MHB Strong induction hypothesis for statement about connected graphs

  • Thread starter Thread starter find_the_fun
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Graphs Induction
find_the_fun
Messages
147
Reaction score
0
Use strong induction to prove that if G is connected and every vertex has even degree that G has a Eulerian Circuit.

a)verify the base case where G has no edges - done
b)Write down the strong induction hypothesis that asserts the statement is true for all graphs that meet the hypotheses and have at most k edges.

I'm not sure if I did b right. Here's what I got
Assume that G is connected and it has a Eularian Circuit if has at most k edges and ever vertex has an even degree.

Is this right? In the induction hypothesis a new constant is introduced, which is k in this case.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Re: strong induction hypothesis for statement about connected graphs

find_the_fun said:
Assume that G is connected and it has a Eularian Circuit if has at most k edges and ever vertex has an even degree.
First, I would exclude the word "assume" from the hypothesis itself. If the hypothesis is $P(k)$, then the induction step starts with "Assume $P(k)$", and this would make two "assume"s in a row. Second, you need to move "$G$ is connected" to the premise of the assumption. If $P(k)$ has the form "$G$ is connected and (... ⇒ ...)", then, when you are proving $P(k+1)$, you have to prove, in particular, that $G$ with at most $k+1$ edges is connected. Instead, you should assume that it is connected.

Finally, you are right that the hypothesis contains a new variable $k$. What about $G$? There are two options: either $G$ is free in $P(k)$ and is thus the same in $P(k)$ and $P(k+1)$, or it is bound by a universal quantifier. The first case happens when you fix $G$ before starting induction, i.e., when you start the proof by saying "Fix an arbitrary $G$ and then apply a strong induction on $k$". In this case, $G$ is the same throughout the whole induction process. But this does not make sense because $G$ is supposed to have different number of edges. Formally, in proving the induction step $P(k)\implies P(k+1)$, you assume $P(k)$ and the premise of $P(k+1)$, which says that $G$ has at most $k+1$ edges. But then you cannot apply $P(k)$ because its own premise says that the same $G$ has at most $k$ edges. Therefore, you need the second option, where $G$ is universally quantified in $P(k)$.

Altogether, the induction hypothesis $P(k)$ should be as follows: For any graph $G$ with at most $k$ edges, if $G$ is connected and every vertex of $G$ has even degree, then $G$ has a Eulerian circuit.
 
Re: strong induction hypothesis for statement about connected graphs

Ok thanks. The next part asks to explain why the induction hypothesis can be applied to the subgraph H constructed by deleting the edges in the longest circuit in G.

What I don't get is how can you explain the induction step still applies? Isn't it just saying assume something is true, so how could it not apply?
 
Re: strong induction hypothesis for statement about connected graphs

find_the_fun said:
The next part asks to explain why the induction hypothesis can be applied to the subgraph H constructed by deleting the edges in the longest circuit in G.

What I don't get is how can you explain the induction step still applies? Isn't it just saying assume something is true, so how could it not apply?
Suppose there is a graph $G$ satisfying the premise of $P(k+1)$, i.e., $G$ has at most $k+1$ edges, $G$ is connected and every vertex of $G$ has even degree. Let $G'$ be obtained from $G$ by deleting the edges in the longest circuit. The question asks to show that $G'$ satisfies the premise of $P(k)$, i.e., $G'$ has at most $k$ edges, $G'$ is connected and every vertex of $G'$ has even degree. This way, the conclusion of $P(k)$ applies to $G'$ as well, i.e., $G'$ has a Eulerian circuit, from which we then construct a Eulerian circuit in $G$.
 
Re: Strong induction hypothesis for statement about connected graphs

Ok so I need to show that
1)G' is connected
2)G' has at most k edges
3)Each edge is G' has even degree

I think I'm getting it now.
 
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