7
$\begingroup$

Conjecture: Let $G$ be a connected simple graph with minimun degree $3$. Suppose that for vertices $s$ and $t$ and a simple $(s,t)$-path $P$, $G \backslash E(P)$ is bipartite with stable classes of vertices $V(P)$ and $V(G)-V(P)$. Then $P$ is not a longest simple $(s,t)$-path of $G$.

$\endgroup$
5
  • $\begingroup$ What are 'stable classes of vertices'? $\endgroup$ Commented Oct 6, 2016 at 20:59
  • $\begingroup$ @FedorPetrov: I assume these parts of the bipartite graph... $\endgroup$ Commented Oct 6, 2016 at 21:01
  • $\begingroup$ Ilya Bognadov is right. A stable set of vertices is a set with no pair of adjacent vertices (some authors call independent). $\endgroup$ Commented Oct 7, 2016 at 5:00
  • $\begingroup$ Can you say a bit about where this question comes from? $\endgroup$
    – Ben Barber
    Commented Oct 13, 2016 at 15:10
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ I was trying to approach Thomassen's conjecture about existence of chords on longest cycles of 3-connected graphs and arrived at this. I guess the conjecture may be reduced to this, but did not check all details. $\endgroup$ Commented Oct 14, 2016 at 17:12

1 Answer 1

1
$\begingroup$

Let's relax your question as follows: Suppose that the minimum degree requirement is only 2, and for the interior vertices of $P$ it is 3. Also, $P$ needn't be induced, so let's only suppose that $V\setminus P$ is stable. I claim that even with these conditions, it is hard to give an example where $P$ is a longest $(s,t)$-path.

Why? Because if the degree of every interior vertex of $P$ is odd, and the degree of the other vertices is even, then we can use Thomason's generalization of the Smith network theorem, according to which there are an even number of Hamiltonian-cycles through any edge of a graph where every degree is odd. To use the theorem, we first get rid of the vertices outside $P$; even degree ($2d$) vertices can be replaced by $d$ edges among $d$ arbitrary endpoints (OK, we should pay attention not to create multiple edges, but let's not care about the details).

Example 1. Suppose that $P=(s,a,b,t)$ and the vertices outside $P$ are $c$ and $d$ such that $c$ is connected to $s$ and $b$, while $d$ is connected to $a$ and $t$. Then after getting rid of the vertices outside $P$, we add the edges $sb$ and $at$ to the graph induced by $P$, so our new graph becomes a complete graph on $(s,a,b,t)$, minus the $st$ edge. By Smith's theorem, there is another Hamiltonian-path connecting $s$ and $t$, namely, $(s,b,a,t)$. In the original graph, this gives the path $(s,c,b,a,d,t)$, which is longer than $P$. (Note that this new path is not necessarily Hamiltonian in the original graph, only in our example because it was too small.)

For other degree distributions, we can also replace, say, a degree $3$ vertex outside $P$ with a triangle, and if the new Hamiltonian cycle would use two edges of it, we instead use only one, which doesn't make the path shorter, as the vertex outside $P$ will also be on it in the original graph. Thus eventually, we run into the problem of constructing uniquely Hamiltonian graphs with some extra conditions, which is not an easy problem.

Example 2. Suppose that $P=(s,a,b,c,d,t)$ and the vertices outside $P$ are $e$ and $f$ such that $d$ is connected to $s,b$ and $t$, while $e$ is connected to $a,c$ and $t$. Then after getting rid of the vertices outside $P$, we add the edges $sb,bd,sd$ and $ac,ct,at$ to the graph induced by $P$. Now we cannot use any parity argument, but we get a minimum degree $3$ graph (if we include the $st$ edge), so these typically are not uniquely Hamiltonian, namely, $(s,b,a,c,d,t)$ is another Hamiltonian path. In the original graph, this gives the path $(s,e,b,a,f,c,d,t)$. Here we were lucky that only one edge of each triangle was used. To see another example, let's consider another Hamiltonian path, $(s,b,d,c,a,t)$. Here $sb$ and $bd$ both would go through $e$, so instead, we will use the $sd$ edge, i.e., $(s,e,d)$ in the original graph, and similarly $ca$ and $at$ will give $(c,f,t)$. Thus, in the original graph our (non-Hamiltonian) path becomes $(s,e,d,c,f,t)$. (Unfortunately this is not even longer than $P$, just equally long, because all new edges were derived from the triangle trick.)

$\endgroup$
5
  • $\begingroup$ I though about this. I think it works for minimum degree $2$ outside of $P$, but I was hopeless to get an answer on that by the reasons you said. I did not understand the idea of replacing a degree $3$ vertex outside of $P$ by a triangle, but, as a longest $(s,t)$-path does not need to use all vertices outside of $P$, I don't see how it turns into the problem of finding uniquely Hamiltonian graphs. $\endgroup$ Commented Oct 20, 2016 at 14:37
  • $\begingroup$ One thing more, on the case that all vertices outside $P$ have degree $2$. Even if the graph $H$ obtained by supressing the vertices of degree $2$ has an unique hamiltonian path, it is possible that there are non-hamiltonian $(s,t)$-paths that yielding longer $(s,t)$-paths than $P$ in the original graph. $\endgroup$ Commented Oct 20, 2016 at 16:47
  • $\begingroup$ I've added two examples to illustrate what I meant, because I'm afraid my description was not clear enough. $\endgroup$
    – domotorp
    Commented Oct 21, 2016 at 4:24
  • $\begingroup$ Thanks for the examples. Let me try to explain what I said by Example 3, defined as follows. Let $P=(s,a,b,c,t)$ and add 2 more vertices $d$ and $e$ and the edges $ds,db,ea$ and $et$ and call such graph $G$. Now, we get rid of $e$ and $d$ to make a graph $H$ (which is $P$ plus the edges $sb$ and $at$). In $H$ we have $P_1:=s,b,a,e,t$, which is not Hamiltonian in $H$ ($c$ is not in $P_1$), but in $G$, $P_1$ corresponds to $s,d,b,a,e,t$, which is an $(s,t)$-path longer than $P$. So, we look for something weaker than an Hamiltonian Path in this case. $\endgroup$ Commented Oct 24, 2016 at 23:04
  • $\begingroup$ Yes, absolutely, even a non-Hamiltonian path might be longer than $P$. I was arguing that in most examples, even a Hamiltonian path will exist, which is necessarily longer than $P$. $\endgroup$
    – domotorp
    Commented Oct 25, 2016 at 18:12

You must log in to answer this question.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged .