MHB A Subset of a Graph with No Perfect Matching

  • Thread starter Thread starter joypav
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Graph
joypav
Messages
149
Reaction score
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
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.
 
Hi all, I've been a roulette player for more than 10 years (although I took time off here and there) and it's only now that I'm trying to understand the physics of the game. Basically my strategy in roulette is to divide the wheel roughly into two halves (let's call them A and B). My theory is that in roulette there will invariably be variance. In other words, if A comes up 5 times in a row, B will be due to come up soon. However I have been proven wrong many times, and I have seen some...
Thread 'Detail of Diagonalization Lemma'
The following is more or less taken from page 6 of C. Smorynski's "Self-Reference and Modal Logic". (Springer, 1985) (I couldn't get raised brackets to indicate codification (Gödel numbering), so I use a box. The overline is assigning a name. The detail I would like clarification on is in the second step in the last line, where we have an m-overlined, and we substitute the expression for m. Are we saying that the name of a coded term is the same as the coded term? Thanks in advance.
Back
Top