Wiener polarity index of quasi-tree molecular structures

Author(s): Zihao Tang1, Li Liang1, Wei Gao2
1School of Mathematics, Yunnan Normal University, Kunming 650500, China.
2School of Information Science and Technology, Yunnan Normal University, Kunming 650500, China.
Copyright © Zihao Tang, Li Liang, Wei Gao. 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

As an important branch of theoretical chemistry, chemical index calculation has received wide attention in recent years. Its theoretical results have been widely used in many fields such as chemistry, pharmacy, physics, biology, materials, etc. and play a key role in reverse engineering. Its basic idea is to obtain compound characteristics indirectly through the calculation of topological index. As a basic structure, quasi-tree structures are widely found in compounds. In this paper, we obtain the maximal value and the second smallest value of quasi-tree graphs of order n.

Keywords: theoretical chemistry, molecular graph, Wiener polarity index, quasi-tree.

1. Introduction

Chemists in the early experiments summed up an important rule: the characteristics of compounds and its molecular structure is closely related. Inspired by this, scientists defined the indicators of molecular structure, and through the calculation of indicators they obtain the nature of the compound. Specifically, each atom in the molecular structure is represented by a vertex, and the chemical bonds between the atoms are represented by the edges, thereby converting the molecule into a graph model. The calculation of the index on the molecular structure can be transferred as the calculation of the index on the graph. The graph derived from the molecular structure is called the molecular graph. A chemical index can be thought of as a function f:GR+ that maps each molecular structure to a positive real number (See Moharir et al. [1], Udagedara et al. [2], Shafiei and Saeidifar [3], Crepnjak and Tratnik [4] for more details).

Due to the low capital requirements of such methods, there is no need to purchase experimental equipment and reagents, and so are the concerns of scientists from underdeveloped countries and regions in the Middle East, Southeast Asia. At the same time, as a branch of theoretical chemistry, its calculation results have potential applications in medical, pharmaceutical, materials and other fields, and thus are widely concerned by scholars in various fields (see Gao et al. [5], [6], [7], [8], [9], [10], [11] and [12]).
Let G=(V(G),E(G)) be a simple connected graph with |V(G)|=n. The distance dG(u,v) between vertices u and v in G is equal to the length of the shortest path that connects u and v. Denote L(n,d0)={G: G is a quasi-tree graph of order n with Gv0 being a tree and dG(v0)=d0}. The concept of quasi-tree was first introduced in Liu and Lu [13].

The Wiener polarity index is a molecular topological index introduced by Harold Wiener [14] for acyclic molecules in 1947. The Wiener polarity index of a molecular graph G=(V,E) was defined as Wp(G)=∣{(u,v)|dG(u,v)=3,u,vV(G)}

This means that Wiener polarity index of a graph G is the number of unordered vertices pairs that are at distance 3 in G. By using its definition, Lukovits and Linert [15] demonstrated quantitative structure-property relationships in a series of acyclic and cycle-containing hydrocarbons. Besides, a physico-chemical interpretation of Wp(G) was found by Hosoya [16]. Ashrafi and Ghalavand [17] determined an ordering of chemical trees with given order n with respect to Wiener polarity index.

As a basic structure, tree-like structure exists in the structure of various chemical molecules such as drugs, materials and macromolecular polymers (see Heuberger and Wagner [18], Vaughan et al. [19], Bozovic et al. [20]). Therefore, the study of the tree structure helps scientists master the physicochemical properties of the structure and apply it to engineering. Although a large number of results have been obtained for the indexing of trees, the results for the quasi-tree are few, which motivates us to conduct special studies on the important indicators of the quasi-tree.

In this paper, we obtain the maximal Wiener polarity index of quasi-tree graphs of order n in section 2. In section 3, we first introduce the smallest Wiener polarity index of quasi-tree graphs of order n, and then obtain the second smallest value.

