Minimal graphs for hamiltonian extension

Author(s): Christophe Picouleau1
1CEDRIC laboratory, Conservatoire National des Arts et Métiers, Paris, France.
Copyright © Christophe Picouleau. This is an open access article distributed under the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.

Abstract

For every \(n\ge 3\), we determine the minimum number of edges of graph with \(n\) vertices such that for any non edge \(xy\) there exits a hamiltonian cycle containing \(xy\).

Keywords: 2-factor, hamiltonian cycle, hamiltonian path.

1. Introduction

For all graph theoretical terms and notations not defined here the reader is referred to [1]. We only consider simple finite loopless undirected graphs. For a graph \(G=(V,E)\) with \(\vert V\vert=n\) vertices, an edge is a pair of two connected vertices \(x,y\), we denote it by \(xy,xy\in E\); when two vertices \(x,y\) are not connected this pair form the non-edge \(xy,xy\not\in E\). In \(G\) a \(2\)-factor is a subset of edges \(F\subset E\) such that every vertex is incident to exactly two edges of \(F\). Since \(G\) is finite a \(2\)-factor consists of a collection of vertex disjoint cycles spanning the vertex set \(V \). When the collection consists of an unique cycle the \(2\)-factor is connected, so it is a hamiltonian cycle.

We intend to determine, for any integer \(n\ge 3\), a graph \(G=(V,E),n=\vert V\vert\) with a minimum number of edges such that for every non-edge \(xy\) it is always possible to include the non-edge \(xy\) into a connected \(2\)-factor, i.e., the graph \(G_{xy}=(V,E\cup \{xy\})\) has a hamiltonian cycle \(H,xy\in H\). In other words for any non-edge \(xy\) of \(G\) there exits a hamiltonian path between \(x\) and \(y\).

This problem is related to the minimal \(2\)-factor extension studied in [2] in which the \(2\)-factors are not necessary connected. It is also related to the problem of finding minimal graphs for non-edge extensions in the case of perfect matchings (\(1\)-factors) studied in [3]. Another problem of hamiltonian extension can be found in [4].

Definition 1. Let \(G=(V,E)\) be a graph and \(xy\not\in E\) an non-edge. If \(G_{xy}=(V,E\cup \{xy\})\) has a hamitonian cycle that contains \(xy\) we shall say that \(xy\) has been extended (to a connected \(2\)-factor, to an hamiltonian cycle).

Definition 2. A graph \(G=(V,E)\) is connected 2-factor expandable or hamiltonian expandable (shortly expandable) if every non-edge \(xy\not\in E\) can be extended.

Definition 3. An expandable graph \(G=(V,E)\) with \(\vert V \vert=n\) and a minimum number of edges is a minimum expandable graph. The size \(\vert E\vert\) of its edge set is denoted by \(Exp_h(n)\).

The case where the \(2\)-factor is not constrained to be hamiltonian is studied in [2]. In this context \(Exp_2(n)\) denotes the size of a minimum expandable graph with \(n\) vertices. It follows that \(Exp_h(n)\ge Exp_2(n)\). We use the following notations. For \(G=(V,E)\), \(N(v)\) is the set of neighbors of a vertex \(v\), \(\delta(G)\) is the minimum degree of a vertex. A vertex with exactly \(k\) neighbors is a \(k\)-vertex. When \(P=v_i,\ldots,v_j\) is a sequence of vertices that corresponds to a path in \(G\), we denote by \({\bar P}=v_j,\ldots,v_i\) its mirror sequence (both sequences correspond to the same path). We state our result.

Theorem 1. The minimum size of a connected \(2\)-factor expandable graph is: $$Exp_h(3)=2,Exp_h(4)=4,Exp_h(5)=6; Exp_h(n)= \lceil {3\over 2}n\rceil,n\ge 6$$

Proof. For \(n\ge 3\) we have \(Exp_h(n)\ge Exp_2(n)\). In [2] it is proved that the three graphs given by Figure 1 are minimum for \(2\)-factor extension. They are also minimum expandable for connected \(2\)-factor extension.

