New bounds on the signed domination numbers of graphs

Similar documents
GLOBAL MINUS DOMINATION IN GRAPHS. Communicated by Manouchehr Zaker. 1. Introduction

Transactions on Combinatorics ISSN (print): , ISSN (on-line): Vol. 4 No. 2 (2015), pp c 2015 University of Isfahan

Properties of independent Roman domination in graphs

k-tuple Domatic In Graphs

Lower bounds on the minus domination and k-subdomination numbers

EXACT DOUBLE DOMINATION IN GRAPHS

Complementary Signed Dominating Functions in Graphs

Roman domination perfect graphs

On graphs having a unique minimum independent dominating set

ON DOMINATING THE CARTESIAN PRODUCT OF A GRAPH AND K 2. Bert L. Hartnell

Locating-Total Dominating Sets in Twin-Free Graphs: a Conjecture

A note on obtaining k dominating sets from a k-dominating function on a tree

Introduction to Domination Polynomial of a Graph

2-bondage in graphs. Marcin Krzywkowski*

University of Alabama in Huntsville Huntsville, AL 35899, USA

ON INTEGER DOMINATION IN GRAPHS AND VIZING-LIKE PROBLEMS. Boštjan Brešar, 1 Michael A. Henning 2 and Sandi Klavžar 3 1.

Characterization of total restrained domination edge critical unicyclic graphs

THE RAINBOW DOMINATION NUMBER OF A DIGRAPH

Independent Transversal Equitable Domination in Graphs

Dominating a family of graphs with small connected subgraphs

Double domination edge removal critical graphs

The domination game played on unions of graphs

ALL GRAPHS WITH PAIRED-DOMINATION NUMBER TWO LESS THAN THEIR ORDER. Włodzimierz Ulatowski

A note on the total domination number of a tree

Graphs with few total dominating sets

INDEPENDENT TRANSVERSAL DOMINATION IN GRAPHS

SEMI-STRONG SPLIT DOMINATION IN GRAPHS. Communicated by Mehdi Alaeiyan. 1. Introduction

Research Article k-tuple Total Domination in Complementary Prisms

Applied Mathematics Letters

A Note on Roman {2}-domination problem in graphs

Some New Approaches for Computation of Domination Polynomial of Specific Graphs

The Study of Secure-dominating Set of Graph Products

Rainbow domination in the Cartesian product of directed paths

Vertices contained in all or in no minimum k-dominating sets of a tree

Roman dominating influence parameters

Uniform Star-factors of Graphs with Girth Three

Real and Integer Domination in Graphs

Bulletin of the Iranian Mathematical Society

Maximum Alliance-Free and Minimum Alliance-Cover Sets

Double domination in signed graphs

Relations between edge removing and edge subdivision concerning domination number of a graph

STRUCTURE OF THE SET OF ALL MINIMAL TOTAL DOMINATING FUNCTIONS OF SOME CLASSES OF GRAPHS

A Characterization of the Cactus Graphs with Equal Domination and Connected Domination Numbers

GENERALIZED INDEPENDENCE IN GRAPHS HAVING CUT-VERTICES

arxiv: v1 [math.co] 21 Jan 2019

Analogies and discrepancies between the vertex cover number and the weakly connected domination number of a graph

Minimal Spanning Tree From a Minimum Dominating Set

ON GLOBAL DOMINATING-χ-COLORING OF GRAPHS

Some results on incidence coloring, star arboricity and domination number

On k-rainbow independent domination in graphs

AALBORG UNIVERSITY. Total domination in partitioned graphs. Allan Frendrup, Preben Dahl Vestergaard and Anders Yeo

Czechoslovak Mathematical Journal

Rainbow domination in the lexicographic product of graphs

Communicated by Alireza Abdollahi. 1. Introduction. For a set S V, the open neighborhood of S is N(S) = v S

An Explicit Construction of Optimal Dominating and [1, 2] Dominating Sets in Grid

A characterization of diameter-2-critical graphs with no antihole of length four

Dominator Colorings and Safe Clique Partitions

Cographs; chordal graphs and tree decompositions

On Brooks Coloring Theorem

THE RAINBOW DOMINATION NUMBER OF A DIGRAPH

On the mean connected induced subgraph order of cographs

Double Total Domination on Generalized Petersen Graphs 1

On minimum cutsets in independent domination vertex-critical graphs

ON MINUS TOTAL DOMINATION OF DIRECTED GRAPHS

Average distance, radius and remoteness of a graph

Technische Universität Ilmenau Institut für Mathematik

Irredundance saturation number of a graph

Dominating Broadcasts in Graphs. Sarada Rachelle Anne Herke

On Pairs of Disjoint Dominating Sets in a Graph

arxiv: v1 [math.co] 20 Oct 2018

Zero-Sum Flows in Regular Graphs

Relating 2-rainbow domination to weak Roman domination

Fractional and circular 1-defective colorings of outerplanar graphs

3-Chromatic Cubic Graphs with Complementary Connected Domination Number Three

Fundamental Dominations in Graphs

Generalized connected domination in graphs

Czechoslovak Mathematical Journal

arxiv: v1 [math.co] 6 Jan 2017

A Note on Disjoint Dominating Sets in Graphs

Even Cycles in Hypergraphs.

