A solution to small cases of the honeymoon Oberwolfach problem

Marie Rose Jerade1, Mateja Šajna1
1Department of Mathematics and Statistics, University of Ottawa, Ottawa, ON, Canada

Abstract

The honeymoon Oberwolfach problem HOP\((2m_1,2m_2,\ldots,2m_t)\) asks the following question. Given \(n=m_1+m_2+\ldots +m_t\) newlywed couples at a conference and \(t\) round tables of sizes \(2m_1,2m_2,\ldots,2m_t\), is it possible to arrange the \(2n\) participants at these tables for \(2n-2\) meals so that each participant sits next to their spouse at every meal, and sits next to every other participant exactly once? A solution to HOP\((2m_1,2m_2,\ldots,2m_t)\) is a decomposition of \(K_{2n}+(2n-3)I\), the complete graph \(K_{2n}\) with \(2n-3\) additional copies of a fixed 1-factor \(I\), into 2-factors, each consisting of disjoint \(I\)-alternating cycles of lengths \(2m_1,2m_2,\ldots,2m_t\). The honeymoon Oberwolfach problem was introduced in a 2019 paper by Lepine and Šajna. The authors conjectured that HOP\((2m_1,2m_2,\ldots,\) \(2m_t)\) has a solution whenever the obvious necessary conditions are satisfied, and proved the conjecture for several large cases, including the uniform cycle length case \(m_1=\ldots=m_t\), and the small cases with \(n \le 9\). In the present paper, we extend the latter result to all cases with \(n \le 20\) using a computer-assisted search.

Keywords: honeymoon Oberwolfach problem, 2-factorization, Semi-uniform 1-factorization, HOP-colouring-orientation

1. Introduction

The well-known Oberwolfach problem, denoted OP\((m_1,\ldots,m_t)\), asks whether \(n=m_1+\ldots+m_t\) participants can be seated at \(t\) tables of sizes \(m_1,\ldots,m_t\) for several nights in a row so that each participant gets to sit next to every other participant exactly once. Thus, we are asking whether \(K_n\), the complete graph on \(n\) vertices, admits a 2-factorization such that each 2-factor is a disjoint union of \(t\) cycles of lengths \(m_1,\ldots,m_t\). The problem has been solved in many special cases — see [1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 12, 13, 14] — but is in general still open.

In the 2019 paper [11], Lepine and the second author introduced a new variant of the Oberwolfach problem, called the honeymoon Oberwolfach problem. This problem, denoted HOP\((m_1,\ldots,m_t)\), can be described as follows. We have \(n=\frac{1}{2}(m_1+\ldots+m_t)\) newlywed couples attending a conference and \(t\) tables of sizes \(m_1,\ldots,m_t\) (where each \(m_i \ge 3\)). Is it possible to arrange the participants at these \(t\) round tables on \(2n-2\) consecutive nights so that each couple sit together every night, and every participant sits next to every other participant exactly once?

In graph-theoretic terms we are asking whether \(K_{2n}+(2n-3)I\), the multigraph obtained from the complete graph \(K_{2n}\) by adjoining \(2n-3\) additional copies of a chosen 1-factor \(I\), admits a decomposition into 2-factors, each a vertex-disjoint union of cycles of lengths \(m_1,\ldots,m_t\), so that in each of these cycles, every other edge is a copy of an edge of \(I\). A solution to HOP\((m_1,m_2,\ldots,m_t)\) is equivalent to a semi-uniform 1-factorization of \(K_{2n}\) of type \((m_1,m_2,\ldots,m_t)\); that is, a 1-factorization \(\{ F_1,F_2,\ldots,F_{2n-1} \}\) such that for all \(i \bullet 1\), the 2-factor \(F_1 \cup F_i\) consists of disjoint cycles of lengths \(m_1,m_2,\ldots,m_t\).

If \(m_1=\ldots=m_t=m\) and \(tm=2n\), then the symbol HOP\((m_1,\ldots,m_t)\) is abbreviated as HOP\((2n;m)\). Note that if HOP\((m_1,\ldots,m_t)\) has a solution, then the \(m_i\) are all even and at least 4; these are the obvious necessary conditions.

In [11], the authors proposed the following conjecture.

Conjecture 1.1. [11] The obvious necessary conditions for HOP\((m_1,\ldots,m_t)\) to have a solution are also sufficient.

They also proved the conjecture in the following cases.

Theorem 1.2. [11] Let \(m\) and \(n\) be positive integers, \(2 \le m \le n\). Then HOP\((2n;2m)\) has a solution if and only if \(n \equiv 0 \pmod{m}\).

Theorem 1.3. [11] Let \(2 \le m_1 \le \ldots \le m_t\) be integers, and \(n=m_1+\ldots +m_t\). Then HOP\((2m_1,\ldots,2m_t)\) has a solution in each of the following cases.

(a) \(m_i \equiv 0 \pmod{4}\) for all \(i\).

(b) \(n\) is odd and OP\((m_1,\ldots,m_t)\) has a solution.

(c) \(n\) is odd and \(t=2\).

(d) \(n\) is odd, \(n < 40\), and \(m_1 \ge 3\).

(e) \(n \le 9\).

We remark that case (d) of Theorem  1.3 is extended to \(n \le 100\) by the results of [13, 12]. In this paper, we extend case (e) of Theorem 1.3, thus proving the following result.

Theorem 1.4. Let \(m_1, \ldots, m_t\) be integers with \(m_i \ge 2\) for all \(i\), and \(n=m_1+\ldots +m_t\) such that \(n \le 20\). Then HOP\((2m_1,\ldots,2m_t)\) has a solution.

To prove Theorem 1.4, we use the approach described in [11], combined with a computer-assisted search. In Sections 2 and 3, we present the relevant terminology and tools from [11], and in Section 4, we give the framework of the proof of Theorem 1.4, referring to the longer version of the paper [10] for the long list of computational results supporting the proof.

2. Terminology

In this paper, graphs may contain parallel edges, but not loops. As usual, \(K_n\) and \(\lambda K_n\) denote the complete graph and the \(\lambda\)-fold complete graph, respectively, on \(n\) vertices. For \(m \ge 2\), the symbol \(C_m\) denotes the cycle of length \(m\), or \(m\)-cycle.

Let \(G\) be a graph, and let \(H_1,\ldots,H_t\) be subgraphs of \(G\). The collection \(\{ H_1,\ldots,H_t\}\) is called a decomposition of \(G\) if \(\{ E(H_1),\ldots,E(H_t)\}\) is a partition of \(E(G)\).

An \(r\)-factor in a graph \(G\) is an \(r\)-regular spanning subgraph of \(G\), and an \(r\)-factorization of \(G\) is a decomposition of \(G\) into \(r\)-factors. A 2-factor of \(G\) consisting of disjoint cycles of lengths \(m_1,\ldots, m_t\), respectively, is called a \((C_{m_1},\ldots,C_{m_t})\)-factor of \(G\), and a decomposition into \((C_{m_1},\ldots,C_{m_t})\)-factors is called a \((C_{m_1},\ldots,C_{m_t})\)-factorization of \(G\).

For a positive integer \(n\) and \(S \subseteq \mathbb{Z}_n^\ast\) such that \(S=-S\), we define a circulant \({\rm Circ}(n;S)\) as the graph with vertex set \(\{ x_i: i \in \mathbb{Z}_n\}\) and edge set \(\{ x_i x_{i+d}: i \in \mathbb{Z}_n, d \in S\}\). An edge of the form \(x_i x_{i+d}\) is said to be of difference \(d\). Note that an edge of difference \(d\) is also of difference \(n-d\), so we may assume that each difference is in \(\{ 1,2,\ldots, \lfloor \frac{n}{2} \rfloor \}\).

In this paper, the complete graph \(K_n\) will be viewed as the join of the circulant \({\rm Circ}(n-1;\mathbb{Z}_{n-1}^\ast)\) and the complete graph \(K_1\) with vertex \(x_{\infty}\). Thus, \(V(K_n)=\{ x_i: i \in \mathbb{Z}_{n-1}\} \cup \{ x_{\infty} \}\) and \(E(K_n)=\{ x_i x_j: i,j \in \mathbb{Z}_{n-1}, i \bullet j \} \cup \{ x_i x_{\infty}: i \in \mathbb{Z}_{n-1} \}\). If this is the case, then an edge of the form \(x_i x_{\infty}\) will be called of difference infinity.

