The simple graph threshold number $\sigma(r,s,a,t)$
A.J.W. Hilton, A. Rajkumar

TL;DR
This paper determines the threshold degree for simple graphs to be decomposable into specific factors, providing exact values and conditions based on parameters and parity considerations.
Contribution
The paper explicitly evaluates for all parameter values and characterizes factorization conditions based on parity, advancing understanding of graph factorization thresholds.
Findings
Explicit formulas for for all parameters.
Characterization of factorization existence based on degree and parity.
Conditions for the number of factors in graph decompositions.
Abstract
For , a -{\em graph} is a graph whose degrees all lie in the interval . For , , an -{\em factor} of a graph is a spanning -subgraph of . An -{\em factorization} of a graph is a decomposition of into edge-disjoint -factors. A graph is -{\em factorable} if it has an -factorization. Let be the least integer such that, if , then every -simple graph is -factorable with factors for at least different values of . In this paper we evaluate for all values of and . We also show that if and , then, when is even and is odd, every -simple graph has an -factorization with factors if andβ¦
Peer Reviews
No public reviews on file for this paper yet. If you reviewed it on a platform where reviews are public (OpenReview, ICLR, NeurIPS, ICML), you can paste yours below so the community can read it here.
Videos
No videos yet. Explain this paper in a talk, walkthrough, or lecture? Add one.
Taxonomy
TopicsGraph theory and applications Β· Advanced Graph Theory Research Β· graph theory and CDMA systems
The simple graph threshold number
A.J.W. Hilton and A. Rajkumar
Abstract
For , a -graph is a graph whose degrees all lie in the interval . For , , an -factor of a graph is a spanning -subgraph of . An -factorization of a graph is a decomposition of into edge-disjoint -factors. A graph is -factorable if it has an -factorization.
Let be the least integer such that, if , then every -simple graph is -factorable with factors for at least different values of .
In this paper we evaluate for all values of and . We also show that if and , then, when is even and is odd, every -simple graph has an -factorization with factors if and only if
[TABLE]
and we prove similar statements for other parities of and .
1 Introduction
For , , a -graph is a graph whose degrees all lie in the interval . For , an -factor of a graph is a spanning -subgraph of . An -factorization of a graph is a decomposition of into edge-disjoint -factors. If has an -factorization then we say it is -factorable. Sometimes when there can be no confusion we refer simply to factors, rather than -factors.
For , , and , let be the least integer such that, if , then every -simple graph has an -factorization into -factors for at least different values of . The number is called the simple graph -threshold number. In this paper we evaluate .
Let us illustrate our terminology with a few examples. By Vizingβs theorem [17], every simple -graph has a -factorization into -factors. Thus
[TABLE]
[In fact, you can deduce this without using Vizingβs theorem.] Similarly by Guptaβs theorem [5], [6], for every -regular graph has a -factorization into -factors. Thus
[TABLE]
To give an example illustrating the parameter , we may take a proper edge-colouring with 30 colours of a -regular simple graph , which exists by Vizingβs theorem. Let us combine the colours in threes, so that there are 10 sets of combined colours. This gives a -factorization of with -factors. Now take the same -regular graph and form an edge-covering with colours, so that each colour appears on an edge at each vertex; this exists by Guptaβs theorem. Combine these colours together in twoβs, so that there are sets of combined colours. This gives another -factorization of , but this time there are -factors. It was shown in [8] that in fact has a -factorization with colours for each and for no other values of . Moreover, it was shown in [8] that
[TABLE]
Thus there is a regular simple graph of degree which does not have a -factorization with -factors for different values of , but, if , then every -regular simple graph does have a -factorization with factors for at least different values of .
1.1 Analogous threshold numbers
The threshold numbers for several analogous concepts have already been evaluated. Let be the analogous threshold number for bipartite multigraphs, and let be the analogous threshold number for bipartite simple graphs. Let be the analogous threshold number for pseudographs (also known as general graphs, that is graphs where multiple edges and multiple loops are allowed). Finally let be the analogous threshold number for multigraphs (that is, pseudographs with no loops).
