existence of a certain subset of vertices in a graph












4














Take an undirected graph $G=(V,E)$. For any subset $Msubseteq V$, we define ${rm deg}_M(v)=|{kin M:(v,k)in E}|$, namely, the number of neighbors of $v$ in $M$.



Is it true that, there exists a subset $Msubseteq V$ such that, for every $vin M$, ${rm deg}_M(v)leq 3$, and for every $v'in Vsetminus M$, ${rm deg}_M(v')geq 4$?



Note that, some obvious cases. If nobody are friends, we can simply take $V$ to be the entire set. Similarly, if $G$ is fully connected, then any $4-$element subset work. I tried to reason in the following way, take a maximal (in the sense of cardinality) $M$, such that, for every $vin M$, ${rm deg}_M(v)leq 3$. Now, for any point outside, if it has $geq 4$ neighbors, we are done. If not, then there are points in $M$, which are neighbors of $v$, such that, their in$-M$ degree is precisely $3$, but this did not lead me to anywhere.






co.combinatorics graph-theory







share|cite|improve this question



























    4














    Take an undirected graph $G=(V,E)$. For any subset $Msubseteq V$, we define ${rm deg}_M(v)=|{kin M:(v,k)in E}|$, namely, the number of neighbors of $v$ in $M$.



    Is it true that, there exists a subset $Msubseteq V$ such that, for every $vin M$, ${rm deg}_M(v)leq 3$, and for every $v'in Vsetminus M$, ${rm deg}_M(v')geq 4$?



    Note that, some obvious cases. If nobody are friends, we can simply take $V$ to be the entire set. Similarly, if $G$ is fully connected, then any $4-$element subset work. I tried to reason in the following way, take a maximal (in the sense of cardinality) $M$, such that, for every $vin M$, ${rm deg}_M(v)leq 3$. Now, for any point outside, if it has $geq 4$ neighbors, we are done. If not, then there are points in $M$, which are neighbors of $v$, such that, their in$-M$ degree is precisely $3$, but this did not lead me to anywhere.






    co.combinatorics graph-theory







    share|cite|improve this question

























      4












      4








      4


      1





      Take an undirected graph $G=(V,E)$. For any subset $Msubseteq V$, we define ${rm deg}_M(v)=|{kin M:(v,k)in E}|$, namely, the number of neighbors of $v$ in $M$.



      Is it true that, there exists a subset $Msubseteq V$ such that, for every $vin M$, ${rm deg}_M(v)leq 3$, and for every $v'in Vsetminus M$, ${rm deg}_M(v')geq 4$?



      Note that, some obvious cases. If nobody are friends, we can simply take $V$ to be the entire set. Similarly, if $G$ is fully connected, then any $4-$element subset work. I tried to reason in the following way, take a maximal (in the sense of cardinality) $M$, such that, for every $vin M$, ${rm deg}_M(v)leq 3$. Now, for any point outside, if it has $geq 4$ neighbors, we are done. If not, then there are points in $M$, which are neighbors of $v$, such that, their in$-M$ degree is precisely $3$, but this did not lead me to anywhere.






      co.combinatorics graph-theory







      share|cite|improve this question













      Take an undirected graph $G=(V,E)$. For any subset $Msubseteq V$, we define ${rm deg}_M(v)=|{kin M:(v,k)in E}|$, namely, the number of neighbors of $v$ in $M$.



      Is it true that, there exists a subset $Msubseteq V$ such that, for every $vin M$, ${rm deg}_M(v)leq 3$, and for every $v'in Vsetminus M$, ${rm deg}_M(v')geq 4$?



      Note that, some obvious cases. If nobody are friends, we can simply take $V$ to be the entire set. Similarly, if $G$ is fully connected, then any $4-$element subset work. I tried to reason in the following way, take a maximal (in the sense of cardinality) $M$, such that, for every $vin M$, ${rm deg}_M(v)leq 3$. Now, for any point outside, if it has $geq 4$ neighbors, we are done. If not, then there are points in $M$, which are neighbors of $v$, such that, their in$-M$ degree is precisely $3$, but this did not lead me to anywhere.






