1 / 20

Decomposition Theory in Matching Covered Graphs

Decomposition Theory in Matching Covered Graphs. Qinglin Yu Nankai U. , China & U. C. Cariboo, Canada. Topics. Basic concepts Ear Decomposition Brick Decomposition Matching Lattice Properties of Bricks. Basic Concepts:.

moya
Download Presentation

Decomposition Theory in Matching Covered Graphs

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript


  1. Decomposition Theory in Matching Covered Graphs Qinglin Yu Nankai U. , China & U. C. Cariboo, Canada

  2. Topics • Basic concepts • Ear Decomposition • Brick Decomposition • Matching Lattice • Properties of Bricks

  3. Basic Concepts: Perfect Matching (p.m.): a set of independent edges saturated all vertices of a graph. Matching-covered (or 1-extendable) graph: every edge lies in a p.m. Bicritical graph G: G-{u, v} has a p.m. for any pair of {u, v}V(G). Tutte’s Theorem: A graph G has a p.m. if and only if o(G-S) ≤ |S| for any S V(G) Barrier set S: a vertex-set S satisfying o(G-S) = |S|

  4. 1. Ear Decomposition Let G′ be a subgraph of a graph G. An ear: 1) a path P of odd length; 2) end-vertices of P are in V(G′); 3) internal vertices of P are not in V(G′). An ear system: a set of vertex-disjoint ears. Ear-decomposition: G′ =G1G2G3 … Gr= G where each Gi is an ear system and Gi+1is obtained from Gi by an ear system so that Gi+1 is 1-extendable.

  5. 1. Ear Decomposition Let G′ be a subgraph of a graph G. An ear: 1) a path P of odd length; 2) end-vertices of P are in V(G′); 3) internal vertices of P are not in V(G′). An ear system: a set of vertex-disjoint ears. Ear-decomposition: G′ =G1G2G3 … Gr= G where each Gi is an ear system and Gi+1is obtained from Gi by an ear system so that Gi+1 is 1-extendable.

  6. Theorem (Lovasz and Plummer, 76) Let G be a 1-extendable graph and G′ a subgraph of G. Then G has an ear-decomposition starting with G′ if and only if G-V(G′) has a p.m. Theorem (Two Ears Theorem) Every 1-extendable graph G has an ear decomposition K2G2G3 … Gr= G so that each Gicontains at most two ears.

  7. Let d*(G) = min # of double ears in an ear decomposition of a graph G. Optimal ear decomposition is an ear decomposition with exactly d*(G) double ears. Examples: i) a graph G is bipartite, then d*(G) = 0. ii) For the Petersen graph P, d*(P) = 2. Theorem (Carvahho, et al, '02) If G is a 1-extenable graph, then d*(G) = b(G) + p(G) where b(G) is # of bricks in G and p(G) is # of Petersen bricks in G. (Note: both b(G) and p(G) are invariants.)

  8. 2. Brick Decomposition Step 1. If G is a brick or is bipartite, then it is indecomposable Step 2. Create bicriticality: if G is non-bipartite and not critical, then let X be a maximal barrier with |X|  2, and let S be the vertex set of a component of G-X such that |S|  3. Let G1 = G  S (the graph obtained by shrinking S in G to a vertex) and G2 = G  (G-S). Repeat this step on G1 and G2.

  9. Brick Decomposition (Contin.) Step 3. Create 3-connectivity: if G is bicritical, but not 3-connected, then let {u, v} be a vertex cut, let S be the vertex set of a component of G-{u, v} and let T = V-(S{u, v}). Let G1 = G  (S {u}) and G2 = G  (T {v}). Repeat this step on G1 and G2.

  10. Example: Step 2: Step 3:

  11. Theorem (Lovasz, 87) In a brick decomposition, the list of bricks and bipartite graphs are independent or unique (up to multiplicity of edges) of choices of max. barrier X (in Step 2) or 2-cut (in Step 3).

  12. 3. Matching Lattice For any A  E(G), incident vector χA of A in ZE is a vector w of 0’s and 1’s such that w(e) = 0 if eA and w(e) = 1 if e A. Matching lattice for G=(V, E) is denoted Lat(G) := {w ZE : w = MMM χM, M Z} IntCon(G) := {w ZE0 : w = MMM χM, M Z0 }

  13. Matching Lattice (Contin.) • Example: H=C3K2 is a 1-extendable and bicritical graph (i.e., a brick) • It has only 4 p.m., namely M1={1, 5, 9}, χM1 = {1,0,0,0,1,0,0,0,1}; M2={2, 6, 7}, χM2 = {0,1,0,0,0,1,1,0,0}; M3={3, 4, 8}, χM3 = {0,0,1,1,0,0,0,1,0}; M4={4, 5, 6}, χM4 = {0,0,0,1,1,1,0,0,0}; Lat(H) is all integer combinations of χM1, χM2, χM3and χM4

  14. Remarks: Convex hull, integer cone and lattice have been used as tools or relaxations to many well known problems • A k-regular graph G is k-edge-colorable  1-factorable 1= {1, 1, …, 1} lies in IntCon(G); • 4CC  every 2-connected cubic planar graph is 3-edge colorable 1 IntCon; • For an ear decomposition G = K2G2G3 … Gr= G In matching lattice, we can associate each subgraph Gi with a p.m., to obtain a set of r p.m.′s M1, M2, …, Mr so that χM1, χM2, …, χMrare linearly independent.

  15. Theorem (Edmonds, Lovasz and Pulleyblank, 82) Let G = (V, E) be a 1-extendable graph. Let P(G) be p.m. polytope (i.e., convex hull of incident vectors of p.m. of G). Then the dimension of P(G) is |E|-|V|-1 if G is bipartite; |E|- |V| +1 – b if G is nonbipartite (where b is # of bricks in brick decomposition) Theorem (Lovasz, 87) Let G = (V, E) be a 1-extendable graph. Then the dimension of Lat(G) is |E|-|V|+2 – b.

  16. Theorem (Lovasz, 87) Let G = (V, E) be a 1-extendable graph. Then the dimension of Lat(G) is |E|-|V|+2 – b.

  17. 4. Structure results of bricks Theorem (Carvahho, et al, '02) Every brick G ( K4, C3K2) has (D-2) edges ei’s such that G-ei is matching-covered. Conjecture (Lovasz, 87) Every brick different from K4, C3K2, and Petersen graph has an edge e such that G and G-e have the same number of bricks. (Carvahho proved this conjecture and showed a strong result that there exists an edge e such that (b+p)(G-e) = (b+p)(G), where b is # of bricks and p is # of Petersen bricks.)

  18. Theorem Let G be a 1-extendable graph and C is a vertex-cut of G so that both C-contractions are 1-extendable. If C is not tight, then min{|MC|: Mm(G)} = 3 or 5. Theorem If min{|MC|: Mm(G)} = 5, then the underlying simple graph of G is Petersen graph. (Lovasz’s conjecture that every minimal (edge-wise) brick has two adjacent vertices of degree 3 is still open)

  19. Theorem Let G be a brick and its ear-decomposition is G1G2G3 … Gr-1Gr= G Then either Gr-1 is bipartite or G arises from Gr-1 by adding a single edge.

  20. Thank you!!

More Related