1. Introduction
For graph theoretic terminology, we refer to [1,2,3,4]. Let be a graph with a vertex set () of order and an edge set () of size . For , let be the number of edges between X and Y in G. Let denote the induced subgraph of X in G. For each vertex (), the degree () of v is the number of neighbors of v in G. () denotes the maximum (minimum) degree of G. The open neighborhood () of a vertex (v) in G is the set of neighbors of v, and the closed neighborhood () of v is . For a subset (), the open neighborhood of S is the set expressed as , and the closed neighborhood of S is the set expressed as . represents the subgraph of G obtained by deleting the vertices of S and all edges incident to all vertices of S. The path, the cycle, the star and the complete graph of order n are written as , , and , respectively. The complete bipartite graph and the complete multipartite graph are written as and , respectively.
For a vertex subset (S) of G, S is a of G if . The () of G is the minimum cardinality of a dominating set of G, that is, .
For an integer (k), if , the size of a minimum -isolating set of G is denoted by . The k- is the minimum cardinality of an -isolating set (S) of G if , denoted by . In particular, a subset () is called an of G if has no edge. We define set as set . Therefore, a set () is said to be an isolating set if is an independent set of G. The is the minimum cardinality of an isolating set (S) of G, denoted by . Obviously, if , S is a dominating set of G.
In 1958, Berge [1] first proposed the concept of the domination number. Many scholars have great research interest in domination theory in graphs, mostly due to its application in many research fields, such as genetics [5], chemistry [6], computer communication networks [7], facility location [8], social networks [9], etc. With the deepening of research, scholars have found that although classical domination theory can solve many practical problems, many solutions that rely only on dominating sets are not optimal solutions to solve problems. As a result, various domination variants are constantly proposed. Partial domination is one of the more widely used approaches. The study of isolating sets was introduced by Caro and Hansberg. In 2015, Caro and Hansberg [10] extended domination to partial domination and proposed the concept of an -isolating set of graphs for the first time. Results of research on the isolation number can be found in [11,12,13,14,15,16,17,18,19,20]. On the basis of this research, in this paper, we mainly focus on research on the isolation number and -isolation number of a graph, total graph and central graph of graph G.
Given a graph (G) with a vertex set of = , we define a bipartite graph () of G in the following way. Let and be two partite sets of , and for , let be adjacent to if and only if either or is adjacent to in G. Note that , |E(B(G))|=3n − 2 and for each (Figure 1).
([21]). Let G be a graph with vertex set and edge set ; a total graph () of G is a graph in which vertex set is and two vertices in are adjacent whenever they are either adjacent or incident in G. In the proof below, let and comprise the vertex set of in which for (Figure 2).
([22]). For a graph () with order n and size m, the central graph of G denoted by is a graph of order and size , which is obtained by subdividing each edge of G exactly once and joining all the non-adjacent vertices of G in . In this section, assume that is the vertex set of G and is the vertex set of , where (Figure 3).
A spanning tree of a graph G is said to be a BFS tree rooted at a vertex r if and only if, for any vertex (u) of G, the shortest distance between r and u in G is equal to the shortest distance between r and u in the spanning tree. It starts at the root and searches all vertices of G at the current depth level before moving on to the vertex at the next depth level (Figure 4).
The BFS tree is also a breadth-first search tree, which is essentially a spanning tree of the graph. In fact, the purpose of the BFS tree is to determine a vertex from the graph and traverse all vertices of the graph layer by layer from this vertex. Each connected graph has a BFS tree.
([23]). Let G be an n-vertex graph with a minimum degree of . If , then .
([10]). For any graph (G), let and and be two families of graphs. If such that and , then .
2. Main Results
2.1. Isolation Number of a Graph
In this section, we describe some bounds on .
Let G be a path () or a cycle (); then, .