      co.combinatorics graph-theory




      co.combinatorics graph-theory






      share|cite|improve this question













      share|cite|improve this question











      share|cite|improve this question




      share|cite|improve this question










      asked Nov 22 '18 at 23:50









      kawa

      1587




      1587






















          1 Answer
          1






          active

          oldest

          votes


















          9














          Let us consider all sets $M$ with $d_M(v)le 3$ for all $vin M$ (I'll write $d$ instead of $rm{deg}$) and choose the set that maximizes
          $$
          |M|-frac 14 E(M)
          $$
          where $E(M)$ is the number of edges between the vertices in $M$.
          Assume that there is a vertex $w$ with $d_M(w)le 3$. We can try to add it to $M$ but it may spoil some its neighbors in $M$ (those that had degree $3$ in $M$ already). Then we may just delete the bad neighbors one by one as long as their degree is $4$ (after the first deletion we can improve other vertices too, so we may delete only part of spoiled neighbors and the rest may get their low degree recovered). If we do $k$ deletions, we get $|M|to |M|+1-k$, $E(M)to le E(M)+3-4k$, which certainly increases the functional by at least $frac 14$. Thus the trivial algorithm (add a vertex and remove the resulting conflicts, if any, one by one) works and achieves the desired result in $4|V|$ steps at the worst.






          share|cite|improve this answer





















          • And of course the same argument shows that, for any nonnegative integer $d$ and any finite graph $G=(V,E)$, there is a set $Msubseteq V$ such that $M={xin V:|N(x)cap M|le d}$. Is this also true for infinite graphs?
            – bof
            Nov 23 '18 at 5:49










          • @bof Hard to tell... Of course, when we have some sort of compactness principle, we can reduce the question to the finite case, but what would you do in the case of the unit distance graph for the points in $mathbb R^n$, for instance?
            – fedja
            Nov 23 '18 at 22:19










          • At least it's true for locally finite graphs, by compactness. Right?
            – bof
            Nov 24 '18 at 12:46












          • The unit distance graph on $mathbb R^n$ is easy. The cases $n=0$ (finite graph) and $n=1$ (locally finite) are trivial. For $nge2$ an easy transfinite construction (with the axiom of choice of course) gets us a set $Asubsetmathbb R^n$ such that $|N(x)cap A|=0$ for $xin A$ while $|N(x)cap A|=|mathbb R|$ for $xinmathbb R^nsetminus A$.
            – bof
            Nov 27 '18 at 6:57











          Your Answer





          StackExchange.ifUsing("editor", function () {
          return StackExchange.using("mathjaxEditing", function () {
          StackExchange.MarkdownEditor.creationCallbacks.add(function (editor, postfix) {
          StackExchange.mathjaxEditing.prepareWmdForMathJax(editor, postfix, [["$", "$"], ["\\(","\\)"]]);
          });
          });
          }, "mathjax-editing");

          StackExchange.ready(function() {
          var channelOptions = {
          tags: "".split(" "),
          id: "504"
          };
          initTagRenderer("".split(" "), "".split(" "), channelOptions);

          StackExchange.using("externalEditor", function() {
          // Have to fire editor after snippets, if snippets enabled
          if (StackExchange.settings.snippets.snippetsEnabled) {
          StackExchange.using("snippets", function() {
          createEditor();
          });
          }
          else {
          createEditor();
          }
          });

          function createEditor() {
          StackExchange.prepareEditor({
          heartbeatType: 'answer',
          autoActivateHeartbeat: false,
          convertImagesToLinks: true,
          noModals: true,
          showLowRepImageUploadWarning: true,
          reputationToPostImages: 10,
          bindNavPrevention: true,
          postfix: "",
          imageUploader: {
          brandingHtml: "Powered by u003ca class="icon-imgur-white" href="https://imgur.com/"u003eu003c/au003e",
          contentPolicyHtml: "User contributions licensed under u003ca href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"u003ecc by-sa 3.0 with attribution requiredu003c/au003e u003ca href="https://stackoverflow.com/legal/content-policy"u003e(content policy)u003c/au003e",
          allowUrls: true
          },
          noCode: true, onDemand: true,
          discardSelector: ".discard-answer"
          ,immediatelyShowMarkdownHelp:true
          });


          }
          });














          draft saved

          draft discarded


















          StackExchange.ready(
          function () {
          StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fmathoverflow.net%2fquestions%2f315994%2fexistence-of-a-certain-subset-of-vertices-in-a-graph%23new-answer', 'question_page');
          }
          );

