ABSTRACT A STUDY OF PROJECTIONS OF 2-BOUQUET GRAPHS. A new field of mathematical research has emerged in knot theory,
|
|
- Rosalind Patterson
- 6 years ago
- Views:
Transcription
1 ABSTRACT A STUDY OF PROJECTIONS OF -BOUQUET GRAPHS A new field of mathematical research has emerged in knot theory, which considers knot diagrams with missing information at some of the crossings. That is, the observer does not know which strand lies over or under the other at a crossing, and this new type of crossing is known as a precrossing. Pseudodiagrams are knot-like diagrams that contain precrossings and crossings, while projections are knot-like diagrams that only contain precrossings. The trivializing number (or knotting number, respectively) of a pseudodiagram is the number of precrossings that need to be changed to a crossing to obtain a diagram that represents the unknot (or a nontrivial knot, respectively) regardless of how the remaining precrossings are resolved. Spatial graph theory is a subfield of knot theory that focuses on embeddings of graphs in three-dimensional space. In this thesis, we extend the concepts of trivializing and knotting numbers to spatial graph theory, where we focus on -bouquet graphs. Specifically, we calculate the trivializing and knotting number for projections and pseudodiagrams of -bouquet spatial graphs based on the number of precrossings and the placement of the precrossings in the pseudodiagram of a spatial graph. Elaina Aceves May 016
2
3 A STUDY OF PROJECTIONS OF -BOUQUET GRAPHS by Elaina Aceves A thesis submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Master of Arts in Mathematics in the College of Science and Mathematics California State University, Fresno May 016
4 APPROVED For the Department of Mathematics: We, the undersigned, certify that the thesis of the following student meets the required standards of scholarship, format, and style of the university and the student s graduate degree program for the awarding of the master s degree. Elaina Aceves Thesis Author Carmen Caprau (Chair) Mathematics Tamás Forgács Mathematics Oscar Vega Mathematics For the University Graduate Committee: Dean, Division of Graduate Studies
5 AUTHORIZATION FOR REPRODUCTION OF MASTER S THESIS I grant permission for the reproduction of this thesis in part or in its entirety without further authorization from me, on the condition that the person or agency requesting reproduction absorbs the cost and provides proper acknowledgment of authorship. X Permission to reproduce this thesis in part or in its entirety must be obtained from me. Signature of thesis author:
6 ACKNOWLEDGMENTS I would like to thank my advisor, Dr. Carmen Caprau, for introducing me to knot theory and for all of her time, support, and contagious enthusiasm for mathematics. I also want to thank Dr. Tamás Forgács for convincing me to change my major to mathematics from engineering (sorry Uncle Luke). Additionally, I want to thank Dr. Oscar Vega for introducing me to mathematical research and becoming my biggest fan at all of my presentations. Everyone in the math department has been so supportive and I will always be grateful for being a part of such a great group of people. Lastly, a big thanks to my family for always being there for me through all of the math you had to endure, even if you did just smile and nod.
7 TABLE OF CONTENTS Page LIST OF TABLES vi LIST OF FIGURES vii INTRODUCTION Mathematical Knots Pseudodiagrams of Knots Rigid Vertex Embeddings of Spatial -Bouquet Graphs Examples of Trivializing and Knotting Numbers INITIAL EXPLORATION SINGLE STACK OF PRECROSSINGS FINITE NUMBER OF STACKS OF PRECROSSINGS ADDITIONAL RESULTS INVOLVING PRETZEL PROJECTIONS.. 35 PRIME -BOUQUETS Trivializing and Knotting Numbers of Prime -Bouquets Weighted Resolutions Set CONCLUSION REFERENCES APPENDIX
8 LIST OF TABLES Page Table 1. Trivializing and Knotting Numbers of -Bouquets of Type K 43 Table. Trivializing and Knotting Numbers of -Bouquets of Type L 44
9 LIST OF FIGURES Page Figure 1. The Reidemeister Moves Figure. Pseudodiagrams Figure 3. Pseudodiagrams that are Trivial, Knotted, or Neither... 3 Figure 4. The Extended Reidemeister Moves Figure 5. Trivial -Bouquets of Type K and Type L Figure 6. Vertex with Labels Figure 7. Pretzel Projection (n 1, n,..., n k ) Figure 8. Pretzel Projection (1) Figure 9. Resolutions of (1) Figure 10. Pretzel Projection () Figure 11. Knotted Resolution of () Figure 1. Resolutions of () Figure 13. Alternate Version of the RV Move Figure 14. Proof of a Case of the Alternate Version of the RV Move. 14 Figure 15. Two Stacks Figure 16. Diagram T (p, q) Figure 17. Labeled Edges on a Vertex Figure 18. R + and R Figure 19. K-trivial Diagram Figure 0. L-trivial Diagram Figure 1. The Projection 5 k Figure. The Projection 5 l Figure 3. The Extended Pseudo-Reidemeister Moves
10 Page Figure 4. Proof of Invariance under PRII move Figure 5. Proof of Invariance under PRIII move Figure 6. The Projection 4 k Figure 7. Prime -Bouquets of Type K up to Six Crossings Figure 8. Prime -Bouquets of Type K up to Six Crossings (continued) 55 Figure 9. Prime -Bouquets of Type L up to Six Crossings viii
11 INTRODUCTION Mathematical Knots A knot K is an embedding of a circle into R 3. A diagram of a knot K is a projection of K onto a plane. Knot diagrams contain double points which illustrate which strand lies over or under the other when they interact. This type of double point is known as a crossing. Two knots are ambient isotopic if and only if their diagrams are related by a finite sequence of the Reidemeister moves given in Figure 1. RI: RII: RIII: Figure 1. The Reidemeister Moves A knot can be represented by more than one diagram. However, any two diagrams representing the same knot are related via a finite sequence of the Reidemeister moves. A knot is called trivial, or unkotted, if any diagram of it can be transformed via a finite sequence of the Reidemeister moves to a simple closed loop in a plane. Otherwise, a knot is called nontrivial, or knotted. We note that there is only one trivial knot up to ambient isotopy, which we call the unknot. A more detailed introduction to knots can be found in [1] and [5].
12 Pseudodiagrams of Knots For application purposes, one may want to allow the possibility that no information is known about which strand lies over the other at a double point in a diagram. We refer to this type of double point as a precrossing. A projection P is a knot diagram without over/under information at every double point. That is, all of the double points in a projection P are precrossings. A pseudodiagram Q of a knot is a projection P in which over/under information may be known at some of the precrossings of P. To be precise, a pseudodiagram can contain both crossings and precrossings. With these definitions in place, all projections are pseudodiagrams but not all pseudodiagrams are projections. Resolving a precrossing in a projection or a pseudodiagram is the action of replacing the precrossing with a crossing of either type. By resolving a precrossing of a pseudodiagram Q, we obtain two new pseudodiagrams Q 1 and Q, one for each way that we can obtain a crossing from a precrossing. A resolution of Q is a knot diagram that is obtained by resolving all of the precrossings of Q into crossings. In Figure, diagrams (a) and (b) are both pseudodiagrams but only diagram (a) is a projection. A pseudodiagram Q is trivial if any resolution of Q represents the trivial knot. Conversely, a pseudodiagram Q is knotted if any resolution of Q represents a nontrivial knot. Notice that a pseudodiagram can be trivial, knotted, or neither. In Figure 3, pseudodiagram (a) is trivial, (b) is knotted, and (c) is neither.
13 3 (a) (b) Figure. Pseudodiagrams (a) (b) (c) Figure 3. Pseudodiagrams that are Trivial, Knotted, or Neither We note that the above definitions apply to projections P, as well. The trivializing number of a knot projection P (if it exists), denoted tr(p ), is the minimum number of precrossings needed to be replaced by a crossing in order to obtain a trivial pseudodiagram. The knotting number of a knot projection P (if it exists), denoted kn(p ), is the minimum number of precrossings needed to be replaced by a crossing in order to obtain a knotted pseudodiagram. If the trivializing or knotting number does not exist,
14 4 we simply denote it as. For further information about trivializing and knotting numbers for knot projections, see Hanaki s work []. Remark 1. Given a pseudodiagram P with tr(p ) = n, if we resolve k precrossings into crossings, where k < n, there will always be a way to resolve the remaining n k precrossings to obtain a nontrivial pseudodiagram. Otherwise, the trivializing number would be k instead of n. Similarly, given a pseudodiagram P with kn(p ) = n, if we resolve k precrossings into crossings, where k < n, there will always be a way to resolve the remaining precrossings to obtain a trivial pseudodiagram. The majority of this work is based on ideas from Hanaki s paper [], which focuses on calculating the trivializing and knotting numbers for projections of knots. The main results from [] are listed below: Theorem ([], Theorem 1.6). For any knot projection P, the trivializing number of P is even. Theorem 3 ([], Proposition 1.9). For any non-negative even number n and any positive integer l 3, there exists a knot projection P with tr(p ) = n and kn(p ) = l. Hanaki s paper also includes results about the type of projections that are required to achieve equality between the number of precrossings and the trivializing or knotting numbers. We will adapt Hanaki s approach to projections of spatial -bouquet graphs instead of projections of knots.