Domination and Total Domination Contraction Numbers of Graphs

On Dominator Colorings in Graphs

On Domination Critical Graphs with Cutvertices having Connected Domination Number 3

On the connectivity of the direct product of graphs

Chih-Hung Yen and Hung-Lin Fu 1. INTRODUCTION

Anoteonsignedk-matching in graphs

NORDHAUS-GADDUM RESULTS FOR WEAKLY CONVEX DOMINATION NUMBER OF A GRAPH

Minimal dominating sets in maximum domatic partitions

arxiv: v1 [math.co] 28 Oct 2016

Minimizing the Laplacian eigenvalues for trees with given domination number

ON GENERALIZED ZERO-DIVISOR GRAPH ASSOCIATED WITH A COMMUTATIVE RING

Independence in Function Graphs

k-tuple Total Domination in Supergeneralized Petersen Graphs

On the k-independence number in graphs

Maximum graphs with a unique minimum dominatingset

arxiv: v1 [math.co] 28 Oct 2015

Eternal domination on 3 n grid graphs

Secure Connected Domination in a Graph

SOME VERTEX-DEGREE-BASED TOPOLOGICAL INDICES UNDER EDGE CORONA PRODUCT

Restrained Independent 2-Domination in the Join and Corona of Graphs

Transcription:

AUSTRALASIAN JOURNAL OF COMBINATORICS Volume 61(3) (015), Pages 73 80 New bounds on the signed domination numbers of graphs S.M. Hosseini Moghaddam Department of Mathematics Qom Branch, Islamic Azad University Qom Iran sm.hosseini1980@yahoo.com Abdollah Khodkar Department of Mathematics University of West Georgia Carrollton, GA 30118 U.S.A. akhodkar@westga.edu Babak Samadi Department of Mathematics Arak University Arak Iran b-samadi@araku.ac.ir Abstract A signed dominating function of a graph G with vertex set V is a function f : V { 1, 1} such that for every vertex v in V the sum of the values of f at v and at every vertex u adjacent to v is at least 1. The weight of f is the sum of the values of f at every vertex of V. The signed domination number of G is the minimum weight of a signed dominating function of G. In this paper, we study the signed domination numbers of graphs and present new sharp lower and upper bounds for this parameter. As an example, we prove that the signed domination number of a tree of order n with l leaves and s support vertices is at least (n +4+(l s))/3. corresponding author

S.M. HOSSEINI MOGHADDAM ET AL. / AUSTRALAS. J. COMBIN. 61 (3) (015), 73 80 74 1 Introduction Throughout this paper, let G be a finite connected graph with vertex set V = V (G), edge set E = E(G), minimum degree = (G) andmaximumdegree=(g). We use [9] for terminology and notation which are not defined here. For any vertex v V, N(v) ={u G uv E(G)} denotes the open neighborhood of v in G, and N[v] =N(v) {v} denotes its closed neighborhood. A set S V is a dominating set in G if each vertex in V \ S is adjacent to at least one vertex in S. The domination number γ(g) is the minimum cardinality of a dominating set in G. A subset B V (G) isapacking in G if for every distinct vertices u, v B, N[u] N[v] =. The packing number ρ(g) is the maximum cardinality of a packing in G. In [5], Harary and Haynes introduced the concept of tuple domination as a generalization of domination in graphs. Let 1 k (G) +1. AsetD V is a k-tuple dominating set in G if N[v] D k, for all v V (G). The k-tuple domination number, denoted by γ k (G), is the minimum cardinality of a k-tuple dominating set. In fact, the authors showed that every graph G with k 1 hasak-tuple dominating set and hence a k-tuple domination number. It is easy to see that γ 1 (G) =γ(g). This concept has been studied by several authors including [4, 8]. Gallant et al. [4] introduced the concept of limited packing in graphs and exhibited some real-world applications of it to network security, market saturation and codes. A set of vertices B V is called a k-limited packing set in G if N[v] B k for all v V,wherek 1. The k-limited packing number, L k (G), is the largest number of vertices in a k-limited packing set. When k =1wehaveL 1 (G) =ρ(g). Let S V. For a real-valued function f : V R we define f(s) = v S f(v). Also, f(v )istheweight of f. Asigned dominating function, abbreviated SDF, of G is defined in [] as a function f : V { 1, 1} such that f(n[v]) 1, for every v V. The signed domination number, abbreviated SDN, of G is γ s (G) = min{f(v ) f is a SDF of G}. This concept was defined in [] and has been studied by several authors including [1, 3, 6, 7]. In this paper, we continue the study of the concept of the signed domination numbers of graphs. The authors noted that most of the existing bounds on γ s (G) are lower bounds except those that are related to regular graphs; for more information the reader can consult [3]. In Section, we prove that γ s (G) n ρ(g)+(g),foragraphgof order n with (G). In Section 3, we find some new sharp lower bounds on γ s (G) for a general graph G. The lower bound given in Part (i) of Theorem 3. can also be found in [6] with a much longer proof n +4+(l s) than the one presented here. We also prove that γ s (T ),fora 3 tree of order n with l leaves and s support vertices. Furthermore we show that this bound is sharp.