          Post as a guest















          Required, but never shown

























          1 Answer
          1






          active

          oldest

          votes








          1 Answer
          1






          active

          oldest

          votes









          active

          oldest

          votes






          active

          oldest

          votes









          9














          Let us consider all sets $M$ with $d_M(v)le 3$ for all $vin M$ (I'll write $d$ instead of $rm{deg}$) and choose the set that maximizes
          $$
          |M|-frac 14 E(M)
          $$
          where $E(M)$ is the number of edges between the vertices in $M$.
          Assume that there is a vertex $w$ with $d_M(w)le 3$. We can try to add it to $M$ but it may spoil some its neighbors in $M$ (those that had degree $3$ in $M$ already). Then we may just delete the bad neighbors one by one as long as their degree is $4$ (after the first deletion we can improve other vertices too, so we may delete only part of spoiled neighbors and the rest may get their low degree recovered). If we do $k$ deletions, we get $|M|to |M|+1-k$, $E(M)to le E(M)+3-4k$, which certainly increases the functional by at least $frac 14$. Thus the trivial algorithm (add a vertex and remove the resulting conflicts, if any, one by one) works and achieves the desired result in $4|V|$ steps at the worst.






          share|cite|improve this answer





















          • And of course the same argument shows that, for any nonnegative integer $d$ and any finite graph $G=(V,E)$, there is a set $Msubseteq V$ such that $M={xin V:|N(x)cap M|le d}$. Is this also true for infinite graphs?
            – bof
            Nov 23 '18 at 5:49










          • @bof Hard to tell... Of course, when we have some sort of compactness principle, we can reduce the question to the finite case, but what would you do in the case of the unit distance graph for the points in $mathbb R^n$, for instance?
            – fedja
            Nov 23 '18 at 22:19










          • At least it's true for locally finite graphs, by compactness. Right?
            – bof
            Nov 24 '18 at 12:46












          • The unit distance graph on $mathbb R^n$ is easy. The cases $n=0$ (finite graph) and $n=1$ (locally finite) are trivial. For $nge2$ an easy transfinite construction (with the axiom of choice of course) gets us a set $Asubsetmathbb R^n$ such that $|N(x)cap A|=0$ for $xin A$ while $|N(x)cap A|=|mathbb R|$ for $xinmathbb R^nsetminus A$.
            – bof
            Nov 27 '18 at 6:57
















          9














          Let us consider all sets $M$ with $d_M(v)le 3$ for all $vin M$ (I'll write $d$ instead of $rm{deg}$) and choose the set that maximizes
          $$
          |M|-frac 14 E(M)
          $$
          where $E(M)$ is the number of edges between the vertices in $M$.
          Assume that there is a vertex $w$ with $d_M(w)le 3$. We can try to add it to $M$ but it may spoil some its neighbors in $M$ (those that had degree $3$ in $M$ already). Then we may just delete the bad neighbors one by one as long as their degree is $4$ (after the first deletion we can improve other vertices too, so we may delete only part of spoiled neighbors and the rest may get their low degree recovered). If we do $k$ deletions, we get $|M|to |M|+1-k$, $E(M)to le E(M)+3-4k$, which certainly increases the functional by at least $frac 14$. Thus the trivial algorithm (add a vertex and remove the resulting conflicts, if any, one by one) works and achieves the desired result in $4|V|$ steps at the worst.






          share|cite|improve this answer





















          • And of course the same argument shows that, for any nonnegative integer $d$ and any finite graph $G=(V,E)$, there is a set $Msubseteq V$ such that $M={xin V:|N(x)cap M|le d}$. Is this also true for infinite graphs?
            – bof
            Nov 23 '18 at 5:49










          • @bof Hard to tell... Of course, when we have some sort of compactness principle, we can reduce the question to the finite case, but what would you do in the case of the unit distance graph for the points in $mathbb R^n$, for instance?
            – fedja
            Nov 23 '18 at 22:19










          • At least it's true for locally finite graphs, by compactness. Right?
            – bof
            Nov 24 '18 at 12:46












          • The unit distance graph on $mathbb R^n$ is easy. The cases $n=0$ (finite graph) and $n=1$ (locally finite) are trivial. For $nge2$ an easy transfinite construction (with the axiom of choice of course) gets us a set $Asubsetmathbb R^n$ such that $|N(x)cap A|=0$ for $xin A$ while $|N(x)cap A|=|mathbb R|$ for $xinmathbb R^nsetminus A$.
            – bof
            Nov 27 '18 at 6:57














          9












          9








          9






          Let us consider all sets $M$ with $d_M(v)le 3$ for all $vin M$ (I'll write $d$ instead of $rm{deg}$) and choose the set that maximizes
          $$
          |M|-frac 14 E(M)
          $$
          where $E(M)$ is the number of edges between the vertices in $M$.
          Assume that there is a vertex $w$ with $d_M(w)le 3$. We can try to add it to $M$ but it may spoil some its neighbors in $M$ (those that had degree $3$ in $M$ already). Then we may just delete the bad neighbors one by one as long as their degree is $4$ (after the first deletion we can improve other vertices too, so we may delete only part of spoiled neighbors and the rest may get their low degree recovered). If we do $k$ deletions, we get $|M|to |M|+1-k$, $E(M)to le E(M)+3-4k$, which certainly increases the functional by at least $frac 14$. Thus the trivial algorithm (add a vertex and remove the resulting conflicts, if any, one by one) works and achieves the desired result in $4|V|$ steps at the worst.






