arxiv: v1 [math.co] 22 May 2015

Transcription

1 arxiv: v [math.co] 22 May 205 Optimal extensions and quotients of 2 Cayley Digraphs F. Aguiló, A. Miralles and M. Zaragozá Departament de Matemàtica Aplicada IV Universitat Politècnica de Catalunya Jordi Girona -3, Mòdul C3, Campus Nord Barcelona. October 8, 208 Abstract Given a finite Abelian group G and a generator subset A G of cardinality two, we consider the Cayley digraph Γ = Cay(G, A. This digraph is called 2 Cayley digraph. An extension of Γ is a 2 Cayley digraph, Γ = Cay(G, A with G < G, such that there is some subgroup H < G satisfying the digraph isomorphism Cay(G /H, A = Cay(G, A. We also call the digraph Γ a quotient of Γ. Notice that the generator set does not change. A 2 Cayley digraph is called optimal when its diameter is optimal with respect to its order. In this work we define two procedures, E and Q, which generate a particular type of extensions and quotients of 2 Cayley digraphs, respectively. These procedures are used to obtain optimal quotients and extensions. Quotients obtained by procedure Q of optimal 2 Cayley digraphs are proved to be also optimal. The number of tight extensions, generated by procedure E from a given tight digraph, is characterized. Tight digraphs for which procedure E gives infinite tight extensions are also characterized. Finally, these two procedures allow the obtention of new optimal families of 2 Cayley digraphs and also the improvement of the diameter of many proposals in the literature. Keywords: Cayley digraph, diameter, digraph isomorphism, minimum distance diagram, quotient, extension. AMS subject classifications 0502, 05C25. Introduction, known results and motivation Let G N be a finite Abelian group of order N generated by A = {a, b} G N \ {0}. The Cayley digraph Γ = Cay(G N, A is a directed graph with set of vertices V = G N and set of Research supported by the Ministerio de Educación y Ciencia (Spain with the European Regional Development Fund under projects MTM C02-0 and by the Catalan Research Council under project 204SGR47. s: matfag@ma4.upc.edu, almirall@ma4.upc.edu, marisa@ma4.upc.edu

2 arcs E = {g g + a, g g + b : g G N }. These digraphs are called 2 Cayley digraphs. The concepts of (directed path, distance, minimum path and diameter are the usual ones. We denote the diameter of Γ by D(G N, A. Definition Fixed N 3, the functions D and D 2 are defined as and, for non square-free N, we also define D (N = min{d(g N, A : G N cyclic, A G N } D 2 (N = min{d(g N, A : G N non-cyclic, A G N }. Most known proposals of 2 Cayley digraphs are given in terms of D -optimality and sometimes, even more restricted, with generator set A = {, b} Z N. However, D 2 -optimality also has to be taken into account for non square-free order N. In this work the optimality means { D (N if N is square-free, D 3 (N = min{d (N, D 2 (N} otherwise. Table shows D (N and D 2 (N for several values of non square-free N. Notice different behaviors in the table, i.e. D < D 2, D = D 2 and D > D 2, for some values of N. N lb(n D (N Optimal Cyclic D 2 (N Optimal Non-cyclic Cay(Z 8, {, 3} 4 Cay(Z 2 Z 4, {(0,, (, } Cay(Z 9, {, 2} 4 Cay(Z 3 Z 3, {(0,, (, 0} Cay(Z 2, {, 4} 4 Cay(Z 2 Z 6, {(0,, (, 2} Cay(Z 6, {, 7} 6 Cay(Z 2 Z 8, {(0,, (, 2} Cay(Z 8, {, 4} 7 Cay(Z 3 Z 6, {(0,, (, 0} Cay(Z 20, {, 3} 6 Cay(Z 2 Z 0, {(0,, (, 2} Table : Some optimal 2-Cayley digraphs for non square-free order Metrical properties of 2 Cayley digraphs can be studied using minimum distance diagrams (MDD for short. Sabariego and Santos [] gave the algebraic definition of MDD in the general case (for any cardinality of A. Here we particularize their definition to 2-Cayley digraphs. Definition 2 A minimum distance diagram related to the digraph Cay(G N, {a, b} is a map ψ : G N N 2 with the following two properties (a for each η G N, ψ(η = (i, j satisfies ia + jb = η and ψ(η is minimum among all vectors in N 2 satisfying that property ( (i, j = i + j, (b for every η G N and for every vector (s, t N 2 that is coordinate-wise smaller than ψ(η, we have (s, t = ψ(γ for some γ G N (with sa + tb = γ. These diagrams are also known as L-shapes when A = 2. They were used first by Wong and Coppersmith [3] in 974 for cyclic groups and generator set of type {, s}. Fiol, Yebra, Alegre and Valero [7] in 987 used L-shapes and their related tessellations to obtain infinite families of tight 2 Cayley digraphs for cyclic groups, known as double-loop networks. There 2

