MHB Proving K-Extendability of a Bipartite Graph

  • Thread starter Thread starter Aryth1
  • Start date Start date
Aryth1
Messages
38
Reaction score
0
I was asked to see if I could prove this was true, but I have been totally unable to. I can't find many results about extendability and so I have had a lot of trouble. After days of thinking about it without anything to show, I figured that I'd ask for some help here. Here's the problem:

A graph is k-extendable if $|V(G)|\geq 2k + 2$ and for any k disjoint edges, there is a perfect matching containing them. Let $G[A,B]$ be a bipartite graph with a perfect matching. If for any $S\subset A$, $|N(S)|\geq |S| + k$, show that $G$ is k-extendable.

Any help is greatly appreciated!
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Hi Aryth,

I think I'm missing something, if there is a perfect matching in a bipartite graph then $$|A|=|B|$$ and $$N(A)=B$$.

And from $$|N(S)| \geq |S| + k$$ with $$S=A$$ we get $$k\leq 0$$ so the statement is trivial.

What's wrong? :/
 
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.
Back
Top