          share|cite|improve this answer












          Let us consider all sets $M$ with $d_M(v)le 3$ for all $vin M$ (I'll write $d$ instead of $rm{deg}$) and choose the set that maximizes
          $$
          |M|-frac 14 E(M)
          $$
          where $E(M)$ is the number of edges between the vertices in $M$.
          Assume that there is a vertex $w$ with $d_M(w)le 3$. We can try to add it to $M$ but it may spoil some its neighbors in $M$ (those that had degree $3$ in $M$ already). Then we may just delete the bad neighbors one by one as long as their degree is $4$ (after the first deletion we can improve other vertices too, so we may delete only part of spoiled neighbors and the rest may get their low degree recovered). If we do $k$ deletions, we get $|M|to |M|+1-k$, $E(M)to le E(M)+3-4k$, which certainly increases the functional by at least $frac 14$. Thus the trivial algorithm (add a vertex and remove the resulting conflicts, if any, one by one) works and achieves the desired result in $4|V|$ steps at the worst.







          share|cite|improve this answer












          share|cite|improve this answer



          share|cite|improve this answer










          answered Nov 23 '18 at 3:31









          fedja

          37.4k7109203




          37.4k7109203












          • And of course the same argument shows that, for any nonnegative integer $d$ and any finite graph $G=(V,E)$, there is a set $Msubseteq V$ such that $M={xin V:|N(x)cap M|le d}$. Is this also true for infinite graphs?
            – bof
            Nov 23 '18 at 5:49










          • @bof Hard to tell... Of course, when we have some sort of compactness principle, we can reduce the question to the finite case, but what would you do in the case of the unit distance graph for the points in $mathbb R^n$, for instance?
            – fedja
            Nov 23 '18 at 22:19










          • At least it's true for locally finite graphs, by compactness. Right?
            – bof
            Nov 24 '18 at 12:46












          • The unit distance graph on $mathbb R^n$ is easy. The cases $n=0$ (finite graph) and $n=1$ (locally finite) are trivial. For $nge2$ an easy transfinite construction (with the axiom of choice of course) gets us a set $Asubsetmathbb R^n$ such that $|N(x)cap A|=0$ for $xin A$ while $|N(x)cap A|=|mathbb R|$ for $xinmathbb R^nsetminus A$.
            – bof
            Nov 27 '18 at 6:57


















          • And of course the same argument shows that, for any nonnegative integer $d$ and any finite graph $G=(V,E)$, there is a set $Msubseteq V$ such that $M={xin V:|N(x)cap M|le d}$. Is this also true for infinite graphs?
            – bof
            Nov 23 '18 at 5:49










          • @bof Hard to tell... Of course, when we have some sort of compactness principle, we can reduce the question to the finite case, but what would you do in the case of the unit distance graph for the points in $mathbb R^n$, for instance?
            – fedja
            Nov 23 '18 at 22:19










          • At least it's true for locally finite graphs, by compactness. Right?
            – bof
            Nov 24 '18 at 12:46












          • The unit distance graph on $mathbb R^n$ is easy. The cases $n=0$ (finite graph) and $n=1$ (locally finite) are trivial. For $nge2$ an easy transfinite construction (with the axiom of choice of course) gets us a set $Asubsetmathbb R^n$ such that $|N(x)cap A|=0$ for $xin A$ while $|N(x)cap A|=|mathbb R|$ for $xinmathbb R^nsetminus A$.
            – bof
            Nov 27 '18 at 6:57
















          And of course the same argument shows that, for any nonnegative integer $d$ and any finite graph $G=(V,E)$, there is a set $Msubseteq V$ such that $M={xin V:|N(x)cap M|le d}$. Is this also true for infinite graphs?
          – bof
          Nov 23 '18 at 5:49




          And of course the same argument shows that, for any nonnegative integer $d$ and any finite graph $G=(V,E)$, there is a set $Msubseteq V$ such that $M={xin V:|N(x)cap M|le d}$. Is this also true for infinite graphs?
          – bof
          Nov 23 '18 at 5:49












          @bof Hard to tell... Of course, when we have some sort of compactness principle, we can reduce the question to the finite case, but what would you do in the case of the unit distance graph for the points in $mathbb R^n$, for instance?
          – fedja
          Nov 23 '18 at 22:19




          @bof Hard to tell... Of course, when we have some sort of compactness principle, we can reduce the question to the finite case, but what would you do in the case of the unit distance graph for the points in $mathbb R^n$, for instance?
          – fedja
          Nov 23 '18 at 22:19












          At least it's true for locally finite graphs, by compactness. Right?
          – bof
          Nov 24 '18 at 12:46






          At least it's true for locally finite graphs, by compactness. Right?
          – bof
          Nov 24 '18 at 12:46














          The unit distance graph on $mathbb R^n$ is easy. The cases $n=0$ (finite graph) and $n=1$ (locally finite) are trivial. For $nge2$ an easy transfinite construction (with the axiom of choice of course) gets us a set $Asubsetmathbb R^n$ such that $|N(x)cap A|=0$ for $xin A$ while $|N(x)cap A|=|mathbb R|$ for $xinmathbb R^nsetminus A$.
          – bof
          Nov 27 '18 at 6:57




          The unit distance graph on $mathbb R^n$ is easy. The cases $n=0$ (finite graph) and $n=1$ (locally finite) are trivial. For $nge2$ an easy transfinite construction (with the axiom of choice of course) gets us a set $Asubsetmathbb R^n$ such that $|N(x)cap A|=0$ for $xin A$ while $|N(x)cap A|=|mathbb R|$ for $xinmathbb R^nsetminus A$.
          – bof
          Nov 27 '18 at 6:57


















          draft saved

          draft discarded




















































          Thanks for contributing an answer to MathOverflow!


          • Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!

          But avoid …



          • Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.

          • Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.


          Use MathJax to format equations. MathJax reference.


          To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.





          Some of your past answers have not been well-received, and you're in danger of being blocked from answering.


          Please pay close attention to the following guidance:


          • Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!

          But avoid …



          • Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.

          • Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.


          To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.




          draft saved


          draft discarded














          StackExchange.ready(
          function () {
          StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fmathoverflow.net%2fquestions%2f315994%2fexistence-of-a-certain-subset-of-vertices-in-a-graph%23new-answer', 'question_page');
          }
          );

          Post as a guest















          Required, but never shown





















































          Required, but never shown














          Required, but never shown












          Required, but never shown







          Required, but never shown

































          Required, but never shown














          Required, but never shown












          Required, but never shown







          Required, but never shown







          -

          Popular posts from this blog

          AnyDesk - Fatal Program Failure

          Image
          up vote 0 down vote favorite Good day all. I have a window that pops up saying Fatal Program Failure (AnyDesk). This is what I have done so far: Uninstalled AnyDesk and reinstalled it. ( The window still appeared ) I disabled AnyDesk start up in Msconfig and the window seems to have disapeared. Lastly I made sure that AnyDesk worked by remoting into it, and it worked. Today the same window appeared. How do I get rid of this window? remote-desktop share | improve this question edited 10 hours ago Tomasz Jakub Rup 552 3 13 ...
          Read more

          How to calibrate 16:9 built-in touch-screen to a 4:3 resolution?

          Image
          up vote 0 down vote favorite I need help with an issue we're facing in a project where we are moving from a Windows-based POS environment to one running on CentOS7. The problem consists of a number of factors, please find the details below: The supplier of our POS application will only deliver an application that is hard-coded to run in a 1024:768 4:3 format. The hardware we are using is a POS unit from HP that has a built-in 16:9 touch-screen. The employees using this solution is not supposed to see nor have access to anything but the POS application. Our sales organization demands that touch is an available feature when going live with the new POS environment. Going further into this, allow me to explain what we have encountered on the way trying to achieve the goal of having a touch-screen: We've simply change...
          Read more

          QoS: MAC-Priority for clients behind a repeater

          Image
          1 1 I've setup a wireless network using a Linksys-Router (DD-WRT) as an AP and a TP-Link repeater for range extension. To manage bandwith for specific users, I've setup QoS-Rules on the AP (DD-WRT) using MAC-Priority: However the AP shows only the Repeater's MAC and the MACs of users inside the AP-Range. The MAC addresses of users behind the Repeater are not listed : The purple MAC is not listed in the AP-Clientlist. Its related to a device connected via the TP-Link repeater. Q: How can I setup MAC-Priority for repeater-clients? Do I simply add the purple MAC in AP-MAC priority list although it's not listed as a client? I want to setup specific priority instead of giving one priority for all clients behind the repeater by adding the repeater's MAC in the MAC priority list in the AP as ...
          Read more