To save content items to your account,
please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies.
If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account.
Find out more about saving content to .
To save content items to your Kindle, first ensure no-reply@cambridge.org
is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings
on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part
of your Kindle email address below.
Find out more about saving to your Kindle.
Note you can select to save to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations.
‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be saved to your device when it is connected to wi-fi.
‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.
In this opening chapter it is our intention to give the basic definitions and some of the notation which we shall use throughout this book. We begin with some basic concepts concerning graphs.
A graph is an ordered triple (V(G), E(G), ψG) consisting of a finite, non-empty set of vertices, V(G), a finite set E(G) of edges, disjoint from V(G), and an incidence function ψG that associates an unordered pair of distinct vertices with each edge. We say that e joins u and v if ψG(e) = {u, v}, written uv, and that e has ends u and v. An edge is incident with a vertex v if v is one of its ends, and two vertices joined by an edge are adjacent. Edges which have the same ends are called multiple or parallel edges: the case when an edge joins a vertex to itself will not be considered in this book. We shall call a graph with no multiple edges simple. If G is simple and e ∈ E(G) an edge with ψG(e) = uv, we shall write e = uv. The degree dG(v) of a vertex v is the number of edges incident with v. We denote the minimum and maximum degrees of G by δ(G) and Δ(G), respectively. A vertex with degree zero is called an isolated vertex.
Many problems in graph theory can be formulated as an instance of the following, somewhat general, covering problem:
We are given two sets X and Y, and with each element x ∈ X there is an associated subset K(x) of elements of Y (which are covered in some sense by the element x). We know that ∪x∈X K(x) = Y; our task is to find a subset X0 ⊆ X of minimum cardinality such that ∪x∈x0 K(x) = Y.
The set X is called the covering set and the set Y is the covered set. Every subset X′ ⊆ X satisfying ∪x∈X′K(x) = Y is called a covering of Y by X. Our problem is to find a covering consisting of as few elements as possible, a minimum covering of Y by X. As an example we might take X to be the set of all matchings in a bipartite graph G, Y to be the set of edges E(G), and K(M) = M for each matching M ∈ X. Then a proper Δ(G)-colouring of G induces a minimum covering of Y by X. There are many other possible such examples, several are given in the exercises for this section. Later, in Section 12.2, we will consider covering the edges of a non-bipartite graph with bipartite subgraphs with prescribed properties. First, however, there are several special forms of coverings for bipartite graphs which merit particular attention.
Let F = (S1, …, Sn) be a family of subsets of a finite set S. A sequence F = (f1, …, fn) of elements of S is called a system of representatives of F if fi ∈ Si, for i = 1,2, …, n. If the elements of F are distinct then F is called a system of distinct representatives (SDR) for F.
Example 11.1.1Let S1={u2, u3, u4}, S2={u1, u2, u3} and S3={u3, u4, u5}. Then F = (u2, u1, u3) is an SDR for F = (S1, S2, S3), since u2 ∈ S1, u1 ∈ S2 and u3 ∈ S3.
Many criteria for the existence of systems of representatives, under various restrictions, have been developed (see Mirsky (1971)). Bipartite graphs have proven to be a particularly useful tool in these investigations, since every collection of subsets F can be represented by the bipartite graph G(F) with bipartition (V1, V2) where V1 = {S1, …, Sn}, V2 = S and the vertices Si ∈ V1 and u ∈ V2 are joined by an edge if and only if u ∈ Si. We shall give a few examples of results on SDRs to demonstrate how this representation can be used, which employ a variety of different graph theoretic results. We begin with the principal result in this area, obtained by P. Hall (1935).
The spectral function ρα(μ) (−∞<μ<∞) associated with the Sturm–Liouville equation
and a boundary condition
is a non-decreasing function of μ which is defined in terms of the Titchmarsh–Weyl function mα(λ) for (1.1) and (1.2). Thus, taking into account a standardization of the sign attached to mα(λ), we have
We give a characterization for isoperimetric invariants, including the Cheeger constant and the isoperimetric number of a graph. This leads to an isoperimetric inequality for the Cartesian products of graphs.
