Timeline for Bounding a graph invariant
Current License: CC BY-SA 3.0
7 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| May 2, 2017 at 11:30 | comment | added | Peter Heinig | Good. Added notation for this. If you like it, then you could introduce the $q$-notation right from the start, to make this thread more systematic.$q$ both for $q$uantity and $q$uantum. | |
| May 2, 2017 at 11:28 | history | edited | Peter Heinig | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
Introduced notation for the function the OP is interested in.
|
| May 2, 2017 at 9:47 | comment | added | A Simmons | What a nice start! I'd personally been trying to use the Hadamard graphs as an example family with low independence number but was finding it hard to calculate the $|T|$. I agree with you regarding the dependence on $k$. I'll update the OP. | |
| May 2, 2017 at 8:46 | history | edited | Peter Heinig | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
Introduced abbreviation for readability.
|
| Apr 29, 2017 at 17:43 | comment | added | Peter Heinig | I reckon that to make your question into a resarch question, you should filtrate your question by asking for the dependence of $\sup q$ on the clique number. More precisely, you are probably more interested in what the value of $\sup_{\text{all finite graphs $G$ with $\omega(G)=k$}} q_{\mathrm{relative}}(G)$ is. This then would rule out any answer that focuses one one value of the clique number only, in particular, would rule out answering your question by triangle-free graphs (which already provide a non-trivial lower-bound on your number, though). | |
| Apr 29, 2017 at 17:34 | history | edited | Peter Heinig | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
added 10 characters in body
|
| Apr 29, 2017 at 15:52 | history | answered | Peter Heinig | CC BY-SA 3.0 |