This paper determines the maximum spectral radius of large graphs that exclude specific star-path forest subgraphs, advancing spectral graph theory by identifying extremal structures under these constraints.
Contribution
It introduces new extremal spectral bounds for graphs forbidding certain star-path forest configurations, extending previous results in spectral extremal graph theory.
Findings
01
Identifies maximum spectral radius for graphs avoiding $kS_{\ell-1}\cup P_{\ell}$
02
Determines spectral bounds for graphs excluding $k_1S_{2\ell -1}\cup k_2P_{2\ell}$
03
Establishes extremal graphs for forbidden star-path forests
Abstract
A path of order n is denoted by Pn, and a star of order n is denoted by Sn−1. A star-path forest is a forest whose connected components are paths and stars. In this paper we determine the maximum spectral radius of graphs that contain no copy of kSℓ−1∪Pℓ, k1S2ℓ−1∪k2P2ℓ or kS4∪2P5 for n appropriately large.
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
TopicsAdvanced Graph Theory Research · Lignin and Wood Chemistry
Full text
Spectral extrema of graphs: Forbidden star-path forests 111This work was supported by the National Nature Science Foundation of China (Nos. 11871040, 11971180, 12271337).
Yanni Zhai1
Xiying Yuan1,
Lihua You2
1Department of Mathematics, Shanghai University, Shanghai 200444, P.R. China
2 School of Mathematical Sciences, South China Normal University, Guangzhou, 510631, P.R. China
Abstract
A path of order n is denoted by Pn, and a star of order n is denoted by Sn−1. A star-path forest is a forest whose connected components are paths and stars. In this paper we determine the maximum spectral radius of graphs that contain no copy of kSℓ−1∪Pℓ, k1S2ℓ−1∪k2P2ℓ or kS4∪2P5 for n appropriately large.
In this paper, we consider undirected graphs without loops or multiedges. The order of a graph G=(V(G),E(G)) is the number of its vertices, and the size of a graph G is the number of its edges, denoted by e(G). The adjacent matrix A(G)=(aij) of G is a matrix, where aij=1 if vi is adjacent to vj, and 0 otherwise. The spectral radius of G is the largest eigenvalue of A(G), denoted by ρ(G).
For a vertex v∈V(G), the neighborhood of v in G is denoted by NG(v)={u∈V(G):uv∈E(G)} or simply N(v) and N[v]=N(v)∪{v}. Denote NG2(v) or simply N2(v) by the set of vertices at distance two from v in G.
Given two vertex-disjoint graphs G and H, the union of graphs G and H is the graph G∪H with vertex set V(G)∪V(H) and edge set E(G)∪E(H). In particular, G=kH is the vertex-disjoint union of k copies of H. The join of G and H, denoted by G∨H, is the graph obtained from G∪H by adding all edges between V(G) and V(H). For a graph G and its subgraph H, G−H denotes the subgraph induced by V(G)∖V(H). For U⊆V(G), let G[U] be the subgraph of G induced by U.
A path of order n is denoted by Pn, and a star of order n is denoted by Sn−1.
Let Sn,h be the graph of order n obtained by joining a clique of order h with an independent set of order n−h, i.e., Sn,h=Kh∨Kn−h. Let Sn,h+ be the graph obtained from Sn,h by adding one edge, i.e., Sn,h+=Kh∨(K2∪Kn−h−2) .
A graph is H-free if it does not contain a copy of H as a subgraph. The Turán number ex(n,H) is the maximum number of edges in a graph of order n which is H-free. We denote by Ex(n,H) the set of H-free graphs of order n with ex(n,H) edges, and call a graph in Ex(n,H) an extremal graph for H.
In 1956, Erdős and Gallai [9] studied Turán numbers of paths. Then in 2008, Balister and Győri [4] gave an improvement of the extremal graph theorem for Pk. In 2019, Lan et al. [18] determined the Turán number of a star.
A linear forest is a forest whose connected components are paths. A star forest is a forest whose connected components are stars. A star-path forest is a forest whose connected components are paths and stars. In 2011, Bushaw and Kettle [3] determined the Turán numbers of kPℓ for sufficiently large n, which was extended by Lidiciký, Liu and Palmer [16]. Yuan and Zhang [25, 24] determined the Turán numbers of linear forests containing at most one odd path for all n. In 2022, Li, Yin and Li [17] determined the Turán numbers of star forests. Very recently, Fang and Yuan [10] determined the Turán numbers of kSℓ−1∪Pℓ, k1S2ℓ−1∪k2P2ℓ and kS4∪2P5 for n appropriately large.
