notes-100311 - MATH 682 1 1.1 Notes Combinatorics and Graph...

Info iconThis preview shows pages 1–2. Sign up to view the full content.

View Full Document Right Arrow Icon
MATH 682 Notes Combinatorics and Graph Theory II 1 Other coloring problems 1.1 Edge coloring Many properties which are traditionally based on vertices (e.g. connectivity) also exist in an edge version, so it is probably not surprising that one can investigate coloring as a property of edges as well as vertices. Definition 1. A r -edge-coloring of a graph G is a function c : E ( G ) → { 1 , 2 , 3 ,...,r } such that, if e and f are distinct edges sharing an endpoint, c ( e ) 6 = c ( f ). If G has an r -edge-coloring, it is called r -edge-colorable . The edge chromatic number of G , denoted χ 0 ( G ), is the least r such that G is r -edge-colorable. It is easy to find a lower bound for χ 0 ( G ), and a quite sloppy upper bound: Proposition 1. For a nontrivial graph G , Δ( G ) χ 0 ( G ) 2Δ( G ) - 1 . Proof. Let v be a vertex of maximum degree in G , i.e. d ( v ) = Δ( G ), so v has incident edges e 1 ,e 2 ,...,e Δ( G ) . All of these edges must be different colors in a valid coloring, so at least Δ( G ) colors are required. On the other hand, if we enact a greedy coloring of the edges (i.e. coloring the edges, in some order, using the least color possible at each step), then each edge { u,v } which we have not yet colored is forbidden to use at most ( d ( u ) - 1) + ( d ( v ) - 1) 2Δ( G ) - 2 colors. Thus, there is some color in { 1 , 2 ,..., 2Δ( G ) - 1 which is not forbidden, and can be used to color this edge in a greedy coloring. Since this is true of every edge we consider for greedy coloring, the entire greedy coloring can be achieved with 2Δ( G ) - 1 or fewer colors. There is a whole family of graphs that achieves the lower bound seen above: Theorem 1 (K¨onig ’18) . If G is bipartite, then χ 0 ( G ) = Δ( G ) . Proof. We shall prove this via induction on k G k . When k G k = 0, both χ 0 ( G ) and Δ( G ) are zero, so the base case is trivially true. Now, considering an arbitrary G , let us select an edge e = { u,v } . By our inductive hypothesis, G - e is Δ( G )-colorable (in fact it is possible that one color is not even necessary, but we don’t need that fact). Since d G - e ( u ) Δ( G ) - 1 and d G - e ( v ) Δ( G ) - 1, then there must be some color a not utilized on edges incident on u , and some color b not utilized on edges incident to v . If a = b , we may extend our coloring of G - e , coloring e in the color a to get a simple Δ( G )-coloring of G . The interesting and troublesome case, then, is where the color not utilized at u is utilized at v and vice versa. Let us denote v = v 0 , and denote the other endpoint of the edge in color a from v 0 as v 1 . Now note that if v 1 has no incident edge in color b , then we could simply change the edge { v 0 ,v 1 } to be of color b , and then we would have the situation described above, where the coloring in G - e is easily extended to G . Now, consider the possibility that v 1 does have an incident edge in color b , and denote its other endpoint as v 2 . Then, if v 2 had no incident edge in color
Background image of page 1

Info iconThis preview has intentionally blurred sections. Sign up to view the full version.

View Full DocumentRight Arrow Icon
Image of page 2
This is the end of the preview. Sign up to access the rest of the document.

Page1 / 6

notes-100311 - MATH 682 1 1.1 Notes Combinatorics and Graph...

This preview shows document pages 1 - 2. Sign up to view the full document.

View Full Document Right Arrow Icon
Ask a homework question - tutors are online