For and we define a number by
[TABLE]
For bipartite graphs we showed [9], [10],
Theorem 1**.**
For and ,
[TABLE]
The quite easy arguments used to derive our results for bipartite graphs serve as a template for our arguments for simple graphs. Our results on pseudographs were mainly a rather complicated deduction from the bipartite graph results. Thus our results on pseudographs and our results for simple graphs are more or less independent, the only connection being via our results/arguments for bipartite graphs.
An easy deduction from Theorem 1 and first principles tells us:
Lemma 2**.**
For and
[TABLE]
Proof.
Each bipartite simple graph is a fortiori a simple graph, so
[TABLE]
The other inequalities follow similarly. β
For and both even we have [9], [10],
Theorem 3**.**
For , even, and , ,
[TABLE]
For pseudographs we have the following two theorems [9], [10]. The first deals with the special cases when or . First let us remark that the notation means that there is no smallest value of , say , such that, if then each -pseudograph has an -factorization with factors for at least values of .
Theorem 4**.**
Let and be integers with and positive and non-negative. Then
[TABLE]
and
[TABLE]
There is a further special case when and is odd, which we hope to prove in a sequel to [10].
Theorem 5**.**
Let and be integers with odd, and . Then
[TABLE]
For the cases when not covered by Theorem 4 we have:
Theorem 6**.**
Let and be integers with and positive, and non-negative.
If and are both even, then
[TABLE]
- 2.
If and are both odd, then
[TABLE]
- 3.
If is odd and is even, then
[TABLE]
- 4.
If is even and is odd, then
[TABLE]
Cases (1), (2) and (4) are proved in [10]. The proof and result in Case (3) in [10] was wrong, since the special result when was not noticed. The argument in this overlooked case is quite complicated, and it is hoped to publish it elsewhere as a sequel to [10].
In the main the values of are not known, and it certainly looks at present that they will be harder to determine than the results for simple graphs or pseudographs. However, we do have some results.
In Theorem 3 we gave the evaluation when and are both even; specifically:
βIf and are both even, , , then
[TABLE]
In the case when and we have [3], [4]:
Theorem 7**.**
Let . Then
[TABLE]
[TABLE]
1.2 Known results for simple graphs
The first noteworthy result was due to Era in 1984 [2] and Egawa in 1986 [1].
Theorem 8**.**
For integers ,
[TABLE]
In 2009, extending this and other work by Hilton and Wojciechowski [13], Hilton [8] evaluated in the special case when .
Theorem 9**.**
Let and be integers with and positive and non-negative. Then
[TABLE]
For and even we have the following special case of Theorem 3.
Theorem 10**.**
For , even, and , ,
[TABLE]
In other words
[TABLE]
This result βdropped outβ of the same result for pseudographs. The general method we use for simple graphs is quite different.
1.3 New results for simple graphs
Theorem 9 gives the evaluation when . For general positive integer values of we have the following result.
Theorem 11**.**
Let , , and be integers. Then
- (i)
If is odd and is even, then
[TABLE]
- (ii)
If is even and is even , then
[TABLE]
- (iii)
If is even and is odd, then
[TABLE]
- (iv)
If and are both odd, then
[TABLE]
The evaluation of (i) in Theorem 11 was attempted in [11], but we thank C.J.H. McDiarmid for pointing out that that evaluation was wrong.
It will be noticed that in the case of simple graphs, the evaluations are all quite close to each other (not far from ) unlike the case of pseudographs where the denominator varies from to in the various cases.
Another unexpected point of interest for simple graphs is given in Theorem 12.