3 are two complete surveys on double-loop networks, i.e. Bermond, Comellas and Hsu [2] in 995 and Hwang [8] in Minimum distance diagrams are usually represented by the image ψ(g N, where each vector ψ(η = (i, j is depicted as a unit square [i, j ] = [i, i + ] [j, j + ] R 2 (for every η G N. A square [[i, j ] is labeled with the element ia + jb G N. L-shapes are usually denoted by the lengths of their sides, i.e. L = L(l, h, w, y with 0 w < l, 0 y < h and lh wy = N. The plane tessellation using the tile L is given by translation through the vectors u = (l, y and v = ( w, h (see [7] for more details. Metrical properties of the digraph are contained in their related diagrams. For instance, the distance between vertices in the digraph can be computed from any related MDD L. In particular, the diameter of the digraph Cay(G N, {a, b}, denoted by D(G N, {a, b}, is obtained from the so called diameter of L d L = l + h min{w, y} 2. ( Fixed the area of L, N, a tight lower bound lb(n is known for d L (see for instance [7, 2], The value lb(n is also a tight lower bound for D 3 (N. lb(n = 3N 2. (2 (,2 (,3 (,4 (,5 (2,0 (2, (2,2 (2,3 (3,0 (3, (3,0 (3, (0,8 (0,9 (0,0 (0, 5 3 (,6 (,7 (,8 (,9 (,0 (, (,0 (, (2,4 (2,5 (2,6 (2,7 (2,8 (2,9 (2,0 (2, (3,2 (3,3 (3,4 (3,5 (3,6 (3,7 (3,8 (3, (0,0 (0, (0,2 (0,3 (0,4 (0,5 (0,6 (0,7 Figure : H F = L(5, 4, 2, 2 and H G = L(8, 8, 4, 4 Figure shows two minimum distance diagrams, L(5, 4, 2, 2 related to Cay(Z 6, {2, 5} and L(8, 8, 4, 4 associated with Cay(Z 4 Z 2, {(0,, (3, 2}. In Table, either D or D 2 attain the lower bound. The first non square-free value of N with D (N, D 2 (N > lb(n is N = 25, that is D (25 = D(Z 25, {, 4} = 8 and D 2 (25 = D(Z 5 Z 5, {(0,, (, 0} = 8 whilst lb(25 = 7. Definition 3 The digraph Cay(G N, {a, b} is k tight if D(G N, {a, b} = lb(n + k. Given a minimum distance diagram, H = L(l, h, w, y, we also say (by analogy with its related digraph that H is k tight when d H = lb(lh wy + k. According to these definitions, we say 3

4 the digraph Cay(Z 8, {, 3} is 0-tight (optimal and Cay(Z 2 Z 4, {(0,, (, } is -tight. 0-tight digraphs are called tight (optimal ones. There are optimal digraphs that are not tight, for instance Cay(Z 5 Z 5, {(0,, (, 0} is -tight optimal. The following theorem geometrically characterizes minimum distance diagrams. Theorem ([, Theorem ] H = L(l, h, w, y is a minimum distance diagram related to the digraph Cay(G N, {a, b} if and only if lh wy = N, la = yb and hb = wa in G N, (l y(h w 0 and both factors do not vanish at the same time. Given a minimum distance diagram H = L(l, h, w, y, we can find a 2 Cayley digraph associated with H. The details can be found ( in [7, 5, 6] using the Smith normal norm, S, of the integral matrix M = M(l, h, w, y =. That is, S = diag(s l w y h, s 2, s = gcd(l, h, w, y, s s 2, ( s s 2 = N and S = UMV for some unimodular matrices U, V Z 2 2. More precisely, u u if U = 2 then H is related to Cay(Z u 2 u s Z s2, {(u, u 2, (u 2, u 22 }. Thus, if H is 22 related to Cay(G N, {a, b}, the group G N is cyclic if and only if gcd(l, h, w, y =. Although this result is known since time ago, few authors have used it for 2 Cayley digraphs related to non-cyclic groups. Clearly, for some non square-free values of N, non-cyclic groups are better than cyclic ones, as in Table. The motivation of this work appears from some numerical evidences associated with minimum distance diagrams. Here we give four examples to remark some structural and metric details of 2 Cayley digraphs. Examples and 2 are related to quotients whilst examples 3 and 4 correspond to extensions. Quotients and extensions will be defined in the next section, but now we want to highlight some numerical details using these examples. The definition of Cayley digraph isomorphism is the usual one, that is Γ = Cay(G, A = = Cay(G 2, A 2 whenever there is some isomorphism of groups f : G G 2 such that there is an arc g g 2 in Γ if and only if there is an arc f(g f(g 2 in. Example Let us consider Γ = Cay(Z 6, {2, 5} with related minimum distance diagram H = L(5, 4, 2, 2. See the left hand side of Figure. The digraph Γ is tight with diameter D(Γ = d H = lb(6 = 5. Taking the subgroup H = {0, 8} < Z 6, we get Γ = Cay(Z 6 /H, {2, 5}. Notice that H contains the minimum distance diagram H = L(4, 2,, 0 related to Γ = Cay(Z 8, {2, 5} (labels 9 and correspond to and 2 modulo 8. The diameter D(Γ = d H = 4 is not optimal since D(Z 8, {, 3} = D (8 = 3 = lb(8. Example shows a non-optimal quotient from an optimal 2 Cayley digraph. Notice how the algebraic structure of this quotient is reflected in the tessellation of the MDD L(4, 2,, 0, related to Cay(Z 8, {2, 5}, through u = (4, 0 and v = (, 2 with respect the tessellation of the MDD L(5, 4, 2, 2, related to Cay(Z 6, {2, 5}, through u = (5, 2 = u v and v = ( 2, 4 = 2v. Here, it is not clear how to obtain L(4, 2,, 0 from L(5, 4, 2, 2 without looking at the lateral classes of H in Z 6. Example 2 Let us consider now Γ = Cay(Z 4 Z 2, {(0,, (3, 2}, with minimum distance diagram H = L(8, 8, 4, 4. See the right hand side of Figure. Γ is tight since D(Γ = d H = lb(48 = 0. Here we take the subgroup H = {(0, 0, (2, 6} < Z 4 Z 2. Then, the quotient Cay(Z 4 Z 2 /H, {(0,, (3, 2} = Cay(Z 2 Z 6, {(0,, (3, 2} = Γ has related minimum distance diagram H = L(4, 4, 2, 2. This quotient Γ is also tight since D 2 (Γ = d H = lb(2 = 4. 4