2. The maximal Wiener polarity index among all quasi-tree graphs of order n

First, we state some transformations on the quasi-tree with n10,d03. σ: Let GL(n,d0) with n10,d03, G1 be a condition of G with nd01 pendant vertices adjacent to v1, G2 be a condition of G with nd02 pendant vertices adjacent to v1, G3 be a condition of G with nd02 pendant vertices adjacent to v1. Transformation σ on Gi(i=1,2,3) is deleting a pendant vertex which is adjacent to v1 and attaching a pendant vertex to v2. See Fig. 1 for more details.

Lemma 2.1. G1 attains the maximal value of Wiener polarity index n27n+133 after applying transformation σ.

Proof. Let G1 from G1 by applying transformation σ m times on G2, then there are nd01m pendant vertices adjacent to v1 and m pendant vertices adjacent to v2. Wp(G1)=m(nd01m)+(nd01m)(d02)+m(d03)=(mnd022)2+(n243n34d02+2d0+12nd0+3). Wp(G1) attains the maximal value when m=[nd022], it’s equal to m=nd012. That is, when there are nd012 pendant vertices adjacent to v1, nd012 pendant vertices adjacent to v2, Wp(G1) attains the maximal value. Let G1 denote G1 with the maximal value of Wiener polarity index. Wp(G1)=nd012nd012+nd012(d03)+nd012(d02) ={34(d0n+43)2+n27n+133,if nd0 iseven         34(d0n+43)2+4n228n+4912,if nd0 isdd It is easy to check that when d0=n+43 or n+43, Wp(G1) attains the maximal value n27n+133.

Lemma 2.2. G2 attains the maximal value of Wiener polarity index n24n+44 after applying transformation σ.

Proof. Let G2 from G2 by applying transformation σ m times on G2, then there are nd02m pendant vertices adjacent to v1 and m pendant vertices adjacent to v2. Wp(G)=m(nd02m)+d0(nd02m)=(mn2d022)2+n24n+44. When 2d0<n2, the maximal value of Wp(G) is n24n+44 when m=n2d022. When 2d0n2, the value of Wp(G) attain the maximal value when m=0, it means that don't apply transformation σ on G2 and G2 itself attain the maximal value, now Wp(G2)=d0(nd02)=(d0n22)2+n24n+44 the maximal value of Wp(G2) is n24n+44 when d0=n22. Combining the above conditions, let G2 denote G2 after applying transformation σ t(t0) times, the maximal value of Wp(G2) is n24n+44.

Lemma 2.3. G3 attains the maximal value of Wiener polarity index n26n+93 after applying transformation σ.

Proof. Let G3 from G3 by applying transformation σ m times on G3, then there are nd02m pendant vertices adjacent to v1 and m pendant vertices adjacent to v2. Wp(G3)=m(nd02m)+(nd02)(d01)=(mnd022)2+n23d02+2nd08n+124. Wp(G3) attains the maximal value when m=nd022 or nd022. That is, when there are nd022 pendant vertices adjacent to v1, nd022 pendant vertices adjacent to v2, Wp(G3) attains the maximal value. Let G3 denote G3 with the maximal value of Wiener polarity index. Wp(G3)=nd022nd022+(nd02)(d01)             ={34(d0n3)2+n26n+93if nd0 iseven34(d0n3)2+4n224n+3312if nd0 isdd It is easy to check that when d0=n3 or n3, Wp(G3) attains the maximal value n26n+93.

Lemma 2.4.(Hou et al. [21]) Let U ba a unicyclic graph of order n with n10,g(U)4, then Wp(U)n22n154.

Lemma 2.5.Let GL(n,2) with n10, then Wp(G)n22n154.

