On Vertex-Euclidean Deficiency of Complete Fan Graphs and Complete Wheel Graphs

Zhen-Bin Gao1, Ricky Guo2, Harris Kwong3, Sin-Min Lee4, Wei Qiu5
1College of General Education, Guangdong University of Science and Technology, Dongguan, 523000, P.R. China
2Dept.\ of Computer Science Univ.\ of Calif.\ at Los Angeles Los Angeles, CA 90095, USA
3Dept.\ of Math.\ Sci. SUNY Fredonia Fredonia, NY 14063, USA
41786 Plan Tree Drive Upland, CA 91784, USA
5College of Math.\ Sci.Harbin Engineering Univ.Harbin, 150001, China

Abstract

A simple graph G with p vertices is said to be vertex-Euclidean if there exists a bijection f:V(G){1,2,,p} such that f(v1)+f(v2)>f(v3) for each C3-subgraph with vertex set {v1,v2,v3}, where f(v1)<f(v2)<f(v3). More generally, the vertex-Euclidean deficiency of a graph G is the smallest integer k such that GNk is vertex-Euclidean. To illustrate the idea behind this new graph labeling problem, we study the vertex-Euclidean deficiency of two new families of graphs called the complete fan graphs and the complete wheel graphs. We also explore some related problems, and pose several research topics for further study.

Keywords: Graph labeling, Wheel graph, Fan graph

1. Introduction

On a triangle, the sum of the lengths of any two sides is greater than the length of the third side. This motivates us to call a simple graph G with q edges edge-Euclidean if it admits a bijective edge labeling f:E(G){1,2,,q} such that on any C3-subgraph with edges e1, e2 and e3, where f(e1)<f(e2)<f(e3), we have f(e1)+f(e2)>f(e3). As a result, the edge labels of any triangle satisfy the triangle inequality. The edge labeling f is called an edge-Euclidean labeling of the graph G. For example, the graph displayed below on the left is not edge-Euclidean, but the graph on the right is.

Let Lk denote the null graph with k isolated vertices, each of them is incident to a loop. If a graph G is not edge-Euclidean, its edge-Euclidean deficiency or discrepancy, denoted μe(G), is the smallest integer k so that GLk is edge-Euclidean. Hence, a simple graph G is edge-Euclidean if and only if μe(G)=0. The graph below on the left is not edge-Euclidean, its edge-Euclidean deficiency is 1, as indicated on the right below.

We have just started to study this new labeling problem, and discover many interesting properties that will appear in a series of forthcoming papers.

Note that we can define μe(G) as the smallest integer k such that G admits a bijection edge labeling f:E(G){k+1,k+2,,k+q} such that on any C3-subgraph with edges e1, e2 and e3, where f(e1)<f(e2)<f(e3), we have f(e1)+f(e2)>f(e3). Since all the results we have derived thus far are based on the original definition, we will stay with it for consistency.

Meanwhile, we also begin to study of the vertex analog of this problem.

Definition 1. A simple graph G with p vertices is said to be vertex-Euclidean if there exists a bijection f:V(G){1,2,,p} such that, on any C3-subgraph on the vertices v1,v2,v3, where f(v1)<f(v2)<f(v3), we have f(v1)+f(v2)>f(v3). In other words, the vertex labels on any C3-subgraph satisfy the triangle inequality.

It is obvious that C3 itself is not vertex-Euclidean, because when its three vertices are labeled with 1, 2, and 3, we find 1+23. Any C3-free graph is, by default, vertex-Euclidean. However, a graph that contains a C3-subgraph may still be vertex-Euclidean. Here is an example:

In general, if a graph contains a C3-subgraph, the label 1 cannot be used on any one of its three vertices. The reason is: if the three vertices of the C3-subgraph are labeled 1, x, and y, where 1<x<y, then x+1y. Thus, 1+xy.

A graph is said to be triangulated if every vertex lies on a C3-subgraph. It follows that a triangulated graph cannot be vertex-Euclidean.

Definition 2. The vertex-Euclidean deficiency or discrepancy of a graph G is the smallest integer k such that GNk (where Nk denotes the null graph on k vertices) is vertex-Euclidean, and we write μv(G)=k.

For example, a graph G is vertex-Euclidean if and only if μv(G)=0. It is easy to see that μv(C3)=1.

We also find μv(K4)=2. The reason is: if μv(K4)=1, then the four vertices of K4 will be labeled 2, 3, 4, and 5. Since 2+35, this labeling is not vertex-Euclidean. Thus, the smallest label on K4 is 3. This shows that μv(K4)2.

