trees of diameter at most five have
already been determined [3, 4]. In this paper, we generalize these
previous results and characterize the integer-magic spectra of trees of
arbitrary diameter. For a compilation of results regarding the
integer-magic spectra of other families of graphs, we refer the reader
to [5].
The term pendant vertex will refer to vertices with degree
one. Similarly, the term pendant edge will refer to edges which
are incident to pendant vertices. Note that a pendant vertex will have
the same label as the pendant edge incident to it, so in order for to be constant, all pendent edges
must have the same label. We will reserve the variable for the label that every pendant edge
must have. Consequently, for to
be an -magic labeling, we need
for every
vertex .
Figure 1: A Typical Tree of Diameter
2. Notation for Trees
To determine the integer-magic spectrum of any tree, we need to
develop notation that applies to trees of any diameter. To achieve this,
we use the fact that trees of even diameter have as a center a single
vertex, and that trees of odd diameter have as a center the path . From now on, will denote the vertex at the center of
a tree of even diameter; similarly, and will denote the vertices at the
center of a tree of odd diameter. Also, to simplify the statement of our
theorems, we will use to refer
to a tree of diameter .
We start by describing vertices in terms of their distance from the
center.
Definition 2. For a tree and an integer , let
Trees of diameter have the
added complication of having two vertices at the center. For the sake of
having formal definitions, we need to distinguish those vertices that
are closer to from those that
are closer to . With this
objective, we define the function where .
Definition 3. For a tree and an integer , let
We are abusing notation by using for both even and odd diameter trees.
However, for our purposes, their definitions are equivalent. In both
cases, is the collection of
vertices at distance from the
center. See Figure 2 for an example.
Figure 2: A Tree with the Members of Highlighted in Red
Note that for both and diameters, if ; otherwise, the diameter would be
bigger. Furthermore, if the tree has diameter , then by definition there must be at
least two pendant vertices that are distance away from ; similarly, for , and each must have at least one pendant
vertex that is away. Thus, for
both odd and even diameters, if , then .
Additionally, even diameters have , and odd diameters have Finally, we note that, for any , if and , then
either or because and are adjacent, so the difference in
their distance from the center is exactly one.
To discuss -magic labelings for
trees, we need a way to talk about the subgraph that “branches out” of a
vertex. With this objective in mind, we define the branches of . To simplify the statement of these
definitions, we will use the term , where ,
to refer to the vertex set of the unique path in from to .
Definition 4. For a tree and , let the branch of, or , be the induced subgraph of with vertex set: Furthermore, define .
Informally, is the subgraph
of that extends from and outwards to the pendant vertices.
We now make an equivalent definition for trees of odd diameter.
Definition 5. For a tree of and ,
let the branch of, or
, be the induced subgraph of
with vertex set: Furthermore, let be the induced subgraph with
vertex set: The definition of follows similarly.
Figure 3: A Tree with Highlighted in Red
If and , then we say extends from . An important observation to make about
these branches is that if , with and
, then is a subgraph of since all the vertices that extend
from also extend from . In general, the branch of any vertex
that extends from is a subgraph
of . We now create a term that
combines the objectives behind
and .
Definition 6. For a tree , a vertex and an integer , let
Informally, is the
collection of vertices at distance from the center that also extend from
. An important observation is that
if and is not a pendant vertex, then all the
vertices in are adjacent
to because they extend from and are distance one away. On the other
hand, if is a pendant vertex,
then it must be that because nothing would be able to extend from . Finally, if , then because all other vertices
in must be further away from
the center than .
Having the same notation for both even and odd diameter trees allows
us to make reference to trees in general without having to specify the
parity of its diameter; when the parity of the diameter of the tree is
important, we will separate the cases. We now prove a result that makes
no reference to -magic labelings;
it is a general fact about trees. A special case of the result will be
extensively used in the next section.
Theorem 1. Let be a tree, let and be integers where , and let be a vertex in such that the set is nonempty. If ,
then, for every integer such that
,
Proof. Set . If , the result is trivial since all
the sets in (1) are empty. Thus, assume that .
Observe that the sets and are all pairwise disjoint
since their corresponding branches in do not overlap. Thus, We finish the proof by showing
that . Let for some where
. By definition,
and . Since extends from , is a subgraph of . Thus, . It follows that . Now let . Then .