15 5 Rigid Vertex Embeddings of Spatial -Bouquet Graphs A spatial graph is an embedding of a graph in R 3, while a diagram of a spatial graph G is a projection of G onto a plane. One of the simplest graphs to investigate are the bouquet graphs, which are graphs with one vertex and only loops as edges. The -bouquet graph is the graph with one vertex and two loops, as shown in Figure 5 on page 7. Throughout this thesis, we will refer to the loops of the -bouquet graphs as petals. We consider only rigid-vertex embeddings of graphs. Specifically, we regard a spatial graph as an embedding in R 3 of a 4-valent graph whose vertices have been replaced by rigid disks. Each disk has four strands attached to it, and the cyclic order of these strands is determined via the rigidity of the disk. Two spatial graphs, G 1 and G, with rigid vertices are called ambient isotopic if there exists an orientation-preserving homeomorphism of R 3 onto itself that maps G 1 to G. It is well-known that G 1 and G are ambient isotopic if and only if there is a finite sequence of extended Reidemeister moves transforming a diagram of G 1 into a diagram of G. The extended Reidemeister moves are depicted in Figure 4; the solid dot in moves RIV and RV represent the 4-valent vertex of the -bouquet graph. These moves introduce an equivalence relation on the diagrams, and as a consequence, we can view a spatial graph as the equivalence class of a spatial graph diagram. We refer the reader to Kauffman s work [4, 5] for more details on rigid-vertex embeddings of graphs.
16 6 RI: RII: RIII: RIV: RV: Figure 4. The Extended Reidemeister Moves We call two spatial graph diagrams equivalent if one can be transformed into the other via a finite sequence of the extended Reidemeister moves. Specifically, equivalent diagrams belong to the same equivalence class. In this paper, we restrict our attention to rigid-vertex embeddings of the -bouquet graph, and we call such an object a -bouquet for short. Moreover, we will consider pseudodiagrams and projections of -bouquets. There are two trivial rigid-vertex embeddings of the -bouquet in R 3, up to cyclic order of the edges meeting at the vertex, as shown in Figure 5 on page 7. We will refer to these as the unknotted -bouquet of type K and
17 the unknotted -bouquet of type L, respectively (see [6]). For simplicity, we will also refer to these as the trivial -bouquet of type K or of type L type K type L Figure 5. Trivial -Bouquets of Type K and Type L To identify a -bouquet diagram as type K or type L, we exit the vertex along a given edge. As we travel along the petal, we will return to the vertex at a different edge. If the two edges are adjacent, we have a -bouquet diagram of type K. Otherwise, we have a -bouquet diagram of type L. More precisely, we can label the edges around the vertex as in Figure Figure 6. Vertex with Labels If we exit the vertex via the edge labeled 1 and by traveling along the petal we return to the vertex via the edge labeled or 4 (the edge labeled 3, respectively), the diagram is of type K (type L, respectively).
18 8 We call a pseudodiagram of a -bouquet K-trivial (or L-trivial) if any diagram obtained by resolving all of its precrossings is equivalent to the standard diagram of the unknotted -bouquet of type K (or type L). Otherwise, a pseudodiagram of a -bouquet is called knotted. The trivializing number of a pseudodiagram Q of a -bouquet (if it exists), denoted tr(q), is the minimum number of precrossings one needs to replace by a crossing to obtain a K-trivial or L-trivial pseudodiagram. The knotting number of a pseudodiagram Q of a -bouquet graph (if it exists), denoted kn(q), is the minimum number of precrossings one needs to replace by a crossing to obtain a knotted pseudodiagram. If the trivializing or knotting number does not exist, we denote it as. It is clear from the previous definition that the trivializing and knotting numbers are non-negative integers or infinity. We will frequently consider the diagram shown in Figure 7, which we will refer to as a pretzel projection, where n i N for all 1 i k and where k is finite positive integer. The leftmost dashed circle contains only a 4-valent vertex, and the remaining k dashed circles from left to right contain n 1, n,..., n k precrossings stacked vertically. We will denote such a diagram as (n 1, n,..., n k ) n 1 n n k n i Figure 7. Pretzel Projection (n 1, n,..., n k )
19 9 Remark 4. We want to emphasize that only one of the dashed circles contains the 4-valent vertex. Also, the location of the 4-valent vertex among the k dashed circles does not matter, since we can always use planar isotopy to transform a diagram into another diagram where the 4-valent vertex is in the leftmost circle. Throughout the remainder of the thesis, we will refer to the n i precrossings that are stacked vertically in each dashed circle as a stack for each i. We will also label the first (top) precrossing in the stack of n i precrossings as p i,1. Similarly, we write p i,ni for the last (bottom) precrossing in the stack of n i precrossings. Remark 5. To simplify notation, we will use tr(n 1, n,, n k ) and kn(n 1, n,, n k ) to denote the trivializing and knotting numbers, respectively, of the pretzel projection (n 1, n,, n k ). We proceed to our first result. Lemma 6. Given a pretzel projection (n 1, n,..., n k ) of a -bouquet, at most one n i is even. Proof. We prove this result by contradiction. To this end, we suppose that n i and n j are both even for some i j. Without loss of generality, let i < j. Notice that we have another component in our diagram that joins stacks n i and n j by traveling through the top right hand corner of p i,1, the bottom right hand corner of p i,ni, through the stacks n i+1,, n j 1, through the bottom left hand side of p j,nj, and the top left hand side of p j,1. Since we have an additional component in union with our -bouquet, we do not have a
20 10 projection of a -bouquet. Thus, we can only allow one of our stacks of precrossings to contain an even number of precrossings. Examples of Trivializing and Knotting Numbers In this subsection, we provide two examples of projections of -bouquets and their trivializing and knotting numbers. More specifically, we consider pretzel projections of the form (n 1 ), for some n 1 N. Example 7. Figure 8 is the pretzel projection (n 1 ) with n 1 = 1: (1) = Figure 8. Pretzel Projection (1) After we resolve the precrossing in one of the two possible ways, we obtain the following diagrams in Figure 9. Figure 9. Resolutions of (1) Notice that both diagrams represent the unknotted -bouquet of type L. Thus, we have that tr(1) = 0 and kn(1) =. Example 8. The next pretzel projection that we consider is (n 1 ) with n 1 = which is shown in Figure 10 on the next page.
21 11 () = Figure 10. Pretzel Projection () First, we calculate the trivializing number of the diagram (). To begin, note that tr() 0 because a nontrivial diagram can be obtained by resolving the precrossings in the manner shown in Figure 11. Figure 11. Knotted Resolution of () If tr() = 1, we only need to resolve a single precrossing so that any resulting pseudodiagram obtained by resolving the remaining precrossing is trivial. Since diagram () is symmetrical, the precrossing we choose to resolve is arbitrary and the manner in which we resolve the precrossing is arbitrary as well. Thus, without loss of generality, we will choose the top precrossing to be resolved by the crossing where the overstrand will extend from the top left hand side to the bottom right hand side of the double point. Once we have done so, the following two pseudodiagrams in Figure 1 are obtained by resolving the remaining precrossing.
22 1 Figure 1. Resolutions of () Notice that the first diagram is nontrivial, since the two petals are linked together. On the other hand, the second diagram is K-trivial via a Reidemeister II move. Consequently, we must have that tr() =, because we need the precrossings to be resolved in such a way so as to allow one petal to lie above the other. This ensures that we can perform a Reidemeister II move to unlink the two petals, which results in a trivial -bouquet. Using similar reasoning, but instead attempting to force all the resulting diagrams to represent a knotted -bouquet, we obtain that kn() =.
23 INITIAL EXPLORATION In this section, we begin the exploration of calculating the trivializing and knotting numbers of our diagrams. Lemma 9. Let P be a projection of a -bouquet. Then the trivializing number of P is even. Proof. Recall that our goal with calculating the trivializing number is to find the minimum number of precrossings that we need to change to crossings, in order for our diagram to become a trivial pseudodiagram. Thus, we need to resolve our precrossings in such a way so that there exists a sequence of extended Reidemeister moves transforming our diagram into a trivial pseudodiagram. First, we consider the Reidemeister I move. If we want to use the Reidemeister I move, we need to have a precrossing in P that has two adjacent strands joined together. Regardless of how we resolve the corresponding precrossing (we only have two resolutions), we can always use a Reidemeister I move to simplify the diagram. Thus, we do not need to resolve the precrossing in a certain manner to make the diagram trivial. As a result, utilizing the Reidemeister I move does not affect our trivializing number. Next we consider the Reidemeister II move. To implement this move, we need to resolve two precrossings in P that are adjacent to each other (and involve two parallel strands of the projection) in such a way as to force one strand to be above the other. Therefore, the trivializing number will increase by two every time we apply a Reidemeister II move.