Let for n= 1 or 2. For , let ; then, , and is adjacent to and . For and n, is adjacent to and , and is adjacent to and . Hence, can dominate three vertices in . If , let for . Clearly, S is an isolating set of . Therefore, . On the other hand, if , since deleting one vertex and its closed neighborhood results in, at most, 9 edges being deleted in and 9( − 1) < 3n − 2 = , can no longer be said to be an isolating set, so , that is, . In conclusion, we have for . If , can dominate three vertices in . Let for and . Clearly, is an isolating set of . Therefore, for . On the other hand, if , since deleting one vertex and its closed neighborhood results in, at most, 9 edges being deleted in and 9() < 3n − 2 = . Then, can no longer be said to be an isolating set, so , that is, . If , let for . Clearly, S is an isolating set of . Therefore, for . On the other hand, if , since deleting one vertex and its closed neighborhood results in, at most 9, edges being deleted in and 9() < 3n − 2 = , S can no longer be said to be an isolating set, so , that is, . Then, we have for . In conclusion,
For the isolation number of , for n = 1 or 2. For , assume that ; then, and is adjacent to and . For and n, is adjacent to , and , and is adjacent to , and . Therefore, we select or and can achieve three vertices in in isolation. We can think about the rest of the vertices in terms of according to the above proof of , i.e., ; therefore, for a cycle (), . □
Let G be a graph with n vertices. Then, .
For the first equation, let . Then, according to the definition of , we have . Let D be a set of G. Without loss of generality, let . Let . Since , according to the definition of , we can obtain . Hence, . Obviously, is an isolating set, so H is an isolating set of ; then, . On the other hand, let be a minimum isolating set of ; then, let be an independent set of . Let . Let be a any vertex in . Then, . Therefore, is adjacent to in . Since is an isolating set of , either or is not in , such as . Then, . Hence, has a neighbor in , that is, has a neighbor in . Then, is a dominating set of G. Hence, we can get . In conclusion, . For the second inequality, let S be an set of G. Let ; then, T is a dominating set of G. According to the proof of the above equation, T is also an isolating set of . Then, □
Let G be a connected graph with n vertices; then, .
We prove by induction on . For , the result is obvious. If , then . Let G be a connected graph on vertices and T be a BFS tree of by choosing a vertex () as the root of T. Let be the set of leaves of T. Let and be the set of vertices with distance i from r. Let l denote the last generation of vertices in T. Then, , since . If , choose as the isolating set of , and the conclusion is clearly valid. Therefore, assume that . For some , there exists a vertex () such that and . Let and . If , then, clearly, u is an isolating set of and holds. Then, suppose , that is, . If , then u is also an isolating set of and . If , then, according to the induction hypothesis, there exists an isolating set () of with . Therefore, is an isolating set of . Since , .
For any and each vertex () either u has only one child v and or u has grandchildren. Since , there is a vertex () that has grandchildren. Consider the following cases.
Case 1: u has only one child (v) in T.
Since and v has no grandchildren, according to the above assumption, v has only one child (w), which is a leaf in T. Let . Consider the following subcases.
Subcase 1.1: .
In this case, , and it is easy to prove the result.
Subcase 1.2: .
By induction we find that there exists an isolating set () of with . According to the definition of , is an isolating set of G; then, we have .
Case 2: u has at least two children in T.
Let X be the set of children of u and Y be the set of grandchildren of u in T. Assume that , and . Let and I be the set of independent vertices in . Now, we consider the following subcases.
Subcase 2.1: .
In this case, is an isolating set of . Now, let . Clearly, is either an empty graph or a connected graph. If , then consists of the vertices from , which is a tree with one leaf in the father of u. If , then by definition, all its vertices are adjacent to some vertex of tree , which is also a tree with one leaf in the father of u. Now, we consider two different subcases.
Subcase 2.1.1: .
If , then and is an isolating set of . If , all the vertices of have a neighbor in , again forcing . Hence, is still an isolating set of . Hence, in both cases, we have . If , then let and x be the father of u in T. If , then is an independent set. Since u dominates , is an isolating set of ; thus, . Finally, suppose that . Then, , and , and we have . Clearly, is an isolating set of ; then, .
Subcase 2.1.2: .
Let be a minimum isolating set of . According to the induction hypothesis, . Moreover, since and is an independent set in , is an isolating set of . Hence, .
Subcase 2.2: .
