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

  • Thread starter Thread starter joypav
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Probability Set
Click For Summary
SUMMARY

The discussion focuses on proving that a randomly chosen vertex set \( S \) in an \( r \)-regular \( n \)-vertex graph \( G \) is totally \( t \)-dominating with a probability greater than \( \frac{1}{2} \), given the conditions \( r > 2t \) and \( t \geq \frac{14}{3} \cdot \ln(2n) \). The proof employs Chernoff's bound to analyze the number of neighbors of each vertex in \( S \) and shows that the probability of having fewer than \( t \) neighbors in \( S \) is less than \( \frac{1}{2} \). Consequently, this confirms that \( P[S \text{ is totally } t\text{-dominating}] > \frac{1}{2} \).

PREREQUISITES
  • Understanding of graph theory, specifically \( r \)-regular graphs
  • Familiarity with probabilistic methods in combinatorics
  • Knowledge of Chernoff's bound and its applications
  • Basic concepts of random variables and expectation
NEXT STEPS
  • Study the application of Chernoff's bound in probabilistic proofs
  • Explore properties of \( r \)-regular graphs and their implications in graph theory
  • Learn about totally dominating sets and their significance in network design
  • Investigate advanced probabilistic methods in combinatorial optimization
USEFUL FOR

Researchers, mathematicians, and computer scientists interested in graph theory, probabilistic methods, and combinatorial optimization, particularly those focusing on dominating sets in graphs.

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 $> 1-\frac{1}{2} = \frac{1}{2}$.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
1K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 15 ·
Replies
15
Views
2K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K