24 14 Consider the Reidemeister III move. To accomplish a Reidemeister III move, we need to resolve two precrossings that correspond to the strand that we are attempting to slide over or under the remaining crossing. As a result, the trivializing number will increase by two when we implement a Reidemeister III move. Using similar reasoning, the trivializing number will increase by two for an RIV move as well, to ensure that the strand will slide over or under the 4-valent vertex involved in the move. Lastly, we will consider the RV move. The RV move can be depicted as in Figure 4, as well as its equivalent representation given in Figure 13. RV: Figure 13. Alternate Version of the RV Move Indeed, Figure 14 shows that the first two diagrams depicted in Figure 13 are equivalent via an RIV move and a Reidemeister II move. The other cases of the alternate version of the RV move are verified similarly. RIV RII Figure 14. Proof of a Case of the Alternate Version of the RV Move
25 15 To employ the RV move, we need to resolve two precrossings in P so that two of the adjacent strands exiting the vertex involved in the move will become overstrands at the crossings while the remaining two adjacent strands exiting the vertex will become understrands at the crossings. Thus, to apply the RV move, the trivializing number will increase by two. Regardless of which one of the extended Reidemeister moves we employ, the trivializing number will either remain the same or increase by two. Consequently, the trivializing number is even. Remark 10. The trivializing number for projections of knots and -bouquets are both even by Theorem and Lemma 9. Before we can move on to the next result, we need to define what it means for a stack to be knotted, when it contains both precrossings and crossings. For our purposes, a stack must contain at least two double points, whether these are precrossings or crossings, and must be formed by linking exactly two parallel strands through the use of the double points. A stack of crossings and precrossings will be considered a knotted stack if, regardless of how the precrossings of the stack are resolved, the two strands are linked and cannot be separated with a series of Reidemeister II moves. Example 11. Of the two stacks in Figure 15, only the left stack is knotted, because regardless of how the precrossing is resolved, the two strands will always be linked together. On the other hand, we can resolve the two precrossings in the right stack with the resolution where the overstrand of the resulting crossings will have negative slope, so as to allow two consecutive
26 16 Reidemeister II moves (starting in the middle of the diagram) to separate the two strands. Thus, the right stack is not knotted, because there exists a resolution of the precrossings that results in the separation of the two strands. Figure 15. Two Stacks Now, we can proceed to our next result. Lemma 1. Given a pretzel pseudodiagram Q = (n 1, n,, n k ) where we allow crossings as well as precrossings in Q, if any stack of Q is knotted, then the pseudodiagram Q is knotted. Proof. Assume that the stack of Q that contains n i double points is knotted. In particular, n i. If n i is even, then the two petals only interact in that particular stack of n i double points. Since the stack containing n i double points is knotted, the two petals are linked together regardless of how the remaining precrossings are resolved, forcing Q to be knotted. Next, we consider the case when n i is odd. In an attempt to force our diagram to be trivial, we can resolve the remaining precrossings in the other stacks to create as many instances of the Reidemeister II move as we see possible. However, with the rigidity of the 4-valent vertex and the way in
27 17 which we construct our pretzel diagrams, a Reidemeister II move cannot be implemented by using one crossing in the stack of n i double points and another crossing in an adjacent stack, unless both stacks only contain a single crossing. Since the stack of n i double points contains at least two double points, we do not have a diagram where a Reidemeister II move can be applied between two adjacent stacks. As a result, the stack of n i double points will remain knotted after all of the remaining precrossings in the other stacks have been resolved. Since n i is odd and the stack of n i double points remains knotted regardless of the way the remaining precrossings are resolved, the two petals are linked together within the stack of n i double points. Therefore, we have that Q is knotted. Before we can progress to the next result, we will define the figure T (p,q) as the diagram in Figure 16 which contains p and q precrossings where p, q 0. T (p, q) = p q Figure 16. Diagram T (p, q) Lemma 13. Let P be a pretzel projection of a -bouquet and let Q be a pseudodiagram obtained from P by resolving some of the precrossings of P into crossings. Then tr(q) = 0 if and only if Q = (1) or Q = T (p, q) for some p, q 0.
28 18 Proof. ( ) We know that tr(1) = 0 because (1) is L-trivial by Example 7. Notice that any resolution of the diagram T (p, q) will result in multiple applications of the Reidemeister I move, so we have that T (p, q) is K-trivial. Hence, both (1) and T (p, q) have a trivializing number of 0 as diagrams of type L and type K, respectively. ( ) Let P = (n 1, n,, n k ) be a pretzel projection and Q be a pseudodiagram obtained from P by resolving some of the precrossings of P. Suppose that tr(q) = 0. By Lemma 1, we know that if one of the stacks is knotted, then the entire diagram is knotted. Since tr(q) = 0 and two precrossings will already provide a nontrivial diagram (see Example 8), we must have that each stack contains one precrossing, or every stack contains a single precrossing except for one stack which does not contain any precrossings to obtain diagrams that are trivial of type L and type K respectively. If n i = 1 for all i, then we have a single horizontal stack of precrossings. If i = 1, then we have the diagram (1) which is L-trivial, so Q = (1) is a possible diagram with tr(q) = 0. However, if i, we can resolve all of the precrossings in the same manner and have no instances where the Reidemeister II move can be applied. This resolution is a knotted diagram, contradicting the fact that tr(q) = 0. As a result, the diagram (1) is the only possible trivial diagram in this case. If n j = 0 for some 1 j k while n i = 1 for all i j, we have the diagram T (p, q) for some p, q 0 which we know to be K-trivial. Therefore, we must have that Q = (1) or Q = T (p, q) for some p, q 0.
29 19 For the next proof, we will require an additional definition. The mirror image diagram of a -bouquet diagram D is the diagram D obtained from D by changing overcrossings into undercrossings and vice-versa, for all crossings of D. The precrossings of D will remain unchanged. Lemma 14. Let P be a projection of a -bouquet. Then kn(p ). Proof. We prove the statement using contradiction. Suppose first that kn(p ) = 0. If P contains zero precrossings, then P = (0), which we know to be K-trivial. If P has a single precrossing, we can have either the diagram (1) or T (p, q) with p = 0 and q = 1 (or vice versa), which we know are trivial. Thus, P must contain at least two precrossings. However, we can resolve the precrossings to force one petal to lie above the other, forcing the diagram to be trivial. This is similar to the method of unknotting a knot via the crossings-change operation so as to obtain an ascending knot diagram. With the assumption that kn(p ) = 0, at least one resolution of P will always be trivial, a contradiction. Therefore, kn(p ) 0. Suppose now that kn(p ) = 1. If kn(p ) = 1, only one precrossing needs to be resolved in order to obtain a knotted pseudodiagram. Let Q be the knotted pseudodiagram obtained from P by resolving a precrossing, call it c, into a crossing. Now, let Q be the pseudodiagram obtained from Q by changing the type of the newly created crossing. Let D be a diagram obtained from Q by resolving all of the precrossings in Q. Notice that the mirror image diagram D can be obtained from Q, and thus D is knotted. Since the mirror image of a knotted spatial graph is also knotted, we have that D is a knotted -bouquet. Thus, Q is knotted. Since both Q and Q are knotted, we
30 0 do not need to resolve the precrossing c in any particular way. This implies that kn(p ) = 0, which we already know is a contradiction. Therefore, kn(p ).
31 SINGLE STACK OF PRECROSSINGS In this section, we begin calculating the trivializing and knotting number of our pretzel projections by considering a single stack of precrossings. Before we can perform the calculations, we need to determine which -bouquet diagrams are of type K and of type L. Lemma 15. Given a pretzel projection P = (n), P is of type K if and only if n is even and is of type L if and only if n is odd. Proof. To avoid repetition, we prove only one implication of each of the statements since the other implication follows similarly. We label the edges around the vertex as shown in Figure Figure 17. Labeled Edges on a Vertex Case 1: n is even. Without loss of generality, let the first petal begin by exiting the vertex along edge. We have that the edge labeled enters the precrossing p 1,1 through the top left hand strand. Since n is even, the edge labeled will pass through all of the precrossings and exit the precrossing p 1,n through the bottom left hand strand. Thus, edge returns to the vertex through edge 3. Since the edge labeled and 3 are adjacent to each other, we have that P is of type K. Case : n is odd. Using similar reasoning as in the previous case, the edge labeled will exit the vertex via p 1,1 through the top left hand strand,
32 pass through all of the precrossings, and exit precrossing p 1,n through the bottom right hand strand, since n is odd. Therefore, strand returns to the vertex via strand 4. Since strands and 4 are not adjacent to each other, we have that P is of type L. In an effort to simplify our explanations when calculating trivializing and knotting numbers, we will introduce the following notation. We assign R + to the crossing where the overstrand has a positive slope, and R to the crossing where the overstrand has a negative slope. R + = R = Figure 18. R + and R Proposition 16. Given a pretzel projection P = (n), where n N 0 = N {0}, we have that: n tr(p ) =. Proof. Suppose first that n is even. Then P is of type K and we need to reduce our pretzel projection into Figure 19. (0) = Figure 19. K-trivial Diagram Since n is even, we have that n = k for some k N 0 and k 0. If we resolve k precrossings with R and k precrossings with R +, we can implement
33 3 k Reidemeister II moves. Thus we have reduced our diagram to (0), which we know to be K-trivial. We conclude that tr(p ) n. Now, we need to show that tr(p ) = n. To do that, we must show tr(p ) n, which is the next possible value since the trivializing number is even, by Lemma 9. We can resolve k precrossings to perform k 1 Reidemeister II moves. We have two precrossings left, but we can resolve them using two R + crossings and the resulting diagram is nontrivial. As a result, tr(p ) n because we can resolve the precrossings in such a way as to obtain a nontrivial diagram. We conclude that tr(p ) = n, when n is even. Suppose next that n is odd. Then P is of type L, and we need to reduce our pretzel projection into Figure 0. Figure 0. L-trivial Diagram Since n is odd, we have that n = k + 1, for some k N 0 and k 0. Using similar reasoning as the previous case, we can reduce our diagram to (1) by implementing k Reidemeister II moves. Since (1) is L-trivial by Example 7, we have that tr(p ) n 1. To show that tr(p ) = n 1, suppose that we resolved k precrossings so that we can apply k 1 Reidemeister II moves. There are three precrossings left, but we can resolve each of them using R + and create a knotted diagram. Thus, we have that tr(p ) = n 1, when n is odd. The result follows by combining the two cases.
