Interesting graph theory problem

Click For Summary
The discussion revolves around a graph theory problem involving a graph G with n vertices, where adding a missing vertex v results in a complete subgraph K_s. The goal is to prove that the number of edges |E(G)| must satisfy the inequality |E(G)| >= C(n,2) - C(n-s+2,2). Participants suggest starting with small values of s to explore examples that could lead to a proof. The conversation emphasizes the necessity of having a minimum number of edges for the condition to hold true. Overall, the focus is on establishing a mathematical foundation for the problem.
alejopelaez
Messages
1
Reaction score
0
I have the following problem, suppose we have a graph G of n elements, with the property that if we add one missing vertex v, we will get a complete subgraph with s elements K_s of G, in which v belongs to G'. In other words every subgraph of s elements of G is almost a complete graph except for at most one missing vertex. (s is fixed btw).

The problem is to prove that |E(G)| >= C(n,2) - C(n-s+2,2), |E(G)| is the number of edges of G. C(n,k) is the binomial coeficient.

I am not sure if this is the appropiate forum for this kind of questions, but couldn't find any adequate subforum.

Any help is appreciated.
 
Mathematics news on Phys.org
You have to show that you already must have a certain number of edges for otherwise the condition cannot hold. I would start with small s and an example to see how a path to a proof could look like.
 
Here is a little puzzle from the book 100 Geometric Games by Pierre Berloquin. The side of a small square is one meter long and the side of a larger square one and a half meters long. One vertex of the large square is at the center of the small square. The side of the large square cuts two sides of the small square into one- third parts and two-thirds parts. What is the area where the squares overlap?

Similar threads

  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
3K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 34 ·
2
Replies
34
Views
5K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
3K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K