In 2010, Nikiforov [20] proposed the spectral counterpart of Turán type extremal problem.
Problem 1.1**.**
Given a graph H, what is the maximum ρ(G) of a graph G of order n without H as a subgraph?
This problem has been intensively investigated in the literature for many classes of graphs. Guiduli [12] and Nikiforov [21] independently studied the case H=Kr. In 2010, Nikiforov [20] studied the case H is a path or cycle of specified length. Chen, Liu and Zhang in 2019 [5] studied the case H is a linear forest, and in 2021 they [6] studied the case H is a star forest. For other classes of graphs, the readers may be referred to [7, 13, 23, 26, 27]. Motivated by Problem 1.1, we will give the maximum value of the spectral radius and characterize corresponding extremal graphs for some kinds of star-path forests.
Denote by Exsp(n,H) the set of H-free graphs of order n with maximum spectral radius.
For any graph F, if its extremal graph is Sn,p (resp. Sn,p+), then we will prove that for appropriate n, its spectral extremal graph is also Sn,p (resp. Sn,p+).
Theorem 1.7**.**
For any graph F, suppose n≥m and Ex(n,F)={Sn,p}. Then when n≥max{24p,m2}, we have Exsp(n,F)={Sn,p}.
2. 2.
For any graph F, suppose n≥m and Ex(n,F)={Sn,p+}. Then when n≥max{24p,m2}, we have
EXsp(n,F)={Sn,p+}.
The spectral extremal graphs for k1S2ℓ−1∪k2P2ℓ and kS4∪2P5 can be determined based on the results of Theorems 1.5 – 1.7.
Lemma 1.1**.**
Suppose k1≥1, k2≥2, ℓ≥2 and n≥max{24(k1+ℓk2−1),[(4ℓ2−2ℓ+1)k1+(2ℓ2+3ℓ−4)k2+3]2}. Then
[TABLE]
Lemma 1.2**.**
Suppose k≥1 and n≥max{24(k+3),(21k+38)2}. Then
[TABLE]
Now we will consider spectral extremal graphs for kSℓ−1∪Pℓ. If ℓ=2, then kSℓ−1∪Pℓ=(k+1)P2 holds. In 2007, Feng, Yu and Zhang [11] gave the spectral extremal graph for kP2.
If n=2k or 2k+1, then Exsp(n,kP2)={Kn} holds.
2. 2.
If 2k+2≤n<3k+2, then Exsp(n,kP2)={K2k+1∪Kn−2k−1} holds.
3. 3.
If n=3k+2, then Exsp(n,kP2)={K2k+1∪Kn−2k−1,Kk∨Kn−k} holds.
4. 4.
If n>3k+2, then Exsp(n,kP2)={Kk∨Kn−k} holds.
If ℓ=3, then kSℓ−1∪Pℓ=(k+1)P3 holds.
In 2019, Chen, Liu and Zhang [5] gave the spectral extremal graph for kP3. Set Fn,k=Kk−1∨(dK2∪Ks), where n−(k−1)=2d+s and 0≤s<2.
then there exists a subgraph H of order q≥⌊n⌋ satisfying one of the following conditions:
q=⌊n⌋* and ρ(H)>(2p+1)q;*
2. 2.
q>⌊n⌋, δ(H)≥p and ρ(H)>2p−1+4pq−4p2+c+2.
Proof of Theorem 1.7 (1).
In [20], it is pointed out that
[TABLE]
Suppose G∈Exsp(n,F). Since Sn,p is F-free, we have
[TABLE]
Case 1.δ(G)≥p.
It is easy to see the function f(x)=2x−1+8e−4xn+(x+1)2 is decreasing with respect to x. Then by Theorem 2.1 we have
[TABLE]
Together with (2.2), we have e(G)≥pn−2p2+p=e(Sn,p). Then G=Sn,p holds.
Case 2.δ(G)<p.
