Timeline for Laplacian matrix of a graph with negative weights
Current License: CC BY-SA 3.0
8 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Apr 14, 2014 at 13:24 | comment | added | Supriyo | Thank you for sharing this monograph with me. Yesterday I was just asking about recent research work related to Laplacian matrix of a graph with loop. | |
| Apr 13, 2014 at 10:15 | comment | added | Delio Mugnolo | I am sorry, but I do not understand your question yet. The Laplacian is just a matrix defined in a certain way, and its introduction goes back to Kirchhoff. At a certain point in the history (around 1970) people started noticing this matrix was tightly connected with the "usual" Laplacian on domains. If you are interested in some historical remarks, you can take a look at the notes at the end of Chapter 2 of this monograph: uni-ulm.de/fileadmin/website_uni_ulm/mawi.inst.010/mugnolo/… | |
| Apr 13, 2014 at 5:53 | comment | added | Supriyo | How much work has been done to find out the Laplacian for a graph with loop? | |
| Apr 13, 2014 at 5:37 | vote | accept | Supriyo | ||
| Apr 13, 2014 at 5:24 | comment | added | Delio Mugnolo | Concerning your first question: What do you mean by "references"? It is a definition. But a standard one, if you mean this: Take a look in Biggs' book, Godsil-Royle's book, Mohar's surveys, etc. Yes, loops are generally very problematic when it comes to defining Laplacians, even if no weights are assigned. | |
| Apr 12, 2014 at 12:29 | comment | added | Supriyo | It is working for graphs without loops but there are some obstacle it you add loop in the graph. | |
| Apr 12, 2014 at 11:23 | comment | added | Supriyo | Thank you for your help. Reference? | |
| Apr 12, 2014 at 8:46 | history | answered | Delio Mugnolo | CC BY-SA 3.0 |