34 Now we calculate the knotting number of a single stack of precrossings. Proposition 17. Given a pretzel projection P = (n), where n N 0, we have 4 that: if n = 0, 1 kn(p ) = n + 1 if n > 1. Proof. If n = 0, we know that tr(0) = 0, since (0) is K-trivial. As a consequence, we must have that kn(0) =. If n = 1, then tr(1) = 0, since (1) is L-trivial, which forces kn(1) =. We now consider the case n > 1. Suppose first that n is even. Then n = k, for some k N 0, and P is of type K. Without loss of generality, if we resolved k + 1 precrossings with R, even if we maximized the number of Reidemeister II moves by resolving k 1 precrossings with R +, we can apply at most k 1 Reidemeister II moves. Then regardless of how we resolve the remaining precrossings, we have at least two R crossings which results in a nontrivial diagram, implying that kn(p ) n + 1. Now, we need to show that kn(p ) = n + 1 = k + 1. Suppose that we resolved k precrossings with R. To create the most Reidemeister II moves, we can resolve the remaining k precrossings with R +, to apply k Reidemeister II moves. By doing so, we reduce our diagram to (0), which we know to be K-trivial. As a consequence, kn(p ) = n + 1. Suppose next that n is odd. Then n = k + 1, for some k N 0, and P is of type L. If we resolved n + 1 precrossings with R, even if we maximized the number of Reidemeister II moves by resolving n 1 precrossings with R +, we would have at most n 1 Reidemeister II moves.
35 5 Therefore, we have at least three R crossings, which results in a nontrivial diagram, implying that kn(p ) n + 1. To show that kn(p ) = n + 1, suppose that we resolved n precrossings with R. To create the most Reidemeister II moves, we can resolve the remaining n precrossings with R + and apply n Reidemeister II moves. By doing so, we reduce our diagram to (1), which we know to be L-trivial. Thus, kn(p ) = n + 1. Therefore, regardless of the parity of n, where n > 1, we have that kn(p ) = n + 1.
36 FINITE NUMBER OF STACKS OF PRECROSSINGS Now that we have finished calculating the trivializing and knotting numbers for pretzel projections that contain a single stack of precrossings, we can proceed by considering pretzel projections that contain a finite number of stacks. In this section, we will make the additional assumption that given a diagram (n 1, n,, n k ), n i, for all 1 i k. Lemma 18. Given a pretzel projection P = (n 1, n,, n k ), the diagram is of type K if and only if one n j is even or all n i are odd and k is even. The diagram is of type L if and only if all n i are odd and k is odd. Proof. We prove only one implication of each of the statements to avoid repetition, as the other implication follows similarly. We prove the lemma by cases and use the same labeling of the edges at the vertex as in Lemma 15. Without loss of generality, let the first petal begin by exiting the vertex along edge. Case 1: The stack n j is even for some 1 j k. We have that the edge labeled enters the jth stack either via the top left hand corner of precrossing p j,1 or in the bottom left hand corner of precrossing p j,nj. Since n j is even, the strand through the top left hand corner of precrossing p j,1 is connected to the strand in the bottom left hand corner of precrossing p j,nj. When strand exits the jth stack, it will connect with edge 3 upon entering the vertex. Since edges and 3 are adjacent to each other, we have that P is of type K. Case : Suppose that all n i are odd and k is even.
37 7 Since n 1 is odd, strand will travel through the first stack of precrossings and exit the stack through the bottom right hand strand of precrossing p 1,n1 and enter the second stack through the bottom left hand strand of precrossing p,n. Since n is odd, edge will travel through the second stack of precrossings and exit the stack through the top right hand strand of precrossing p,1. This process will continue through the k stacks of our diagram. Since k is even, strand will exit the final stack through the top right hand strand of precrossing p k,1. Hence, the edge labeled will enter the vertex through the edge labeled 1. Since these edges are adjacent to each other, we have that P is of type K. Case 3: Suppose that all n i are odd and k is odd. Using the same reasoning as in the previous case, we know that strand will exit the last stack of precrossings through the bottom right hand strand of precrossing p k,nk. Thus, strand will enter the vertex through strand 4. Since strands and 4 are not adjacent to each other, we have that P is of type L. Theorem 19. Given a pretzel projection P = (n 1, n,, n k ) where n i for each i, the trivializing number of P is given by k i=1 n i ( k ) tr(p ) = n i 1 if k is odd and each n i is odd i=1 n j + if k is even and each n i is odd k (n i 1) if one n j is even for some 1 j k. i=1,i j
38 8 Proof. We prove this theorem by taking cases. Case 1: If k is even and each n i is odd, then P is of type K. By Lemma 1, we know that if one of the n k is knotted, the entire diagram is knotted. Recall that even a stack of two precrossings contains a nontrivial diagram, so we must perform as many Reidemeister II moves as possible in each stack of precrossings to result in a trivial pseudodiagram. Since each stack contains an odd number of precrossings, after we perform all of the Reidemeister II moves in each stack of precrossings, we have one precrossing remaining in each stack. We have reduced our diagram to the diagram (k). Since k is even, by Proposition 16, we have that tr(k) = k. Since we were forced to resolve every precrossing to obtain diagram (0) which is K-trivial, k tr(p ) = n i. i=1 Case : If k is odd and each n i is odd, then P is of type L. With the same reasoning as in the previous case, we perform all of the Reidemeister II moves in each vertical stack of precrossings, and obtain the diagram (k). Since k is odd, Proposition 16 states that tr(k) = k 1. Thus we have reduced our diagram to (1), which we ( know to be L-trivial. Since we did not k ) resolve the last precrossing, tr(p ) = n i 1. Case 3: If n j is even for one 1 j k, then P is of type K. Using the same reasoning as in the previous case, we will resolve pairs of precrossings in each stack to create as many instances of the Reidemeister II move as we see possible. Notice that this eliminates all of the precrossings in the n j stack to ensure that the two petals are not linked together. Then we have reduced our i=1
39 9 diagram to T (p, q) for some p, q 0. Since the diagram T (p, q) is K-trivial, k tr(p ) = n j + (n i 1). i=1,i j Theorem 0. Given a pretzel projection P = (n 1, n,, n k ) where n i for each i, the knotting number of P is given by kn(p ) = min { n1 + 1, n + 1,, nk } + 1. Proof. By Lemma 1, we know that if one of the stacks of precrossings is knotted, the entire diagram is knotted. Thus, we require the minimum number of precrossings to be resolved, so as to ensure that one of the stacks of precrossings is knotted. By Proposition 17, we know that the knotting number of a stack of n i precrossings is n i + 1. The result follows. Theorem 1. Given a pretzel projection P = (n 1, n,, n m, n m+1,, n k ) where m 1, n i = 1 for all 1 i m, and n j for all m + 1 j k, the trivializing number of P is given by m + tr(p ) = m 1 + n j + k i=m+1 n i k i=m+1 k i=m+1,i j n i if all n i are odd, m and k have the same parity if all n i are odd, m and k have different parity (n i 1) if one n j is even. Proof. We prove this theorem by cases. Case 1: Let k be even and all of the n i be odd. Since each n i is odd, by k Theorem 19, tr(n m+1, n m+,, n k ) = n i. In an attempt to make our i=m+1
40 30 k diagram trivial, we resolve the n i precrossings as described in i=m+1 Theorem 19 to eliminate the n m+1, n m+,, n k precrossings. As a result, we have reduced our diagram to (m). By Lemma 16, we know that diagram (m) has trivializing number m if m is even, and m 1 if m is odd. Case : Let k and all of the n i be odd. Using similar reasoning as in the previous case, Theorem 19 implies that ( k ) tr(n m+1, n m+,, n k ) = n i 1. i=m+1 ( k ) When we resolve the n i 1 precrossings as described in Theorem 19, i=m+1 the n m+1, n m+,, n k precrossings are reduced to a single precrossing. Overall, our diagram has been transformed into (m + 1). By Lemma 16, we know that diagram (m + 1) has trivializing number m + 1 if m is odd, and m if m is even. Case 3: Let one n j be even for some 1 j k. Since one n j is even, Theorem 19 states that k tr(n 1, n,, n k ) = n j + (n i 1). i=m+1,i j k After we resolve the n j + (n i 1) precrossings according to i=m+1,i j Theorem 19, we have reduced our diagram to T (p, q) for some p, q 0. By Lemma 13, we know that the diagram T (p, q) is K-trivial.
41 The result follows by combining all of the cases together, according to the parity of m and k. 31 Theorem. Given a pretzel projection P = (n 1, n,, n m, n m+1,, n k ) where m 1, n i = 1 for all 1 i m, and n j for all m + 1 j k, the knotting number of P is given by kn(n m+1,, n k ) if m k+1 or one n j is even kn(p ) = min { } kn(n m+1,, n k ), k+ if m k+ and P is of type K min { } kn(n m+1,, n k ), k+3 if m k+3 and P is of type L Proof. So far, when calculating the knotting number of a diagram, we obtained the results by only considering the stacks of the diagram. However, we also need to consider whether it is possible to reduce our knotting number by resolving some, or all, of the m initial precrossings in our diagram. Consider the case when one n j is even for some m + 1 j k. We want to prove that regardless of how we resolve the initial m precrossings in our diagram, a K-trivial diagram can be created by resolving the remaining precrossings. By contradiction, suppose that we resolve the initial m precrossings and the resulting diagram is knotted. We will resolve the remaining precrossings in the n m+1, n m+,, n k stacks to create the most possible Reidemeister II moves in each stack. This will ensure that the two strands that interact in the jth stack will not be linked and that each stack in our diagram is not knotted. Subsequently, we have transformed our diagram into the diagram T (p, q) for some p, q 0. Since T (p, q) is K-trivial by Lemma 13, we have a contradiction to our diagram being knotted. Therefore,
42 the m initial precrossings have no effect in obtaining a knotted diagram and only by knotting a stack of P will we obtain a knotted diagram. Thus, kn(p ) = kn(n m+1, n m+,, n k ), when one n j is even for some m + 1 j k. For the remainder of this proof, we assume that n l is odd for all m + 1 l k. Consider the case when m k+1. Similarly to the previous case, we will use a proof by contradiction. The most knotted diagram that we can obtain with m precrossings is created by replacing all of the precrossings with crossings of the same type. Without loss of generality, we resolve all of the m initial precrossings with R + and, towards a contradiction, suppose that the resulting diagram is knotted. We resolve the remaining precrossings in the stacks of P by creating as many Reidemeister II moves as possible in each stack and resolve the remaining precrossing in each stack with R. After applying all of the possible Reidemeister II moves, our diagram has been reduced to a diagram containing m (k m) = m k crossings of type R +. 3 Notice that ( ) k + 1 m k k = k + 1 k = 1. Therefore, we have at most a single instance of R + if P is of type L, and zero instances of R + if P is of type K. Regardless of the type, we have created a trivial diagram. This contradicts the fact that our diagram is knotted. As a result, the only way to create a knotted diagram is to create a knotted stack in P. Hence, kn(p ) = kn(n m+1, n m+,, n k ) when m k+1. Next consider the case when P is of type K and m k+. By Lemma 15, k is even, so k+ N. We claim that k+ is the knotting number of P.