Since is further away from the
center than any of the vertices in , the path from to must go through for some . That is, extends from , and so . Since , .
In the next section, we will use the special case of since, as discussed before, consists of vertices adjacent
to . For convenience and future
reference, we state it explicitly.
Corollary 1. For a tree , let be a vertex in such that is not a pendant vertex. If , then, for every such that ,
3. The Forced Labeling
In an -magic labeling, every
pendant edge is forced to have the same label. We will show that in
trees this notion of a “forced” labeling extends beyond pendant
edges.
We start by showing a method for labeling edges that makes constant with the exception of the
vertices at the center. The method will depend on the labeling assigned
to the pendant edges, though it will not guarantee that the edge
labeling does not include 0 in its range.
In Figure 4, we see such method applied. We can label the edges
closer to the center according to the label of the edges further away in
such a way that their common vertex gets the constant label. For
instance, for , the sum of the
labels of the edges further away is . Thus, the label of the edge closer
to the center needs to be so
that . By using
the notation we developed in the previous section, we can define a
function that calculates the number that multiplies the for each edge.
Figure 4: Edges Labelled Such That Is Constant
Definition 7. For a tree , define such
that if , and , then Furthermore, for a tree , define
such that if , and
, then As for , let
The definition of for odd
diameter trees is more complicated because there is an extra edge at the
center to consider. For edges other than that one, is the same for even and odd
diameters.
Note that, for even diameters,
cannot guarantee that . A
similar problem happens for odd diameters. Although there is an edge at
the center, this edge can only guarantee the constant label for or , but not always both. We arbitrarily
chose to secure the constant label for . Another problem with this method is
the possibility that for
some edge . If that happens, then
this method cannot be applied to construct an -magic labeling since cannot be assigned to an edge. These
problems, however, do not happen in -magic graphs. The proof of this fact
follows
Lemma 1. Let be an -magic tree where is an -magic labeling. If the pendant edges
have label , then for every edge
,
Proof. We first prove the statement for . Define for such that . This partitions into sets. We will prove the statement by
using the principle of backwards induction on .
For the base case, let where
and . Since , then is a pendant edge. By definition,
, and so We used the fact that for all , .
Now assume that the statement is true for all edges in . Let , where , so . Assume is a pendant vertex. By definition,
, and so We used the fact that, since is a pendant vertex, for all .
Assume then that is not a
pendant vertex. Let . Since is
an -magic labeling, But for each , so we can apply the induction hypothesis and obtain
Note that we used Corollary (1) in the last step.
In the future, we will use it without reference. From the above fact it
follows that Thus, by the principal of backwards induction,
the statement is true for all
such that . And so,
the statement is true for all edges in trees of even diameter.
Note that this proof does not depend on the fact that the edges and
vertices are in a tree of even diameter. Since is the same for both odd and even
diameters with the exception of , the same proof suffices for all
edges in an odd diameter tree except for , which we now prove
separately.
Let . Since is
an -magic labeling, and since for every , then .
Thus, From this, it follows that
Thus, the lemma is true for all edges of an odd diameter tree, and so
the proof is done.
This result is significant because it allows us to describe any -magic labeling of a tree . In particular, it tells us that any
such labeling is dictated entirely by , the label of the pendant edges. Thus,
determining if a tree is -magic becomes a matter of determining
if we can find an that satisfies
the two conditions that itself
does not guarantee. These conditions, again, are that no edge has the
label 0 and that is also
constant for the center vertices. It turns out that being able to find
such an characterizes -magic graphs.
Theorem 2. is -magic if and only if there exists an
integer with the following two
properties.
For every edge ,
If is even, then
If is odd, then
Before the proof, we note that the first property corresponds to not
allowing the edges to have the label 0, and that the second property
corresponds to having the center vertices constant under . In particular, the left hand side of
(3) will correspond to . Similarly, the left hand side of
(4) will correspond to and the right side to . Since by definition guarantees that , equation (4) will suffice
to show that is constant.
Proof. Assume is
-magic and let be an -magic labeling. We will demonstrate
that if is the label of the
pendant edges under , then has both properties. We prove that
property 1 holds by contradiction. Assume there exists an edge such that . By Lemma 1, too, which contradicts the fact that is an -magic labeling. Thus, has property 1.