Proof. It is clear G is a unicyclic graph. If g(G)4, by Lemma 2.4, Wp(U)n22n154. If g(G)=3, let C denote the cycle with V(C)={v1,v2,v3}. The rest of n3 vertices can only adjacent to two vertices of V(C), let it be v2,v3. If all the n3 vertices are only adjacent to v2, Wp(G) is equal to WP(T), where T is a tree from G by deleting the edge v1v3. And the maximal value of Wp(T) is n22n22([22]). If all the n3 vertices are adjacent to both v1 and v2, it is easy to check that the maximal value of Wp(G) is n32n32. While n22n154>n24n+44 when n>10, the Lemma is proved.

Lemma 2.6.Let GL(n,d0) with n10,d03. Then Wp(G)Wp(G3). The equality holds if and only if GG3.

Proof. For the degree of v0 is d0, all the vertices of G can be divided into two sets. The first set includes d0+1 vertices for they are v0 and the d0 vertices are adjacent to v0, denoted by S1. The second set includes the rest of nd01 vertices, denoted by S2.
Clearly, if a pair of vertices u and v are both in S1, then dG(u,v)2. Suppose that u and v are a pair of vertices in G such that dG(u,v)=3, it’s either u and v is in S2 or u, v are in S1, S2, respectively.
For the pair of vertices are both in S2, denote the pairs as n1. For all the nd01 vertices can’t be in the 3 vertices of a triangle, respectively, so n1nd012nd012. For the pair of vertices are in S1, S2, respectively. Denote the pairs as n2, then Wp(G)=n1+n2. For there at least 2 vertices connect the other pair of vertices which with a distance 3, so there at least 2 vertices aren’t in the pairs with a distance 3 and at least one is from S1. The less vertices aren’t in, the more of the value n1+n2. The maximal value of n2 will be d0(nd02) if just one is from S1, and then the other one is from S2, so the possible maximal value of n1 is nd022nd022. The maximal value of n2 will be (d01)(nd02) if there are two from S1 and one is from S2, so the possible maximal value of n1 is nd022nd022. The maximal value of n2 will be (d02)(nd01) if there are three from S1 and none is from S2, so the possible maximal value of n1 is nd012nd012. G1, G2, G3 attain the three maximum values of n2 for (d02)(nd01),d0(nd02),(d01)(nd02). Using the same notations in transformation σ.
Case 1: n2 attains one of the maximal value (d02)(nd01) in G1. After applying transformation σ, n1 attains the maximal value nd012nd012 in G1, but n2 decreased to nd012(d02)+nd012(d03), it’s between (d03)(nd01) and (d02)(nd01). n1+n2 will attain the maximal value of n27n+133 in G1.
Case 2: n2 attains one of the maximal value d0(nd02) in G2 while the value of n1 is 0. After applying transformation σ, n1 attains the possible maximal value nd022nd022, but n2 decreased. n1+n2 will attain the maximal value of n24n+44 in G2.
Case 3: n2 attains one of the maximal value (d01)(nd02) in G3, it’s smaller than that in G2, but after applying transformation σ, n1 attains the possible maximal value nd022nd022 while the value of n2 unchanged. n1+n2 will attain the maximal value of n26n+93 in G3.
From case 1 and case 2, the conclusion is that n1 and n2 can’t attain the maximal value simultaneously in G1 and G2. It’s only in G3 that n1 and n2 attain the maximal value simultaneously. So we just need to compare the maximal value of n1+n2 in G1, G2, G3. By Lemma 2.1, 2.2, 2.3, Wp(G3) attains the maximal value.

By combining all the conclusions above, we yield our first main result in this paper which is stated below.

Lemma 2.7.Let GL(n,d0) with n4,d02.

  • (1) If n=4, then Wp(G)1.
  • (2) If n=5, then Wp(G)2.
  • (3) If n=6, then Wp(G)3.
  • (4) If n=7, then Wp(G)7.
  • (5) If n=8, then Wp(G)9.
  • (6) If n=9, then Wp(G)12.
  • (7) If n10, then Wp(G)n26n+93.