43 33 Without loss of generality, resolve k+ many precrossings of the m initial precrossings with R +. In an attempt to make the diagram trivial, we can resolve the remaining precrossings of P by creating as many Reidemeister II moves in each stack as possible. Furthermore, all of the remaining single precrossings will be resolved with R. After completing all other instances of the Reidemeister II moves between the R + and R precrossings, we have exactly two R + crossings, as seen by the calculations below: k + ( k k + ) = k + k + k + = k + k = We know by Example 8 that the diagram containing two R + crossings is knotted. Thus, if we resolve k+ many precrossings, we can ensure that P will always be knotted, regardless of how we resolve the remaining precrossings. Therefore, we have that { kn(p ) = min kn(n m+1,, n k ), k + }. Lastly, consider the case when P is of type L and m k+3. By Lemma 15, k is odd, so k+3 N and we want to show that kn(p ) = k+3. Similar to the previous case, without loss of generality, resolve k+3 many precrossings of the m initial precrossings with R +. The remaining precrossings will be resolved to create as many Reidemeister II moves within each stack and all other precrossings will be replaced with R. After all of the Reidemeister II moves have been completed, we will have exactly three R + crossings remaining, as seen in the following calculations.
44 34 k + 3 ( k k + 3 ) = k + 3 k + k + 3 = k + 3 k = 3 Note that the diagram containing three R + is knotted, so if we resolve k+3 many precrossings, we can ensure that P is knotted. Therefore, we conclude that { kn(p ) = min kn(n m+1,, n k ), k + 3 }.
45 ADDITIONAL RESULTS INVOLVING PRETZEL PROJECTIONS In previous sections, we were given a pretzel projection and then we calculated the trivializing and knotting numbers. In this section, we will instead start with a number and attempt to create a pretzel projection with that number as its trivializing or knotting number. Proposition 3. For any non-negative even number n, there exists a pretzel projection P with tr(p ) = n. Proof. By Proposition 16, we know that the pretzel projection P = (n) has tr(p ) = n, since n is even. Proposition 4. For any n N, where n, there exists a pretzel projection P with kn(p ) = n. Proof. By Theorems 0 and, we have that the pretzel projection P = (1, (n 1)) has knotting number equal to n, since (n 1) kn(p ) = + 1 = n = n. The next result establishes the relationship between the trivializing and knotting numbers. Hanaki stated that the trivializing and knotting numbers for knot projections are independent of each other (see Theorem 3). However, in our case of projections of -bouquets, we find that the trivializing number depends on the knotting number of the projection.
46 36 Proposition 5. For any n N, where n, there exists a pretzel projection P with kn(p ) = n and tr(p ) = l, where l = (n 1) or l = 4(n 1) + (k 1), for some k N 0. Proof. Consider the pretzel projection P 1 = ((n 1)). Using Proposition 17, (n 1) kn(p 1 ) = + 1 = n = n. Moreover, Proposition 16 states that tr(p 1 ) = (n 1). For the pretzel projection P = ((n 1) 1, (n 1) + k 1), where k N 0, we use Theorem 0 to conclude that (n 1) 1 kn(p ) = + 1 = n = n = n. For all k N 0, by Theorem 19, we have that tr(p ) = (n 1) 1 + (n 1) + k 1 = 4(n 1) + (k 1). This completes the proof. For the remaining results in this section, we introduce an additional definition. Given a pretzel projection P, let p(p) be the number of precrossings in P. Proposition 6. Given a pretzel projection P, tr(p ) = p(p ) if and only if P = (n 1, n,, n k ), where k is even and each n i is odd, or
47 37 P = (n 1, n,, n m, n m+1,, n k ), where m 1, n i = 1 for all 1 i m, n j for all m + 1 j k, and m and k have the same parity. Proof. ( ) We have this implication from Theorems 19 and 1. ( ) Suppose tr(p ) = p(p ). Then P = (n 1, n,, n k ) or P = (n 1, n,, n m, n m+1,, n k ), where m 1, n i = 1 for all 1 i m, and n j for all m + 1 j k. First consider the case P = (n 1, n,, n k ). Since tr(p ) is even, p(p ) must be even. Thus, in the case when all n i are odd, we must have an even number of stacks for p(p ) to be even, which implies that k must be even. Then k tr(p ) = n i = p(p ), by Theorem 19. If one n j is even for some 1 j k, we know i=1 k tr(p ) = n j + (n j 1) < i=1,i j k n i = p(p ), i=1 by Theorem 19. Then in the case that one n j is even, we have that tr(p ) p(p ). Therefore, tr(p ) = p(p ) when P = (n 1, n,, n k ), where all n i are odd and k is even. Consider the case P = (n 1, n,, n m, n m+1,, n k ) where m 1, n i = 1 for all 1 i m, and n j for all m + 1 j k. First notice that, if exactly one n j is even for some m + 1 j k, then by Theorem 1, k tr(p ) = n j + (n j 1) < m + i=1,i j k n i = p(p ). i=1
48 38 Thus, tr(p ) p(p ) when one n j is even. Next, suppose that all n i are odd. If m and k have different parity, we have that p(p ) is odd. This particular case must be discarded, since the trivializing number is always even, by Lemma 9. Thus, we have that tr(p ) p(p ) when m and k have different parity. If m and k have the same parity, by Theorem 1, we have that tr(p ) = m + k n i = p(p ). i=1 Hence, tr(p ) = p(p ) when P = (n 1, n,, n m, n m+1,, n k ), where m 1, n i = 1 for all 1 i m, and n j for all m + 1 j k, and where each n i is odd, and m and k have the same parity. Proposition 7. kn(p ) = p(p ) if and only if P = () = (1, 1) or P = (3) = (1, 1, 1). Proof. ( ) This implication is a consequence of Proposition 17. ( ) Suppose kn(p ) = p(p ). Then P = (n 1, n,, n k ) or P = (n 1, n,, n m, n m+1,, n k ), where m 1, n i = 1 for all 1 i m, and n j for all m + 1 j k. First, we consider the case when P = (n 1, n,, n k ). Then kn(p ) = min { n1 + 1, n + 1,, nk } + 1, by Theorem 0. If k, we conclude that min { n1 + 1, n + 1,, nk } + 1 = ni + 1
PSEUDO DIAGRAMS OF KNOTS, LINKS AND SPATIAL GRAPHS
PSEUDO DIAGRAMS OF KNOTS, LINKS AND SPATIAL GRAPHS RYO HANAKI Abstract. A pseudo diagram of a spatial graph is a spatial graph projection on the 2-sphere with over/under information at some of the double
More informationKNOT CLASSIFICATION AND INVARIANCE
KNOT CLASSIFICATION AND INVARIANCE ELEANOR SHOSHANY ANDERSON Abstract. A key concern of knot theory is knot equivalence; effective representation of these objects through various notation systems is another.
More informationarxiv: v1 [math.gt] 24 Dec 2014
The Signed Weighted Resolution Set is Not a Complete Pseudoknot Invariant arxiv:1412.7722v1 [math.gt] 24 Dec 2014 Allison Henrich Slavik Jablan Inga Johnson Abstract When the signed weighted resolution
More informationCLASSICAL AND VIRTUAL PSEUDODIAGRAM THEORY AND NEW BOUNDS ON UNKNOTTING NUMBERS AND GENUS
CLASSICAL AND VIRTUAL PSEUDODIAGRAM THEORY AND NEW BOUNDS ON UNKNOTTING NUMBERS AND GENUS A. HENRICH, N. MACNAUGHTON, S. NARAYAN, O. PECHENIK, AND J. TOWNSEND arxiv:0908.1981v [math.gt] 11 Jan 010 Abstract.
More informationComposing Two Non-Tricolorable Knots
Composing Two Non-Tricolorable Knots Kelly Harlan August 2010, Math REU at CSUSB Abstract In this paper we will be using modp-coloring, determinants of coloring matrices and knots, and techniques from
More information= A + A 1. = ( A 2 A 2 ) 2 n 2. n = ( A 2 A 2 ) n 1. = ( A 2 A 2 ) n 1. We start with the skein relation for one crossing of the trefoil, which gives:
Solutions to sheet 4 Solution to exercise 1: We have seen in the lecture that the Kauffman bracket is invariant under Reidemeister move 2. In particular, we have chosen the values in the skein relation
More informationCOMPOSITE KNOT DETERMINANTS
COMPOSITE KNOT DETERMINANTS SAMANTHA DIXON Abstract. In this paper, we will introduce the basics of knot theory, with special focus on tricolorability, Fox r-colorings of knots, and knot determinants.
