MHB Probability of Having a Totally Dominating Set (Probabilistic Methods)

  • Thread starter Thread starter joypav
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Probability Set
joypav
Messages
149
Reaction score
0
Problem: A vertex set $S$ in a graph $G$ is said to be totally t-dominating, for a positive integer t, if
$|N(v) \cap S| \geq t$ for all $v \in V (G)$.
Suppose that r, t, n are positive integers such that $r > 2t$ and $t \geq \frac{14}{3}\cdot ln(2n)$, and let $G$ be an r-regular n-vertex graph. Choose a random vertex set $S$ by independently adding each vertex to $S$ with probability p, where $p =\frac{2t}{r}$. Prove that $P[S$ is totally t-dominating$] > \frac{1}{2}$.

I honestly am not sure where to begin with this problem.
I know that $E[|S|] = n \cdot p = n \cdot \frac{2t}{r}$ (the expectation of the size of $S$) and $|E(G)| = \frac{nr}{2}$ (because G is r-regular). I don't know if either of these will be of any use...

Here is what I was thinking.
Fix $v \in V(G)$. $G$ is r-regular, so label each of $v$'s neighbors: $N(v) = \left\{u_1,...,u_r\right\}$.
Let $A_{v,u_i}$ be the event that $u_i \in S$.
Let $X_{v,u_i}$ be the indicator for $A_{v,u_i}$, (i.e. it is equal to 1 if $u_i \in S$ and 0 otherwise).
Let $X_v$= the # of neighbors of $v$ that are in $S$.
Then, $X_v = \sum_{u_i \in N(v)} X_{v,u_i}$.

We "want" $v$ to have at least t neighbors in $S$. So then we'd like to look at $P[X_v \geq t]$.

Then, consider the event $X$: $S$ is totally t-dominating.
We want to show that $P[X] > \frac{1}{2}$.

Is this at all on the right track?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Another proof for your consideration (I was busy busy busy working on problems today!).

Proof:
Fix $v \in V(G)$. G is r-regular, so we know $|N(v)|=r$. Label $v$'s neighbors $u_1, ..., u_r$. Let $A_{u_i}$ be the event that $u_i \in S$ and let $X_{u_i}$ be its indicator. Let $X_v = \sum_{i=1}^r X_{u_i}$, (giving the number of neighbors that $v$ has in $S$). Using Chernoff's, we may bound the "bad" event: that $v$ has less than $t$ neighbors in $S$. Apply Chernoff's with,
$$E[X_v] = \sum_{i=1}^r X_{u_i} = r(p) = r(\frac{2t}{r})=2t$$
$$P[|N(v) \cap S| \leq t] = P[X_v \leq t] = P[X_v \leq 2t - t] = P[X_v \leq E[X_v] - t]$$
$$\leq e^{-\frac{t^2}{2(np+t/3)}} = e^{-\frac{t^2}{2(4tn/r+2t/3)}} = e^{-\frac{t^2}{\frac{12tn+2tr}{3r}}} = e^{-\frac{3rt^2}{12tn+2tr}} = e^{-\frac{3rt}{12n+2r}} < e^{-\frac{3(14/3ln(2n)}{14}} = e^{-ln(2n)}$$
Then,
$$\sum_{v \in V(G)} P[|N(v) \cap S| \leq t] = \sum_{v \in V(G)} P[X_v \leq t] < n \cdot e^{-ln(2n)} = e^{ln(n)-ln(2n)} = e^{ln(n/2n)} = e^{ln(1/1)} = \frac{1}{2}$$
If the probability of the "bad" event is less than $\frac{1}{2}$, then the probability of $S$ being totally t-dominating $> 1-\frac{1}{2} = \frac{1}{2}$.
 
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.

Similar threads

Back
Top