Let \(I\) be a chosen 1-factor in the graph \(K_{2n}\). An edge of \(K_{2n}\) is said to be an \(I\)-edge if it belongs to \(E(I)\), and a non-\(I\)-edge otherwise. The symbol \(K_{2n}+\lambda I\) denotes the graph \(K_{2n}\) with \(\lambda\) additional copies of each \(I\)-edge, for a total of \(\lambda+1\) copies of each \(I\)-edge. (Note that these additional copies of \(I\)-edges of \(K_{2n}\) are then also considered to be \(I\)-edges of \(K_{2n}+\lambda I\).) A cycle \(C\) of \(K_{2n}+\lambda I\), necessarily of even length, is said to be \(I\)-alternating if the \(I\)-edges and non-\(I\)-edges along \(C\) alternate. A 2-factor (or 2-factorization) of \(K_{2n}+\lambda I\) is said to be \(I\)-alternating if each of its cycles is \(I\)-alternating.

Thus, a solution to the honeymoon Oberwolfach problem HOP\((m_1,\ldots,m_t)\) is an \(I\)-alternating \((C_{m_1},\ldots,C_{m_t})\)-factorization of \(K_{2n}+(2n-3)I\) for \(2n=m_1+m_2+\ldots +m_t\).

3. The tools

As in [11], we use the symbol \(4K_n^\bullet\) to denote the 4-fold complete graph with \(n\) vertices whose edges are coloured pink, blue, and black, and black edges are oriented so that each 4-set of parallel edges contains one pink edge, one blue edge, and two opposite black arcs.

Definition 3.1. [11] A 2-factorization \({\cal D}\) of \(4K_n^\bullet\) is said to be HOP if each cycle of \({\cal D}\) satisfies the following condition:

(C) any two adjacent (that is, consecutive) edges satisfy one of the following:

\(\bullet\) one is blue and the other pink; or

\(\bullet\) both are black and directed in the same way;

\(\bullet\) one is blue and the other black, directed towards the blue edge; or

\(\bullet\) one is pink and the other black, directed away from the pink edge.

Theorem 3.2. [11] Let \(m_1,\ldots,m_t\) be integers greater than 1, and let \(n=m_1+\ldots+m_t\). Then HOP\((2m_1,\ldots,2m_t)\) has a solution if and only if \(4K_n^\bullet\) admits an HOP \((C_{m_1},\ldots,C_{m_t})\)-factorization.

In the next proposition, the symbol \(2K_n^{ Circ}\) denotes the multigraph \(2K_n\) whose edges are coloured pink and black so that each 2-set of parallel edges contains one pink edge and one black edge.

Proposition 3.3. [11] Assume \(n\) is even, and let the vertex set of \(2K_n^{Circ}\) be \(\{ x_i: i \in \mathbb{Z}_{n-1}\} \cup \{ x_{\infty} \}\). Let \(\rho\) be the permutation \(\rho=(x_{\infty})(x_0 \; x_1 \; x_2 \; \ldots \; x_{n-2})\), and let \(\rho_{Circ}\) denote the permutation on the edge set of \(2K_n^{Circ}\) that is induced by \(\rho\) and that preserves the colour of the edges.

Suppose \(2K_n^{Circ}\) admits a \((C_{m_1},\ldots,C_{m_t})\)-factor \(F\) such that

(A1)

each cycle in \(F\) of length at least 3 contains an even number of pink edges, and

(A2)

\(F\) contains exactly one edge from each of the orbits of \(\langle \rho_{Circ} \rangle\).

Then \(4K_n^{\bullet}\) admits an HOP \((C_{m_1},\ldots,C_{m_t})\)-factorization.

Proposition 3.4. [11] Assume \(n\) is even, and let the vertex set of \(4K_n^{\bullet}\) be \(\{ x_i: i \in \mathbb{Z}_{n-1}\} \cup \{ x_{\infty} \}\). Let \(\rho\) be the permutation \(\rho=(x_{\infty})(x_0 \; x_1 \; x_2 \; \ldots \; x_{n-2})\), and let \(\rho_{\bullet}\) denote the permutation on the edge set of \(4K_n^{\bullet}\) that is induced by \(\rho\) and that preserves the colour (and orientation) of the edges.

Suppose \(4K_n^{\bullet}\) admits edge-disjoint \((C_{m_1},\ldots,C_{m_t})\)-factors \(F_1\) and \(F_2\) such that

(D1)

each cycle in \(F_1\) and \(F_2\) satisfies Condition (C) in Definition 3.1, and

(D2)

\(F_1\) and \(F_2\) jointly contain exactly one edge from each of the orbits of \(\langle \rho_{\bullet} \rangle\).

Then \(\mathcal{D}=\{ \rho_{\bullet}^i(F_1), \rho_{\bullet}^i(F_2): i \in \mathbb{Z}_{n-1} \}\) is an HOP \((C_{m_1},\ldots,C_{m_t})\)-factorization of \(4K_n^{\bullet}\).

Proposition 3.5. [11] Assume \(n\) is odd, and let the vertex set of \(4K_n^{\bullet}\) be \(\{ x_i: i \in \mathbb{Z}_{n-1} \} \cup \{ x_{\infty} \}\). Let \(\rho\) be the permutation \(\rho=(x_{\infty})(x_0 \; x_1 \; x_2 \; \ldots \; x_{n-2})\), and let \(\rho_{\bullet}\) denote the permutation on the edge set of \(4K_n^{\bullet}\) that is induced by \(\rho\) and that preserves the colour (and orientation) of the edges.

Suppose \(4K_n^{\bullet}\) admits pairwise edge-disjoint \((C_{m_1},\ldots,C_{m_t})\)-factors \(F_1\), \(F_2\), and \(F_3\) such that

(E1)

each cycle in \(F_1\), \(F_2\), and \(F_3\) satisfies Condition (C) in Definition  3.1;

(E2)

each orbit of \(\langle \rho_{\bullet} \rangle\) has edges either in \(F_1 \cup F_2\) or in \(F_3\);

(E3)

if \(e \in E(F_1 \cup F_2)\), then \(\rho_{\bullet}^{\frac{n-1}{2}}(e)\in E(F_1 \cup F_2)\); and

(E4)

\(F_1 \cup F_2\) contains a pink and a blue edge of difference \(\frac{n-1}{2}\).

Then \(\mathcal{D}=\{ \rho_{\bullet}^i(F_1), \rho_{\bullet}^i(F_2): i=0,1,\ldots,\frac{n-3}{2} \} \cup \{ \rho_{\bullet}^i(F_3): i \in \mathbb{Z}_{n-1} \}\) is an HOP \((C_{m_1},\ldots,C_{m_t})\)-factorization of \(4K_n^{\bullet}\).

The required 2-factors \(F\) from Proposition 3.3, \(F_1\) and \(F_2\) from Proposition 3.4, and \(F_1\), \(F_2\), and \(F_3\) from Proposition 3.5 will are called the starter 2-factors (or starters) of the resulting 2-factorizations. Thus, we are referring to Propositions  3.3, 3.4, and 3.5 as the one-starter, two-starter, and three-starter approach, respectively.

4. Proof of Theorem 1.4

By the type of a \((C_{m_1},\ldots,C_{m_t})\)-factor we mean the multiset \([m_1,\ldots,m_t]\).

Proof. By Theorem 1.3(e), it suffices to consider \(10 \le n \le 20\). For each value of \(n\), we list all possible 2-factor types \([m_1,\ldots,m_t]\), and refer to the result that guarantees existence of a solution to HOP\((2m_1,\ldots,2m_t)\). In cases where we are referring to Proposition 3.3, 3.4, or 3.5, the computational results (that is, appropriate starter 2-factors) are given in the appendices of the extended version of this paper, namely [10].

Case \(n=10\): see [10, Appendix B] for the computational results.

2-factor type \([m_1,\ldots,m_t]\) HOP\((2m_1,\ldots,2m_t)\) has a solution by…
\([2, 2, 2, 2, 2]\) Theorem 1.2
\([4, 2, 2, 2]\) Proposition 3.3 (one starter)
\([3, 3, 2, 2]\) Proposition 3.4 (two starters)
\([6, 2, 2]\) Proposition 3.4 (two starters)
\([5, 3, 2]\) Proposition 3.3 (one starter)
\([4, 4, 2]\) Proposition 3.3 (one starter)
\([4, 3, 3]\) Proposition 3.4 (two starters)
\([8,2]\) Proposition 3.3 (one starter)
\([7,3]\) Proposition 3.4 (two starters)
\([6,4]\) Proposition 3.4 (two starters)
\([5,5]\) Theorem 1.2
\([10]\) Theorem 1.2

Case \(n=11\): see [10, Appendix C] for the computational results.

2-factor type \([m_1,\ldots,m_t]\) HOP\((2m_1,\ldots,2m_t)\) has a solution by…
\([3, 2, 2, 2, 2]\) Proposition 3.5 (three starters)
\([5, 2, 2, 2]\) Proposition 3.5 (three starters)
\([4, 3, 2, 2]\) Proposition 3.5 (three starters)
\([3, 3, 3, 2]\) Proposition 3.5 (three starters)
\([7, 2, 2]\) Proposition 3.5 (three starters)
\([6, 3, 2]\) Proposition 3.5 (three starters)
\([5, 4, 2]\) Proposition 3.5 (three starters)
\([5, 3, 3]\) Theorem 1.2
2-factor type \([m_1,\ldots,m_t]\) HOP\((2m_1,\ldots,2m_t)\) has a solution by…
\([4, 4, 3]\) Theorem 1.2
\([9,2]\) Theorem 1.2
\([8,3]\) Theorem 1.2
\([7,4]\) Theorem 1.2
\([6,5]\) Theorem 1.2
\([11]\) Theorem 1.2

Case \(n=12\): see [10, Appendix D] for the computational results.

2-factor type \([m_1,\ldots,m_t]\) HOP\((2m_1,\ldots,2m_t)\) has a solution by…
\([2, 2, 2, 2, 2, 2]\) Theorem 1.2
\([4, 2, 2, 2, 2]\) Proposition  3.3 (one starter)
\([3, 3, 2, 2, 2]\) Proposition 3.4 (two starters)
\([6, 2, 2, 2]\) Proposition 3.4 (two starters)
\([5, 3, 2, 2]\) Proposition 3.3 (one starter)
\([4, 4, 2, 2]\) Proposition 3.3 (one starter)
\([4, 3, 3, 2]\) Proposition 3.4 (two starters)
\([3, 3, 3, 3]\) Theorem 1.2
\([8, 2, 2]\) Proposition 3.3 (one starter)
\([7, 3, 2]\) Proposition 3.4 (two starters)
\([6, 4, 2]\) Proposition  3.4 (two starters)
\([5, 5, 2]\) Proposition 3.4 (two starters)
\([6, 3, 3]\) Proposition 3.3 (one starter)
\([5, 4, 3]\) Proposition 3.3 (one starter)
\([4, 4, 4]\) Theorem 1.2
\([10,2]\) Proposition 3.4 (two starters)
\([9,3]\) Proposition 3.3 (one starter)
\([8,4]\) Theorem 1.2
\([7,5]\) Proposition 3.3 (one starter)
\([6,6]\) Theorem 1.2
\([12]\) Theorem 1.2

Case \(n=13\): see [10, Appendix E] for the computational results.

2-factor type \([m_1,\ldots,m_t]\) HOP\((2m_1,\ldots,2m_t)\) has a solution by…
\([3, 2, 2, 2, 2, 2]\) Proposition 3.5 (three starters)
\([5, 2, 2, 2, 2]\) Proposition 3.5 (three starters)
\([4, 3, 2, 2, 2]\) Proposition 3.5 (three starters)
\([3, 3, 3, 2, 2]\) Proposition 3.5 (three starters)
2-factor type \([m_1,\ldots,m_t]\) HOP\((2m_1,\ldots,2m_t)\) has a solution by…
\([7, 2, 2, 2]\) Proposition 3.5 (three starters)
\([6, 3, 2, 2]\) Proposition 3.5 (three starters)
\([5, 4, 2, 2]\) Proposition 3.5 (three starters)
\([5, 3, 3, 2]\) Proposition 3.5 (three starters)
\([4, 4, 3, 2]\) Proposition  3.5 (three starters)
\([4, 3, 3, 3]\) Theorem 1.2
\([9, 2, 2]\) Proposition 3.5 (three starters)
\([8, 3, 2]\) Proposition 3.5 (three starters)
\([7, 4, 2]\) Proposition 3.5 (three starters)
\([6, 5, 2]\) Proposition 3.5 (three starters)
\([7, 3, 3]\) Theorem 1.2
\([6, 4, 3]\) Theorem 1.2
\([5, 5, 3]\) Theorem 1.2
\([5, 4, 4]\) Theorem 1.2
\([11,2]\) Theorem 1.2
\([10,3]\) Theorem 1.2
\([9,4]\) Theorem 1.2
\([8,5]\) Theorem 1.2
\([7,6]\) Theorem 1.2
\([13]\) Theorem 1.2

Case \(n=14\): see [10, Appendix F] for the computational results.

2-factor type \([m_1,\ldots,m_t]\) HOP\((2m_1,\ldots,2m_t)\) has a solution by…
\([2, 2, 2, 2, 2, 2, 2]\) Theorem 1.2
\([4, 2, 2, 2, 2, 2]\) Proposition 3.3 (one starter)
\([3, 3, 2, 2, 2, 2]\) Proposition 3.4 (two starters)
\([6, 2, 2, 2, 2]\) Proposition 3.4 (two starters)
\([5, 3, 2, 2, 2]\) Proposition 3.3 (one starter)
\([4, 4, 2, 2, 2]\) Proposition 3.3 (one starter)
\([4, 3, 3, 2, 2]\) Proposition 3.4 (two starters)
\([3, 3, 3, 3, 2]\) Proposition 3.3 (one starter)
\([8, 2, 2, 2]\) Proposition 3.3 (one starter)
\([7, 3, 2, 2]\) Proposition 3.4 (two starters)
\([6, 4, 2, 2]\) Proposition 3.4 (two starters)
\([5, 5, 2, 2]\) Proposition 3.4 (two starters)
\([6, 3, 3, 2]\) Proposition 3.3 (one starter)
\([5, 4, 3, 2]\) Proposition 3.3 (one starter)
\([4, 4, 4, 2]\) Proposition 3.3 (one starter)
2-factor type \([m_1,\ldots,m_t]\) HOP\((2m_1,\ldots,2m_t)\) has a solution by…
\([5, 3, 3, 3]\) Proposition 3.4 (two starters)
\([4, 4, 3, 3]\) Proposition 3.4 (two starters)
\([10, 2, 2]\) Proposition 3.4 (two starters)
\([9, 3, 2]\) Proposition 3.3 (one starter)
\([8, 4, 2]\) Proposition 3.3 (one starter)
\([7, 5, 2]\) Proposition 3.3 (one starter)
\([6, 6, 2]\) Proposition 3.3 (one starter)
\([8, 3, 3]\) Proposition 3.4 (two starters)
\([7, 4, 3]\) Proposition 3.4 (two starters)
\([6, 5, 3]\) Proposition 3.4 (two starters)
\([6, 4, 4]\) Proposition 3.4 (two starters)
\([5, 5, 4]\) Proposition 3.4 (two starters)
\([12,2]\) Proposition 3.3 (one starter)
\([11,3]\) Proposition 3.4 (two starters)
\([10,4]\) Proposition 3.4 (two starters)
\([9,5]\) Proposition 3.4 (two starters)
\([8,6]\) Proposition 3.4 (two starters)
\([7,7]\) Theorem 1.2
\([14]\) Theorem 1.2

Case \(n=15\): see [10, Appendix G] for the computational results.