More informationGenerell Topologi. Richard Williamson. May 28, 2013
Generell Topologi Richard Williamson May 28, 2013 1 20 Thursday 21st March 20.1 Link colourability, continued Examples 20.1. (4) Let us prove that the Whitehead link is not p-colourable for any odd prime
More informationFACTORING POSITIVE BRAIDS VIA BRANCHED MANIFOLDS
Submitted to Topology Proceedings FACTORING POSITIVE BRAIDS VIA BRANCHED MANIFOLDS MICHAEL C. SULLIVAN Abstract. We show that a positive braid is composite if and only if the factorization is visually
More informationThe Three-Variable Bracket Polynomial for Reduced, Alternating Links
Rose-Hulman Undergraduate Mathematics Journal Volume 14 Issue 2 Article 7 The Three-Variable Bracket Polynomial for Reduced, Alternating Links Kelsey Lafferty Wheaton College, Wheaton, IL, kelsey.lafferty@my.wheaton.edu
More informationAN OVERVIEW OF KNOT INVARIANTS
AN OVERVIEW OF KNOT INVARIANTS WILL ADKISSON ABSTRACT. The central question of knot theory is whether two knots are isotopic. This question has a simple answer in the Reidemeister moves, a set of three
More informationGeneralized Knot Polynomials and An Application
Generalized Knot Polynomials and An Application Greg McNulty March 17, 2005 ABSTRACT: In this paper we introduce two generalized knot polynomials, the Kauffman and HOMFLY polynomials, show that they are
More informationTwist Numbers of Links from the Jones Polynomial
Twist Numbers of Links from the Jones Polynomial Mathew Williamson August 26, 2005 Abstract A theorem of Dasbach and Lin s states that the twist number of any alternating knot is the sum of the absolute
More informationFrom Tangle Fractions to DNA
From angle Fractions to DNA Louis H. Kauffman and Sofia Lambropoulou Abstract his paper draws a line from the elements of tangle fractions to the tangle model of DNA recombination. In the process, we sketch
More informationThe Classification of Nonsimple Algebraic Tangles
The Classification of Nonsimple Algebraic Tangles Ying-Qing Wu 1 A tangle is a pair (B, T ), where B is a 3-ball, T is a pair of properly embedded arcs. When there is no ambiguity we will simply say that
More informationDIAGRAM UNIQUENESS FOR HIGHLY TWISTED PLATS. 1. introduction
DIAGRAM UNIQUENESS FOR HIGHLY TWISTED PLATS YOAV MORIAH AND JESSICA S. PURCELL Abstract. Frequently, knots are enumerated by their crossing number. However, the number of knots with crossing number c grows
More informationNEWLY FOUND FORBIDDEN GRAPHS FOR TRIVIALIZABILITY
NEWLY FOUND FORBIDDEN GRAPHS FOR TRIVIALIZABILITY RYO NIKKUNI Department of Mathematics, School of Education, Waseda University, Nishi-Waseda -6-, Shinjuku-ku, Tokyo, 69-8050, Japan nick@kurenai.waseda.jp
More informationTotal Linking Numbers of Torus Links and Klein Links
Rose- Hulman Undergraduate Mathematics Journal Total Linking Numbers of Torus Links and Klein Links Michael A Bush a Katelyn R French b Joseph R H Smith c Volume, Sponsored by Rose-Hulman Institute of
More informationarxiv: v2 [math.gt] 17 May 2018
FAMILIES OF NOT PERFECTLY STRAIGHT KNOTS arxiv:1804.04799v2 [math.gt] 17 May 2018 NICHOLAS OWAD Abstract. We present two families of knots which have straight number higher than crossing number. In the
More informationRelationships between Braid Length and the Number of Braid Strands
The University of San Francisco USF Scholarship: a digital repository @ Gleeson Library Geschke Center Mathematics College of Arts and Sciences 2007 Relationships between Braid Length and the Number of
More informationVirtual Crossing Number and the Arrow Polynomial
arxiv:0810.3858v3 [math.gt] 24 Feb 2009 Virtual Crossing Number and the Arrow Polynomial H. A. Dye McKendree University hadye@mckendree.edu Louis H. Kauffman University of Illinois at Chicago kauffman@uic.edu
More informationVassiliev Invariants, Chord Diagrams, and Jacobi Diagrams
Vassiliev Invariants, Chord Diagrams, and Jacobi Diagrams By John Dougherty X Abstract: The goal of this paper is to understand the topological meaning of Jacobi diagrams in relation to knot theory and
More informationRATIONAL TANGLES AND THE MODULAR GROUP
MOSCOW MATHEMATICAL JOURNAL Volume, Number, April June 0, Pages 9 6 RATIONAL TANGLES AND THE MODULAR GROUP FRANCESCA AICARDI Dedicated to V.I. Arnold, with endless gratitude Abstract. There is a natural
More informationarxiv: v2 [math.gt] 2 Nov 2018
AN UNKNOTTING INDEX FOR VIRTUAL LINKS KIRANDEEP KAUR, MADETI PRABHAKAR, AND ANDREI VESNIN arxiv:1806.01798v [math.gt] Nov 018 Abstract. Given a virtual link diagram D, we define its unknotting index U(D)
More informationTutte Polynomials with Applications
Global Journal of Pure and Applied Mathematics. ISSN 0973-1768 Volume 12, Number 6 (26), pp. 4781 4797 Research India Publications http://www.ripublication.com/gjpam.htm Tutte Polynomials with Applications
More informationNON-TRIVIALITY OF GENERALIZED ALTERNATING KNOTS
Journal of Knot Theory and Its Ramifications c World Scientific Publishing Company NON-TRIVIALITY OF GENERALIZED ALTERNATING KNOTS MAKOTO OZAWA Natural Science Faculty, Faculty of Letters, Komazawa University,
More informationCLASSIFYING AND APPLYING RATIONAL KNOTS AND RATIONAL TANGLES
CLASSIFYING AND APPLYING RAIONAL KNOS AND RAIONAL ANGLES LOUIS H. KAUFFMAN AND SOFIA LAMBROPOULOU Abstract. In this survey paper we sketch new combinatorial proofs of the classification of rational tangles
More informationA survey of butterfly diagrams for knots and links
University of Northern Iowa UNI ScholarWorks Electronic Theses and Dissertations Graduate College 2017 A survey of butterfly diagrams for knots and links Mark Ronnenberg University of Northern Iowa Copyright
More informationOn the Classification of Rational Knots
arxiv:math/0212011v2 [math.gt] 27 Nov 2003 On the Classification of ational Knots Louis H. Kauffman and Sofia Lambropoulou Abstract In this paper we give combinatorial proofs of the classification of unoriented
More informationBRAID GROUPS ALLEN YUAN. 1. Introduction. groups. Furthermore, the study of these braid groups is also both important to mathematics
BRAID GROUPS ALLEN YUAN 1. Introduction In the first lecture of our tutorial, the knot group of the trefoil was remarked to be the braid group B 3. There are, in general, many more connections between
More information4 CONNECTED PROJECTIVE-PLANAR GRAPHS ARE HAMILTONIAN. Robin Thomas* Xingxing Yu**
4 CONNECTED PROJECTIVE-PLANAR GRAPHS ARE HAMILTONIAN Robin Thomas* Xingxing Yu** School of Mathematics Georgia Institute of Technology Atlanta, Georgia 30332, USA May 1991, revised 23 October 1993. Published
More informationClassifying and Applying Rational Knots and Rational Tangles
Contemporary Mathematics Classifying and Applying Rational Knots and Rational angles Louis H. Kauffman and Sofia Lambropoulou Abstract. In this survey paper we sketch new combinatorial proofs of the classification
More informationModular Monochromatic Colorings, Spectra and Frames in Graphs
Western Michigan University ScholarWorks at WMU Dissertations Graduate College 12-2014 Modular Monochromatic Colorings, Spectra and Frames in Graphs Chira Lumduanhom Western Michigan University, chira@swu.ac.th
More informationMax-Planck-Institut für Mathematik Bonn
Max-Planck-Institut für Mathematik Bonn Prime decompositions of knots in T 2 I by Sergey V. Matveev Max-Planck-Institut für Mathematik Preprint Series 2011 (19) Prime decompositions of knots in T 2 I
More informationPerfect matchings in highly cyclically connected regular graphs
Perfect matchings in highly cyclically connected regular graphs arxiv:1709.08891v1 [math.co] 6 Sep 017 Robert Lukot ka Comenius University, Bratislava lukotka@dcs.fmph.uniba.sk Edita Rollová University
More informationCross-index of a graph
Cross-index of a graph Akio Kawauchi, Ayaka Shimizu, and Yoshiro Yaguchi Abstract. A family of topological invariants of a connected graph associated to every tree is introduced and called the cross-index.
More informationDistance and intersection number in the curve graph of a surface
Distance and intersection number in the curve graph of a surface Joan Birman, Matthew J. Morse, and Nancy C. Wrinkle arxiv:0.07v [math.gt] Sep 0 September, 0 Abstract We highlight a new relationship between
More informationKnot Theory and the Alexander Polynomial
Knot Theory and the Alexander Polynomial Reagin Taylor McNeill Submitted to the Department of Mathematics of Smith College in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Bachelor of Arts
More informationTOWARDS A SPLITTER THEOREM FOR INTERNALLY 4-CONNECTED BINARY MATROIDS VII
TOWARDS A SPLITTER THEOREM FOR INTERNALLY 4-CONNECTED BINARY MATROIDS VII CAROLYN CHUN AND JAMES OXLEY Abstract. Let M be a 3-connected binary matroid; M is internally 4- connected if one side of every
More informationarxiv: v1 [math.gt] 30 Jul 2015
BRIDGE TRISECTIONS OF KNOTTED SURFACES IN S 4 JEFFREY MEIER AND ALEXANDER ZUPAN arxiv:1507.08370v1 [math.gt] 30 Jul 2015 Abstract. We introduce bridge trisections of knotted surfaces in the four-sphere.