5 Example 2 shows an optimal quotient Γ from an optimal digraph Γ. We can see how the tessellation by H is compatible with tessellation by H. In this example, unlike Example, it is clear how L(4, 4, 2, 2 is obtained from L(8, 8, 4, 4, with no help of the related algebraic structure. The previous two examples are significant. A quotient of an optimal cyclic digraph may not be optimal. However, in Section 2, it will be shown that an Example 2-like quotient of an optimal non-cyclic digraph is always optimal (Theorem 3. The following two examples concern extensions of digraphs. Example 3 Consider the digraph Γ = Cay(Z 3 Z 3, {(, 0, (0, } with optimal diameter D(Γ = 4 = lb(9 and related minimum distance diagram H = L(3, 3, 0, 0. The digraph Γ = Cay(Z 6 Z 6, {(, 0, (0, } has related minimum distance diagram H = L(6, 6, 0, 0. Γ is an extension of Γ taking the subgroup H = {(0, 0, (3, 3} < Z 6 Z 6. The diameter D(Γ = 0 is not optimal since D(Z 36, {, } = 9 = lb(36. Example 4 Let us consider the tight digraph Γ = Cay(Z, {, 4} = Cay(Z Z, {(0,, (, 4} with diameter D(Γ = 4 = lb( and related minimum distance diagram H = L(4, 3,,. The digraphs Γ m = Cay(Z m Z m, {(0,, (, 4} are extensions of Γ, with related minimum distance diagram H m = L(4m, 3m, m, m, for m 2. Numerical calculations give D(Γ m = lb(m 2 = 6m 2 for m = 2, 3. Thus, Γ 2 and Γ 3 are optimal extensions of Γ. Examples 3 and 4 show that extensions of optimal digraphs can be optimal or not. The previous examples allow us to define quotients and extensions of 2 Cayley digraphs from their related minimum distance diagrams. From a given MDD H = L(l, h, w, y of area N = lh wy, we can consider the L-shape mh = L(ml, mh, mw, my of area m 2 N that corresponds to an extension-like procedure on the related digraphs. The same observations suggest a quotient-like procedure from the related minimum distance diagram. By Theorem 2, the L-shape mh is also a minimum distance diagram. In Section 2 we define two procedures, for quotients and extensions, based on minimum distance diagrams. Metrical properties of these procedures are also studied in that section. Theorem 3 shows that these kind of quotients are well suited from the metrical point of view. That is, quotients on optimal non-cyclic 2 Cayley digraphs are also optimal. Properties of these kind of extensions are studied in Section 3 and tight extensions are characterized. Tight digraphs with infinite tight extensions are proved to be (Lemma 3 those having order 3t 2, for some t. Theorem 4 shows that these digraphs are always extensions of the same digraph Cay(Z 3, {2, }. Thus, tight 2 Cayley digraphs with order N 3t 2 can not have infinite tight extensions of this type. Theorem 5 gives the exact number of tight extensions a tight digraph of order N can have. This number is called the extension coefficient c(n. Proposition 3 shows that c(n can not be larger than O( N. Theorem 6 gives infinite families of digraphs having maximum value of the extension coefficient, i.e. c(n = O( N. Finally, in Section 4, quotients and extensions of 2 Cayley digraphs are used to improve the diameter of some proposals in the literature. 5