It is easy to find a vertex-Euclidean labeling with two isolated vertices.

This observation can be generalized.

Theorem 1. For any integer n3, we have μv(Kn)=n2.

Proof. Let x be the smallest label on the vertices of Kn. Then the next smallest label is x+1, and the largest label is x+n1. On the C3-subgraph on these three vertices, we find x+(x+1)>x+n1. Therefore, x>n2, which implies that we need k=n2 isolated vertices for KnNk to be vertex-Euclidean. ◻

Corollary 1. If G is connected, with p vertices, then μv(G)p2.

Proof. It is clear that if H is a subgraph of G with the same number of vertices, then μv(H)μv(G). Since G is a subgraph of Kp, the result follows immediately. ◻

In this exposition, we study the vertex-Euclidean deficiency of two new families of graphs defined below. They illustrate why the problem is not as simple or direct as it may appear to be. We also introduce some related problems for further study.

2. Complete Fan Graphs

The join of two graphs G1 and G2 (see, for example, [1]) is constructed from G1 and G2 by joining each vertex of G1 to each vertex in G2. It is also called the Zykov sum of G1 and G2 [2], and is denoted G1+G2. For example, the complete bipartite graph Km,n is the join Nm+Nn. The join Pn+N1 is called a fan graph. It is formed by connecting an isolated vertex to every vertex on the path Pn. Below are the graphs FnN1 for n=2,3,4,5,6:

It appears that μv(Fn)=1 for all integers n2. Since each fan graph is triangulated, μv(Fn)1. To show that FnN1 is vertex-Euclidean, we first label the isolated vertex w1 with 1. Next, label the left-most C3-subgraph with 2, 3, and 4, such that the edge it shares with the next C3-subgraph is labeled 3 and 4. Label the remaining vertices with 5, 6, … . The result is a vertex-Euclidean labeling. Thus, μv(Fn)=1.

A fan graph can be viewed as an array of K3s, aligned in a way that neighboring K3s share a common edge. Inspired by this observation, we extend the idea to an array of complete graphs Kms. Again, we demand that neighboring copies of Kms should share a common edge, similar to the neighboring K3s in a fan graph. This produces the complete fan graph KmFn. Hence, the complete fan graph KmFn is essentially an array of n1 copies of the complete graphs Km. A precise definition is given below.

Definition 3. For m3 and n2, define the complete fan graph KmFn as follows.

  • Let V(KmFn)={c}{v1,v2,,vn}{vi,1,vi,2,,vi,m31in1}.

  • The edge set E(KmFn) consists of the edges that form a complete graph Km on the vertex set {c,vi,vi+1,vi,1,,vi,m3} for 1in1.

Notice that

  • the vertex set {c,v1,v2,,vn} induces the fan graph Fn, KmFn=Fn when m=3;

  • KmFn=Km when n=2; and

  • any adjacent complete graphs Km share a common edge of the form cvi, where 2in1.

Below are the graphs K4FnN2 for n=2,3,4,5,6:

In each case, we find μv(K4Fn)=2.

In general, since K4Fn contains at least one copy of K4, we know that μv(K4Fn)μv(K4)=2. To show that K4FnN2 is vertex-Euclidean, we first label the two isolated vertices w1 and w2 with the integers 1 and 2. Next, label the left-most copy of K4 with the integers 3, 4, 5, and 6, so that c is labeled 6, and the highest labels 5 and 6 occupy the edge between the first two K4s. Next, label the remaining vertices of the second K4 with 7 and 8, such that the highest label 8 is adjacent to c. This ensures that the edge between the second and third copies of K4 is incident to c and the highest label that has been used thus far. Repeat this until all vertices have been labeled. The result is a vertex-Euclidean labeling of K4FnN2. This proves that μv(K4Fn)=2.

Below are the graphs K5FnN3 for n=2,3,4,5:

The algorithm described above shows that μv(KmFn)=m2 for all integers m3 and n2.

3. Complete Wheel Graphs

The wheel graph Wn is formed by connecting an isolated vertex to every vertex of the cycle Cn. In other words, Wn=Cn+N1. This is similar to the fan graph except that the two C3 on the far left and far right wrap around to form a wheel. The result is a circular array of n copies of C3s so that adjacent copies share a common edge. Here are W3, W4, and W5:

We can form the complete wheel graph KmWn, similar to the construction of KmFn. For KmWn to be well-defined, we need m,n3. Naturally, KmWn=Wn when m=3. The complete wheel graphs K4Wn, where m=4,5 and n=3,4,5, are displayed below.