In this note we give an answer to the following problem of Todorcevic: Find out the combinatorial essence behind the fact that the family ℋ of the ground-model infinite sets of integers in a Perfect-set forcing extension has the property that for any Borel f: [ℕ]ω → {0, 1} there exists an A ∈ ℋ such that f is constant on [A]ω (see [7], [13]). In other words, one needs to capture the combinatorial properties of the family ℋ of ground-model subsets of ℕ which assure that it diagonalizes all Borel partitions. It turns out that the notion which results from our analysis of this problem is a bit more optimal than the older notion of a “happy family” (or selective coideal) introduced by A.R.D. Mathias [16] long ago in order to extend the well-known theorems of Galvin–Prikry [6] and Silver [25] (see Theorems 3.1 and 4.1 below). We should remark that these Mathias-style extensions can indeed be as useful in the applications as the original partition theorems.
Let M be a loopless matroid with rank r and c components. Let P(M, t) be the characteristic polynomial of M. We shall show that (−1)rP(M, t)[ges ](1−t)r for t∈(−∞, 1), that the multiplicity of the zeros of P(M, t) at t=1 is equal to c, and that (−1)r+cP(M, t)[ges ](t−1)r for t∈(1, 32/27]. Using a result of C. Thomassen we deduce that the maximal zero-free intervals for characteristic polynomials of loopless matroids are precisely (−∞, 1) and (1, 32/27].
It was conjectured by Bartels and Welsh [1] that removing an edge from an n-vertex graph G will not increase the average number of colours in the proper colourings of G if k=n colours are available. This paper shows that for all n>3, and for each k∈{3, 4, …, [lfloor](3n−6)/2[rfloor]}, there is a graph on n vertices with an edge whose removal increases the average number of colours in the k-colourings, thus disproving the conjecture.
L'objet de cet article est d'étudier un procédé de summation associé á certaines séries. Notant P(n) le plus grand facteur premier d'un entier générique n, nous rappellons les définitions de P-convergence et de P-régularité d'une série, introduites dans [7].
Deuber's theorem states that, given any m, p, c, r in IN, there exist n, q, μ in IN such that, whenever an (n, q, cμ)-set is r-coloured, there is a monochrome (m, p, c)-set. This theorem has been used in conjunction with the algebraic structure of the Stone–Čech compactification βIN of IN to derive several strengthenings of itself. We present here an algebraic proof of the main results in βIN and derive Deuber's theorem as a consequence.
We study the concept of list total colourings and prove that every multigraph of maximum degree 3 is 5-total-choosable. We also show that the total choice number of a graph of maximum degree 2 is equal to its total chromatic number.
Let kp(G) denote the number of complete subgraphs of order p in the graph G. Bollobás proved that any real linear combination of the form [sum ]apkp(G) attains its maximum on a complete multipartite graph. We show that the same is true for a linear combination of the form [sum ]apkp(G)+bpkp(G¯), provided bp[ges ]0 for every p.
We consider Riemannian orbifolds with Ricci curvature nonnegative outside a compact set and prove that the number of ends is finite. We also show that if that compact set is small then the Riemannian orbifolds have only two ends. A version of splitting theorem for orbifolds also follows as an easy consequence.
The boundary-layer spots involved here come from large-time theory and related computations on the Euler equations to cover the majority of the global properties of the spot disturbances, which are nonlinear, three-dimensional, and transitional rather than turbulent. The amplitude levels investigated are higher than those examined in detail previously and produce a new near-wall momentum contribution in the mean flow, initially close to the wingtips of the spot. This enables the amplitude levels in the analysis to be raised successively, a process which gradually causes the wing-tip region to spread inwards. The process is accompanied by subtle increases in the induced phase variations. Among other things the work finds the details of how nonlinear effects grow from the wing-tips to eventually alter the entire trailing edge, and then the centre of the spot, in a strongly nonlinear fashion. Comparisons with earlier suggestions and with experiments are described at the end.
There is an error in our paper “Bounds on the covering radius of a lattice” published in this journal in 1996 (vol. 43, pp. 159–164). Theorem 1 of the paper should be corrected as follows.