In this case, and . Let be two adjacent vertices in and be the father of y in T. We define . Note that, by assumption and since , x can have only one child, which is y. Now, we consider the following subcases.
Subcase 2.2.1: .
Since u has at least two children in T and , let . Clearly, . Since z has a father in X different from x, let represent six paths. It follows that . Hence, is an isolating set and .
Subcase 2.2.2: .
According to the induction hypothesis, there is an isolating set () of with . Then, is an isolating set of , that is, .
In conclusion, we obtain . □
Let G be a complete graph or a star graph with n vertices; then, for .
2.2. Isolation Number of the Total Graph
In this section, we describe some bounds on .
For a graph (G) and a set () of graphs, denote the set of components of G. Let denote the component of G. For , denotes the -isolation number of .
If G is a graph and is a family of graphs, then
Let G be a path (); then, .
Let ; then according to the definition of , , and is adjacent to . For and , is adjacent to and , and is adjacent to and . For , the result is easily proven. Let , and if 0 (mod 3), let for . At the moment, for . According to the structure of , is an independent set. Hence, S is an isolating set of ; then, . On the other hand, let S be an set of . According to the structure of , ; then, , that is, , , as for . Then, . Hence, for 0 (mod 3).
For , let for . At the moment, for . According to the structure of , is an independent set. Hence, is an isolating set of ; then, . On the other hand, if 1 or 2(mod 3), we prove by induction on n. For n = 4 or 5, and . Therefore, suppose and assume that is valid for . We now consider the following cases.
Case 1: 1 (mod 3).
In this case, 0 (mod 3). According to the proof presented above for 0 (mod 3), we have . According to the structure of , we have for 1 (mod 3). Since 1 (mod 3), . Hence, according to the above assumption, , so , that is, .
Case 2: 2 (mod 3).
In this case, 1 (mod 3). According to the structure of , we have for 2 (mod 3). Hence, according to the above assumption, , so , that is, .
Hence, for 1,2 (mod 3).
In conclusion, . □
Let G be a cycle (); then, .
Let . According to the definition of , , and is adjacent to . For and , is adjacent to , and , and is adjacent to , and . Let and be a component of for . Let the last component of be , where . Clearly, for . According to , for , . Since is an integer, for . Hence, for . □
The following statements hold.
- (i)
- (ii)
- (iii)
Let G be a connected graph on n vertices and m edges with a maximum degree of Δ; then,
- (i)
- (ii)
(i) Let ; then, according to the definition of , let and be a minimum isolating set of . Let . Let ; then, . Clearly, is an independent set of G. Hence, H is an isolating set of G. Then, . For the right-hand inequality, we start with the edge bound of G to prove it. Let S be a minimum isolating set of G. Since G has a maximum degree of , . On the other hand, the vertices of have at least one neighbor in S, so we have , that is, . Hence, . In conclusion, we have
Let G be a graph with n vertices and m edges and a maximum degree of . According to the definition of , we have and . Let v be the vertex of with a maximum degree of and . Let I be the independent set of and . For the dominating set (D) of H, we have . Clearly, is an isolating set of ; then, . □
2.3. Isolation Number of Central Graph
In this section, we describe some bounds on .
For a complete bipartite graph () that is not , .
Let and . According to the definition of , . For any two vertices ( and ) from , and let . Since is adjacent to and is adjacent to , . Hence, we have S is an isolating set of . Thus, . In addition, we have .
Now, we show . Let S be an isolating set of and . If , then or . Without loss of generality, assume that . Then, there exist edges and edges in . Thus, S is not an isolating set of . If , clearly, is not an independent set; then, S is not an isolating of , si . Hence, . □
Let G be a connected graph with n vertices and m edges; then, .