3. The smallest and second smallest Wiener polarity index among all quasi-tree graphs of order n

Let GL(n,d0). Then Wp(G)0. In the graph G4, no matter what the value of d0 is, all vertices are adjacent to v1, then there isn’t any pair of vertices whose distance is greater or equal to 3. So the smallest Wiener polarity index among all quasi-tree graphs of order n is 0. The graph that attains the smallest Wiener polarity index is not unique, G5 is just an example.

Lemma 3.1. (Liu and Liu [22]) Let G be an unicyclic graph of order n, and Wp(G)>0. Then Wp(G)n4.

By Lemma 3.1, if GL(n,2), the second smallest Wiener polarity index of G is n4. As for GL(n,d0) with d03, all the vertices of G can be divided into two sets. The first set includes d0+1 vertices for they are v0 and the d0 vertices are adjacent to v0, denote the set by S1 and the d0+1 vertices by v0, v01, v02,,v0d0. The second set includes the rest of nd01 vertices, denote the set by S2 and the nd01 vertices by v1, v2, … vnd01.

Lemma 3.2. Let GL(n,d0) with d03. Let v1,v2S2, and dG(v1,v2)3. Then the two conditions can’t hold simultaneously, for they are the distance between v1 and every vertex of S1 is less than or equal to 2, the distance between v2 and every vertex of S1 is less than or equal to 2.

Proof. For dG(v1,v2)3, without loss of generality, let dG(v1,v2)=3 and the path of length 3 is v1vivjv2. For d03, there at least exists one vertex v01 in S1, while v01 is different from vi and vj(even if vi, vj are both in S1 ), the distance between v01 and v1 is less than or equal to 2, so v01 is adjacent to v1 or the vertices which are adjacent to v1(let it be vi) and the distance between v01 and v2 is greater or equal to 3.

Lemma 3.3. Let GL(n,d0) with d03. If Wp(G)>0, there at least exist a vertex vi in S2 such that dG(vi,vj)3, while vjS1.

Proof. If the distance between any a vertex in S1 and every vertex in S2 is less than or equal to 2. In terms of the condition of Lemma 3.2, there isn’t any pair of vertices with a distance of 3 in S2. And it’s clear that there isn’t any pair of vertices with a distance of 3 in S1, so Wp(G)=0.

Lemma 3.4. Let GL(n,d0) with d03. If there are t(t2) vertices in S2 satisfying the condition that the distance between each vertex and every vertex in S1 is less than or equal to 2, the t vertices can only be composed by two forms:
Case 1. If t=2, the 2 vertices must be adjacent.
Case 2. If t2, the t vertices must be adjacent to one common vertex, where the common vertex is v0i in S1.

Proof. By means of Lemma 3.3, the distance between any two of the t vertices is less than or equal to 2. If t=2, the two vertices are either adjacent or adjacent to one common vertex, where the common vertex is v0i in S1. When the two vertices are adjacent, every v0i in S1 should be adjacent to one and only one of them. When the two vertices are adjacent to one common vertex(let it be v01), the other v0i in S1 should be adjacent to v01.
If t=3 and the 3 vertices compose a path of length 2, denote the path by v1v2v3. For the distance between v0 and vt is 2, v1, v2 and v3 must be adjacent to 3 different v0i in S1. Let v01 be the vertex that v1 adjacent to, then the distance between v01 and v3 is 3. So the 3 vertices can only adjacent to one common vertex, where the common vertex is v0i in S1. Similarly, if t>3, the t vertices must be adjacent to one common vertex, where the common vertex is v0i in S1.

Now, we prove our second main result.

Theorem 3.5. Let GL(n,d0). If Wp(G)>0 and d0n3 then Wp(G)nd02.

Proof. (1)If d0=2, by Lemma 3.1, Wp(G)nd02=n4. G6 is an example that attains the smallest value.
(2)If 3d0n3, let v1, v2, … , vi in S2 satisfy the condition that the distance between any one of them and every vertex in S1 is less than or equal to 2. By Lemma 3.3, i<nd01, let vi+1, … vnd01 be the rest vertices satisfy the condition that the distance between any one of them and every vertex in S1 is greater or equal to 3.