2-factor type \([m_1,\ldots,m_t]\) HOP\((2m_1,\ldots,2m_t)\) has a solution by…
\([3, 2, 2, 2, 2, 2, 2]\) Proposition 3.5 (three starters)
\([5, 2, 2, 2, 2, 2]\) Proposition 3.5 (three starters)
\([4, 3, 2, 2, 2, 2]\) Proposition 3.5 (three starters)
\([3, 3, 3, 2, 2, 2]\) Proposition 3.5 (three starters)
\([7, 2, 2, 2, 2]\) Proposition 3.5 (three starters)
\([6, 3, 2, 2, 2]\) Proposition 3.5 (three starters)
\([5, 4, 2, 2, 2]\) Proposition 3.5 (three starters)
\([5, 3, 3, 2, 2]\) Proposition 3.5 (three starters)
\([4, 4, 3, 2, 2]\) Proposition 3.5 (three starters)
\([4, 3, 3, 3, 2]\) Proposition 3.5 (three starters)
\([3, 3, 3, 3, 3]\) Theorem  1.2
\([9, 2, 2, 2]\) Proposition 3.5 (three starters)
\([8, 3, 2, 2]\) Proposition 3.5 (three starters)
\([7, 4, 2, 2]\) Proposition 3.5 (three starters)
\([6, 5, 2, 2]\) Proposition 3.5 (three starters)
\([7, 3, 3, 2]\) Proposition 3.5 (three starters)
\([6, 4, 3, 2]\) Proposition 3.5 (three starters)
2-factor type \([m_1,\ldots,m_t]\) HOP\((2m_1,\ldots,2m_t)\) has a solution by…
\([5, 5, 3, 2]\) Proposition 3.5 (three starters)
\([5, 4, 4, 2]\) Proposition 3.5 (three starters)
\([6, 3, 3, 3]\) Theorem 1.2
\([5, 4, 3, 3]\) Theorem 1.2
\([4, 4, 4, 3]\) Theorem 1.2
\([11, 2, 2]\) Proposition 3.5 (three starters)
\([10, 3, 2]\) Proposition 3.5 (three starters)
\([9, 4, 2]\) Proposition 3.5 (three starters)
\([8, 5, 2]\) Proposition 3.5 (three starters)
\([7, 6, 2]\) Proposition 3.5 (three starters)
\([9, 3, 3]\) Theorem 1.2
\([8, 4, 3]\) Theorem 1.2
\([7, 5, 3]\) Theorem 1.2
\([6, 6, 3]\) Theorem 1.2
\([7, 4, 4]\) Theorem 1.2
\([6, 5, 4]\) Theorem 1.2
\([5, 5, 5]\) Theorem 1.2
\([13,2]\) Theorem 1.2
\([12,3]\) Theorem 1.2
\([11,4]\) Theorem 1.2
\([10,5]\) Theorem 1.2
\([9,6]\) Theorem 1.2
\([8,7]\) Theorem 1.2
\([15]\) Theorem 1.2

Case \(n=16\): see [10, Appendix H] for the computational results.

2-factor type \([m_1,\ldots,m_t]\) HOP\((2m_1,\ldots,2m_t)\) has a solution by…
\([2, 2, 2, 2, 2, 2, 2, 2]\) Theorem 1.2
\([4, 2, 2, 2, 2, 2, 2]\) Proposition 3.3 (one starter)
\([3, 3, 2, 2, 2, 2, 2]\) Proposition 3.4 (two starters)
\([6, 2, 2, 2, 2, 2]\) Proposition 3.4 (two starters)
\([5, 3, 2, 2, 2, 2]\) Proposition 3.3 (one starter)
\([4, 4, 2, 2, 2, 2]\) Proposition 3.3 (one starter)
\([4, 3, 3, 2, 2, 2]\) Proposition 3.4 (two starters)
\([3, 3, 3, 3, 2, 2]\) Proposition 3.3 (one starter)
\([8, 2, 2, 2, 2]\) Proposition 3.3 (one starter)
\([7, 3, 2, 2, 2]\) Proposition 3.4 (two starters)
\([6, 4, 2, 2, 2]\) Proposition 3.4 (two starters)
\([5, 5, 2, 2, 2]\) Proposition 3.4 (two starters)
\([6, 3, 3, 2, 2]\) Proposition 3.3 (one starter)
2-factor type \([m_1,\ldots,m_t]\) HOP\((2m_1,\ldots,2m_t)\) has a solution by…
\([5, 4, 3, 2, 2]\) Proposition 3.3 (one starter)
\([4, 4, 4, 2, 2]\) Proposition 3.3 (one starter)
\([5, 3, 3, 3, 2]\) Proposition 3.4 (two starters)
\([4, 4, 3, 3, 2]\) Proposition 3.4 (two starters)
\([4, 3, 3, 3, 3]\) Proposition 3.3 (one starter)
\([10, 2, 2, 2]\) Proposition 3.4 (two starters)
\([9, 3, 2, 2]\) Proposition 3.3 (one starter)
\([8, 4, 2, 2]\) Proposition 3.3 (one starter)
\([7, 5, 2, 2]\) Proposition 3.3 (one starter)
\([6, 6, 2, 2]\) Proposition 3.3 (one starter)
\([8, 3, 3, 2]\) Proposition 3.4 (two starters)
\([7, 4, 3, 2]\) Proposition 3.4 (two starters)
\([6, 5, 3, 2]\) Proposition 3.4 (two starters)
\([6, 4, 4, 2]\) Proposition 3.4 (two starters)
\([5, 5, 4, 2]\) Proposition  3.4 (two starters)
\([7, 3, 3, 3]\) Proposition 3.3 (one starter)
\([6, 4, 3, 3]\) Proposition 3.3 (one starter)
\([5, 5, 3, 3]\) Proposition 3.3 (one starter)
\([5, 4, 4, 3]\) Proposition 3.3 (one starter)
\([4, 4, 4, 4]\) Theorem 1.2
\([12, 2, 2]\) Proposition 3.3 (one starter)
\([11, 3, 2]\) Proposition 3.4 (two starters)
\([10, 4, 2]\) Proposition 3.4 (two starters)
\([9, 5, 2]\) Proposition 3.4 (two starters)
\([8, 6, 2]\) Proposition 3.4 (two starters)
\([7, 7, 2]\) Proposition 3.4 (two starters)
\([10, 3, 3]\) Proposition 3.3 (one starter)
\([9, 4, 3]\) Proposition 3.3 (one starter)
\([8, 5, 3]\) Proposition 3.3 (one starter)
\([7, 6, 3]\) Proposition 3.3 (one starter)
\([8, 4, 4]\) Theorem 1.2
\([7, 5, 4]\) Proposition 3.3 (one starter)
\([6, 6, 4]\) Proposition 3.3 (one starter)
\([6, 5, 5]\) Proposition 3.3 (one starter)
\([14, 2]\) Proposition 3.4 (two starters)
\([13, 3]\) Proposition 3.3 (one starter)
\([12, 4]\) Theorem 1.2
\([11, 5]\) Proposition 3.3 (one starter)
\([10, 6]\) Proposition 3.3 (one starter)
\([9, 7]\) Proposition 3.3 (one starter)
\([8, 8]\) Theorem 1.2
\([16]\) Theorem 1.2

Case \(n=17\): see [10, Appendix I] for the computational results.