Let G be a graph with n vertices and m edges. According to the definition of , the maximum degree () of is . Assume that v is a vertex with a maximum degree of in and . Let be the set of vertices of all components of, at most, two vertices in , and let Y be the set of vertices of all components of and H be a minimum -isolating set of . Clearly, we have . Let S be a minimum isolating set of . In particular, if , we say . It is obvious that is a -isolating set of . According to Theorem 2.3, we have . Hence,
(1)
□
3. Conclusions
In this paper, we introduced the concepts of partial domination–isolation in graphs and researched the isolation numbers of several classes of transformed graphs. The main contents include an upper bound on the isolation number of the B(G) graph of a connected graph, upper and lower bounds on the isolation number of the total graph of a connected graph with respect to the maximum degree of the graph and an upper bound on the -isolation number of the center graph of a connected graph with respect to the number of edges.
For the isolation number of several types of transition graphs studied in this paper, here are some issues that can be further studied and discussed:
Question 1: What isolation numbers of transition graphs can also be studied in graph theory?
Question 2: What is the relationship between the isolation number and -isolation number of various conversion graphs and other parameters of the original graph?
Validation, S.Z.; Writing—original draft, J.Q. All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.
The original contributions presented in this study are included in the article. Further inquiries can be directed to the corresponding author.
The authors declare no conflicts of interest.
The following abbreviations are used in this manuscript:
The induced subgraph of vertex set X | |
The number of neighbors of v in G | |
The maximum degree of G | |
The minimum degree of G | |
The set of neighbors of v | |
The set of neighbors of v and v | |
The set of neighbors of all vertices in S | |
The set of neighbors of all vertices in S and S | |
A minimum dominating set | |
A minimum isolating set | |
The domination number of graph G | |
The | |
The k-isolation number of graph G | |
The 1-isolation number of graph G | |
The isolation number of graph G |
Footnotes
Disclaimer/Publisher’s Note: The statements, opinions and data contained in all publications are solely those of the individual author(s) and contributor(s) and not of MDPI and/or the editor(s). MDPI and/or the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to people or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content.
References
1. Berge, C. Theory of Graphs and Its Applications; Dunod: Paris, France, 1958.
2. Hansberg, A.; Meierling, D.; Volkmann, L. A general method in the theory of domination in graphs. Int. J. Comput. Math.; 2010; 87, pp. 2915-2924. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1080/00207160903137167]
3. Haynes, T.; Hedetniemi, S.; Slater, P. Fundamentals of Domination in Graphs; CRC Press: New York, NY, USA, 1998.
4. West, D. Introduction to Graph Theory; Longman: London, UK, 1985.
5. Hao, G.S.; Lim, M.H.; Ong, Y.S.; Huang, H.; Wang, G.G. Domination landscape in evolutionary algorithms and its applications. Soft Comput.; 2019; 23, pp. 3563-3570. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00500-018-3206-x]
6. Stephen, S.; Rajan, B.; Ryan, J.; Grigorious, C.; William, A. Power domination in certain chemical structures. J. Discret. Algorithms; 2015; 33, pp. 10-18. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jda.2014.12.003]
7. Rajan, R.S.; Anitha, J.; Rajasingh, I. 2-Power Domination in Certain Interconnection Networks. Procedia Comput. Sci.; 2015; 57, pp. 738-744. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.procs.2015.07.466]
8. Corcoran, P.; Gagarin, A. Heuristics for k-domination models of facility location problems in street networks. Comput. Oper. Res.; 2021; 133, pp. 53-68. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.cor.2021.105368]
9. Zhu, X.; Yu, J.; Lee, W. New dominating sets in social networks. J. Glob. Optim.; 2010; 48, pp. 633-642. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s10898-009-9511-2]
10. Caroa, Y.; Hansbergb, A. Partial domination-the isolation number of a graph. Filomath; 2017; 31, pp. 3925-3944. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.2298/FIL1712925C]
11. Favaron, O.; Kaemawichanurat, P. Inequalities between the Kk-isolation number and the independent Kk-isolation number of a graph. Discret. Appl. Math.; 2021; 289, pp. 93-97. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.dam.2020.09.011]
12. Peter, B.; Kurt, F.; Pawaton, K. Isolation of k-cliques. Discret. Math.; 2020; 343, 111879.
13. Shin-ichi, T.; Thiradet, J.; Pawaton, K. Isolation number of maximal outerplanar graphs. Discret. Appl. Math.; 2019; 267, pp. 215-218.