If we take c=(p−1)2 in Theorem 2.2, then there is a graph H⊆G of order q≥⌊n⌋ satisfying one of the following conditions:
q=⌊n⌋ and ρ(H)>(2p+1)q;
2. 2.
q>⌊n⌋, δ(H)≥p and ρ(H)>2p−1+4pq−4p2+c+2>2p−1+4pq−4p2+(p−1)2.
When q=⌊n⌋ and ρ(H)>(2p+1)q, then
[TABLE]
Noting that q=⌊n⌋≥m and Ex(q,F)={Sq,p} hold, then H contains a copy of F and then G contains a copy of F. This is a contradiction.
When q>⌊n⌋, δ(H)≥p and ρ(H)>2p−1+4pq−4p2+(p−1)2, applying Theorem 2.1, we have
[TABLE]
Combining with ρ(H)>2p−1+4pq−4p2+(p−1)2, we have e(H)>qp−2p2+p=e(Sq,p). Hence H contains a copy of F and then G contains a copy of F. That is a contradiction.
The proof of Theorem 1.7 (2) is similar to that of (1).
□
3 Some auxiliary results
To prove Theorem 1.10, we need a rough bound on the size of kSℓ−1∪Pℓ-free bipartite graphs.
Lemma 3.1**.**
Let ℓ≥4 and n be positive integers. If G is a Pℓ-free bipartite graph of order n, then
[TABLE]
Proof.
When n<ℓ, we have e(G)≤⌊2n⌋⌈2n⌉≤(⌊2ℓ⌋−1)n. When n≥ℓ, we show the inequality by using induction on n.
When n=ℓ, since G is bipartite and Pℓ-free, we have
[TABLE]
Suppose that n>ℓ and the inequality holds for all ℓ≤n′<n. If G is connected, then by Theorem 1.1, we have
[TABLE]
Now we suppose G1,G2,⋯,Gs are the connected components of G with ∣V(Gi)∣=ni. If ni≥ℓ, then by induction hypothesis e(Gi)≤(⌊2ℓ⌋−1)ni holds.
If ni<ℓ, then we have e(Gi)≤⌊2ni⌋⌈2ni⌉≤(⌊2ℓ⌋−1)ni.
Therefore, we obtain
[TABLE]
∎
Lemma 3.2**.**
Let G be a kSℓ−1∪Pℓ-free bipartite graph of order n≥(k+⌊2ℓ⌋−1)2−(k+⌊2ℓ⌋−2)ℓ+ℓ2k+ℓ2−ℓ with k≥0 and ℓ≥4. Then
[TABLE]
Proof.
We show the inequality by using induction on k. When k=0, the result holds by Lemma 3.1. Suppose that k≥1 and the conclusion holds for all k′<k. Write h=k+⌊2ℓ⌋−1. Let H be a kSℓ−1∪Pℓ-free bipartite graph of order n with maximum size. Since the complete bipartite graph Kh,n−h is kSℓ−1∪Pℓ-free, we have
[TABLE]
Hence H contains a copy of kSℓ−1. The fact that H is kSℓ−1∪Pℓ-free implies H−Sℓ−1 is (k−1)Sℓ−1∪Pℓ-free. By induction hypothesis we have e(H−Sℓ−1)≤(h−1)(n−ℓ).
Let m0 be the number of edges incident with the vertices of a Sℓ−1 in H. Then we have
[TABLE]
Then each copy of Sℓ−1 in H contains a vertex of degree at least ℓn−h2+(h−1)ℓ. Let
U⊆V(H) with ∣U∣=k and each vertex in U belongs to distinct Sℓ−1 with degree at least ℓn−h2+(h−1)ℓ. Set U=V(H)∖U, W=∪u∈UN(u) and W0=W∩U . For any u∈U, we have
[TABLE]
Then ∣W0∣≥ℓn−h2+(h−1)ℓ−(k−1) holds. If H[U] contains a copy of Pℓ, we set W1=W0∖V(Pℓ), then we have
[TABLE]
Then we may find k copies of Sℓ−1 in H−Pℓ with k center vertices in U and leaves vertices in W1, then H contains a copy of kSℓ−1∪Pℓ, a contradiction. Therefore, H[U] is Pℓ-free and bipartite. By Lemma 3.1, we have e(H[U])≤(⌊2ℓ⌋−1)(n−k). Then we deduce
[TABLE]
Therefore we have e(G)≤e(H)≤(k+⌊2ℓ⌋−1)n.