2-factor type \([m_1,\ldots,m_t]\) HOP\((2m_1,\ldots,2m_t)\) has a solution by…
\([3, 2, 2, 2, 2, 2, 2, 2]\) Proposition 3.5 (three starters)
\([5, 2, 2, 2, 2, 2, 2]\) Proposition 3.5 (three starters)
\([4, 3, 2, 2, 2, 2, 2]\) Proposition 3.5 (three starters)
\([3, 3, 3, 2, 2, 2, 2]\) Proposition 3.5 (three starters)
\([7, 2, 2, 2, 2, 2]\) Proposition 3.5 (three starters)
\([6, 3, 2, 2, 2, 2]\) Proposition 3.5 (three starters)
\([5, 4, 2, 2, 2, 2]\) Proposition 3.5 (three starters)
\([5, 3, 3, 2, 2, 2]\) Proposition 3.5 (three starters)
\([4, 4, 3, 2, 2, 2]\) Proposition 3.5 (three starters)
\([4, 3, 3, 3, 2, 2]\) Proposition 3.5 (three starters)
\([3, 3, 3, 3, 3, 2]\) Proposition 3.5 (three starters)
\([9, 2, 2, 2, 2]\) Proposition 3.5 (three starters)
\([8, 3, 2, 2, 2]\) Proposition 3.5 (three starters)
\([7, 4, 2, 2, 2]\) Proposition 3.5 (three starters)
\([6, 5, 2, 2, 2]\) Proposition 3.5 (three starters)
\([7, 3, 3, 2, 2]\) Proposition 3.5 (three starters)
\([6, 4, 3, 2, 2]\) Proposition 3.5 (three starters)
\([5, 5, 3, 2, 2]\) Proposition 3.5 (three starters)
\([5, 4, 4, 2, 2]\) Proposition 3.5 (three starters)
\([6, 3, 3, 3, 2]\) Proposition 3.5 (three starters)
\([5, 4, 3, 3, 2]\) Proposition 3.5 (three starters)
\([4, 4, 4, 3, 2]\) Proposition 3.5 (three starters)
\([5, 3, 3, 3, 3]\) Theorem 1.2
\([4, 4, 3, 3, 3]\) Theorem 1.2
\([11, 2, 2, 2]\) Proposition 3.5 (three starters)
\([10, 3, 2, 2]\) Proposition 3.5 (three starters)
\([9, 4, 2, 2]\) Proposition 3.5 (three starters)
\([8, 5, 2, 2]\) Proposition 3.5 (three starters)
\([7, 6, 2, 2]\) Proposition 3.5 (three starters)
\([9, 3, 3, 2]\) Proposition 3.5 (three starters)
\([8, 4, 3, 2]\) Proposition 3.5 (three starters)
\([7, 5, 3, 2]\) Proposition 3.5 (three starters)
\([6, 6, 3, 2]\) Proposition 3.5 (three starters)
\([7, 4, 4, 2]\) Proposition 3.5 (three starters)
\([6, 5, 4, 2]\) Proposition 3.5 (three starters)
\([5, 5, 5, 2]\) Proposition 3.5 (three starters)
\([8, 3, 3, 3]\) Theorem 1.2
\([7, 4, 3, 3]\) Theorem 1.2
\([6, 5, 3, 3]\) Theorem 1.2
2-factor type \([m_1,\ldots,m_t]\) HOP\((2m_1,\ldots,2m_t)\) has a solution by…
\([6, 4, 4, 3]\) Theorem 1.2
\([5, 5, 4, 3]\) Theorem 1.2
\([5, 4, 4, 4]\) Theorem 1.2
\([13, 2, 2]\) Proposition 3.5 (three starters)
\([12, 3, 2]\) Proposition 3.5 (three starters)
\([11, 4, 2]\) Proposition 3.5 (three starters)
\([10, 5, 2]\) Proposition 3.5 (three starters)
\([9, 6, 2]\) Proposition 3.5 (three starters)
\([8, 7, 2]\) Proposition 3.5 (three starters)
\([11, 3, 3]\) Theorem 1.2
\([10, 4, 3]\) Theorem 1.2
\([9, 5, 3]\) Theorem 1.2
\([8, 6, 3]\) Theorem 1.2
\([7, 7, 3]\) Theorem 1.2
\([9, 4, 4]\) Theorem 1.2
\([8, 5, 4]\) Theorem 1.2
\([7, 6, 4]\) Theorem 1.2
\([7, 5, 5]\) Theorem 1.2
\([6, 6, 5]\) Theorem 1.2
\([15, 2]\) Theorem 1.2
\([14, 3]\) Theorem 1.2
\([13, 4]\) Theorem 1.2
\([12, 5]\) Theorem 1.2
\([11, 6]\) Theorem 1.2
\([10, 7]\) Theorem 1.2
\([9, 8]\) Theorem 1.2
\([17]\) Theorem 1.2

Case \(n=18\): see [10, Appendix J] for the computational results.

2-factor type \([m_1,\ldots,m_t]\) HOP\((2m_1,\ldots,2m_t)\) has a solution by…
\([2, 2, 2, 2, 2, 2, 2, 2, 2]\) Theorem 1.2
\([4, 2, 2, 2, 2, 2, 2, 2]\) Proposition 3.3 (one starter)
\([3, 3, 2, 2, 2, 2, 2, 2]\) Proposition 3.4 (two starters)
\([6, 2, 2, 2, 2, 2, 2]\) Proposition 3.4 (two starters)
\([5, 3, 2, 2, 2, 2, 2]\) Proposition 3.3 (one starter)
\([4, 4, 2, 2, 2, 2, 2]\) Proposition 3.3 (one starter)
\([4, 3, 3, 2, 2, 2, 2]\) Proposition 3.4 (two starters)
\([3, 3, 3, 3, 2, 2, 2]\) Proposition 3.3 (one starter)
\([8, 2, 2, 2, 2, 2]\) Proposition 3.3 (one starter)
\([7, 3, 2, 2, 2, 2]\) Proposition 3.4 (two starters)
2-factor type \([m_1,\ldots,m_t]\) HOP\((2m_1,\ldots,2m_t)\) has a solution by…
\([6, 4, 2, 2, 2, 2]\) Proposition 3.4 (two starters)
\([5, 5, 2, 2, 2, 2]\) Proposition 3.4 (two starters)
\([6, 3, 3, 2, 2, 2]\) Proposition 3.3 (one starter)
\([5, 4, 3, 2, 2, 2]\) Proposition 3.3 (one starter)
\([4, 4, 4, 2, 2, 2]\) Proposition 3.3 (one starter)
\([5, 3, 3, 3, 2, 2]\) Proposition 3.4(two starters)
\([4, 4, 3, 3, 2, 2]\) Proposition 3.4 (two starters)
\([4, 3, 3, 3, 3, 2]\) Proposition 3.3 (one starter)
\([3, 3, 3, 3, 3, 3]\) Theorem 1.2
\([10, 2, 2, 2, 2]\) Proposition 3.4 (two starters)
\([9, 3, 2, 2, 2]\) Proposition 3.3 (one starter)
\([8, 4, 2, 2, 2]\) Proposition 3.3 (one starter)
\([7, 5, 2, 2, 2]\) Proposition 3.3 (one starter)
\([6, 6, 2, 2, 2]\) Proposition 3.3 (one starter)
\([8, 3, 3, 2, 2]\) Proposition 3.4 (two starters)
\([7, 4, 3, 2, 2]\) Proposition 3.4 (two starters)
\([6, 5, 3, 2, 2]\) Proposition 3.4 (two starters)
\([6, 4, 4, 2, 2]\) Proposition 3.4 (two starters)
\([5, 5, 4, 2, 2]\) Proposition 3.4 (two starters)
\([7, 3, 3, 3, 2]\) Proposition 3.3 (one starter)
\([6, 4, 3, 3, 2]\) Proposition 3.3 (one starter)
\([5, 5, 3, 3, 2]\) Proposition 3.3 (one starter)
\([5, 4, 4, 3, 2]\) Proposition 3.3 (one starter)
\([4, 4, 4, 4, 2]\) Proposition 3.3 (one starter)
\([6, 3, 3, 3, 3]\) Proposition 3.4 (two starters)
\([5, 4, 3, 3, 3]\) Proposition 3.4 (two starters)
\([4, 4, 4, 3, 3]\) Proposition 3.4 (two starters)
\([12, 2, 2, 2]\) Proposition 3.3 (one starter)
\([11, 3, 2, 2]\) Proposition 3.4 (two starters)
\([10, 4, 2, 2]\) Proposition 3.4 (two starters)
\([9, 5, 2, 2]\) Proposition 3.4 (two starters)
\([8, 6, 2, 2]\) Proposition 3.4 (two starters)
\([7, 7, 2, 2]\) Proposition 3.4 (two starters)
\([10, 3, 3, 2]\) Proposition 3.3 (one starter)
\([9, 4, 3, 2]\) Proposition 3.3 (one starter)
\([8, 5, 3, 2]\) Proposition 3.3 (one starter)
\([7, 6, 3, 2]\) Proposition 3.3 (one starter)
2-factor type \([m_1,\ldots,m_t]\) HOP\((2m_1,\ldots,2m_t)\) has a solution by…
\([8, 4, 4, 2]\) Proposition 3.3 (one starter)
\([7, 5, 4, 2]\) Proposition 3.3 (one starter)
\([6, 6, 4, 2]\) Proposition 3.3 (one starter)
\([6, 5, 5, 2]\) Proposition 3.3 (one starter)
\([9, 3, 3, 3]\) Proposition 3.4 (two starters)
\([8, 4, 3, 3]\) Proposition 3.4 (two starters)
\([7, 5, 3, 3]\) Proposition 3.4 (two starters)
\([6, 6, 3, 3]\) Proposition 3.4 (two starters)
\([7, 4, 4, 3]\) Proposition 3.4 (two starters)
\([6, 5, 4, 3]\) Proposition 3.4 (two starters)
\([5, 5, 5, 3]\) Proposition 3.4 (two starters)
\([6, 4, 4, 4]\) Proposition 3.4 (two starters)
\([5, 5, 4, 4]\) Proposition 3.4 (two starters)
\([14, 2, 2]\) Proposition 3.4 (two starters)
\([13, 3, 2]\) Proposition 3.3 (one starter)
\([12, 4, 2]\) Proposition 3.3 (one starter)
\([11, 5, 2]\) Proposition 3.3 (one starter)
\([10, 6, 2]\) Proposition 3.3 data-reference-type=”ref” data-reference=”pro:main1″>[pro:main1] (one starter)
\([9, 7, 2]\) Proposition 3.3 (one starter)
\([8, 8, 2]\) Proposition 3.3 (one starter)
\([12, 3, 3]\) Proposition 3.4 (two starters)
\([11, 4, 3]\) Proposition 3.4 (two starters)
\([10, 5, 3]\) Proposition 3.4 (two starters)
\([9, 6, 3]\) Proposition 3.4 (two starters)
\([8, 7, 3]\) Proposition 3.4 (two starters)
\([10, 4, 4]\) Proposition 3.4 (two starters)
\([9, 5, 4]\) Proposition 3.4 (two starters)
\([8, 6, 4]\) Proposition 3.4 (two starters)
\([7, 7, 4]\) Proposition 3.4 (two starters)
\([8, 5, 5]\) Proposition 3.4 (two starters)
\([7, 6, 5]\) Proposition 3.4 (two starters)
\([6, 6, 6]\) Theorem 1.2
\([16, 2]\) Proposition 3.3 (one starter)
\([15, 3]\) Proposition 3.4 (two starters)
\([14, 4]\) Proposition 3.4 (two starters)
\([13, 5]\) Proposition 3.4 (two starters)
\([12, 6]\) Proposition 3.4 (two starters)
\([11, 7]\) Proposition 3.4 (two starters)
\([10, 8]\) Proposition 3.4 (two starters)
\([9, 9]\) Theorem 1.2
\([18]\) Theorem 1.2