6 2 Quotients and extensions of 2 Cayley digraphs Let us denote the non-negative integers by N. Given a minimum distance diagram H = L(l, h, w, y and m N, m 0, we use the notation gcd(h = gcd(l, h, w, y, mh = L(ml, mh, mw, my and H/m = L(l/m, h/m, w/m, y/m whenever m gcd(h. Theorem 2 Let H be a minimum distance diagram. Consider m N with m 0. Then, (a mh is a minimum distance diagram. (b If m gcd(h, then H/m is a minimum distance diagram. Proof: Let us assume gcd(h = g, so the area of H is N with g 2 N and l = gl, h = gh, w = gw, y = gy with gcd(l, h, w, y =. The Smith normal form of the matrix M(l, h, w, y is S = diag(g, N/g = UMV and the related 2 Cayley digraph is isomorphic to Γ = Cay(Z g Z N/g, {a, b} with a = (u, u 2 and b = (u 2, u 22. Since H is a minimum distance diagram, it fulfills Theorem, i.e. lh wy = N, la = yb and hb = wa in Z g Z N/g and (l y(h w 0 (and both factors don t vanish. Take m N with m 0. Let us consider mh of area m 2 N. The Smith normal form of the matrix mm is ms = U(mMV. Let us consider the group G m = Z mg Z m(n/g. Now we have m(la yb = 0 and m(hb wa = 0 in G m and (ml my(mh mw 0 (and both factors do not vanish. Therefore, mh fulfills Theorem and it is a minimum distance diagram (related to Cay(G m, {a, b}. Similar arguments can be used to prove that H/m is also a minimum distance diagram related to Cay(Z g/m Z ( N /m (whenever m g. g Now we define the procedures that give the kind of extensions and quotients we study in this work. Definition 4 (Procedures E and Q Let H be a minimum distance diagram of area N, with gcd(h = g, related to the digraph Γ = Cay(Z g Z N/g, {a, b}. Procedure E. We call the digraph mγ, related to mh, the m-extension of Γ. Procedure Q. For m g, we call the digraph Γ/m, related to H/m, the m-quotient of Γ. By analogy, we also call the MDD mh the m-extension of H. We also call the MDD H/m the m-quotient of H whenever Procedure Q can be applied to H. Definition 4 is a correct definition by the following proposition. Proposition Let us consider the digraph Γ = Cay(Z g Z N/g, {(u, u 2, (u 2, u 22 } with related minimum distance diagram H of area N and gcd(h = g. Then, (a For any m N, m 0, the m-expansion given by Procedure E, related to mh, is mγ = Cay(Z mg Z (mn/g, {(u, u 2, (u 2, u 22 }. (b Let m N be a divisor of g. Then, the m-quotient given by Procedure Q, related to H/m, is Γ/m = Cay(Z g/m Z N/(gm, {(u, u 2, (u 2, u 22 }. Proof: The proof of these facts are a direct consequence of Theorem 2. 6

7 From now on, we denote the distance from [0, 0] to [i, j ] H = L(l, h, w, y by d([[i, j ] = i+j. The value d([[i, j ] represents the distance from the vertex 0 to the vertex ia+jb in the related 2 Cayley digraph. We remark two important unit squares in H, p = [l, h y ] and q = [l w, h ]. Notice that d H = max{d(p, d(q}. For instance, when considering the minimum distance diagram L(5, 4, 2, 2 of the left hand side of Figure, the unit square p corresponds to vertex 3 and q corresponds to 3. Lemma Let H = L(l, h, w, y be a minimum distance diagram of area N and gcd(h = g >. Assume m g with m N. Let us consider the unit squares p = [l/m, h/m y/m ] and q = [l/m w/m, h/m ] of the m-quotient H/m. Thus, (a if d H = d(p, then d H/m = d(p, (b if d H = d(q, then d H/m = d(q. Proof: (a We have d H = l + h min{w, y} 2 = l + h w 2 = d(p. Then, d H/m = l/m + h/m w/m 2 = d(p. The same argument proves item (b. Lemma 2 For a minimum distance diagram H and an m extension mh, the equality d mh = m(d H holds. Proof: This identity is a direct consequence of Lemma. Notice that this lemma also states the identity d H/m = d H+2 m 2. Theorem 3 Quotients of optimal digraphs given by Procedure Q are also optimal digraphs. Proof: Let us assume that Γ is an optimal 2 Cayley digraph of order N related to the minimum distance diagram H. Let Γ = Γ/m be an m-quotient of Γ, generated by applying Procedure Q. Thus, Γ has order N/m 2. Let us assume there is some 2 Cayley digraph of order N/m 2,, with related MDD L and d L < d H, where H = H/m. Let us consider the extension = m given by Procedure E. This extension has order N and diameter m(d L < m(d H This fact leads to contradiction because the diameter of Γ, m(d H + 2 2, is the smallest one over all 2 Cayley digraphs of order N. This theorem ensures the optimality of a quotient of any optimal minimum distance diagram. Example 3 shows that this property is not true for extensions generated by Procedure E. Thus, there is a need to study when optimal extensions are obtained. Some properties of tight extensions are studied in the next section. 3 Tight extensions In this section we are interested in studying optimal extensions obtained by Procedure E. We focus our attention on tight digraphs, i.e. tight extensions of tight digraphs. Proposition 2 Let us consider a tight minimum distance diagram H of area N and m. Then, mh is tight if and only if equality m 3N = m 3N holds. Proof: H is tight if and only if d H = 3N 2. From Lemma 2 it follows that mh is tight if and only if equality m 3N = m 3N holds. 7

