Interesting graph theory problem

Click For Summary
SUMMARY

The discussion revolves around a graph theory problem involving a graph G with n vertices. The main objective is to prove that the number of edges |E(G)| must satisfy the inequality |E(G)| >= C(n,2) - C(n-s+2,2), where C(n,k) represents the binomial coefficient. The problem highlights the condition that adding a missing vertex v results in a complete subgraph K_s, indicating that every subgraph of s elements is nearly complete except for one vertex. The discussion suggests starting with small values of s and constructing examples to facilitate the proof.

PREREQUISITES
  • Understanding of graph theory concepts, specifically complete graphs and subgraphs.
  • Familiarity with binomial coefficients and their properties, particularly C(n,k).
  • Basic knowledge of edge counting in graphs and the significance of edge density.
  • Experience with constructing mathematical proofs and examples in combinatorial contexts.
NEXT STEPS
  • Study the properties of complete graphs and their subgraphs in detail.
  • Learn about binomial coefficients and their applications in combinatorial proofs.
  • Explore edge density and its implications in graph theory.
  • Investigate examples of graph constructions that satisfy specific edge conditions.
USEFUL FOR

Mathematicians, computer scientists, and students studying graph theory, particularly those interested in combinatorial proofs and edge properties in graphs.

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.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
3K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 34 ·
2
Replies
34
Views
6K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
485
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
3K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K