Exercise about connected graphs

  • Context: MHB 
  • Thread starter Thread starter mathmari
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Exercise Graphs
Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around a problem related to connected graphs, specifically focusing on the properties of paths between vertices in a graph. Participants explore the implications of the distance between two vertices and the structure of paths that connect them, considering conditions under which certain edges may or may not exist in those paths.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory, Technical explanation, Debate/contested, Mathematical reasoning

Main Points Raised

  • One participant presents a problem regarding the existence of a path between two vertices in a connected graph, emphasizing the condition that certain edges should not exist between non-consecutive vertices.
  • Another participant seeks clarification on the definition of distance between two vertices, leading to a consensus that it refers to the minimum number of edges in a path connecting them.
  • Several participants discuss the implications of assuming edges exist between non-consecutive vertices in a shortest path, suggesting that this would lead to a contradiction regarding the length of the path.
  • A participant references a proof from their notes, questioning the calculation of path length and the reasoning behind certain inequalities, which prompts further clarification and exploration of the definitions involved.
  • There is a discussion about the calculation of the length of a path, with participants breaking down the components of the path length based on the number of edges and vertices involved.
  • One participant acknowledges a misunderstanding in their earlier calculations regarding the number of vertices versus edges, which contributes to the overall exploration of the problem.
  • Participants engage in a back-and-forth regarding the implications of their findings, particularly focusing on the contradiction that arises if certain edges are assumed to exist.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants generally agree on the definitions of distance and path length, but there is ongoing debate regarding the implications of certain edges existing in the context of shortest paths. The discussion remains unresolved as participants explore different interpretations and calculations.

Contextual Notes

There are limitations in the assumptions made about the structure of paths and the definitions of distance and length, which are not fully resolved in the discussion. The calculations presented rely on specific interpretations that may vary among participants.

mathmari
Gold Member
MHB
Messages
4,984
Reaction score
7
Hey! :o

I got stuck at the following exercise... Could you give me an idea how to show this?

Let $G=(V,E)$ be a connected graph and $u,v$ $\epsilon$ $V$.If $d(v,u)=k$,then there is a path $v=v_{1},v_{2},...,v_{k+1}=u$ so that $\{v_{i},v_{j}\}$ doesn't belong in $E$ for $j \geq i+2$. Especially,there can't be repeated vertices.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
And what is $d(u,v)$?
 
Evgeny.Makarov said:
And what is $d(u,v)$?

$d(u,v)$ is the minimum distance from the vertex u to the vertex v.
 
By distance I assume the number of edges in a path from $u$ to $v$. Then the path of this minimal length has the required property, doesn't it? Otherwise it could be shortened.
 
mathmari said:
Hey! :o

I got stuck at the following exercise... Could you give me an idea how to show this?

Let $G=(V,E)$ be a connected graph and $u,v$ $\epsilon$ $V$.If $d(v,u)=k$,then there is a path $v=v_{1},v_{2},...,v_{k+1}=u$ so that $\{v_{i},v_{j}\}$ doesn't belong in $E$ for $j \geq i+2$. Especially,there can't be repeated vertices.
Just as Evgeny mentioned, you can argue by contradiction.

Since $d(u,v)=k$, the shortest path between $u$ and $v$ has length $k$.
Let $v=v_1,\ldots,v_{k+1}=u$ be a shortest path between $u$ and $v$ and call this path $P$.
Assume there exists $i$ and $j$ with $j\geq i+2$ such that $v_iv_j\in E$.

Can you construct a path between $u$ and $v$ which is shorter than $P$?
 
caffeinemachine said:
Just as Evgeny mentioned, you can argue by contradiction.

Since $d(u,v)=k$, the shortest path between $u$ and $v$ has length $k$.
Let $v=v_1,\ldots,v_{k+1}=u$ be a shortest path between $u$ and $v$ and call this path $P$.
Assume there exists $i$ and $j$ with $j\geq i+2$ such that $v_iv_j\in E$.

Can you construct a path between $u$ and $v$ which is shorter than $P$?