14. Zhang, G.; Wu, B. K1,2-isolation in graphs. Discret. Appl. Math.; 2021; 304, pp. 365-374. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.dam.2021.08.013]
15. Magdalena, L.; María José, S.; Adriana, D.; Francisco, J.V. Isolation Number versus Domination number of trees. Mathematics; 2021; 9, 1325. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.3390/math9121325]
16. Peter, B. Isolation of Cycles. Graphs Comb.; 2020; 36, pp. 631-637.
17. Peter, B. Isolation of connected graphs. Discret. Appl. Math.; 2023; 339, pp. 154-165.
18. Chen, J.; Xu, S. P5-isolation in graphs. Discret. Appl. Math.; 2023; 340, pp. 331-349. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.dam.2023.07.018]
19. Zhang, G.; Wu, B. A note on the Cycle Isolation Number of Graphs. Bull. Malays. Math. Sci. Soc.; 2024; 47, 57. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s40840-024-01655-x]
20. Zhang, G.; Wu, B. Cycle Isolation of Graphs with Small Girth. Graphs Comb.; 2024; 40, 38. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00373-024-02768-7]
21. Yang, Z.; Arockiaraj, M.; Prabhu, S.; Arulperumjothi, M.; Liu, J.N. Second Zagreb and Sigma Indices of Semi and TotalTransformations of Graphs. Complexity; 2021; 2021, 6828424. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1155/2021/6828424]
22. Kalpana, M.; Vijayalakshmi, D. On b-coloring of central graph of some graphs. Commun. Fac. Sci. Univ. Ank. Ser. A1 Math. Stat.; 2019; 68, pp. 1229-1239. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.31801/cfsuasmas.516089]
23. Peter, B.; Kurt, F.; Pawaton, K. Isolation of k-cliques II. Discret. Appl. Math.; 2022; 345, 112641.
You have requested "on-the-fly" machine translation of selected content from our databases. This functionality is provided solely for your convenience and is in no way intended to replace human translation. Show full disclaimer
Neither ProQuest nor its licensors make any representations or warranties with respect to the translations. The translations are automatically generated "AS IS" and "AS AVAILABLE" and are not retained in our systems. PROQUEST AND ITS LICENSORS SPECIFICALLY DISCLAIM ANY AND ALL EXPRESS OR IMPLIED WARRANTIES, INCLUDING WITHOUT LIMITATION, ANY WARRANTIES FOR AVAILABILITY, ACCURACY, TIMELINESS, COMPLETENESS, NON-INFRINGMENT, MERCHANTABILITY OR FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE. Your use of the translations is subject to all use restrictions contained in your Electronic Products License Agreement and by using the translation functionality you agree to forgo any and all claims against ProQuest or its licensors for your use of the translation functionality and any output derived there from. Hide full disclaimer
© 2024 by the authors. Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/). Notwithstanding the ProQuest Terms and Conditions, you may use this content in accordance with the terms of the License.
Abstract
Let
You have requested "on-the-fly" machine translation of selected content from our databases. This functionality is provided solely for your convenience and is in no way intended to replace human translation. Show full disclaimer
Neither ProQuest nor its licensors make any representations or warranties with respect to the translations. The translations are automatically generated "AS IS" and "AS AVAILABLE" and are not retained in our systems. PROQUEST AND ITS LICENSORS SPECIFICALLY DISCLAIM ANY AND ALL EXPRESS OR IMPLIED WARRANTIES, INCLUDING WITHOUT LIMITATION, ANY WARRANTIES FOR AVAILABILITY, ACCURACY, TIMELINESS, COMPLETENESS, NON-INFRINGMENT, MERCHANTABILITY OR FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE. Your use of the translations is subject to all use restrictions contained in your Electronic Products License Agreement and by using the translation functionality you agree to forgo any and all claims against ProQuest or its licensors for your use of the translation functionality and any output derived there from. Hide full disclaimer
Details
1 School of Mathematics and Statistics, Qinghai Normal University, Xining 810001, China;
2 School of Mathematics and Statistics, Qinghai Normal University, Xining 810001, China;