Theorem 12**.**
Let , , . Every -simple graph has an -factorization with factors if and only if
[TABLE]
2 Preliminary Considerations
2.1 Basic Inequalities
First we show that if all simple -graphs have an -factorization with factors then
[TABLE]
Lemma 13**.**
Suppose that all simple -graphs have an -factorization. Then
[TABLE]
Proof.
Let be a simple -regular graph and suppose . Suppose has an -factorization with factors. The average degree over all the factors of any vertex is . But , so the largest degree of a vertex in some factor is greater than , a contradiction. Similarly, suppose that is a simple -regular graph and that . The average degree over all the factors of any vertex is , so the smallest degree in some factor is less than , a contradiction. Therefore
[TABLE]
as asserted. β
Next we show that
Lemma 14**.**
The inequalities in Theorem 12 are necessary conditions for all simple -graphs to have an -factorization.
Proof.
- (i)
follows from Lemma 13.
- (ii)
Let . First suppose that is odd. Let be a graph obtained from by removing a and s, so has one vertex of degree and the remaining vertices have degree . Let be the regular graph of degree obtained from two copies of by joining the two vertices of degree by an edge . Then is regular of degree . Since has odd order, any -factor of must contain the edge . Since and since in any -factorization of with factors, each factor must be an -factor, it follows that does not have an -factorization with factors.
Next suppose that is even. Then has odd order and degree . Let and . Since is odd, has no -factor, and so does not have an -factorization with factors.
- (iii)
In this case is odd. Let . Suppose first that is odd. The argument is very like that used in (ii) when is odd. Let be a graph obtained from by removing a and s, so that has one vertex of degree and the remaining vertices have degree . Take two copies of Β and join the two vertices of degree by an edge Β . Call the graph obtained this way . Then is regular of degree and has even order. Any -factor of must contain the edge . Since in any -factorization of with factors, each factor must be an -factor it follows that does not have an -factorization with factors.
If is even, then has odd order and even degree . Since is odd, has no -factor, and it follows as in Case 1 that does not have an -factorization with factors.
- (iv)
First suppose that . We assume in this case, as in case (ii), that is odd. Then the argument in case (ii) works verbatim to give examples (when is odd and when is even) of -graphs which do not have an -factorization with factors.
Next suppose that . We assume in this case, as in the case (iii), that is odd. Then the argument in case (iii) works verbatim to give examples (when is odd and when is even) of -graphs which do not have an -factorization with factors.
β
In [9] the following lemma was proved:
Lemma 15**.**
If and are positive integers, and is a non-negative integer, and if
[TABLE]
then every -pseudograph is -factorizable with factors.
Lemma 15 was derived in a not very complicated way from a similar result for bipartite multigraphs, which is relatively straightforward to prove.
We shall use Lemma 15 to prove:
Lemma 16**.**
Let . Then Theorem 12(i) is true.
Proof.
The necessity follows from Lemma 14. We shall derive the sufficiency from Lemma 15.
- (1)
If and are even this follows from Lemma 15.
- (2)
If and are both odd, if
[TABLE]
then
[TABLE]
so, by Lemma 15, every -pseudograph is -factorizable with factors. But a -pseudograph is a -pseudograph. Therefore every -pseudograph is -factorizable with factors.
- (3)
If is odd and is even and , then
[TABLE]
so, by Lemma 15, every -pseudograph is -factorable with factors. But every -pseudograph is a -pseudograph, so every -pseudograph is -factorable with factors.
- (4)
If is even and is odd and , then
[TABLE]
so, by Lemma 15, every -pseudograph is -factorable with factors. But a-pseudograph is a -pseudograph, so every -pseudograph is -factorable with factors.
β
This completes the proof of the sufficiency in Lemma 16.
2.2 Equitable edge-colourings
We need various results about equitable and nearly equitable edge-colourings of simple graphs.
Definition of an equitable edge-colouring
If , where is a set of colours, then is equitable if
[TABLE]
where and are the sets of edges incident with coloured and respectively, for every pair , of colours of , and for every vertex .