∎
Suppose S1,⋯,Sk are k finite sets, and the following inequality was proved by [7].
[TABLE]
The following formulas are introduced in [27].
For a graph G and any two vertex subsets A and B of V(G), e(A,B) denotes the number of the edges of G with one end vertex in A and the other in B.
[TABLE]
[TABLE]
[TABLE]
4 Some characterizations of the graphs in EXsp(n,kSℓ−1∪Pℓ)
Suppose G∈Exsp(n,kSℓ−1∪Pℓ). For V1,V2⊆V(G) and V1∩V2=∅, G[V1,V2] denotes the induced bipartite graph with one partite set V1 and the other partite set V2.
In this section we always suppose k≥1, ℓ≥4, h=k+⌊2ℓ⌋−1, t=(ℓ2−ℓ+1)k+2ℓ2+3ℓ−2, α=2(h+1)t21 and n≥α3t2. The fact that Sn,h is kSℓ−1∪Pℓ-free implies
[TABLE]
Firstly we will show G is connected. Suppose to the contrary that G is disconnected and G1 is a component of G with
ρ(G1)=ρ(G)≥hn. Let u∈V(G1) with the maximum degree in G1, G′ be the graph obtained from G1 by attaching a pendent edge at u and n−∣V(G1)∣−1 isolated vertices. Then G′ is kSℓ−1∪Pℓ-free. Otherwise there is a copy of kSℓ−1∪Pℓ in G1 as dG1(u)≥ρ(G1)≥hn≥ℓ−1. However, the fact ρ(G′)>ρ(G1)=ρ(G) contradicts G∈Exsp(n,kSℓ−1∪Pℓ). Hence G is connected. Let x be the Perron vector of G, i.e., A(G)x=ρ(G)x and ∥x∥2=1. Set xz=max{xv:v∈V(G)}.
Write ρ=ρ(G) for convenience.
Let R={v∈V(G):xv>αxz}, and R=V(G)∖R. We will evaluate the cardinality of R.
If ∣R∣>2hn, we have ∣R∣>t as n≥α3t2. Since G[R] is kSℓ−1∪Pℓ-free, by (1.1) we have e(G[R])≤(h+21)∣R∣. Furthermore, by Lemma 3.2 and the fact that the bipartite graph G[R,R] is kSℓ−1∪Pℓ-free, e(R,R)≤hn holds. Hence we obtain
[TABLE]
Since n≥α3t2≥α2(4h+2)2, we have hnα−2(h+21)≥21hnα. Then from (4.3) we have
[TABLE]
which is a contradiction. Therefore ∣R∣≤2hn holds.
∎
Furthermore, we set R′={v∈V(G):xv>4αxz}.
Lemma 4.2**.**
For each v in R′, dG(v)>31αn holds.
Proof.
First we prove a claim.
Claim.
For any vertex v in R, if dG(v)≤31αn, then e(G[(N(v)∪R)∖{v}])≤6(5h−2)αn holds.
When ∣(N(v)∪R)∖{v}∣<t, we have
[TABLE]
where the last inequality holds as n≥α3t2 and α=2(h+1)t21.
Now we suppose ∣(N(v)∪R)∖{v}∣≥t. Since G[N(v)∪R] is kSℓ−1∪Pℓ-free, by (1.1), we have
[TABLE]
which implies
[TABLE]
where the last second inequality follows from n≥α3t2≥(3h−1)2α2(12h+6)2h.
Suppose to the contrary that there is a vertex v∈R′ with dG(v)≤31αn. By the fact
[TABLE]
and the above claim, we obtain
[TABLE]
From
[TABLE]
we have dG(v)≥4hnα≥t. Since G\big{[}N\left[v\right]\big{]} is kSℓ−1∪Pℓ-free, we obtain
e\left(G\big{[}N\left[v\right]\big{]}\right)\leq(h+\frac{1}{2})d_{G}(v). Therefore, e(G[N(v)])≤(h−21)dG(v) holds. It follows
[TABLE]
Moreover, from Lemma 3.2, we have e(N(v),N2(v)∖R)≤hn,
which implies
Simplifying the inequality, we obtain h≤−92, which is a contradiction. Therefore, each vertex in R′ has degree larger than 31αn.
∎
Lemma 4.3**.**
∣R′∣≤α3(h+1).
