Let $G$ be a simple graph (finite or infinite), $[n]\mathrel{:=}\{1,...,n\}$. Define the function: $$\varepsilon_n(G)\mathrel{:=}\min_\phi{\lvert{\operatorname{dom} (\phi)}\rvert},$$ where $\phi$ is the partial function $\phi:V(G)\to[n]$ such that $\forall x,y\in[n]$, $x\neq y$, $\exists u,v\in V(G)$: $\phi(u)=x$, $\phi(v)=y$, $uv \in E(G)$ and $\forall u,v\in \operatorname{dom}(\phi)$, $u\neq v$, $\phi(u)=\phi(v) \implies uv\notin E(G) $. I need information about this function, but I don't know where to search. Intuitively, one can think of this function as the minimum number of characters we can write to express the inequality of $n$ numbers if we place them on the nodes of a graph and place symbols of inequality on the edges. It's obvious that $0 \leq \varepsilon_n(G) \leq v(G) $, $$\varepsilon_n(K_m)=\begin{cases}n,\ m\geq n\\0,\ m < n. \end{cases}$$ In particular, I am interested in the values of $\varepsilon_n(\mathbb{Z}_G)$, where $\mathbb{Z}_G $ is the undirected infinite graph such that $V(\mathbb{Z}_G )= \mathbb{Z} $, and $E(\mathbb{Z}_G)=\{(i,j)\in \mathbb{Z}^2\mathrel: i+1=j \}$. It's clear that $\varepsilon_n(\mathbb{Z}_G) \neq 0 $ for all $n$, but I have no rigorous proof of this statement. I am also interested in the complexity of calculating $ \varepsilon_n(G) $ in the general case, but I do not understand how not to iterate over many $\phi$. I think that $\varepsilon_n(G) \in \mathrm{FNP}$.
-
$\begingroup$ I don't think "$\varepsilon_n(G) \in \mathrm{FNP}$" literally makes sense, but perhaps this sort of shorthand for "the problem of computing $\varepsilon_n(G)$ belongs to $\mathrm{FNP}$" is common. $\endgroup$– LSpiceCommented Jul 12, 2021 at 21:46
-
$\begingroup$ By $v(G)$ do you mean $n(G)$, the number of vertices? When $n\gt m$ why isn't $\varepsilon_n(K_m)$ undefined or $\infty$?> $\endgroup$– bofCommented Jul 12, 2021 at 22:52
-
$\begingroup$ @bof, yes, $v(G)$ is a number of vertices. It seemed to me that $\varepsilon_n(G)= 0$ would be correct if there are no required colorings . I guess I want to keep the boundaries $0\leq \varepsilon_n(G)\leq v(G) $ Maybe I was wrong. $\endgroup$– Ben TomCommented Jul 12, 2021 at 23:26
-
$\begingroup$ Have you noticed the relationship of your question to the concept of the achromatic number of a graph? $\endgroup$– bofCommented Jul 12, 2021 at 23:37
-
1$\begingroup$ @bof, strange, but this is the first time I hear about the achromatic number and it definitely has relationship of my question. $\endgroup$– Ben TomCommented Jul 13, 2021 at 6:45
1 Answer
Rephrasing, given $G$ and $n$ you're looking for the smallest subset $V' \subseteq V$ of the vertices of $G$ such that the subgraph $G'$ induced by $V'$ has a vertex colouring $\phi$ on $n$ colours for which every pair of colours $c \neq d$ has an edge between those colours and there is no edge between two vertices of the same colour.
For your particular case of interest, when $n$ is odd we can colour a subchain of $\mathbb{Z}_G$ in the sequence of colours of an Eulerian path on $K_n$ to find that $\varepsilon_n(\mathbb{Z}_G) = \binom{n}{2} + 1$. When $n$ is even, $\varepsilon_n(\mathbb{Z}_G) = \binom{n}{2} + \frac{n-2}{2} + 1$ by a similar argument, as bof correctly pointed out in a comment improving the earlier claim of this answer: the addition of $\frac{n-2}{2}$ edges is necessary and sufficient for an Eulerian trace to exist.
-
1$\begingroup$ In other words, $\varepsilon_n(G)$ is the minimum order of an induced subgraph of $G$ whose achromatic number is $n$, with the weird stipulation that $\varepsilon_n(G)=0$ if there is no such subgraph. $\endgroup$– bofCommented Jul 12, 2021 at 23:31
-
1$\begingroup$ Doesn't your argument for even $n$ show that $\varepsilon_n(\mathbb Z_G)=1+\binom n2+\frac{n-2}2=\frac{n^2}2$ in that case? By adding $\frac{n-2}2$ new edges to $K_n$ you get a (multi-)graph with only two vertices of odd degree, so it has an Eulerian trail. $\endgroup$– bofCommented Jul 16, 2021 at 8:44
-