Definition of nearly equitable edge-colouring
This is the same as above except that the requirement is that
[TABLE]
The oldest result on this topic is due independently to McDiarmid [15] and de Werra [18], and is not restricted to simple graphs.
Theorem 17**.**
Let be a positive integer and let be a bipartite multigraph. Then has an equitable edge-coloring with colours.
A result just for simple graphs was proved by Hilton and de Werra [12].
Theorem 18**.**
Let be a positive integer and let be a simple graph. Suppose that no two vertices and such that and are adjacent. Then has an equitable edge-colouring with colours.
A nice improvement to this theorem by Xia Zhang and Guizhen Liu [19] appeared recently.
We can use Theorem 18 to prove the following very useful theorem.
Lemma 19**.**
Let be positive integers and a non-negative integer. If is a simple -graph satisfying , then has an -factorization with factors.
Proof.
In this case . At each vertex where , it follows that . We form a simple graph from by joining a pendant edge to each vertex of satisfying . For each vertex of the simple graph we have , and so has an equitable edge-colouring with colours, by Theorem 18. Restricting this edge-colouring to gives an edge-colouring of which is equitable at the vertices where , and is nearly equitable at the vertices where . Thus for each pair of colours and ,
[TABLE]
The average number of edges of each colour at is exactly if . Then , so for each colour . If then , so again for each colour . Therefore each colour class is an -factor, and so has an -factorization with factors. β
We can now prove another case when Theorem 12 is true.
Lemma 20**.**
Theorem 12(ii) is true.
Proof.
In this case is odd and is even and . By Lemma 14(ii) the condition is necessary. By Lemma 19 this condition is sufficient for to have an -factorization with factors. β
3 A lower bound for (achieved when is even and is even)
In this section we recall that if and are both even and positive then any -simple graph has an -factorization with factors if and only if . This was Theorem 12(i).
We also have from Lemma 2 that, for all with and ,
[TABLE]
We need to show that this lower bound for is achieved when and are both even. It suffices to prove:
Lemma 21**.**
Let and both be even. Let and . Then
[TABLE]
Proof.
First note that a number satisfies
[TABLE]
if and only if
[TABLE]
for some integer such that and .
Let
[TABLE]
where . We show that, in this case, there do exist values of between and . Then it follows from Theorem 12(i) that every -simple graph is -factorable into factors for at least values of .
It is easy to see that
[TABLE]
and that
[TABLE]
Therefore if then, since , the values of lying between and include
[TABLE]
so there are at least such values of .
Next suppose that where and . Then
[TABLE]
and
[TABLE]
The integer values of between and are
[TABLE]
for . Thus there are at least such integer values.
So indeed
[TABLE]
as asserted.
β
4 An upper bound for (achieved when is odd and is even)
Recall that if is odd and is even and , then any -simple graph has an -factorization with factors if and only if when ; this was Theorem 12(ii).
We first prove the following upper bound for , valid for all , , and .
Theorem 22**.**
Let and , and . Then
[TABLE]
Proof.
Let us first point out that a number satisfies
[TABLE]
if and only if
[TABLE]
for some integer such that
[TABLE]
and
[TABLE]
We show that
[TABLE]
So we show that
[TABLE]
where when .
Let
[TABLE]
where . We show that in this case there do exist at least integer values of satisfying . Then it follows by Theorem 12(ii) that every -simple graph is -factorable into factors for at least values of .
Note that
[TABLE]
and that
[TABLE]
so that
[TABLE]
If then the integer values of satisfying include
[TABLE]
for . Thus there are at least such integer values of in this case.
For then the integer values of satisfying include
[TABLE]
for . thus there are at least such integer values of in this case.
For then the integer values of satisfying include
[TABLE]
for , since
[TABLE]
i.e., , which is true since
[TABLE]
so there are at least such integer values of .