8 Let {x} be defined by {x} = x x. Lemma 3 Identity m 3N = m 3N holds for all m 2 if and only if N = 3t 2, for any t. Proof: Clearly identity m 3N = m 3N holds for all m 2 if N = 3t 2. Assume now the identity holds for all m 2. If 3N / N, then 0 < { 3N} <. Therefore, there is some large enough value m N with m{ 3N} >. So, from identity m 3N = m 3N + m{ 3N}, the inequality m 3N > m 3N holds. A contradiction. Thus, identity 3N = x 2 must be satisfied for some x N and so 3 x. Hence, we have x = 3t for some t N and N = 3t 2. Lemma 3 suggests the existence of an infinite family of tight non-cyclic 2 Cayley digraphs that are t extensions of a digraph on three vertices. The following result confirms this suggestion. Theorem 4 Let us consider the tight digraph Γ = Cay(Z 3, {2, } with related minimum distance diagram H = L(2, 2,,. Then, for all t 2 (a H t = th is a tight minimum distance diagram of area N t = 3t 2, (b H t is related to Γ t = Cay(Z t Z 3t, {(,, (0, }, (c D(Γ t = D 2 (N t = lb(n t = 3t 2. Proof: By Theorem 2, H t = L(2t, 2t, t, t of area N t = 3t 2, is a minimum distance diagram of Γ t for all t. By Lemma 3 and Proposition 2, H t is tight for all t. Thus (a holds. Statement (b comes from the isomorphism of digraphs Γ = Cay(Z Z 3, {(,, (0, } and then, Γ t is a t extension of Γ. Statement (c follows directly from the tightness of H t given by Proposition 2. By Lemma 3, the number of tight extensions of a tight digraph on N vertices is always finite whenever N 3t 2. Now we are interested in the number of these tight extensions. Theorem 5 Let H be a tight minimum distance diagram of area N 3t 2. Then, the extension mh is tight if and only if m. 3N 3N Proof: Let Q be the set of rational numbers. If N 3t 2, then 3N 3N / Q. Thus, there is some n 0 N with n 0 < 3N < n 3N 0 +. Hence, taking m N such that 0 < n 0 + < 3N 3N < n 0 m, inequalities 0 < m 3N m 3N < hold. Therefore, equality m 3N = m 3N holds for m n 0 = 3N 3N Assume now that m n 0 +. Let us see that mh is not tight. From m n 0 + < 3N 3N < n 0 it follows that < m 3N m 3N. Since m 3N < m 3N, the extension mh is not tight by Proposition 2. Definition 5 Given N 3t 2, we define the extension coefficient c(n =.. 3N 3N 8

9 By Theorem 5, the number of tight extensions of a tight digraph only depends on its tightness and its order N. It is a surprising fact that this coefficient does not depend on the structure of the related group. For instance, consider the non isomorphic tight digraphs Γ = Cay(Z 89, {, 56} = Cay(Z Z 89, {(0,, (, 56} and = Cay(Z 3 Z 63, {(0,, (, 9}. Since c(89 = 5, Γ and have four tight extensions mγ = Cay(Z m Z 89m, {(0,, (, 56} and m = Cay(Z 3m Z 63m, {(0,, (, 9} for m {2, 3, 4, 5}, respectively Figure 2: Values of c(n for 4 N 300 and N 3t 2 Clearly we can choose N 3t 2 with small value of 3N 3N, i.e. with large extension coefficient c(n. Figure 2 shows some values of c(n. This figure appears to suggest that largest values of c(n may have order O( N. Proposition 3 confirms this numerical evidence. Lemma 4 ([5, Proposition 3.] Set N = t=0 J t with J t = [3t 2 +, 3(t + 2 ]. Consider the union J t = I t, I t,2 I t,3 with I t, = [3t 2 +, 3t 2 + 2t], I t,2 = [3t 2 + 2t +, 3t 2 + 4t + ] and I t,3 = [3t 2 + 4t + 2, 3(t + 2 ]. Then 3t + ifn I t,, 3N = 3t + 2 ifn I t,2, 3t + 3 ifn I t,3. Proposition 3 Set E t,i = max{c(n : N I t,i and N 3k 2 } for i {, 2, 3}. Then E t, = 6t +, E t,2 = 6t + 3 and E t,3 = 2t +. Proof: Let us see E t, = 6t +. Take N I t, with N 3k 2 for all k N. Then, by Lemma 4, we have 3N = 3t +. Thus, 3N 3N 3t + 9t 2 + 6t = α(t. Using the Mean Value Theorem, we have α(t = (3t + 2 9t 2 + 6t = 2 ξ t, with 9t 2 + 6t < ξ t < (3t + 2. Then, from inequalities 6t + < 2 9t 2 + 6t < 2 ξ t < 6t + 2, it follows that 3N 3N α(t = 2 ξ t, for N I t,, N 3k 2. Therefore, c(n 2 ξ t = 6t + = c(3t 2 + 2t for N I t, and N 3k 2. So E t, = 6t +. Similar arguments lead to E t,2 = 6t + 3 = c(3t 2 + 4t + and E t,3 = 2t + = c(3(t

