9
$\begingroup$

A graph is Hamiltonian if and only if its closure is Hamiltonian.

I am looking for a simple (i.e. short) proof of the theorem, that I can use as part of an article on topological sorting.

I've not been able to find one in the literature I have access to. Any help would be appreciated.

$\endgroup$

2 Answers 2

12
$\begingroup$

Let $G=G_0, G_1, G_2$, etc. be a sequence of graphs where each $G_i$ is formed by performing a single closure step to $G_{i-1}$ — that is, add an edge $uv$ to $G_i$ when $u$ and $v$ together have at least $n$ neighbors. If any graph in this sequence is Hamiltonian, let $k$ be the minimum $k$ such that $G_k$ is Hamiltonian. Then I claim that $k=0$. For, otherwise let $uv$ be the edge added to form $G_k$ from $G_{k-1}$ and let $C$ be a Hamiltonian cycle in $G_k$. There are $n-1$ other edges in $C$, and $n$ edges going out from $u$ and $v$ together, so by the pigeonhole principle there exists an edge $pq$ in $C$ (with the vertex labeling chosen so that $u$ is clockwise of $v$ and $p$ is clockwise of $q$) such that $G_{k-1}$ contains edges $up$ and $vq$. But then $C + up + vq - pq - uv$ is a Hamiltonian cycle in $G_{k-1}$ contradicting the assumption that $k>0$.

$\endgroup$
0
6
$\begingroup$

Let me restate the theorem for variables.

Notation Read $p\bowtie q$ as "$p$ is adjacent to $q$", and $p\not\bowtie q$ as "$p$ is not adjacent to $q$".

Theorem Let $G$ be a graph whose order is greater than $2$. Let $v_1$ and $v_2$ be vertices such that $v_1\neq v_2 \land v_1\not\bowtie v_2$ and $\deg v_1 + \deg v_2 \ge n\in\mathbb{N}$. Then $G$ is Hamiltonian iff $G' = G + v_1 v_2$ is Hamiltonian.

Proof Assume $G'$ is Hamiltonian but not $G$. Therefore, by definition, there exists a cycle $(p_1,\ldots,p_n)$ in $G$ connecting $v_1$ (at $p_1$) to $v_2$ (at $p_n$) visiting all of $G$'s vertices. If $p_k\bowtie p_1$ then $p_{k-1} \not\bowtie p_n$, since $(p_1,p_k,p_{k+1},\ldots,p_n,p_{k-1},p_{k-2},\ldots,p_1)$ is a Hamiltonian cycle of $G$. As such, $\deg p_n \le n - (1 + \deg p_1)$, a contradiction.

$\endgroup$

Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service and acknowledge you have read our privacy policy.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.