More informationarxiv: v1 [math.gt] 25 Jan 2011
AN INFINITE FAMILY OF CONVEX BRUNNIAN LINKS IN R n BOB DAVIS, HUGH HOWARDS, JONATHAN NEWMAN, JASON PARSLEY arxiv:1101.4863v1 [math.gt] 25 Jan 2011 Abstract. This paper proves that convex Brunnian links
More informationTHE MINIMALLY NON-IDEAL BINARY CLUTTERS WITH A TRIANGLE 1. INTRODUCTION
THE MINIMALLY NON-IDEAL BINARY CLUTTERS WITH A TRIANGLE AHMAD ABDI AND BERTRAND GUENIN ABSTRACT. It is proved that the lines of the Fano plane and the odd circuits of K 5 constitute the only minimally
More informationFactoring Families of Positive Knots on Lorenz-like Templates
Southern Illinois University Carbondale OpenSIUC Articles and Preprints Department of Mathematics 10-2008 Factoring Families of Positive Knots on Lorenz-like Templates Michael C. Sullivan Southern Illinois
More informationOn the warping sum of knots
arxiv:1712.07332v1 [math.gt] 20 Dec 2017 On the warping sum of knots Slavik Jablan, Ayaka Shimizu September 24, 2018 Abstract The warping sum e(k) of a knot K is the minimal value of the sum of the warping
More informationTHE CLASSIFICATION OF TOROIDAL DEHN SURGERIES ON MONTESINOS KNOTS. Ying-Qing Wu 1
THE CLASSIFICATION OF TOROIDAL DEHN SURGERIES ON MONTESINOS KNOTS Ying-Qing Wu 1 Abstract. Exceptional Dehn surgeries have been classified for 2-bridge knots and Montesinos knots of length at least 4.
More informationDisjoint G-Designs and the Intersection Problem for Some Seven Edge Graphs. Daniel Hollis
Disjoint G-Designs and the Intersection Problem for Some Seven Edge Graphs by Daniel Hollis A dissertation submitted to the Graduate Faculty of Auburn University in partial fulfillment of the requirements
More informationTHE MIRROR SYMMETRY CONJECTURE FOR NETWORKS ON SURFACES
TE MIRROR SYMMETRY CONJECTURE FOR NETWORKS ON SURFACES LOUIS GAUDET, BENJAMIN OUSTON-EDWARDS, PAKAWUT JIRADILOK, AND JAMES STEVENS 1. Measurements on Networks Many of the basic definitions are the same
More informationGeometric Estimates from spanning surfaces of knots
Geometric Estimates from spanning surfaces of knots joint w/ Stephan Burton (MSU) Michigan State University Knots in Hellas, Olymbia, Greece, July 18, 2016 Burton-Kalfagianni (MSU) J 1 / 20 Knot complement:
More informationCosmetic generalized crossing changes in knots
Cosmetic generalized crossing changes in knots Cheryl L. Balm Michigan State University Friday, January 11, 2013 Slides and preprint available on my website http://math.msu.edu/~balmcher Background Knot
More informationarxiv: v1 [math.gt] 27 Sep 2018
NP HARD PROBLEMS NATURALLY ARISING IN KNOT THEORY arxiv:1809.10334v1 [math.gt] 27 Sep 2018 DALE KOENIG AND ANASTASIIA TSVIETKOVA Abstract. We prove that certain problems naturally arising in knot theory
More informationREALIZING TOURNAMENTS AS MODELS FOR K-MAJORITY VOTING
California State University, San Bernardino CSUSB ScholarWorks Electronic Theses, Projects, and Dissertations Office of Graduate Studies 6-016 REALIZING TOURNAMENTS AS MODELS FOR K-MAJORITY VOTING Gina
More informationMaximal and Maximum Independent Sets In Graphs With At Most r Cycles
Maximal and Maximum Independent Sets In Graphs With At Most r Cycles Bruce E. Sagan Department of Mathematics Michigan State University East Lansing, MI sagan@math.msu.edu Vincent R. Vatter Department
More informationarxiv: v1 [quant-ph] 11 Mar 2016
The Asymptotics of Quantum Max-Flow Min-Cut Matthew B. Hastings 1 Station Q, Microsoft Research, Santa Barbara, CA 93106-6105, USA 2 Quantum Architectures and Computation Group, Microsoft Research, Redmond,
More informationarxiv: v2 [math.gt] 4 Sep 2017
ON REALIZABILITY OF GAUSS DIAGRAMS Andrey Grinblat and Viktor Lopatkin arxiv:.v [math.gt] Sep Abstract. The problem of which Gauss diagram can be realized by knots is an old one and has been solved in
More informationON POSITIVITY OF KAUFFMAN BRACKET SKEIN ALGEBRAS OF SURFACES
ON POSITIVITY OF KAUFFMAN BRACKET SKEIN ALGEBRAS OF SURFACES THANG T. Q. LÊ Abstract. We show that the Chebyshev polynomials form a basic block of any positive basis of the Kauffman bracket skein algebras
More informationThe Satellite crossing number conjecture for cables of knots
The Satellite crossing number conjecture for cables of knots Alexander Stoimenow Department of Mathematical Sciences, KAIST April 25, 2009 KMS Meeting Aju University Contents Crossing number Satellites
More informationA brief Incursion into Knot Theory. Trinity University
A brief Incursion into Knot Theory Eduardo Balreira Trinity University Mathematics Department Major Seminar, Fall 2008 (Balreira - Trinity University) Knot Theory Major Seminar 1 / 31 Outline 1 A Fundamental
More informationReduced [tau]_n-factorizations in Z and [tau]_nfactorizations
University of Iowa Iowa Research Online Theses and Dissertations Summer 2013 Reduced [tau]_n-factorizations in Z and [tau]_nfactorizations in N Alina Anca Florescu University of Iowa Copyright 2013 Alina
More informationPRIME LABELING OF SMALL TREES WITH GAUSSIAN INTEGERS. 1. Introduction
PRIME LABELING OF SMALL TREES WITH GAUSSIAN INTEGERS HUNTER LEHMANN AND ANDREW PARK Abstract. A graph on n vertices is said to admit a prime labeling if we can label its vertices with the first n natural
More informationOn links with cyclotomic Jones polynomials
On links with cyclotomic Jones polynomials Abhijit Champanerkar Department of Mathematics and Statistics University of South Alabama Ilya Kofman Department of Mathematics College of Staten Island, City
More informationExtension of continuous functions in digital spaces with the Khalimsky topology
Extension of continuous functions in digital spaces with the Khalimsky topology Erik Melin Uppsala University, Department of Mathematics Box 480, SE-751 06 Uppsala, Sweden melin@math.uu.se http://www.math.uu.se/~melin
More informationKnot Theory and the Jones Polynomial
Knot Theory and the Jones Polynomial By: Wilson Poulter Faculty Advisor: Dr. Maria Grazia Viola A project submitted to the Department of Mathematical Sciences in conformity with the requirements for Math
More informationFundamentally Different m-colorings of Pretzel Knots
Journal of Knot Theory and Its Ramifications c World Scientific Publishing Company Fundamentally Different m-colorings of Pretzel Knots KATHRYN BROWNELL Lenoir-Rhyne College, Department of Mathematics,
More informationTemperley Lieb Algebra I
Temperley Lieb Algebra I Uwe Kaiser Boise State University REU Lecture series on Topological Quantum Computing, Talk 3 June 9, 2011 Kauffman bracket Given an oriented link diagram K we define K Z[A, B,
More informationA note on graphs and rational balls
RACSAM (2018) 112:705 716 https://doi.org/10.1007/s13398-017-0464-x ORIGINAL PAPER A note on graphs and rational balls AnaG.Lecuona 1 Received: 10 May 2017 / Accepted: 24 October 2017 / Published online:
More informationKLEIN LINK MULTIPLICITY AND RECURSION. 1. Introduction
KLEIN LINK MULTIPLICITY AND RECURSION JENNIFER BOWEN, DAVID FREUND, JOHN RAMSAY, AND SARAH SMITH-POLDERMAN Abstract. The (m, n)-klein links are formed by altering the rectangular representation of an (m,
More informationMidterm 1. Your Exam Room: Name of Person Sitting on Your Left: Name of Person Sitting on Your Right: Name of Person Sitting in Front of You:
CS70 Discrete Mathematics and Probability Theory, Fall 2018 Midterm 1 8:00-10:00pm, 24 September Your First Name: SIGN Your Name: Your Last Name: Your Exam Room: Name of Person Sitting on Your Left: Name
More informationRESEARCH INSTITUTE FOR MATHEMATICAL SCIENCES RIMS The state sum invariant of 3-manifolds constructed from the E 6 linear skein.