10 Notice that maximum values given in this proposition are attained by only one value of N, i.e. E t,, E t,2 and E t,3 are only attained by N t, = 3t 2 +2t, N t,2 = 3t 2 +4t+ and N t,3 = 3t 2 +6t+2, respectively. Digraphs attaining the maximum number of consecutive tight extensions E t,, E t,2 and E t,3 are given in the following result. Theorem 6 Set N t, = 3t 2 + 2t, N t,2 = 3t 2 + 4t + and N t,3 = 3t 2 + 6t + 2 for t. Then, the tight digraphs attaining tight E t,, E t,2 and E t,3 -extensions are, respectively, (a Γ t, = Cay(Z Nt,, {t, 2t + }, (b Γ t,2 = Cay(Z Nt,2, {t, 2t + } (c and Γ t,3 = Cay(Z Nt,3, {2t +, t}. Proof: Let us consider N t, = 3t 2 + 2t and the L shape H t, = L(2t +, 2t, ( t, t. Then, the 2t + t area of H t, is N t,, gcd(h t, = and the Smith normal form S t, of M t, = t 2t and the related unimodular matrices are ( ( 2 3t S t, = diag(, N t, = U t, M t, V t, = M t 2t + t,. 0 Taking the generators a t = t and b t = 2t + and the digraph Γ t, = Cay(Z Nt,, {a t, b t }, the diagram H t, is related to Γ t, by Theorem. From equality d Ht, = 3t = lb(n t,, it follows that the digraph Γ t, is tight. By Proposition 3, the digraph Γ t, has c(n t, = E t, = 6t + consecutive tight extensions mγ t, = Cay(Z m Z mnt,, {(, t, (2, 2t+}, for m 6t+. Take now ( N t,2 = 3t 2 + 4t +, the L shape H t,2 = L(2t +, 2t +, t, t and the matrix 2t + t M t,2 = with Smith normal form t 2t + S t,2 = diag(, N t,2 = ( 2 t 2t + M t,2 ( 3t 2 0 Similar arguments as in the previous case lead to the tightness of the related digraph Γ t,2 = Cay(Z Nt,2, {t, 2t + }, with c(n t,2 = 6t + 3 consecutive tight extensions mγ t,2 = Cay(Z m Z mnt,2, {(, t, (2, 2t + }. Finally, for N t,3 = 3t 2 + 6t + 2, taking the MDD H t,3 = L(2t + 2, 2t +, t, t with d Ht,3 = lb(n t,3 = 3t + and the ( Smith normal form decomposition ( S t,3 = diag(, N t,3 with unimodular matrices U t,3 = and V 2 0 2t + t t,3 =, we get the tight digraph Γ t,3 = Cay(Z Nt,3, {2t +, t} that has c(n t,3 = 2t + consecutive tight extensions 3t 4 mγ t,3 = Cay(Z m Z mnt,3, {(2, 2t +, (, t}. A tight upper bound for the order of 2 Cayley digraphs, with respect to the diameter k, is known to be AC 2,k = (k+2 2 (see for instance Dougherty and Faber [4] and Miller and Širáň 3 [0]. It is worth mentioning that Γ t, and Γ t,2 attain this bound for k 2(mod 3 and k 0 (mod 3, respectively. The case k (mod 3 is attained by N t,3 + = 3(t + 2 which has infinite tight extensions (Theorem 4.. 0

11 4 Diameter improvement techniques Two techniques for obtaining 2 Cayley digraphs with good diameter are given in this section. They are based on Procedure-Q and Procedure-E. The first one, known as E-technique (Extension technique, gives new tight 2 Cayley digraphs. The second one, known as QE-technique (Quotient-Extension technique, gives a 2 Cayley digraph which improves, if possible, the diameter of a given double-loop network of non square-free order. Corollary (E-technique Let us assume that G t is a family of tight 2 Cayley digraphs of order N t, for t t 0. If m t = c(n t 2, for t t 0, then mg t is a family of tight 2 Cayley digraphs for t t 0 and 2 m m t. Proof: The proof is a direct consequence of Theorem 5. The first example of applying this technique is included in the proof of Theorem 6. Extensions appearing in that proof are all tight ones and they are summarized in the following result. Theorem 7 Given t, the following families contain tight digraphs over non-cyclic groups (i Cay(Z m Z mnt,, {(, t, (2, 2t + } for 2 m 6t +, (ii Cay(Z m Z mnt,2, {(, t, (2, 2t + } for 2 m 6t + 3, (iii Cay(Z m Z mnt,3, {(2, 2t +, (, t} for 2 m 2t +. The second example is given by Table 2. Digraph Order Diameter Cay(Z 2 Z 24t 2 +2, {(3t, 6t +, (, 2} 2 2 (2t 2 + 2t Cay(Z 2 Z 6t 2 +4t+2, {(, 3t, (0, } 2 2 (3t 2 + 2t + 6t + 2 Cay(Z 2 Z 6t 2 +8t+4, {(, 3t 2, (0, } 2 2 (3t 2 + 4t + 2 6t + 4 Table 2: New optimal 2 Cayley digraphs using Procedure E Theorem 8 Table 2 gives three families of tight digraphs for all t. Proof: Consider the following tight families of double-loop networks of table [5, Table 2] Digraph Order Diameter G,t = Cay(Z 2t 2 +, { 6t +, 2} 2t 2 + 6t G 2,t = Cay(Z 3t 2 +2t+, { 3t, } 3t 2 + 2t + 3t G 3,t = Cay(Z 3t 2 +4t+2, { 3t 2, } 3t 2 + 4t + 2 3t + G,t corresponds to the entry. of table [5, Table 2] for x = 2t. They are related to the minimum distance diagrams H,t = L(4t, 4t, 2t, 2t +, H 2,t = L(2t + 2, 2t +, t, t + 2 and H 3,t = L(2t +, 2t + 2, t, t + 2, respectively. Digraphs of Table 2 are 2-extensions of these double-loop networks. By Theorem 5, these extensions are also tight if and only if the value of the expansion coefficient of G i,t is at least 2, for each i {, 2, 3} and t. Here we give the proof of the first case of order 2 2 (2t 2 +. The other cases can be proved by similar arguments and are not included here. Considering G,t and the related matrix M,t (4t, 4t, 2t, 2t +, given in [5, Table 2], we use here the technique of Smith normal