For property 2, we start with even diameters. Assume and set . By
using Lemma 1, we get the result:
To prove the odd case, we let and set . As before, Lemma 1 gives us the
result:
This is equivalent to (4), so has property 2, and so the forward
direction is done.
For the other direction, we first deal with trees of even diameter.
Assume that and that there
exists an integer such that (2)
and (3) are true. Define . We claim that is an -magic labeling, i.e. that for every , so let . We split the proof into
three cases.
Assume . If is the unique vertex adjacent to , then,
Assume , i.e. . If we let ,
then,
Finally, assume where
. The proof of Lemma 1
demonstrates that for
every pendant edge. Thus, if is a
pendant vertex, then . So
assume is not a pendant vertex.
Set such that , and . We obtain the result from the following.
This shows that is an -magic labeling, thus completing the
proof for even diameter trees. As for trees with odd diameter, let and assume there exists an such that (2) and (4)
hold. As with the even case, define . The proof for for is the same
as in the even case. We deal with separately. Set . It follows that
Similarly, if , then
Thus, is
constant for all vertices, and so is -magic. This completes the odd case, and
so the proof.
Having a complete characterization of when is -magic allows us to find the
integer-magic spectrum rather easily. In fact, the proof of Salehi
et al. for trees of diameter 5 in [3, 4] gives a template for the proof of
our final result. Before going on to the main result, we provide a small
and immediate corollary to Theorem 2 that will shed
light on the conditions stated in the main result.
Corollary 2. For any -magic tree of diameter , if is the label of the pendant edges, then
Furthermore, for any -magic tree of diameter , if is the label of the pendant edges, then
4. The Main Result
The integer-magic spectrum of an arbitrary tree is provided by the
following general result.
Theorem 3. Given a tree , let and let When
is even, set and when is odd, set If
is the set of all positive divisors of that are not in , then
Proof. We start by observing, from Corollary 2, that if is the label of the pendant edges in an
-magic labeling, then . Similarly, any
integer with the property that
also has
property 2 in Theorem 2. We now proceed to the cases.
Assume , and for a
contradiction, assume there is an
such that is -magic. Let be an -magic labeling and be the label of the pendant edges. We
then have that . Since , there exist an edge
such that , and so
. But then, , so by Lemma 1, which is a contradiction. We conclude
.
Assume then that . Let
. We will prove
that is -magic by showing that satisfies both properties in Theorem
2.
From the definition of , we have
that for any edge . In other words, , so property 1
is satisfied. Furthermore, implies property 2. Thus, is -magic, so For the other direction,
assume . Let be an -magic labeling and be the label of the pendant edges.
Assume for a contradiction that for some edge . It follows that , so by Lemma 1, which is a contradiction. We conclude
for all edges, so
. This proves that
.
Finally, assume that and . We
have to prove that . Assume first that . Let be an -magic labeling and be the label of the pendant edges. Set
. We claim that
. By definition, , so we only need to prove that
. We do so by
contradiction, so assume for
some . From , we know . But since , then too, and since , it follows that . We combine this with to get that , or , which is a
contradiction with Lemma 1. Thus, , so . And
since , there exists a number
such that , i.e. .
We prove the other direction. Let . By definition, is a multiple of so set where . We will demonstrate
that is a choice of
that satisfies both properties in
Theorem 1. From the definition of , , so . Since ,
for all edges , or . We
conclude that for all edges, so property 1 is satisfied. By
definition, , so . Thus,
property 2 is satisfied. By Theorem 2, is -magic, and so . In other words, ,
and the proof is done.
References:
G. Chartrand and P. Zhang, 2012. A First Course
in Graph Theory, Dover Publications, New York.
Meenakshi, C. and Kathiresan, K.M., 2019. A generalization of magic
and antimagic labelings of graphs. AKCE International Journal of
Graphs and Combinatorics, 16(2), pp.125-144.
Lee, S.M., Salehi, E. and Sun, H., 2004. Integer-magic spectra of
trees with diameters at most four. Journal of Combinatorial
Mathematics and Combinatorial Computing, 50, pp.3-16.
Salehi, E. and Bennett, P., 2008. Integer-magic spectra of trees of
diameter Five. Journal of Combinatorial Mathematics and
Combinatorial Computing, 66, pp.105-111.
Joseph A. G., 2019. A Dynamic Survey in Graphs Labeling
(twenty-second edition), The Electronic Journal of
Combinatorics (2019), pp.129-132.