A Subset of a Graph with No Perfect Matching

  • MHB
  • Thread starter joypav
  • Start date
  • Tags
    Graph
In summary, for a graph $G$ with no perfect matching, if a subset $S$ satisfies $|S| < O(G - S)$, then each vertex in $S$ is adjacent to vertices in at least three odd components of $G - S$. This can be proven by showing that the contrapositive is true, meaning that if for any subset $S$, there exists at least one vertex that is adjacent to less than three odd components of $G - S$, then $G$ has a perfect matching. This can be done by constructing a proof for the contrapositive, which involves showing that for any $S$ satisfying $|S| < O(G - S)$, there exists a vertex $v
  • #1
joypav
151
0
The problem given is...

Let G be a graph with no perfect matching. Then, for some $S \subset G$,

1. $|S|<O(G−S)$
2. Each vertex in S is adjacent to vertices in at least three odd components of $G−S$.
(where $O(G−S)$ is the number of odd components of $G−S$)


Number 1. is the contrapositive of Tutte's 1-Factor Theorem. So no problems there.

Should number 2. also be proved using the contrapositive? Meaning to show...

$\forall S \subset G$ there exists at least one vertex that is adjacent to less than three odd components of $G-S \implies G$ has a perfect matching

I've tried drawing some sketches for the forward proof... with the subset $S$ and odd and even components, but without much progress. I thought maybe the contrapositive was the way to go, and that I needed to construct a perfect matching. Any help or hints would be greatly appreciated!
 
Physics news on Phys.org
  • #2
I think I may have a proof.. I will post it here so the question is complete, but also feel free to make sure it is correct!

Proof:

Case i: $S = \emptyset$
Then both 1. and 2. are obviously true.

Case ii: $S \ne \emptyset$
Assuming 1. to be true, choose the smallest possible $S$ satisfying 1..
Claim: $|G-S|$ is even
Suppose not. Then $\emptyset$ satisfies 1., contradicting that $S$ is the smallest set satisfying 1..
Thus, $|G-S|$ is even.

Choose an arbitrary $v \in V(S)$.
Let $x = $ the number of odd components that $v$ is adjacent to. (we want to show $x \geq 3$)

Let $S^* = S - \left\{v\right\}$.
Then consider the set $G - S^*$.

Note that any components that $v$ was adjacent to when considering the set $G - S$ are merged together when considering $G - S^*$ (meaning, any components that are adjacent to $v$ become one component in our new graph). This new component may be odd or even.

Then,
$O(G - S^*) = O(G - S) - x + \delta$
where $\delta = 0$ if $x$ is even and $1$ if $x$ is odd.

Note the following...
(i.) $|S| + 2 \leq O(G - S)$ (because $|S|$ even $\implies O(G - S)$ even and $|S|$ odd $\implies O(G - S)$ odd)
(ii.) $|S^*| \geq O(G - S^*)$ (otherwise $S^*$ would be a smaller set satisfying 1., contradicting the assumption)Then,

$O(G - S) - x + \delta = O(G - S^*) \leq |S^*| = |S| - 1 \leq O(G - S) - 2 - 1 = O(G - S) - 3$
$\implies O(G - S) - x + \delta \leq O(G - S) - 3$
$\implies x \geq 3 + \delta$
where $\delta$ is $0$ or $1$, completing the proof.
 

1. What is a subset of a graph with no perfect matching?

A subset of a graph with no perfect matching is a set of vertices and edges that is a part of a larger graph, but does not have a perfect matching. A perfect matching is when every vertex in the graph is connected to exactly one other vertex by an edge.

2. Why is it important to study subsets of graphs with no perfect matching?

Studying subsets of graphs with no perfect matching can help us better understand the structure and properties of graphs. It can also help us identify patterns and relationships between different subsets of graphs, which can have practical applications in fields such as computer science and network analysis.

3. How can we determine if a subset of a graph has a perfect matching or not?

There are various algorithms and methods that can be used to determine if a subset of a graph has a perfect matching. One approach is to use the concept of maximum matching, where we try to find the largest possible matching in the subset. If the maximum matching is equal to the number of vertices in the subset, then there is a perfect matching. If not, then there is no perfect matching.

4. Can a subset of a graph with no perfect matching still have other types of matchings?

Yes, a subset of a graph with no perfect matching can still have other types of matchings, such as maximum matchings, minimum matchings, or even partial matchings. These matchings may not cover all the vertices in the subset, but they can still provide important insights into the structure of the graph.

5. Is there any real-world application for subsets of graphs with no perfect matching?

Yes, there are several real-world applications for subsets of graphs with no perfect matching. For example, in network analysis, identifying subsets of graphs with no perfect matching can help us identify potential vulnerabilities or bottlenecks in a network. In computer science, these subsets can be used to optimize algorithms for tasks such as job scheduling or resource allocation.

Similar threads

  • Set Theory, Logic, Probability, Statistics
Replies
1
Views
1K
  • Set Theory, Logic, Probability, Statistics
Replies
1
Views
1K
  • Set Theory, Logic, Probability, Statistics
Replies
1
Views
1K
  • Calculus and Beyond Homework Help
Replies
1
Views
511
  • Set Theory, Logic, Probability, Statistics
Replies
4
Views
1K
Replies
1
Views
1K
  • Advanced Physics Homework Help
Replies
0
Views
559
  • Set Theory, Logic, Probability, Statistics
Replies
1
Views
2K
Replies
1
Views
719
  • Set Theory, Logic, Probability, Statistics
Replies
6
Views
2K
Back
Top