Case \(n=19\): see [10, Appendix K] for the computational results.

2-factor type \([m_1,\ldots,m_t]\) HOP\((2m_1,\ldots,2m_t)\) has a solution by…
\([3, 2, 2, 2, 2, 2, 2, 2, 2]\) Proposition 3.5 (three starters)
\([5, 2, 2, 2, 2, 2, 2, 2]\) Proposition 3.5 (three starters)
\([4, 3, 2, 2, 2, 2, 2, 2]\) Proposition 3.5 (three starters)
\([3, 3, 3, 2, 2, 2, 2, 2]\) Proposition 3.5 (three starters)
\([7, 2, 2, 2, 2, 2, 2]\) Proposition 3.5 (three starters)
\([6, 3, 2, 2, 2, 2, 2]\) Proposition 3.5 (three starters)
\([5, 4, 2, 2, 2, 2, 2]\) Proposition 3.5 (three starters)
\([5, 3, 3, 2, 2, 2, 2]\) Proposition 3.5 (three starters)
\([4, 4, 3, 2, 2, 2, 2]\) Proposition 3.5 (three starters)
\([4, 3, 3, 3, 2, 2, 2]\) Proposition 3.5 (three starters)
\([3, 3, 3, 3, 3, 2, 2]\) Proposition 3.5 (three starters)
\([9, 2, 2, 2, 2, 2]\) Proposition 3.5 (three starters)
\([8, 3, 2, 2, 2, 2]\) Proposition 3.5 (three starters)
\([7, 4, 2, 2, 2, 2]\) Proposition 3.5 (three starters)
\([6, 5, 2, 2, 2, 2]\) Proposition 3.5 (three starters)
\([7, 3, 3, 2, 2, 2]\) Proposition 3.5 (three starters)
\([6, 4, 3, 2, 2, 2]\) Proposition 3.5 (three starters)
\([5, 5, 3, 2, 2, 2]\) Proposition 3.5 (three starters)
\([5, 4, 4, 2, 2, 2]\) Proposition 3.5 (three starters)
\([6, 3, 3, 3, 2, 2]\) Proposition 3.5 (three starters)
\([5, 4, 3, 3, 2, 2]\) Proposition 3.5 (three starters)
\([4, 4, 4, 3, 2, 2]\) Proposition 3.5 (three starters)
\([5, 3, 3, 3, 3, 2]\) Proposition 3.5 (three starters)
\([4, 4, 3, 3, 3, 2]\) Proposition 3.5 (three starters)
\([4, 3, 3, 3, 3, 3]\) Theorem 1.2
\([11, 2, 2, 2, 2]\) Proposition 3.5 (three starters)
\([10, 3, 2, 2, 2]\) Proposition 3.5 (three starters)
\([9, 4, 2, 2, 2]\) Proposition 3.5 (three starters)
\([8, 5, 2, 2, 2]\) Proposition 3.5 (three starters)
\([7, 6, 2, 2, 2]\) Proposition 3.5 (three starters)
\([9, 3, 3, 2, 2]\) Proposition 3.5 (three starters)
\([8, 4, 3, 2, 2]\) Proposition 3.5 (three starters)
\([7, 5, 3, 2, 2]\) Proposition 3.5 (three starters)
\([6, 6, 3, 2, 2]\) Proposition 3.5 (three starters)
\([7, 4, 4, 2, 2]\) Proposition 3.5 (three starters)
\([6, 5, 4, 2, 2]\) Proposition 3.5 (three starters)
\([5, 5, 5, 2, 2]\) Proposition 3.5 (three starters)
\([8, 3, 3, 3, 2]\) Proposition 3.5 (three starters)
\([7, 4, 3, 3, 2]\) Proposition 3.5 (three starters)
2-factor type \([m_1,\ldots,m_t]\) HOP\((2m_1,\ldots,2m_t)\) has a solution by…
\([6, 5, 3, 3, 2]\) Proposition 3.5 (three starters)
\([6, 4, 4, 3, 2]\) Proposition 3.5 (three starters)
\([5, 5, 4, 3, 2]\) Proposition 3.5 (three starters)
\([5, 4, 4, 4, 2]\) Proposition 3.5 (three starters)
\([7, 3, 3, 3, 3]\) Theorem 1.2
\([6, 4, 3, 3, 3]\) Theorem 1.2
\([5, 5, 3, 3, 3]\) Theorem 1.2
\([5, 4, 4, 3, 3]\) Theorem 1.2
\([4, 4, 4, 4, 3]\) Theorem 1.2
\([13, 2, 2, 2]\) Proposition 3.5 (three starters)
\([12, 3, 2, 2]\) Proposition 3.5 (three starters)
\([11, 4, 2, 2]\) Proposition 3.5 (three starters)
\([10, 5, 2, 2]\) Proposition 3.5 (three starters)
\([9, 6, 2, 2]\) Proposition 3.5 (three starters)
\([8, 7, 2, 2]\) Proposition 3.5 (three starters)
\([11, 3, 3, 2]\) Proposition 3.5 (three starters)
\([10, 4, 3, 2]\) Proposition 3.5 (three starters)
\([9, 5, 3, 2]\) Proposition 3.5 (three starters)
\([8, 6, 3, 2]\) Proposition 3.5 (three starters)
\([7, 7, 3, 2]\) Proposition 3.5 (three starters)
\([9, 4, 4, 2]\) Proposition 3.5 (three starters)
\([8, 5, 4, 2]\) Proposition 3.5 (three starters)
\([7, 6, 4, 2]\) Proposition 3.5 (three starters)
\([7, 5, 5, 2]\) Proposition 3.5 (three starters)
\([6, 6, 5, 2]\) Proposition 3.5 (three starters)
\([10, 3, 3, 3]\) Theorem 1.2
\([9, 4, 3, 3]\) Theorem 1.2
\([8, 5, 3, 3]\) Theorem 1.2
\([7, 6, 3, 3]\) Theorem 1.2
\([8, 4, 4, 3]\) Theorem 1.2
\([7, 5, 4, 3]\) Theorem 1.2
\([6, 6, 4, 3]\) Theorem 1.2
\([6, 5, 5, 3]\) Theorem 1.2
\([7, 4, 4, 4]\) Theorem 1.2
\([6, 5, 4, 4]\) Theorem 1.2
\([5, 5, 5, 4]\) Theorem 1.2
\([15, 2, 2]\) Proposition 3.5 (three starters)
\([14, 3, 2]\) Proposition 3.5 (three starters)
\([13, 4, 2]\) Proposition 3.5 (three starters)
\([12, 5, 2]\) Proposition 3.5 (three starters)
\([11, 6, 2]\) Proposition 3.5 (three starters)
\([10, 7, 2]\) Proposition 3.5 (three starters)
\([9, 8, 2]\) Proposition 3.5 (three starters)
2-factor type \([m_1,\ldots,m_t]\) HOP\((2m_1,\ldots,2m_t)\) has a solution by…
\([13, 3, 3]\) Theorem 1.2
\([12, 4, 3]\) Theorem 1.2
\([11, 5, 3]\) Theorem 1.2
\([10, 6, 3]\) Theorem 1.2
\([9, 7, 3]\) Theorem 1.2
\([8, 8, 3]\) Theorem 1.2
\([11, 4, 4]\) Theorem 1.2
\([10, 5, 4]\) Theorem 1.2
\([9, 6, 4]\) Theorem 1.2
\([8, 7, 4]\) Theorem 1.2
\([9, 5, 5]\) Theorem 1.2
\([8, 6, 5]\) Theorem 1.2
\([7, 7, 5]\) Theorem 1.2
\([7, 6, 6]\) Theorem 1.2
\([17, 2]\) Theorem 1.2
\([16, 3]\) Theorem 1.2
\([15, 4]\) Theorem 1.2
\([14, 5]\) Theorem 1.2
\([13, 6]\) Theorem 1.2
\([12, 7]\) Theorem 1.2
\([11, 8]\) Theorem 1.2
\([10, 9]\) Theorem 1.2
\([19]\) Theorem 1.2