Therefore,
[TABLE]
β
In the case when is odd and is even, so that by Theorem 12(ii)
[TABLE]
the upper bound in Theorem 22 is achieved as we now show.
Theorem 23**.**
Let be odd, be even. Let and . Then
[TABLE]
Proof.
From Theorem 22 we already know that
[TABLE]
First assume that , or and . The equation
[TABLE]
is true if and only if
[TABLE]
for some integer such that and .
We first show that if
[TABLE]
and then there is an example of a -simple graph which does not have an -factorization with factors for different values of . It suffices to show that there do not exist integer values of satisfying
[TABLE]
So suppose that
[TABLE]
where and . Then
[TABLE]
and
[TABLE]
so that
[TABLE]
The integer values of which satisfy are
[TABLE]
for , giving only values altogether. Therefore
[TABLE]
where and . In other words
[TABLE]
In view of Theorem 22, it now follows that
[TABLE]
Secondly suppose that and that . Then Theorem 22 tells us that in this case. But if then a -graph is already an factor, so that .
β
5 Some preliminary remarks before the two remaining cases (where is odd)
From Lemma 2 and Theorem 22 it follows that for all with , , ,
[TABLE]
Thus is already tightly bounded. We also note that we have not proved so far Theorem 12(iii) and Theorem 12(iv) which would tell us that
[TABLE]
and
[TABLE]
It seems to be quite hard to provide a direct proof of these inequalities, from which the bounds in 11(iii) and 11(iv) would follow by the same arguments as were used in Section 4. Instead we have it seems to finesse 12(iii) and 12(iv) by what might seem to be rather roundabout arguments.
6 The threshold number when is even and is odd
In this section we prove:
Theorem 12(iii). Let be even and be odd. Then every -simple graph has an -factorization with factors if and only if
[TABLE]
Note that in Lemma 14 we proved the necessity of this condition; namely we showed that if is even and is odd, and if every -simple graph has an -factorization with factors, then satisfies the inequality above. So it remains to prove the sufficiency.
We also prove in this section:
Theorem 11(iii). Let be even and be odd.
Then
[TABLE]
We start by improving very slightly the lower bound for given by Lemma 2. We prove
Theorem 24**.**
Let be even, , and be odd. Let be a positive integer and a non-negative integer. Then
[TABLE]
Proof.
First let us remark that a number satisfies
[TABLE]
if and only if
[TABLE]
for some integer such that
[TABLE]
and
[TABLE]
Suppose that an integer satisfies
[TABLE]
where
[TABLE]
and
[TABLE]
Then
[TABLE]
and
[TABLE]
since
[TABLE]
Since it follows that the integer values of which satisfy are
[TABLE]
for , so there are fewer than such values of . So it follows that if there are at least such values of then
[TABLE]
so that
[TABLE]
Consequently
[TABLE]
when is even and is odd.
β
Next we lower the upper bound for obtained in Theorem 22, this lowering being valid for the case when even, odd. We also show that there are values of satisfying .
Theorem 25**.**
Let be even, , and be odd. Let be a positive integer and a non-negative integer. Then
[TABLE]
furthermore if then there are values of satisfying .
Proof.
The earlier upper bound was established in Theorem 22. We make progress by examining the proof of Theorem 22 in more detail.
We assumed that , where and , and . Then
[TABLE]
and
[TABLE]
Then, for , the number of values of satisfying
[TABLE]
is at least . If there are only such values of . But in this case
[TABLE]
and
[TABLE]
and the values of satisfying
[TABLE]
(with now being allowed) are
[TABLE]
so there are values of in this case. Thus in every case, there are at least values of satisfying
[TABLE]
It follows that
[TABLE]
β
In Theorem 25 we showed that if is a -simple graph with then at least values of satisfy . In particular, if , then every -simple graph has an -factorization with factors if in the case when is even and is odd. Taken together with the necessity part of Theorem 12(iii), and Lemma 14 this proves:
Theorem 12(iii). Let be even, be odd, and let . Then every -simple graph has an -factorization with factors, where is an integer, if and only if
[TABLE]
We finally turn to the proof of the equality
[TABLE]
when is even and is odd. There is more than one way of proving this at this point, but we want to show that Theorem 12(iii) implies Theorem 11(iii).