Case 1. If i=1, for everyone of the rest nd02 vertices in S2, there exist at least one vertex in S1 such that the distance between the two vertices is greater or equal to 3, then Wp(G)nd02.
Case 2. If i=2, and v1, v2 satisfy the case 1 in Lemma 3.4.
Subcase 1. v3 is adjacent to v1 or v2, let it be v1. Then dG(v3v0)=3, dG(v3v02)=3, where v02 is in S1 and v2 is adjacent to it.
Subcase 2. v3 is adjacent to v01, v01 must be adjacent to v1 or v2, let it be v1. Then dG(v3v02)=3, if v02 is adjacent to v1. dG(v3v02)=3, if only v01 in S1 is adjacent to v1 and the path is v3v01v0v02, where v02 is adjacent to v2.
Anyway, there are at least 2 pairs vertices with a distance of 3 for v3. As for v4,…, vnd01, similar to the analysis of v3, there are more than nd04 pairs of vertices with a distance of 3 for them. So there are more than nd02 pairs of vertices for vi(i=1,2,,nd01).
Case 3. If i2, and v1, v2, … , vi satisfy the case 2 in Lemma 3.4, that is v1, v2, … , vi are adjacent to one common vertex(let it be v01).
Subcase 1. vi+1 is adjacent to one of v1, v2, …, vi(let it be v1), then dG(vi+1v2), dG(vi+1v3),…, dG(vi+1vi) are all 3, and dG(vi+1v0)=3.
Subcase 2. vi+1 is adjacent to one v0i, where the v0i should be different from v01(let it be v02). Then dG(vi+1v1), dG(vi+1v2),…, dG(vi+1vi) are all 3.
Anyway, there are at least i pairs of vertices with a distance of 3 for vi+1. As for vi+2,…, vnd01, similar to the analysis of vi+1, there are more than nd02i pairs of vertices with a distance of 3 for them. So there are more than nd02 pairs of vertices for vi(i=1,2,,nd01).
In general, Wp(G)nd02 if i2, WP(G)>nd02 if i=1. That is, when there is only one vertex v1 satisfying the condition that the distance between v1 and every vertex in S1 is less than or equal to 2, Wp(G) can attain the smallest value nd02.

Let GL(n,d0). The second smallest value of Wp(G) is nd02 if d0n3(see G7). The second smallest value of Wp(G) is 1 if d0=n2(see G8).

Conclusion

In this paper, we mainly study the Wiener polarity index of quasi-tree molecular structures, and the maximal value and the second smallest value of quasi-tree graphs with fixed order are presented. Since Wiener polarity index has been widely applied in the analysis of both the melting point and boiling point of chemical compounds and QSPR/QSAR study, and quasi-tree structure is commonly appeared in the molecular structures, the results obtained in this paper have promising prospects of application in the field of chemical, medical and pharmacy engineering.

Competing Interests

The authors declare no competing interest.