Case \(n=20\): see [10, Appendix L] for the computational results.

2-factor type \([m_1,\ldots,m_t]\) HOP\((2m_1,\ldots,2m_t)\) has a solution by…
\([2, 2, 2, 2, 2, 2, 2, 2, 2, 2]\) Theorem 1.2
\([4, 2, 2, 2, 2, 2, 2, 2, 2]\) Proposition 3.3 (one starter)
\([3, 3, 2, 2, 2, 2, 2, 2, 2]\) Proposition 3.4 (two starters)
\([6, 2, 2, 2, 2, 2, 2, 2]\) Proposition 3.4 (two starters)
\([5, 3, 2, 2, 2, 2, 2, 2]\) Proposition 3.3 (one starter)
\([4, 4, 2, 2, 2, 2, 2, 2]\) Proposition 3.3 (one starter)
\([4, 3, 3, 2, 2, 2, 2, 2]\) Proposition 3.3 (two starters)
\([3, 3, 3, 3, 2, 2, 2, 2]\) Proposition 3.3 (one starter)
\([8, 2, 2, 2, 2, 2, 2]\) Proposition 3.3 (one starter)
\([7, 3, 2, 2, 2, 2, 2]\) Proposition 3.4 (two starters)
\([6, 4, 2, 2, 2, 2, 2]\) Proposition 3.4 (two starters)
\([5, 5, 2, 2, 2, 2, 2]\) Proposition 3.4 (two starters)
\([6, 3, 3, 2, 2, 2, 2]\) Proposition 3.3 (one starter)
\([5, 4, 3, 2, 2, 2, 2]\) Proposition 3.3 (one starter)
(one starter)
2-factor type \([m_1,\ldots,m_t]\) HOP\((2m_1,\ldots,2m_t)\) has a solution by…
\([4, 4, 4, 2, 2, 2, 2]\) Proposition 3.3
\([5, 3, 3, 3, 2, 2, 2]\) Proposition 3.4 (two starters)
\([4, 4, 3, 3, 2, 2, 2]\) Proposition 3.4 (two starters)
\([4, 3, 3, 3, 3, 2, 2]\) Proposition 3.3 (one starter)
\([3, 3, 3, 3, 3, 3, 2]\) Proposition 3.4 (two starters)
\([10, 2, 2, 2, 2, 2]\) Proposition 3.4 (two starters)
\([9, 3, 2, 2, 2, 2]\) Proposition 3.3 (one starter)
\([8, 4, 2, 2, 2, 2]\) Proposition 3.3 (one starter)
\([7, 5, 2, 2, 2, 2]\) Proposition 3.3 (one starter)
\([6, 6, 2, 2, 2, 2]\) Proposition 3.3 (one starter)
\([8, 3, 3, 2, 2, 2]\) Proposition 3.4 (two starters)
\([7, 4, 3, 2, 2, 2]\) Proposition 3.4 (two starters)
\([6, 5, 3, 2, 2, 2]\) Proposition 3.4 (two starters)
\([6, 4, 4, 2, 2, 2]\) Proposition 3.4 (two starters)
\([5, 5, 4, 2, 2, 2]\) Proposition 3.4 (two starters)
\([7, 3, 3, 3, 2, 2]\) Proposition 3.3 (one starter)
\([6, 4, 3, 3, 2, 2]\) Proposition 3.3 (one starter)
\([5, 5, 3, 3, 2, 2]\) Proposition 3.3 (one starter)
\([5, 4, 4, 3, 2, 2]\) Proposition 3.3 (one starter)
\([4, 4, 4, 4, 2, 2]\) Proposition 3.3 (one starter)
\([6, 3, 3, 3, 3, 2]\) Proposition 3.4 (two starters)
\([5, 4, 3, 3, 3, 2]\) Proposition 3.4 (two starters)
\([4, 4, 4, 3, 3, 2]\) Proposition 3.4 (two starters)
\([5, 3, 3, 3, 3, 3]\) Proposition 3.3 (one starter)
\([4, 4, 3, 3, 3, 3]\) Proposition 3.3 (one starter)
\([12, 2, 2, 2, 2]\) Proposition 3.3 (one starter)
\([11, 3, 2, 2, 2]\) Proposition 3.4 (two starters)
\([10, 4, 2, 2, 2]\) Proposition 3.4 (two starters)
\([9, 5, 2, 2, 2]\) Proposition 3.4 (two starters)
\([8, 6, 2, 2, 2]\) Proposition 3.4 (two starters)
\([7, 7, 2, 2, 2]\) Proposition 3.4 (two starters)
\([10, 3, 3, 2, 2]\) Proposition 3.3 (one starter)
\([9, 4, 3, 2, 2]\) Proposition 3.3 (one starter)
\([8, 5, 3, 2, 2]\) Proposition 3.3 (one starter)
\([7, 6, 3, 2, 2]\) Proposition 3.3 (one starter)
\([8, 4, 4, 2, 2]\) Proposition 3.3 (one starter)
\([7, 5, 4, 2, 2]\) Proposition 3.3 (one starter)
\([6, 6, 4, 2, 2]\) Proposition 3.3 (one starter)
\([6, 5, 5, 2, 2]\) Proposition 3.3 (one starter)
\([9, 3, 3, 3, 2]\) Proposition 3.4 (two starters)
\([8, 4, 3, 3, 2]\) Proposition 3.4 (two starters)
\([7, 5, 3, 3, 2]\) Proposition 3.4 (two starters)
\([6, 6, 3, 3, 2]\) Proposition 3.4 (two starters)
2-factor type \([m_1,\ldots,m_t]\) HOP\((2m_1,\ldots,2m_t)\) has a solution by…
\([7, 4, 4, 3, 2]\) Proposition 3.4 (two starters)
\([6, 5, 4, 3, 2]\) Proposition 3.4 (two starters)
\([5, 5, 5, 3, 2]\) Proposition 3.4 (two starters)
\([6, 4, 4, 4, 2]\) Proposition 3.4 (two starters)
\([5, 5, 4, 4, 2]\) Proposition 3.4 (two starters)
\([8, 3, 3, 3, 3]\) Proposition 3.3 (one starter)
\([7, 4, 3, 3, 3]\) Proposition 3.3 (one starter)
\([6, 5, 3, 3, 3]\) Proposition 3.3 (one starter)
\([6, 4, 4, 3, 3]\) Proposition 3.3 (one starter)
\([5, 5, 4, 3, 3]\) Proposition 3.3 (one starter)
\([5, 4, 4, 4, 3]\) Proposition 3.3 (one starter)
\([4, 4, 4, 4, 4]\) Theorem 1.2
\([14, 2, 2, 2]\) Proposition 3.4 (two starters)
\([13, 3, 2, 2]\) Proposition 3.3 (one starter)
\([12, 4, 2, 2]\) Proposition 3.3 (one starter)
\([11, 5, 2, 2]\) Proposition 3.3 (one starter)
\([10, 6, 2, 2]\) Proposition 3.3 (one starter)
\([9, 7, 2, 2]\) Proposition 3.3 (one starter)
\([8, 8, 2, 2]\) Proposition 3.3 (one starter)
\([12, 3, 3, 2]\) Proposition 3.4 (two starters)
\([11, 4, 3, 2]\) Proposition 3.4 (two starters)
\([10, 5, 3, 2]\) Proposition 3.4 (two starters)
\([9, 6, 3, 2]\) Proposition 3.4 (two starters)
\([8, 7, 3, 2]\) Proposition 3.4 (two starters)
\([10, 4, 4, 2]\) Proposition 3.4 (two starters)
\([9, 5, 4, 2]\) Proposition 3.4 (two starters)
\([8, 6, 4, 2]\) Proposition 3.4 (two starters)
\([7, 7, 4, 2]\) Proposition 3.4 (two starters)
\([8, 5, 5, 2]\) Proposition 3.4 (two starters)
\([7, 6, 5, 2]\) Proposition 3.4 (two starters)
\([6, 6, 6, 2]\) Proposition 3.4 (two starters)
\([11, 3, 3, 3]\) Proposition 3.3 (one starter)
\([10, 4, 3, 3]\) Proposition 3.3 (one starter)
\([9, 5, 3, 3]\) Proposition 3.3 (one starter)
\([8, 6, 3, 3]\) Proposition 3.3 (one starter)
\([7, 7, 3, 3]\) Proposition 3.3 (one starter)
\([9, 4, 4, 3]\) Proposition 3.3 (one starter)
\([8, 5, 4, 3]\) Proposition 3.3 (one starter)
\([7, 6, 4, 3]\) Proposition 3.3 (one starter)
\([7, 5, 5, 3]\) Proposition 3.3 (one starter)
\([6, 6, 5, 3]\) Proposition 3.3 (one starter)
\([8, 4, 4, 4]\) Theorem 3.3
3
2-factor type \([m_1,\ldots,m_t]\) HOP\((2m_1,\ldots,2m_t)\) has a solution by…
\([7, 5, 4, 4]\) Proposition 3.3 (one starter)
\([6, 6, 4, 4]\) Proposition 3.3 (one starter)
\([6, 5, 5, 4]\) Proposition 3.3 (one starter)
\([5, 5, 5, 5]\) Theorem 1.2
\([16, 2, 2]\) Proposition 3.3 (one starter)
\([15, 3, 2]\) Proposition 3.4 (two starters)
\([14, 4, 2]\) Proposition 3.4 (two starters)
\([13, 5, 2]\) Proposition 3.4 (two starters)
\([12, 6, 2]\) Proposition 3.4 (two starters)
\([11, 7, 2]\) Proposition 3.4 (two starters)
\([10, 8, 2]\) Proposition 3.4 (two starters)
\([9, 9, 2]\) Proposition 3.4 (two starters)
\([14, 3, 3]\) Proposition 3.3 (one starter)
\([13, 4, 3]\) Proposition 3.3 (one starter)
\([12, 5, 3]\) Proposition 3.3 (one starter)
\([11, 6, 3]\) Proposition 3.3 (one starter)
\([10, 7, 3]\) Proposition 3.3 (one starter)
\([9, 8, 3]\) Proposition 3.3 (one starter)
\([12, 4, 4]\) Theorem 1.2
\([11, 5, 4]\) Proposition 3.3 (one starter)
\([10, 6, 4]\) Proposition 3.3 (one starter)
\([9, 7, 4]\) Proposition 3.3 (one starter)
\([8, 8, 4]\) Theorem 1.2
\([10, 5, 5]\) Proposition 3.3 (one starter)
\([9, 6, 5]\) Proposition 3.3 (one starter)
\([8, 7, 5]\) Proposition 3.3 (one starter)
\([8, 6, 6]\) Proposition 3.3 (one starter)
\([7, 7, 6]\) Proposition 3.3 (one starter)
\([18, 2]\) Proposition 3.4 (two starters)
\([17, 3]\) Proposition 3.3 (one starter)
\([16, 4]\) Theorem 1.2
\([15, 5]\) Proposition 3.3 (one starter)
\([14, 6]\) Proposition 3.3 (one starter)
\([13, 7]\) Proposition 3.3 (one starter)
\([12, 8]\) Theorem 1.2
\([11, 9]\) Proposition 3.3 (one starter)
\([10, 10]\) Theorem 1.2
\([20]\) Theorem 1.2