Theorem 26**.**
Let be even, , and let be odd. Let and be integers. Then
[TABLE]
Proof.
By Theorem 25,
[TABLE]
So we need to show that
[TABLE]
where, as in the proof of Theorem 24,
[TABLE]
and
[TABLE]
Let
[TABLE]
where . We show that there exist integer values of satisfying
[TABLE]
Then it follows by the definition of that every -simple graph is -factorable into factors for at least integer values of .
First we note that
[TABLE]
and
[TABLE]
For a non-negative integer, if then and
[TABLE]
so
[TABLE]
and
[TABLE]
Therefore if for some non-negative integer , then the integer values of satisfying
[TABLE]
include
[TABLE]
for so there are at least such values of . Therefore
[TABLE]
as asserted. Theorem 26 now follows. β
7 The threshold number when is odd and is odd
The discussion in this section is rather like the discussion in the previous section, but it is sufficiently different, that, for the sake of clarity, we need to treat it separately.
We shall prove:
Theorem 12(iv). Let be odd and be odd, and let . Then every -simple graph has an -factorization with factors if and only if
[TABLE]
In Lemma 14 we proved the necessity of this condition. So it remains to prove the sufficiency.
We also prove:
Theorem 11(iv). Let be odd and be odd. Let and . Then
[TABLE]
We first prove the following theorem, which gives a lower bound for in this case.
Theorem 27**.**
Let be odd, be odd, and be integers. Then
[TABLE]
Proof.
First suppose that or and . Let us remark that an integer satisfies
[TABLE]
if and only if
[TABLE]
where and .
Let an integer satisfy
[TABLE]
for some such that and . Then
[TABLE]
and
[TABLE]
The integer values of satisfying
[TABLE]
include
[TABLE]
for , since . They do not include or or any other integer values, so there are only such integer values of . Therefore
[TABLE]
and so
[TABLE]
β
Now suppose that and . If applied in this case, the inequality derived in the other case would (erroneously) say that . But if and is an -graph, then would be a -graph with an -factorization with factor. Therefore, in this case,
[TABLE]
Next we provide quite good bounds for when and are both odd, and also show that if
[TABLE]
in this case, then there are integer values of satisfying .
Theorem 28**.**
Let be odd, be odd and or and . Then
[TABLE]
Moreover, if then there are values of satisfying .
Proof.
From Theorem 22 and Theorem 27, if and , then
[TABLE]
We know from the proof of Theorem 22 that if
[TABLE]
where , then there are at least values of satisfying
[TABLE]
With this value of , we know that
[TABLE]
for some , , and .
But if where then if , i.e. , i.e. it is no longer true that
[TABLE]
So if and then it is not true that there are values of satisfying .
But there are values of satisfying . For then (following the discussion of Theorem 22),
[TABLE]
and
[TABLE]
So the values of satisfying are
[TABLE]
so there are integer values of as asserted. In that case
[TABLE]
Therefore if we have
[TABLE]
for integer values of .
β
In Theorem 28 we showed that if is odd and is odd then for every simple graph with there are at least values of , satisfying . In particular, if then every -simple graph has an -factorization with factors for each value of satisfying , provided is odd and is odd. Taken together with the necessity part of Theorem 12(iv) this proves:
Theorem 12(iv). Let be odd and be odd, and let . Then every -simple graph has an -factorization with factors, where is an integer, if and only if .
We finally turn to the proof of our main result in this section.
Theorem 29**.**
Let be odd and be odd. Let and . Then
[TABLE]
if , or if and . If and then
[TABLE]
We shall show that Theorem 12(iv) implies Theorem 28.
Proof.