Proof.
If ∣R′∣≤t, then ∣R′∣≤α3(h+1) holds as α=2(h+1)t21. Now we suppose ∣R′∣>t, then by (1.1) we have e(G[R′])≤(h+21)∣R′∣. By Lemma 4.2, ∑v∈R′dG(v)≥31αn∣R′∣ holds, and we have
[TABLE]
Therefore we have
[TABLE]
Noting n≥α3t2, we have αn≥(6h+3)(h+1), together with (h+21)n≥31αn∣R′∣−(h+21)∣R′∣, we obtain
[TABLE]
∎
Lemma 4.4**.**
If v is a vertex with xv=mxz and 2(h+1)1≤m≤1, then dG(v)>(m−6(h+1)1)n.
Proof.
Suppose to the contrary that there is a vertex v with xv=mxz(2(h+1)1≤m≤1) and dG(v)≤(m−6(h+1)1)n. By the definition of R′, v∈R′ holds.
Let M=N(v)∪N2(v). From (1.1) and (3.3), we obtain
[TABLE]
Since v∈R′, we have dG(v)>31αn from Lemma 4.2. Then G[R′∖{v},N(v)∖R′] is (k−1)Sℓ−1∪Pℓ-free. Otherwise we may add a copy of Sℓ−1 with v as center vertex to obtain a copy of kSℓ−1∪Pℓ in G. Then by Lemma 3.2 we have
Then g(x)≥g(1) holds when x∈[2(h+1)1,1]. So g(m)≥g(1) holds and we have
[TABLE]
Then we get n≤54h(h+1)4t2, while it contradicts the fact n≥8(h+1)3t8.
∎
Let R′′={v∈V(G):xv≥2(h+1)1xz}. Clearly R′′⊆R′⊆R holds. To prove the cardinality of R′′, we prove a lower bound of the degree of vertices in R′′.
Lemma 4.5**.**
For each v in R′′, we have dG(v)≥(1−6(h+1)5)n.
Proof.
By Lemma 4.4, it suffices to prove xv≥(1−3(h+1)2)xz for every v∈R′′. Suppose to the contrary that there is a vertex v∈R′′ such that xv=mxz, where 2(h+1)1≤m<1−3(h+1)2. Let R1=N(z)∩R′, R2=N2(z)∩R′, S1=N(z)∖R1 and S2=N2(z)∖R2.
By (1.1) and Lemma 3.2, we have
[TABLE]
From Lemma 4.3 we have ∣R′∣≤α3(h+1), therefore we deduce
[TABLE]
Noting that
[TABLE]
holds. By Lemma 3.2, we have e(S1,R1∪R2∪{z})≤hn. Then
[TABLE]
Together with the fact that hnxz≤ρ2xz and ∣R′∣≤α3(h+1), we obtain
[TABLE]
Since α=2(h+1)t21 and n≥α3t2, we get
[TABLE]
Since z,v∈R′, by Lemma 4.4 we have dG(v)>(m−6(h+1)1)n>3(h+1)n and dG(z)>(1−6(h+1)1)n. So
[TABLE]
holds, a contradiction to (4.12). Hence we have dG(v)≥(1−6(h+1)5)n for each v in R′′.
∎
Now we prove the exact value of ∣R′′∣.
Lemma 4.6**.**
∣R′′∣=h.
Proof.
Firstly, we prove ∣R′′∣>h−1. Suppose to the contrary that ∣R′′∣≤h−1. Let M=N(z)∪N2(z). By (1.1) and (3.3), we obtain
which may deduce h≤0, a contradiction. Hence, ∣R′′∣>h−1.
If ∣R′′∣≥h+1, suppose {v1,v2,⋯,vh+1}⊆R′′ and W=N(v1)∩⋯∩N(vh+1). By (3.1), it follows
[TABLE]
the last inequality holds as n≥α3t2.
When ℓ is even, we may find a path
Pℓ=u1v1⋯u2ℓv2ℓ, where ui∈W (i=1,2,⋯,2ℓ). As dG(vi)≥(1−6(h+1)5)n (i=2ℓ+1,⋯,h+1), we may find a copy of kSℓ−1 in G−Pℓ with v2ℓ+1,⋯,vh+1 as the k center vertices.