12 form explained in page 4. The Smith normal form of M,t is S,t = diag(, 2t 2 + and it can be factorized as ( ( 3t 6t S,t = U,t M,t V,t = M 2 + t 6t + 2,t 2 2t 2, + 2t + where U,t and V,t are unimodular integral matrices. Thus, G,t related to H,t is isomorphic to Cay(Z Z 2t 2 +, {(3t, 6t +, (, 2}. Let us compute now the expansion coefficient c(n,t, where N,t = 2t 2 +. From the tightness of G,t, we know D(G,t = lb(n,t = 6t, thus 3N,t = 6t +. Using similar arguments as in the proof of Proposition 3, we have 3N,t 3N,t = 6t where 36t < ξ t < (6t + 2. Then, it follows that < 6t < ξt 6t < 2. Therefore, c(n,t = 2 for all t. So, by Theorem 5, the 2-extension 2G,t = Cay(Z 2t 2 +, { 6t+, 2} is also tight. 6t 6t < 6t+ Optimal double-loop networks in the bibliography are candidates to be improved whenever their orders are not square-free. Their optimality is restricted to cyclic groups. Thus, many results can be improved by considering 2 Cayley digraphs of the same order over non-cyclic groups. The technique used in this case is a combination of quotients and extensions of 2 Cayley digraphs. This task is detailed in the following result. Corollary 2 (QE-technique Let Γ be a k-tight 2 Cayley digraph of order N, non squarefree. Assume N = N m 2, m. If there is some minimum distance diagram H of area N such that d H < lb(n+k+2 m 2, then the m-extension mh gives a 2 Cayley digraph with D( < D(Γ. Proof: Let us assume L is a minimum distance diagram related to Γ. Then, we have m gcd(l and we can consider the m-quotient L/m. By Lemma 2, the diameter of L/m is d L/m = d L+2 m 2 = D(G+2 m 2 = lb(n+k+2 m 2. Thus, the existence of a minimum distance diagram of area N and diameter d H < d L/m is equivalent to the existence of a 2 Cayley digraph (related to the m-expansion mh with diameter D( = d mh < D(Γ (by Lemma 2 again. Finally, we have ξt, d H < d L/m d H < lb(n + 2 m 2. In order to remark how this technique can be used to improve some known results, two examples of different type are included here. The first one is of numerical nature and the second one is not. Numerical example. Table 3 summarizes some numerical improvements as an example of applying the QE-technique. The entries of this table are R the bibliographic cite, G or N original optimal double-loop or its order, T tightness of G, G new proposed 2 Cayley digraph, T tightness of G and m that stands for the m-quotients and m-expansions required by Corollary 2. From the algorithmic point of view, the quotient reduces the time cost of searching the minimum distance diagram H mentioned in Corollary 2. The subsequent expansion is done at constant time cost. 2