Let
[TABLE]
where . We show that there do exist integer values of satisfying . Then it follows by Theorem 12(iv) that every -simple graph is -factorable into factors for at least values of .
First we note that
[TABLE]
and
[TABLE]
For a non-negative integer, if then and
[TABLE]
so
[TABLE]
and
[TABLE]
Therefore if for some non-negative integer , then the integer values of satisfying include
[TABLE]
so there are at least such values of .
Therefore
[TABLE]
as asserted. In view of Theorem 27, the main part of Theorem 29 now follows.
If and then the formula yields the value . But when then, since , a -graph is an -factor. Therefore, in this case,
[TABLE]
β
This completes the proof of Theorem 29.
8 Boundary graphs
From Theorems 12(iii) and 12(iv) we know that if is even and is odd, or if is odd and is odd, and if , where is an integer, , and if there are -graphs which satisfy this equation, then the graphs cannot have an -factorization with factors. But do such graphs exist, and what properties do they have? By a result of Kano and Saito [14], such graphs do have at least one -factor. It would be natural to suppose that they have edge-disjoint -factors, but we have not investigated this. In this section we give examples of such graphs.
Given positive integers call a graph satisfying , where is an integer, a boundary graph. Let be the set of all boundary graphs with parameters .
Theorem 30**.**
Let be an even and be an odd positive integer. Let , and be positive integers such that , and . Then .
Proof.
We separate the cases even and odd. Although these are similar, it is easier for the reader if they are treated separately.
Case 1: Let be even.
Let be a bi-degreed simple graph with vertex sets and , where and . Since it follows that , so there is a simple graph with and . Label the vertices of with labels in such a way that if then receives labels. Also assign the labels to the vertices of , assigning one label to each vertex.
We have placed on the vertices of . Then, to form from this, join each vertex of to each vertex of except the vertex with the same label as . Then, for , and, for , .
Notice that
[TABLE]
If has an -factorization with factors, let be such a set of factors. Each will have edges incident with each vertex of , so for ,
[TABLE]
Therefore
[TABLE]
Consequently we have
[TABLE]
a contradiction.
Therefore does not have an -factorization into factors when is even.
In Figure 1 we give an example which illustrates the construction used in Theorem 30, Case 1. Here and , and the -simple graph has no -factorization, and .
Case 2: Let be odd
Let be a simple graph with vertex sets where and . The vertices of have degree and all except one vertex of will have degree and one vertex of , say , will have degree . Let be a simple graph with and . Label the vertices of with labels in such a way that if then receives labels. Also assign the labels to the vertices of , assigning one label to each vertex and leaving one vertex, say unlabelled.
We have already placed on the vertices of . To form from this, first join each vertex of to each vertex of except the vertex with the same label as (the vertex is joined to all the vertices of ). Then, for , , and, for , and . Then
[TABLE]
If has an -factorization with factors, let be such a set of factors. Then each vertex of will have edges incident with each of , and, for all but one , will have edges incident with each vertex of , and the exceptional factor, say , will have edges incident with each vertex of , and will have edges incident with . Therefore
[TABLE]
Therefore
[TABLE]
Therefore
[TABLE]
a contradiction.
Therefore has no -factorization when , odd.
β
In Figure 2 we give an example which illustrates the construction used in Theorem 30, Case 2. Here , , , , , so , and the -simple graph has no -factorization.
Similarly:
Theorem 31**.**
Let and be odd positive integers with . Let , and be positive integers such that and . Then .
Proof.
We separate out the cases even and odd. Although these are similar, it is easier for the reader if they are treated separately.
Case 1: Let be a bi-degreed simple graph with vertex sets and where and . Let be a simple graph with and . Label the vertices of with labels in such a way that if then receives labels. Also assign the labels to the vertices of , assigning one label to each vertex.
We have placed on the vertices of . Then to form from this, join each vertex of to each vertex of except the vertex with the same label as . Then, for , and, for , .