 ◻

References:

  1. P. Adams and D. Bryant. Two-factorisations of complete graphs of orders fifteen and seventeen. Australasian Journal of Combinatorics, 35:113–118, 2006.
  2. B. Alspach and R. Häggkvist. Some observations on the Oberwolfach problem. Journal of Graph Theory, 9(1):177–187, 1985. https://doi.org/10.1002/jgt.3190090114.
  3. B. Alspach, P. J. Schellenberg, D. R. Stinson, and D. Wagner. The Oberwolfach problem and factors of uniform odd length cycles. Journal of Combinatorial Theory, Series A, 52(1):20–43, 1989. https://doi.org/10.1016/0097-3165(89)90059-9.
  4. D. Bryant and P. Danziger. On bipartite 2-factorizations of \(K_{n} – I\) and the Oberwolfach problem. Journal of Graph Theory, 68(1):22–37, 2011. https://doi.org/10.1002/jgt.20538.
  5. A. Deza, F. Franek, W. Hua, M. Meszka, and A. Rosa. Solutions to the Oberwolfach problem for orders 18 to 40. Journal of Combinatorial Mathematics and Combinatorial Computing, 74:95–102, 2010.
  6. F. Franek, J. Holub, and A. Rosa. Two-factorizations of small complete graphs. II. The case of 13 vertices. Journal of Combinatorial Mathematics and Combinatorial Computing, 51:89–94, 2004.
  7. F. Franek and A. Rosa. Two-factorizations of small complete graphs. In volume 86, number 2, pages 435–442, 2000. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0378-3758(99)00123-8. Special issue in honor of Professor Ralph Stanton.
  8. S. Glock, F. Joos, J. Kim, D. Kühn, and D. Osthus. Resolution of the Oberwolfach problem. Journal of the European Mathematical Society (JEMS), 23(8):2511–2547, 2021. https://doi.org/10.4171/jems/1060.
  9. D. G. Hoffman and P. J. Schellenberg. The existence of \(C_k\)-factorizations of \(K_{2n} – F\). Discrete Mathematics, 97(1–3):243–250, 1991. https://doi.org/10.1016/0012-365X(91)90440-D.
  10. M. R. Jerade and M. Šajna. The honeymoon oberwolfach problem: small cases. arXiv, (2407.00204):1–122, 2024. https://arxiv.org/abs/2407.00204.
  11. D. Lepine and M. Šajna. On the honeymoon Oberwolfach problem. Journal of Combinatorial Designs, 27(7):420–447, 2019. https://doi.org/10.1002/jcd.21656.
  12. M. Meszka. Solutions to the Oberwolfach problem for orders up to 100. Australasian Journal of Combinatorics, 89:243–248, 2024.
  13. F. Salassa, G. Dragotto, T. Traetta, M. Buratti, and F. Della Croce. Merging combinatorial design and optimization: the Oberwolfach problem. Australasian Journal of Combinatorics, 79:141–166, 2021.
  14. T. Traetta. A complete solution to the two-table Oberwolfach problem. Journal of Combinatorial Theory, Series A, 120(5):984–997, 2013. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jcta.2013.03.002.