13 R G or N T G T m [2, Remarks] Cay(Z 276, {, } 2 Cay(Z 2 Z 088, {(0, 3, (, 28} Cay(Z 2 Z 626, {(, 286, (, 575} Cay(Z 2 Z 966, {(0, 3, (, 36} Cay(Z 2 Z 2048, {(, 545, (0, 043} Cay(Z 5 Z 880, {(, 7, (2, 5} Cay(Z 2 Z 2270, {(, 457, (, 370} Cay(Z 2 Z 2346, {(0, 7, (, 43} Cay(Z 2 Z 2756, {(0, 9, (, 43} Cay(Z 2 Z 658, {(0, 5, (, 34} Cay(Z 4 Z 5276, {(, 9, (3, 42} Cay(Z 2 Z 596, {(, 2233, (0, 4467} 2 2 [3, Lemma 4] Cay(Z 59076, {, 676} 4 Cay(Z 2 Z 79538, {(0, 3, (, 233} 2 Cay(Z 20488, {, 6696} 4 Cay(Z 2 Z 05244, {(, 29, (, 268} 3 2 [3, Algorithm 2] Cay(Z 9 Z 72287, {(3, 37498, (7, 330} Cay(Z 2 Z 47598, {(, 83, (, 664} Cay(Z 2 Z , {(, 86, (, 709} Cay(Z 2 Z , {(0, 823, (, 708} 2 2 Table 3: Some numerical improvements using the QE-technique R G T G T m [9, Table ] Cay(Z 3t2 +2t 5, {a t, b t } Cay(Z 2 Z 6e2 +32e+40, {a t, b t} 0 2 a t =, b t = 3t 2 odd e = 2λ +, λ 0 t = 2e + 5, e a = (, 6λ 2 25λ 24, b = (0, t t Cay(Z 4 Z 2λ 2 +32λ+20, {a t, b t} 0 2 even e = 2λ, λ a t = (, λ, b t = (, λ + 2 [9, Table 2] Cay(Z 3t 2 +4t, {, 6e} Cay(Z 2 Z 6e 2 +4e, {(, 3e +, (0, } 0 2 even t = 2e, e [9, Table 3] Cay(Z 3t 2 +6t+3, {, 3t + 5} Γ t+ of Theorem 4 for t 0 Table 4: Some symbolical improvements using the QE-technique Symbolic example. QE-technique can also be applied as non-numerical task. An example of this feature is showed in Table 4. We check here the first two entries of Table 4, the other entries of the table can be checked by similar arguments. Replacing t = 2e + 5 to N t = 3t 2 + 3t 5, we get N e = 2 2 (3e 2 + 6e We have lb(n t = 3t = 6e + 4 and D(Cay(Z 3t 2 +2t 5, {a t, b t } = 3t. Taking N e = 3e 2 + 6e + 40 for odd e = 2λ +, there is an MDD of area N e, H e = L(2e+6, 2e+4, e+2, e+2, that is tight d He = lb(n e = 3e+6 (notice the identity 3N e = (3e Taking odd e = 2λ + and applying the Smith normal form procedure on H e, we obtain the generator set {(, 6λ 2 25λ 24, (0, } of the group Z Z 3e 2 +6e+20. Thus, after one 2-expansion, we get the 2 Cayley digraph G with diameter d 2He = 2(3e = 6e+4. So, G is a tight digraph. When taking even e = 2λ, there is a tight 2 Cayley digraph of order N e, F = Cay(Z 2 Z 6λ 2 +6λ+0, {(, λ, (, λ + 2}. This digraph is tight and it is generated from the MDD L = L(4λ+6, 4λ+4, 2λ+2, 2λ+2, with gcd(l = 2. This diagram L comes from the diagram H e for e = 2λ. After one 2-expansion, we obtain the second tight improvement of Table 4. 3

14 5 Conclusion and future work Minimum distance diagrams have been proved to be useful to define two digraph generation procedures by quotient and extension. By Theorem 3, quotients generated by Procedure Q of optimal 2 Cayley digraphs on N (non square-free vertices are also optimal diameter digraphs. Extensions generated by Procedure E of optimal digraphs are not always optimal. A characterization of tight Procedure E-like extensions have been found. Tight digraphs with infinite tight extensions have been also characterized and they have been proved to be extensions of the same digraph Γ = Cay(Z 3, {2, } (Theorem 4. Those tight digraphs that are not Procedure E-like extensions of Γ, with order N 3t 2, have been proved to have a finite number of consecutive tight extensions. This number has been called the extension coefficient and its exact expression has been found in Theorem 5. Theorem 6 shows that there are infinite tight digraphs with extensions coefficient as large as wanted. These two procedures give two techniques that allow the generation of 2 Cayley digraphs which can improve the diameter of many proposals in the literature. Several examples have been included. Now some future whishes. A quotient procedure with good metrical properties is needed when N is square-free. In this case, a study of the number of optimal quotients is worth studying. A characterization of non-tight optimal extensions is also needed. References [] F. Aguiló and C. Marijuán, Classification of numerical 3-semigroups by means of L-shapes Semigroup Forum 88, No. 3 ( [2] J.-C. Bermond, F. Comellas and D.F. Hsu, Distributed loop computer networks: A survey, J. Parallel Distrib. Comput. 24 ( [3] Chen Bao-Xing and Xiao Wen-Jun, Optimal Designs of Directed Double-Loop Networks, Lect. Notes in Computer Science 334 ( [4] R. Dougherty and V. Faber, The degree-diameter problem for several varieties of Cayley graphs I: The Abelian case, SIAM J. Discrete Math. 7 (2004, no. 3, [5] P. Esqué, F. Aguiló and M.A. Fiol, Double commutative-step digraphs with minimum diameters, Discrete Math. 4 ( [6] M.A. Fiol, On congruence in Z n and the dimension of a multidimensional circulant, Discrete Math. 4 ( [7] M.A. Fiol, J.L.A. Yebra, I. Alegre and M. Valero, A discrete optimization problem in local networks and data alignment, IEEE Trans. Comput. C-36 ( [8] F.K. Hwang, A complementary survey on double-loop networks, Theor. Computer Science 263 (

15 [9] Li Q., Xu J.M. and Zhang Z.L., The infinite families of optimal double loop networks, Discrete Appl. Math. 46 ( [0] M. Miller and J. Širáň, Moore graphs and beyond: A survey of the degree/diameter problem, Electron. J. Combin. 20(2 (203 #DS4v2. [] P. Sabariego and F. Santos, Triple-loop networks with arbitrarily many minimum distance diagrams, Discrete Math. 309(6 ( [2] Wang X., Zhou J., Guo Y. and Wang Y., On Constructing Infinite Families of Optimal Double Loop Networks, 200 IEEE PACCS ( [3] C.K. Wong and D. Coppersmith, A combinatorial problem related to multimode memory organizations, J. ACM 2 (