Assuming that there exists $i$ and $j$ with $j \geq i+2$ such that $v_iv_j \in E$, then there is a path between $u$ and $v$ whose distance is less than k, that means that there is a path which shorter than $P$.
 
mathmari said:
Assuming that there exists $i$ and $j$ with $j \geq i+2$ such that $v_iv_j \in E$, then there is a path between $u$ and $v$ whose distance is less than k, that means that there is a path which shorter than $P$.
Yes. Does that solve your problem?
 
I found in my notes the following proof:

If $\{v_i,v_j\} \in E$ for $i,j$ with $j \geq i+1$.
Then the path is $v=v_1, ... , v_i, v_j, v_{j+1}, ..., v_{k+1}=u$ which length is $ i-1+1+(k+1)-j=k-(j-i)+1 \leq k-2+1=k-1$.
$v_j=v_i$ for $j>i$ then $\{v_i,v_{j+1}\}=\{v_j,v_{j+1}\}$

Could you explain me how we calculated the length $ i-1+1+(k+1)-j=k-(j-i)+1 \leq k-2+1=k-1$ ?
I assume that we have calculated the length of the path $v_1, ..., v_i$, which is $i-1+1$ and then the length of the path $ v_j, ..., v_{k+1}$ which is $ k+1-j+1=k-j+2$, isn't?
 
mathmari said:
I found in my notes the following proof:

If $\{v_i,v_j\} \in E$ for $i,j$ with $j \geq i$+$1$. (I believe you meant $2$ rather than $1$.)
Then the path is $v=v_1, ... , v_i, v_j, v_{j+1}, ..., v_{k+1}=u$ which length is $ i-1+1+(k+1)-j=k-(j-i)+1 \leq k-2+1=k-1$.
$v_j=v_i$ for $j>i$ then $\{v_i,v_{j+1}\}=\{v_j,v_{j+1}\}$ $\leftarrow$ I do not understand this line.

Could you explain me how we calculated the length $ i-1+1+(k+1)-j=k-(j-i)+1 \leq k-2+1=k-1$ ?
I assume that we have calculated the length of the path $v_1, ..., v_i$, which is $i-1+1$ and then the length of the path $ v_j, ..., v_{k+1}$ which is $ k+1-j+1=k-j+2$, isn't?
How did calculate the length of the path?
It is kind of immediate from the definition of length of path.
How many edges are there in the path $v=v_1,\ldots,v_i,v_j,v_{j+1},\ldots,v_{k+1}=u$?
(Remember that a path is actually a graph.)

There are $l=\underbrace{(i-1)}_{\text{from } v \text{ to } v_i}+\underbrace{1}_{\text{for the edge between }v_i \text{ and } v_j}+\underbrace{(k+1-j)}_{\text{from } v_j \text{ to } u}$.

This gives $l=i-j+k+1$.
Now since $i-j\leq -2$, we have the $l\leq k-1$.
 
  • #10
caffeinemachine said:
How did calculate the length of the path?
It is kind of immediate from the definition of length of path.
How many edges are there in the path $v=v_1,\ldots,v_i,v_j,v_{j+1},\ldots,v_{k+1}=u$?
(Remember that a path is actually a graph.)

There are $l=\underbrace{(i-1)}_{\text{from } v \text{ to } v_i}+\underbrace{1}_{\text{for the edge between }v_i \text{ and } v_j}+\underbrace{(k+1-j)}_{\text{from } v_j \text{ to } u}$.

This gives $l=i-j+k+1$.
Now since $i-j\leq -2$, we have the $l\leq k-1$.

Oh yes, I calculated the number of vertices between $v$ and $u$ instead of the number of edges. :o
That's why I found an other result..

So, since $ l<k-1$, there is also a shorter path, but that contradicts to that what we have assumed, that the length of the shortest path is $k$. So it cannot be $j \geq i+2$.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
2K
Replies
4
Views
4K
  • · Replies 10 ·
Replies
10
Views
1K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
3K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
Replies
1
Views
1K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
3K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K