Now let \(n\ge 6\). From [2] we know the following when \(G\) a minimum expandable graph for the \(2\)-factor extension:
  • \(G\) is connected;
  • if \(\delta(G)=1\) then \(Exp_2(n)\ge {3\over 2}n\);
  • for \(n\ge 7\), if \(u,v\) are two \(2\)-vertices such that \(N(u)\cap N(v)\ne\emptyset\) then \(Exp_2(n)\ge {3\over 2}n\);
The graph given by Figure 2 is minimum for \(2\)-factor extension (see [2]). One can check that it is expandable for connected \(2\)-factor extension. So we have \(Exp_h(6)=9={3\over 2}n\).

Suppose that \(G\) is a minimum expandable graph with \(n\ge 7\) and \(\delta(G)=2\). Let \(v\in V\) with \(d(v)=2\), \(N(v)=\{u_1,u_2\}\). If \(u_1u_2\not\in E\) then \(u_1u_2\) cannot be expanded into a hamiltonian cycle. So \(u_1u_2\in E\). If \(d(u_1)=2\) then \(u_2\in N(u_1)\cap N(v)\) and \(Exp_h(n)\ge {3\over 2}n\). So from now one we may assume \(d(u_1),d(u_2)\ge 3\). Suppose that \(d(u_1)=d(u_2)=3\). Let \(N(u_1)=\{v,u_2,v_1\}, N(u_2)=\{v,u_1,v_2\}\). If \(v_1\ne v_2\) then \(u_1v_2\) is not expandable. If \(v_1= v_2\) then \(vv_1\) is not expandable. From now we can suppose that \(d(u_1)\ge 3,d(u_2)\ge 4\). Moreover \(v\) is the unique \(2\)-vertex in \(N(u_2)\). It follows that every \(2\)-vertex \(u\in V\) can be matched with a distinct vertex \(u_2\) with \(d(u_2)\ge 4\). Then \(\Sigma_{v\in V}d(v)\ge 3n\) and thus \(m\ge {3\over 2}n\).

When \(\delta(G)\ge3\) we have \(\Sigma_{v\in V}d(v)\ge 3n\). Thus for any expandable graph we have \(\vert E\vert=m\ge {3\over 2}n,n\ge 7\).

For any even integer \(n\ge 8\) we define the graph \(G_n=(V,E)\) as follows. Let \(n=2p\), \(V=A\cup B\) where \(A=\{a_1,\ldots,a_p\}\) and \(B= \{b_1,\ldots,b_p\}\). \(A\) (resp. \(B\)) induces the cycle \(C_A=(A,E_A)\) with \(E_A=\{a_1a_2,a_2a_3,\ldots,a_pa_1\}\) (resp. \(C_B=(B,E_B)\) with \(E_B=\{b_1b_2,b_2b_3,\ldots,b_pb_1\}\). Now \(E=E_A\cup E_B\cup E_C\) with \(E_C=\{a_2b_2,a_3b_3,\ldots,a_{p-1}b_{p-1},a_1b_p,a_pb_1\}\). Note that \(G_n\) is cubic so \(m= {3\over 2}n\). (see \(G_{10}\) in Fig. 3)

We show that \(G_n\) is expandable. First we consider a non-edge \(a_ia_j,p\ge j>i\ge 1\). Note that the case of a non-edge \(b_ib_j\) is analogous. We have \(j\ge i+2\) and since \(a_1a_p\in E\) from symmetry we can suppose that \(j< p\). Let \(P=a_j,a_{j-1},\ldots,a_{i+1},b_{i+1},b_{i+2},\ldots,b_{j+1},a_{j+1},a_{j+2},b_{j+2},\ldots,c_j\) where \(c_j\) is either \(a_p\) or \(b_p\) and let \(Q=a_i,b_i,b_{i-1},a_{i-1},\ldots,c_i\) where \(c_i\) is either \(a_1\) or \(b_1\). From \(P\) and \(Q\) one can obtain an hamiltonian cycle containing \(a_ib_j\) whatever \(c_i\) and \(c_j\) are.

