Subscribe to the gold package and get unlimited access to Shamra Academy
Register a new userMore spectral bounds on the clique and independence numbers
124
0
0.0
(
0
)
Authors
Vladimir Nikiforov
Ask ChatGPT about the research
No Arabic abstract
We give some new bounds for the clique and independence numbers of a graph in terms of its eigenvalues.
rate research
Read More
The analogue of Hadwigers conjecture for the immersion order states that every graph $G$ contains $K_{chi (G)}$ as an immersion. If true, it would imply that every graph with $n$ vertices and independence number $alpha$ contains $K_{lceil frac nalpharceil}$ as an immersion. The best currently known bound for this conjecture is due to Gauthier, Le and Wollan, who recently proved that every graph $G$ contains an immersion of a clique on $bigllceil frac{chi (G)-4}{3.54}bigrrceil$ vertices. Their result implies that every $n$-vertex graph with independence number $alpha$ contains an immersion of a clique on $bigllceil frac{n}{3.54alpha}-1.13bigrrceil$ vertices. We improve on this result for all $alphage 3$, by showing that every $n$-vertex graph with independence number $alphage 3$ contains an immersion of a clique on $bigllfloor frac {n}{2.25 alpha - f(alpha)} bigrrfloor - 1$ vertices, where $f$ is a nonnegative function.
The spectral radius (or the signless Laplacian spectral radius) of a general hypergraph is the maximum modulus of the eigenvalues of its adjacency (or its signless Laplacian) tensor. In this paper, we firstly obtain a lower bound of the spectral radius (or the signless Laplacian spectral radius) of general hypergraphs in terms of clique number. Moreover, we present a relation between a homogeneous polynomial and the clique number of general hypergraphs. As an application, we finally obtain an upper bound of the spectral radius of general hypergraphs in terms of clique number.
We determine the Ramsey number of a connected clique matching. That is, we show that if $G$ is a $2$-edge-coloured complete graph on $(r^2 - r - 1)n - r + 1$ vertices, then there is a monochromatic connected subgraph containing $n$ disjoint copies of $K_r$, and that this number of vertices cannot be reduced.
A pebbling move on a graph removes two pebbles at a vertex and adds one pebble at an adjacent vertex. Rubbling is a version of pebbling where an additional move is allowed. In this new move, one pebble each is removed at vertices $v$ and $w$ adjacent to a vertex $u$, and an extra pebble is added at vertex $u$. A vertex is reachable from a pebble distribution if it is possible to move a pebble to that vertex using rubbling moves. The rubbling number is the smallest number $m$ needed to guarantee that any vertex is reachable from any pebble distribution of $m$ pebbles. The optimal rubbling number is the smallest number $m$ needed to guarantee a pebble distribution of $m$ pebbles from which any vertex is reachable. We give bounds for rubbling and optimal rubbling numbers. In particular, we find an upper bound for the rubbling number of $n$-vertex, diameter $d$ graphs, and estimates for the maximum rubbling number of diameter 2 graphs. We also give a sharp upper bound for the optimal rubbling number, and sharp upper and lower bounds in terms of the diameter.
Let $G$ be a simple graph with $2n$ vertices and a perfect matching. The forcing number of a perfect matching $M$ of $G$ is the smallest cardinality of a subset of $M$ that is contained in no other perfect matching of $G$. Let $f(G)$ and $F(G)$ denote the minimum and maximum forcing number of $G$ among all perfect matchings, respectively. Hetyei obtained that the maximum number of edges of graphs $G$ with a unique perfect matching is $n^2$ (see Lov{a}sz [20]). We know that $G$ has a unique perfect matching if and only if $f(G)=0$. Along this line, we generalize the classical result to all graphs $G$ with $f(G)=k$ for $0leq kleq n-1$, and obtain that the number of edges is at most $n^2+2nk-k^2-k$ and characterize the extremal graphs as well. Conversely, we get a non-trivial lower bound of $f(G)$ in terms of the order and size. For bipartite graphs, we gain corresponding stronger results. Further, we obtain a new upper bound of $F(G)$. Finally some open problems and conjectures are proposed.
Log in to be able to interact and post comments
comments
Fetching comments
Sign in to be able to follow your search criteria