References

  1. Moharir, M., Kang, L., Daoutidis, P., & Almansoori, A. (2017). Graph representation and decomposition of ODE/hyperbolic PDE systems. Computers & Chemical Engineering, 106, 532-543. [Google Scholor]
  2. Udagedara, D. T., Oguchi, C. T., & Gunatilake, A. A. J. K. (2017). Combination of chemical indices and physical properties in the assessment of weathering grades of sillimanite-garnet gneiss in tropical environment. Bulletin of Engineering Geology and the Environment, 76(1), 145-157. [Google Scholor]
  3. Shafiei, F., & Saeidifar, A. (2017). QSPR Study of Some Physicochemical Properties of Sulfonamides Using Topological and Quantum Chemical Indices. J. Chem. Soc. Pak, 39(03), 366-373. [Google Scholor]
  4. Crepnjak, M., & Tratnik, N. (2017). The Szeged index and the Wiener index of partial cubes with applications to chemical graphs. Applied Mathematics and Computation, 309, 324-333. [Google Scholor]
  5. Gao, W., Siddiqui, M. K., Imran, M., Jamil, M. K., & Farahani, M. R. (2016). Forgotten topological index of chemical structure in drugs. Saudi Pharmaceutical Journal, 24(3), 258-264. [Google Scholor]
  6. Gao, W., Farahani, M. R., & Shi, L. (2016). Forgotten topological index of some drug structures. Acta Medica Mediterranea, 32, 579-585. [Google Scholor]
  7. Gao, W., Wang, W., & Farahani, M. R. (2016). Topological indices study of molecular structure in anticancer drugs. Journal of Chemistry, 2016. [Google Scholor]
  8. Gao, W., & Siddiqui, M. K. (2017). Molecular descriptors of nanotube, oxide, silicate, and triangulene networks. Journal of Chemistry, 2017, 10 pages. [Google Scholor]
  9. Gao, W., Yan, L., & Shi, L. (2017). Generalized Zagreb index of polyomino chains and nanotubes. Optoelectronics and Advanced Materials-Rapid Communications, 11(1-2), 119-124. [Google Scholor]
  10. Gao, W., & Wang, W. F. (2017). The fifth geometric-arithmetic index of bridge graph and carbon nanocones. Journal of Difference Equations and Applications, 23(1-2), 100-109. [Google Scholor]
  11. Gao, W., & Wang, W. (2016). The eccentric connectivity polynomial of two classes of nanotubes. Chaos, Solitons & Fractals, 89, 290-294. [Google Scholor]
  12. Gao, W., Wang, W., Jamil, M. K., & Farahani, M. R. (2016). Electron energy studying of molecular structures via forgotten topological index computation. Journal of Chemistry, 2016, Article ID 1053183, 7 pages. [Google Scholor]
  13. Liu, H., & Lu, M. (2008). On the spectral radius of quasi-tree graphs. Linear Algebra and its Applications, 428(11-12), 2708-2714. [Google Scholor]
  14. Wiener, H. (1947). Structural determination of paraffin boiling points. Journal of the American Chemical Society, 69(1), 17-20. [Google Scholor]
  15. Lukovits, I., & Linert, W. (1998). Polarity-numbers of cycle-containing structures. Journal of chemical information and computer sciences, 38(4), 715-719.[Google Scholor]
  16. Hosoya, H., & Gao, Y. D. (2002). Mathematical and chemical analysis of Wiener’s polarity number. Topology in Chemistry (pp. 38-57). [Google Scholor]
  17. Ashrafi, A. R., & Ghalavand, A. (2017). Ordering chemical trees by Wiener polarity index. Applied Mathematics and Computation, 313, 301-312. [Google Scholor]
  18. Heuberger, C., & Wagner, S. G. (2009). Chemical trees minimizing energy and Hosoya index. Journal of mathematical chemistry, 46(1), 214-230.[Google Scholor]
  19. Vaughan, A. S., Hosier, I. L., Dodd, S. J., & Sutton, S. J. (2006). On the structure and chemistry of electrical trees in polyethylene. Journal of Physics D: Applied Physics, 39(5), 962.[Google Scholor]
  20. Bozovic, V., Vukicevic, Z. K., & Popivoda, G. (2016). Chemical trees with extreme values of a few types of multiplicative Zagreb indices. MATCH Commun. Math. Comput. Chem, 76, 207-220.[Google Scholor]
  21. Hou, H., Liu, B., & Huang, Y. (2012). The maximum Wiener polarity index of unicyclic graphs. Applied Mathematics and Computation, 218(20), 10149-10157. [Google Scholor]
  22. Liu, M., & Liu, B. (2011). On the Wiener polarity index. MATCH Commun. Math. Comput. Chem, 66(1), 293-304.[Google Scholor]