Now we consider a non-edge \(a_ib_j\). Without loss of generality we assume \(j\ge i\). Suppose first that \(j=i\), so either \(i=1\) or \(i=p\). Without loss of generality we assume \(i=j=1\): \(a_1,b_p,b_{p-1},\ldots, b_2,a_2,a_3,\ldots, a_p,b_1,a_1\) is an hamiltonian cycle. Now assume that \(j>i\): Let \(P_j=b_j,b_{j-1},\ldots,b_{i+1},a_{i+1},a_{i+2},\ldots,a_{j_+1},b_{j+1},b_{j+2}, a_{j+2},\ldots, c_p\) where either \(c_p=a_p\) or \(c_p=b_p\), \(P_i=a_i,b_i,b_{i-1},a_{i-1},a_{i-2},\ldots,c_1\) where either \(c_1=a_1\) or \(c_1=b_1\). If \(c_p=a_p\) and \(c_1=a_1\) then \(P_j,b_1,b_p,P_i,a_j\) is an hamiltonian cycle. If \(c_p=a_p\) and \(c_1=b_1\) then \(P_j,a_1,b_p,P_i,a_j\) is an hamiltonian cycle. The two other cases are symmetric.

For any odd integer \(n=2p+1\ge 7\) we define the graph \(G_n=(V,E)\) as follows. We set \(V=A\cup B\cup\{v_{n}\}\) where \(A=\{a_1,\ldots,a_p\}\) and \(B= \{b_1,\ldots,b_p\}\). \(A\cup\{v_n\}\) (resp. \(B\cup\{v_n\}\)) induces the cycle \(C_A=(A\cup\{v_n\},E_A)\) with \(E_A=\{a_1a_2,a_2a_3,\ldots,a_pv_n,v_na_1\}\) (resp. \(C_B=(B\cup\{v_n\},E_B)\) with \(E_B=\{b_1b_2,b_2b_3,\ldots,b_pv_n,v_nb_1\}\). Now \(E=E_A\cup E_B\cup E_C\) with \(E_C=\{a_ib_i\vert 1\le i\le p\}\cup\{a_1v_n,b_1v_n,a_pv_n,b_pv_n\}\). Note that \(m= \lceil{3\over 2}n\rceil\). (see \(G_{7}\) and \(G_{11}\) in Figure 3)

We show that \(G_n\) is expandable. First, we consider a non-edge \(a_ia_j,p\ge j>i\ge 1\) (the case of a non-edge \(b_ib_j\) is analogous). \(a_i,a_{i+1},\ldots,a_{j-1},b_{j-1},b_{j-2},b_{j-3},\ldots,b_i,b_{i-1}, a_{i-1},a_{i-2},b_{i-2},\ldots,v_n,c_p,d_p,d_{p-1},c_{p-1},\ldots, c_j,d_j\), where \(d_j=a_j\) and for any \(k,j\le k\le p,\) the ordered pairs \(c_k,d_k\) correspond to either \(a_k,b_k\) or \(b_k,a_k\), is an hamiltonian cycle. Second, let a non-edge \(a_ib_j,p\ge j>i\ge 1\). We use the same construction as above taking \(d_j=b_j\).

Author Contributions

All authors contributed equally to the writing of this paper. All authors read and approved the final manuscript.

Conflicts of Interest:

The authors declare no conflict of interest.

References:

  1. Bondy, J.A., Murty, U. S. R. (2008). Graph Theory. Springer. [Google Scholor]
  2. Costa, M. C., de Werra, D., & Picouleau, C. (2020). Minimal graphs for $2$-factor extension.Discrete Applied Mathematics, accepted for publication. [Google Scholor]
  3. Costa, M. C., de Werra, D., & Picouleau, C. (2018). Minimal graphs for matching extensions. Discrete Applied Mathematics, 234, 47-55. [Google Scholor]
  4. Zhang, P. (2016). Hamiltonian Extension. In Graph Theory (pp. 17-30). Springer, Cham. [Google Scholor]