RIMS-1776 The state sum invariant of 3-manifolds constructed from the E 6 linear skein By Kenta OKAZAKI March 2013 RESEARCH INSTITUTE FOR MATHEMATICAL SCIENCES KYOTO UNIVERSITY, Kyoto, Japan THE STATE
More informationAN ESTIMATE OF THE TRIPLE POINT NUMBERS OF SURFACE-KNOTS BY QUANDLE COCYCLE INVARIANTS
AN ESTIMATE OF THE TRIPLE POINT NUMBERS OF SURFACE-KNOTS BY QUANDLE COCYCLE INVARIANTS ERI HATAKENAKA Abstract. The triple point number of a surface-knot is defined to be the minimal number of triple points
More informationDecomposing planar cubic graphs
Decomposing planar cubic graphs Arthur Hoffmann-Ostenhof Tomáš Kaiser Kenta Ozeki Abstract The 3-Decomposition Conjecture states that every connected cubic graph can be decomposed into a spanning tree,
More informationOn non-hamiltonian circulant digraphs of outdegree three
On non-hamiltonian circulant digraphs of outdegree three Stephen C. Locke DEPARTMENT OF MATHEMATICAL SCIENCES, FLORIDA ATLANTIC UNIVERSITY, BOCA RATON, FL 33431 Dave Witte DEPARTMENT OF MATHEMATICS, OKLAHOMA
More information37th United States of America Mathematical Olympiad
37th United States of America Mathematical Olympiad 1. Prove that for each positive integer n, there are pairwise relatively prime integers k 0, k 1,..., k n, all strictly greater than 1, such that k 0
More informationMini-Course on Limits and Sequences. Peter Kwadwo Asante. B.S., Kwame Nkrumah University of Science and Technology, Ghana, 2014 A REPORT
Mini-Course on Limits and Sequences by Peter Kwadwo Asante B.S., Kwame Nkrumah University of Science and Technology, Ghana, 204 A REPORT submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree
More informationTHE CAPORASO-HARRIS FORMULA AND PLANE RELATIVE GROMOV-WITTEN INVARIANTS IN TROPICAL GEOMETRY
THE CAPORASO-HARRIS FORMULA AND PLANE RELATIVE GROMOV-WITTEN INVARIANTS IN TROPICAL GEOMETRY ANDREAS GATHMANN AND HANNAH MARKWIG Abstract. Some years ago Caporaso and Harris have found a nice way to compute
More informationTHESIS. Presented in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree Master of Science in the Graduate School of The Ohio State University
The Hasse-Minkowski Theorem in Two and Three Variables THESIS Presented in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree Master of Science in the Graduate School of The Ohio State University By
More informationEQUAL LABELINGS FOR P K -SIDED DICE
EQUAL LABELINGS FOR P K -SIDED DICE A Thesis Presented to the Faculty of California State Polytechnic University, Pomona In Partial Fulfillment Of the Requirements for the Degree Master of Science In Mathematics
More informationPolynomials in knot theory. Rama Mishra. January 10, 2012
January 10, 2012 Knots in the real world The fact that you can tie your shoelaces in several ways has inspired mathematicians to develop a deep subject known as knot theory. mathematicians treat knots
More informationKnot Just Another Math Article
Knot Just Another Math Article An Introduction to the Mathematics of Knots and Links BY ROBIN KOYTCHEFF Take a string, such as a loose shoelace, tie it up in some manner and then tape the two ends together
More informationarxiv: v1 [math.gt] 22 Jan 2019
A parity for 2-colourable links William Rushworth Department of Mathematics and Statistics, McMaster University E-mail address: will.rushworth@math.mcmaster.ca arxiv:1901.07406v1 [math.gt] 22 Jan 2019
More informationCombinatorial Consequences of Relatives of the Lusternik-Schnirelmann-Borsuk Theorem
Combinatorial Consequences of Relatives of the Lusternik-Schnirelmann-Borsuk Theorem Gwen Spencer Francis Su, Advisor Alfonso Castro, Reader May 10, 2005 Department of Mathematics Abstract Call a set
More informationarxiv: v2 [math.gt] 15 Nov 2017
CLUSTER ALGEBRAS AND JONES POLYNOMIALS KYUNGYONG LEE AND RALF SCHIFFLER arxiv:1710.08063v2 [math.gt] 15 Nov 2017 Abstract. We present a new and very concrete connection between cluster algebras and knot
More informationarxiv: v1 [math.gt] 2 Jun 2016
CONVERTING VIRTUAL LINK DIAGRAMS TO NORMAL ONES NAOKO KAMADA arxiv:1606.00667v1 [math.gt] 2 Jun 2016 Abstract. A virtual link diagram is called normal if the associated abstract link diagram is checkerboard
More informationCharacters and triangle generation of the simple Mathieu group M 11
SEMESTER PROJECT Characters and triangle generation of the simple Mathieu group M 11 Under the supervision of Prof. Donna Testerman Dr. Claude Marion Student: Mikaël Cavallin September 11, 2010 Contents
More informationDelta link homotopy for two component links, III
J. Math. Soc. Japan Vol. 55, No. 3, 2003 elta link homotopy for two component links, III By Yasutaka Nakanishi and Yoshiyuki Ohyama (Received Jul. 11, 2001) (Revised Jan. 7, 2002) Abstract. In this note,
More informationPerfect Zero-Divisor Graphs of Z_n
Rose-Hulman Undergraduate Mathematics Journal Volume 17 Issue 2 Article 6 Perfect Zero-Divisor Graphs of Z_n Bennett Smith Illinois College Follow this and additional works at: http://scholar.rose-hulman.edu/rhumj
More informationA Forbidden Subgraph Characterization Problem and a Minimal-Element Subset of Universal Graph Classes
Brigham Young University BYU ScholarsArchive All Theses and Dissertations 2004-03-17 A Forbidden Subgraph Characterization Problem and a Minimal-Element Subset of Universal Graph Classes Michael D. Barrus
More informationBasic Combinatorics. Math 40210, Section 01 Fall Homework 8 Solutions
Basic Combinatorics Math 4010, Section 01 Fall 01 Homework 8 Solutions 1.8.1 1: K n has ( n edges, each one of which can be given one of two colors; so Kn has (n -edge-colorings. 1.8.1 3: Let χ : E(K k
More informationSurface-links and marked graph diagrams
Surface-links and marked graph diagrams Sang Youl Lee Pusan National University May 20, 2016 Intelligence of Low-dimensional Topology 2016 RIMS, Kyoto University, Japan Outline Surface-links Marked graph
More informationTHE RADIO NUMBERS OF ALL GRAPHS OF ORDER n AND DIAMETER n 2
LE MATEMATICHE Vol LXVIII (2013) Fasc II, pp 167 190 doi: 104418/201368213 THE RADIO NUMBERS OF ALL GRAPHS OF ORDER n AND DIAMETER n 2 K F BENSON - M PORTER - M TOMOVA A radio labeling of a simple connected
More informationHomework #5 Solutions
Homework #5 Solutions p 83, #16. In order to find a chain a 1 a 2 a n of subgroups of Z 240 with n as large as possible, we start at the top with a n = 1 so that a n = Z 240. In general, given a i we will
More informationProperties and Classification of the Wheels of the OLS Polytope.
Properties and Classification of the Wheels of the OLS Polytope. G. Appa 1, D. Magos 2, I. Mourtos 1 1 Operational Research Department, London School of Economics. email: {g.appa, j.mourtos}@lse.ac.uk
More informationChordal Coxeter Groups
arxiv:math/0607301v1 [math.gr] 12 Jul 2006 Chordal Coxeter Groups John Ratcliffe and Steven Tschantz Mathematics Department, Vanderbilt University, Nashville TN 37240, USA Abstract: A solution of the isomorphism
More informationThe Goldbach Conjecture An Emergence Effect of the Primes
The Goldbach Conjecture An Emergence Effect of the Primes Ralf Wüsthofen ¹ April 20, 2018 ² ABSTRACT The present paper shows that a principle known as emergence lies beneath the strong Goldbach conjecture.
More informationNowhere-zero flows in signed series-parallel graphs arxiv: v1 [math.co] 6 Nov 2014
Nowhere-zero flows in signed series-parallel graphs arxiv:1411.1788v1 [math.co] 6 Nov 2014 Tomáš Kaiser 1,2 Edita Rollová 1,3 Abstract Bouchet conjectured in 1983 that each signed graph that admits a nowhere-zero
More informationKnotted Spheres and Graphs in Balls
arxiv:math/0005193v1 [math.gt] 19 May 2000 Knotted Spheres and Graphs in Balls Hugh Nelson Howards Wake Forest University; and Visiting Researcher University of Texas, Austin e-mail: howards@mthcsc.wfu.edu
More informationSaturation number of lattice animals
ISSN 1855-966 (printed edn.), ISSN 1855-974 (electronic edn.) ARS MATHEMATICA CONTEMPORANEA 15 (018) 191 04 https://doi.org/10.649/1855-974.179.bce (Also available at http://amc-journal.eu) Saturation
More informationProblems in Domination and Graph Products
Clemson University TigerPrints All Dissertations Dissertations 5-2016 Problems in Domination and Graph Products Jason Todd Hedetniemi Clemson University, jason.hedetniemi@gmail.com Follow this and additional
More informationOn the number of cycles in a graph with restricted cycle lengths
On the number of cycles in a graph with restricted cycle lengths Dániel Gerbner, Balázs Keszegh, Cory Palmer, Balázs Patkós arxiv:1610.03476v1 [math.co] 11 Oct 2016 October 12, 2016 Abstract Let L be a
More informationCopyright 2016 by Darren Seitz Lipman. All Rights Reserved
Abstract LIPMAN, DARREN SEITZ. Ties That Don t Bind: Computing the Unknotting Numbers of Knot Families. (Under the direction of Dr. Radmila Sazdanovic.) Computing the unknotting number of knots is generally
More informationPENGYU LIU, YUANAN DIAO AND GÁBOR HETYEI
THE HOMFLY POLYNOMIAL OF LINKS IN CLOSED BRAID FORM PENGYU LIU, YUANAN DIAO AND GÁBOR HETYEI Abstract. It is well known that any link can be represented by the closure of a braid. The minimum number of
More information