Then there is a copy of kSℓ−1∪Pℓ in G, a contradiction. When ℓ is odd, we may find a path
Pℓ=u1v1⋯u2ℓ−1v2ℓ−1u2ℓ+1 where ui∈W (i=1,2,⋯,2ℓ+1) and a copy of kSℓ−1 in G−Pℓ with v2ℓ+1,⋯,vh+1 as the k center vertices.
Then there is a copy of kSℓ−1∪Pℓ in G, a contradiction.
Therefore, ∣R′′∣=h holds.
∎
Suppose k≥1, ℓ≥4, h=k+⌊2ℓ⌋−1, t=(ℓ2−ℓ+1)k+2ℓ2+3ℓ−2, α=2(h+1)t21 and n≥α3t2.
Let G∈Exsp(n,kSℓ−1∪Pℓ), xz=max{xv:v∈V(G)} and R′′={v∈V(G):xv≥2(h+1)1xz}. By Lemma 4.6, ∣R′′∣=h holds. Write R′′={v1,v2,⋯,vh−1,z} and W={v∈V(G):R′′⊆NG(v)}. By Lemma 4.5, we have dG(v)≥n−6(h+1)5n for each v∈R′′. Hence when n≥8(h+1)3t8, we have
[TABLE]
Claim A.G[R′′] is Sℓ−1-free.
Suppose to the contrary that G[R′′] contains a copy of Sℓ−1. Let R1={v1,v2,⋯,vk−1}⊆R′′. Since each vertex in R′′ has degree at least (1−6(h+1)5)n, we may find a (k−1)Sℓ−1 with v1,⋯,vk−1 as the k−1 center vertices and leaves vertices in V(G)∖(R′′∪V(Sℓ−1)). Then there is a copy of kSℓ−1 in G.
When ℓ is even, we have ∣R′′∖R1∣=2ℓ. Since ∣W∣−kℓ>ℓ when n≥α3t2, we may find a copy of Pℓ=vku1⋯zu2ℓ, where ui∈W∖V(kSℓ−1) (i=1,⋯,2ℓ). Then G contains a copy of kSℓ−1∪Pℓ, a contradiction. When ℓ is odd, we have ∣R′′∖R1∣=2ℓ−1. We may find a copy of Pℓ=u1vk⋯u2ℓ−1zu2ℓ+1, where ui∈W∖V(kSℓ−1) (i=1,⋯,2ℓ+1), a contradiction. Therefore, G[R′′] is Sℓ−1-free.
Claim B.z is adjacent to each vertex of R′′.
Suppose to the contrary that there is a vertex v in R′′ not adjacent to z. Let G1 be a graph obtained from G by deleting all edges incident with v in G[R′′] and adding an edge zv. If G1 contains a copy of kSℓ−1∪Pℓ, we have zv∈E(kSℓ−1∪Pℓ). Since zv is a pendent edge in G1 and ∣W∣>(k+1)ℓ, we may find a vertex w∈W and use zw as a replacement of zv, then we obtain a copy of kSℓ−1∪Pℓ in G, a contradiction. Therefore, G1 is kSℓ−1∪Pℓ-free.
The fact that G[R′′] is Sℓ−1-free implies dG[R′′](v)<ℓ−1. When w∈/R′′, we have xw<2(h+1)1xz. It follows
[TABLE]
Then we have
[TABLE]
the inequality deduces that z is adjacent to each vertex of R′′.
Set R2={v1,⋯,vk}⊆R′′.
Claim C.
When ℓ is even, there is no edge in G[R′′].
Suppose to the contrary that there is an edge in G[R′′], denoted by uv. By Claim B, we have uz, vz∈E(G). Since each vertex in R′′ has degree at least (1−6(h+1)5)n, we may find a copy of kSℓ−1 in G with the k center vertices in R2 and leaves vertices in R′′. Then ∣R′′∖R2∣=2ℓ−1 holds. As ∣W∣>(k+1)ℓ, we may find a copy of Pℓ=u1vk+1⋯u2ℓ−2vh−1u2ℓ−1zvu, where ui∈W∖V(kSℓ−1) (i=1,⋯,2ℓ−1). Then G contains a copy of kSℓ−1∪Pℓ, a contradiction.
Claim D.
When ℓ is odd, there is at most one edge in G[R′′].
