Timeline for Counterexamples for this algorithm for recognizing lexicographic product of graphs?
Current License: CC BY-SA 3.0
9 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Sep 25, 2012 at 5:25 | vote | accept | joro | ||
| Sep 14, 2012 at 11:29 | comment | added | joro | ...Some stupid comments deleted. | |
| Sep 14, 2012 at 11:27 | history | rollback | joro |
Rollback to Revision 1 - rollback
|
|
| Sep 14, 2012 at 11:26 | answer | added | joro | timeline score: 2 | |
| Sep 14, 2012 at 6:28 | history | edited | joro | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
addressed some comments
|
| Sep 13, 2012 at 15:17 | comment | added | Gerhard Paseman | When the adjacency matrix is so given, then your algorithm may work (I'm still looking, so I say may instead of does). Suppose I take the adjacency matrix of a large graph and a small number k>1, and permute k of the rows and columns to get the adjacency matrix of a graph isomorphic to T. What does (*) do? Gerhard "Preparing A System Design Response" Paseman, 2012.09.13 | |
| Sep 13, 2012 at 13:10 | comment | added | joro | ...and $T$ is numbered this way. | |
| Sep 13, 2012 at 12:29 | comment | added | Brendan McKay | You seem to be assuming that $T$ is given with the vertices numbered in a particular order. I don't know why this is useful or interesting. | |
| Sep 13, 2012 at 10:18 | history | asked | joro | CC BY-SA 3.0 |