Notice that
[TABLE]
If has an -factorization with factors, let be such a set of factors. Each will have edges incident with each vertex of , so for ,
[TABLE]
Therefore, for each , ,
[TABLE]
Therefore
[TABLE]
a contradiction.
Thus has no -factorization with factors when is even.
An aside.
In Figure 3 we give an example with and .
Case 2: Let be odd
Let be a simple graph with vertex sets where and . The vertices of will have degree and all except one vertex of will have degree , with one vertex having degree . Let be a simple graph with and . Label the vertices of with labels in such a way that labels and are assigned to different vertices of and, if , then receives labels. Also assign the labels to the vertices of , with one vertex, say receiving two labels, say and , and the remaining vertices receiving one label from each.
We have already placed on the vertices of . To form from this, first join each vertex of to each vertex of except the vertex with the same label as . Join to all vertices of except the vertices with labels and . Then, for , , for , and . Then
[TABLE]
If has an -factorization with factors, let be such a set of factors. Then, for all except one , will have edges incident with each vertex of , but for one , say , will have edges incident with , but will have edges incident with each other vertex of . Therefore
[TABLE]
Therefore
[TABLE]
Therefore
[TABLE]
a contradiction (noting that when ).
Therefore has no -factorization when , odd.
β
In Figure 4 we illustrate the construction used in Case 2 in Theorem 31.
Some further problems
- C.J.H. McDiarmid has pointed out to the authors that from Theorem 4.1 of his interesting paper [16] on unimodular matrices follows this fact about -factorizations of bipartite multigraphs. Given a graph and non-negative integers and , let be the set of integers such that has an -factorization with factors. Then if is a bipartite multigraph, is an interval of integers.
He also remarked that, following arguments of the authors (which may be found in Rajkumarβs thesis), it follows that if and are both even, and is any pseudograph, then is again an interval of integers. [Recall that a pseudograph is a multigraph in which multi-loops are permitted, with a loop contributing to the degree of the vertex it is on.].
The question remains if this is also true when one or both of and is odd.
- It remains to determine the threshold number for multigraphs (without loops). Theorem 7 seems to indicate that this will not be an easy task.
The reference list from the paper itself. Each links out to its DOI / PubMed record.
- 1[1] Y. Egawa, Eraβs conjecture on [ k , k + 1 ] π π 1 [k,k+1] -factorizations of regular graphs , Ars Combin., 21 (1986), 217β220.
- 2[2] H. Era, Semiregular factorizations of regular graphs , in: F. Harary, J. Maybee (Eds), Graphs and Applications, Proceedings of the First Colorado Symposium of Graph Theory, Wiley, New York, 1984, pp. 101β116.
- 3[3] M. Ferencak and A.J.W. Hilton, Semiregular factorization of regular multigraphs , Mathematika, 56 (2010), 357β362.
- 4[4] M. Ferencak and A.J.W. Hilton, Regular multigraphs and their semiregular factorizations , Congressus Numerantium, 209 (2011), 149β159.
- 5[5] R.P. Gupta, A theorem on the cover index of an s -graph , Notices Amer. Math. Soc., 13 (1966), 714.
- 6[6] A.J.W. Hilton, The cover index, the chromatic index and the minimum degree of a graph , in: Proceedings of the 5th British Combinatorial Conference, Congressus Numerantium, vol. XV, 1975, pp. 307β318.
- 7[7] A.J.W. Hilton, ( r , r + 1 ) π π 1 (r,r+1) -factorizations of ( d , d + 1 ) π π 1 (d,d+1) -graphs , Discrete Math., 308 (2008), 645β669.
- 8[8] A.J.W. Hilton, On the number of ( r , r + 1 ) π π 1 (r,r+1) -factors in an ( r , r + 1 ) π π 1 (r,r+1) -factorization of a simple graph , J. Graph Theory, 60 (2009), 257β268.