Suppose to the contrary that there is a P3⊆G[R′′], denoted by uvw. By Claim B, we have wz∈E(G). Since each vertex in R′′ has degree at least (1−6(h+1)5)n, we may find a copy of kSℓ−1 in G with the k center vertices in R2 and leaves vertices in R′′. Then ∣R′′∖R2∣=2ℓ−3 holds. As ∣W∣>(k+1)ℓ, we may find a path Pℓ=u1vk+1u2⋯vh−1u2ℓ−3zwvu where ui∈W∖V(kSℓ−1) (i=1,⋯,2ℓ−3). Then there is a copy of kSℓ−1∪Pℓ in G, a contradiction. Hence G is P3-free.
Suppose to the contrary 2P2⊆G[R′′], denoted by w1w2, w3w4. If one of {w1,w2,w3,w4} is adjacent to a vertex in R′′∖{z}, without loss of generality, say v2ℓ−5w1∈E(G). We may find a Pℓ with 2ℓ−3 vertices in R′′, Pℓ=u1v1⋯u2ℓ−5v2ℓ−5w1w2zw3w4, ui∈W (i=1,⋯,2ℓ−5). Moreover, we may find a kSℓ−1 with the remaining k vertices of R′′ as the k center vertices and leaves vertices in R′′∖Pℓ, a contradiction.
Hence we have NG[R′′](wi)={z} (i=1,2,3,4). Let G2 be a graph obtained from G by deleting edge w1w2 and adding edge w1v1. If G2 contains a copy of kSℓ−1∪Pℓ, we have w1v1∈E(kSℓ−1∪Pℓ). Since w1v1 is a pendent edge in G2 and ∣W∣>(k+1)ℓ, we may find a vertex w5∈W and use w5v1 as a replacement of w1v1. Then we obtain a copy of kSℓ−1∪Pℓ in G, a contradiction. Hence
G2 is kSℓ−1∪Pℓ-free. Since v1∈R′′, w2∈R′′, we have
xw2<2(h+1)1xz≤xv1.
Then
[TABLE]
this contradiction implies that G[R′′] is 2P2-free. Hence there is at most one edge in G[R′′].
When ℓ is even, G[R′′]=Kn−h holds from Claim C. By the facts that the spectral radius of a graph does not decrease by adding an edge and Sn,h is kSℓ−1∪Pℓ-free, each vertex in R′′ is adjacent to each vertex in R′′ and G[R′′]={Kn} holds. Then we have G=Sn,h.
When ℓ is odd, G[R′′]=K2∪Kn−h−2 holds from Claim D. Since Sn,h+ is kSℓ−1∪Pℓ-free, each vertex in R′′ is adjacent to each vertex in R′′ and G[R′′]={Kn} holds. Then we have G=Sn,h+.
Declaration
The authors have declared that no competing interest exists.
Bibliography27
The reference list from the paper itself. Each links out to its DOI / PubMed record.
1[1] A. Bhattacharya, S. Friedland, U. N. Peled, On the first eigenvalue of bipartite graphs, Electron. J. Combin. 15 (2008) Article R 144 23pp.
2[2] H. Bielak, S. Kieliszek, The Turán number of the graph 2 P 5 2 subscript 𝑃 5 2P_{5} , Disuss. Math. Graph Theory. 36 (2016) 683-694.
3[3] N. Bushaw, N. Kttle, Turán numbers of multiple paths ad equibipartite forests, Combin. Probab. Comput. 20 (6) (2011) 837-853.
4[4] P. Balister, E. Győri, J. Lehel, R. Schelp, Connected graphs without long paths, Discrete Math. 308 (2008) 4487-4494.
5[5] M. Chen, A. Liu, X. Zhang, Spectral extremal results with forbidding linear forests, Graphs Combin. 35 (2019) 335-351.
6[6] M. Chen, A. Liu, X. Zhang, On the spectral radius of graphs without a star forest, Discrete Math. 344 (2021) 112269.
7[7] S. Cioabǎ, L. Feng, M. Tait, X. Zhang, The maximum spectral radius of graphs without friendship subgraphs, Electron. J. Combin. 27 (2020) P 4.22.
8[8] S. Cioabǎ, D. Desai, M. Tait, The spectral radius of graphs with no odd wheels, European J. Combin. 99 (2022), Paper No. 103420, 19pp.