Unlike the complete fan graphs, the complete graphs Kms wrap around to produce a wheel-like structure. This could produce μv(KmWn)>m2.

Even the vertex-Euclidean deficiency of the wheel graph does not appear to be obvious:

The complete wheel graphs are more complicated:

One more example:

The exact value of μv(KmWn) remains unknown. We invite the readers to determine its value.

We now turn our attention to other related problems. We introduce the notation mboxvEuclid(k) for the set of all connected graphs G with μv(G)=k. We say a graph G is critically vertex-Euclidean if μv(G)=k, and μv(Gv)=k for any vertex v in G, and use the notation vCritEuclid(k), or simply mboxvEuclid(k) to indicate the set of all critically vertex-Euclidean graphs with μv(G)=k. Obviously, if GvEuclid(0), then we also have GmboxvEuclid(0). It is not obvious that mboxvEuclid(k) if k0. Examples can be drawn from the composition (also called dictionary or lexicographic product) of two graphs.

Given two graphs G1=(V1,E1) and G2=(V2,E2), the composition G1[G2] is the graph with V1×V2 as its vertex set, and the vertices (u1,v1) and (u2,v2) are adjacent if

  • u1u2E(G1), or

  • u1=u2, and v1v2E(G2).

See, for example, [1]. The composition C4[P2] is given below.

One can show that μv(C3[N3])=5:

Due to symmetry, it suffices to study C3[N3]v for any vertex v:

Since μv(C3[N3]v)=5, we deduce that C3[N3]mboxvEuclid(5).

Many graphs are not critically vertex-Euclidean. These graphs have the property that the removal of a single vertex would change their vertex-Euclidean deficiency. The deficiency of Gv may depend on the choice of v. Let S be a set of integers. We use the notation mboxvEuclid(kS) for the set of all connected graphs G with μv(G)=k, and S is the minimal set that contains all possible values of μv(Gv) taken over the vertices v in G. For example, we find K3F3mboxvEuclid(1{1,0}):

Here, we use an asterisk to indicated the removed vertex. We also have K3F4mboxvEuclid(1{1,0}):

We find K4F3,K4F4mboxvEuclid(2{1}):

We also find K5F3,K5F5mboxvEuclid(3{2}):

and K6F4mboxvEuclid(4{3}):

Conjecture 1. KmFn{mboxvEuclid(1{1,0})if n=3,mboxvEuclid(n2{n3})if n4.

The behavior of the complete wheel graphs KmWn is more complex. We find K3W3mboxvEuclid(1):

However, we have K3W4mboxvEuclid(2{1,0}):

We also find K3W5mboxvEuclid(2{1,0}):

However, we have K3W6mboxvEuclid(3{2,0}):

We also find K3W7mboxvEuclid(3{2,0}):

However, we have K3W8mboxvEuclid(4{3,0}):

Unexpectedly, we find K3W9mboxvEuclid(5{4,0}):

The behavior becomes more complex when m=4. We have found that μv(K4W3)=2:

We find K4W3mboxvEuclid(2{2,1}):

We know that μv(K4W4)=2:

But we have K4W4mboxvEuclid(2{3,2,1}):

What if m=5? We know that μv(K5W4)=4. We find K5W4mboxvEuclid(4{3,2}):

Let us consider yet another example. We know that μv(K6W5)=4. There are three possible choices for the removed vertex. They are listed in Figure 1. We determine that K6W5mboxvEuclid(4{4,3}).

The case of KmWn appears to be rather complex. We invite the readers the study these problems.

5. Research Problems

There are many problems that we can study.

  1. Determine the vertex-Euclidean deficiency of other families of graphs.

  2. The construction of other vertex-Euclidean and non-vertex-Euclidean graphs.

  3. For any integer n, we know that μv(Kn+2)=n. What is the maximum number of edges that we can remove from Kn+2 without altering the vertex-Euclidean deficiency?

  4. We can study other extremal problems similar the one we just mentioned. For example, what is the maximum number of edges on a connected graph G with p vertices so that μv(G)<p2?

  5. Study the analogous problems for μe(G).

Acknowledgment

We are indebted to the anonymous referee, whose comments and suggestions provide valuable insights that lead to the improvement of the manuscript.

Conflict of Interest

The authors declare no conflict of interest.

References:

  1. Harary, F., 1969. Graph theory.
  2. Addison-Wesley. Zykov, A. A., 1949. On some properties of linear complexes. Matematicheskii Sbornik, 66(2), pp.163–188.