Betwixt and between 2-factor Hamiltonian and Perfect-Matching-Hamiltonian graphs
Federico Romaniello, Jean Paul Zerafa

TL;DR
This paper explores the properties of 2-factor Hamiltonian and Perfect-Matching-Hamiltonian graphs, introducing malleable vertices and star products to characterize and construct such graphs, and proving new theorems related to their structure.
Contribution
It introduces the concept of malleable vertices, establishes their relation to the PMH-property, and proves a characterization of 2FH graphs via malleable vertices, extending previous conjectures.
Findings
Malleable vertices imply the PMH-property but not 2FH.
A cubic graph is 2FH iff all vertices are malleable.
Equivalence of a conjecture relating 2FH graphs to specific cubic graphs.
Abstract
A Hamiltonian graph is 2-factor Hamiltonian (2FH) if each of its 2-factors is a Hamiltonian cycle. A similar, but weaker, property is the Perfect-Matching-Hamiltonian property (PMH-property): a graph admitting a perfect matching is said to have this property if each one of its perfect matchings (1-factors) can be extended to a Hamiltonian cycle. It was shown that the star product operation between two bipartite 2FH-graphs is necessary and sufficient for a bipartite graph admitting a 3-edge-cut to be 2FH. The same cannot be said when dealing with the PMH-property, and in this work we discuss how one can use star products to obtain graphs (which are not necessarily bipartite, regular and 2FH) admitting the PMH-property with the help of malleable vertices, which we introduce here. We show that the presence of a malleable vertex in a graph implies that the graph has the PMH-property, but…
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.