S.M. HOSSEINI MOGHADDAM ET AL. / AUSTRALAS. J. COMBIN. 61 (3) (015), 73 80 75 An upper bound We bound γ s (G) from above in terms of order, minimum degree and packing number of G using the concept of limited packing. Theorem.1. Let G be a graph of order n with. Then ρ(g)+ γ s (G) n and this bound is sharp. Proof. Let B be a -limited packing in G. Define f : V { 1, 1} by { 1 if v B f(v) = 1 if v V \ B. Since B is a -limited packing in G, N[v] (V \B) deg(v) +1. Therefore, for every vertex v in V, f(n[v]) = N[v] (V \ B) N[v] B deg(v) +1 1. Therefore f is a SDF of G with weight n B. So, by the definition of -limited packing number, γ s (G) n L (G). (1) We now claim that B V. If B = V and u V such that deg(u) =,then +1= N[u] B, a contradiction. Now let u V \ B. It is easy to check that N[v] (B {u}) +1, for all v V. Therefore B {u} is a ( + 1)-limited packing set in G. Hence, L +1 (G) B {u} = L (G) + 1. Repeating these inequalities, we obtain L (G) L 1 (G) +1... L 1(G) + 1, and since L1 (G) =ρ(g), we conclude L (G) ρ(g)+ 1 () The upper bound now follows by Inequalities (1) and (). Moreover, The bound is sharp for the complete graph of order n 3. 3 Lower bounds For convenience, for the rest of the paper we make use of the following notations. Let G be a graph and f : V (G) { 1, 1} be a SDF of G. Define V + = {v V f(v) =1} and V = {v V f(v) = 1}. Let G + = G[V + ]andg = G[V ]be the subgraphs of G induced by V + and V, respectively. We also let E + = E(G + ) and E = E(G ). We consider [V +,V ] as the set of edges having one end point

S.M. HOSSEINI MOGHADDAM ET AL. / AUSTRALAS. J. COMBIN. 61 (3) (015), 73 80 76 in V + and the other in V, V o = {v V deg(v) isodd} and V e = {v V deg(v) iseven}. Also V o + = V o V +, Vo = V o V, V e + = V e V + and Ve = V e V. Finally, deg G +(v) = N(v) V + and deg G (v) = N(v) V. For a graph G, let O = {v V deg(v) =0}, L = {v V deg(v) =1}, S = {v V N(v) L }, C(G) =V \ (O L S) and =min{deg(v) v C(G)}. Obviously, if C(G) =, then γ s (G) =n. Therefore, in the following discussions we assume, without loss of generality, that C(G). Thus, max{,}. Lemma 3.1. The following statements hold. ( ) (i) +1 V [V +,V ] ( V + \ L ), (ii) V o + V E + E. Proof. (i) Let v V. Since f(n[v]) 1andv C(G), we have deg G +(v) deg(v) +1 + 1. Therefore, [V +,V ] ( +1) V. On the other hand, all leaves and support vertices belong to V +. Now let v V + \ L. Then deg(v) deg G (v). Therefore, [V +,V ] ( V + \ L ). (ii) We first derive a lower bound for [V +,V ]. Letv V.Sincef(N[v]) 1, we observe that deg G +(v) deg G (v) + and deg G +(v) deg G (v)+3 when deg(v) is odd. This leads to [V +,V ] = v Vo deg G +(v)+ v Ve deg G +(v) v Vo (deg G (v)+3)+ v Ve (deg G (v)+) = 3 Vo + Ve + v V deg G (v) = V + E + Vo. Now let v V +. Since f(n[v]) 1, we observe that deg G +(v) deg G (v) and deg G +(v) deg G (v)+1whendeg(v) is odd. It follows that (3) [V +,V ] = v V o + deg G (v)+ v V e + deg G (v) v V o + (deg G +(v) 1) + v V e + (deg G +(v)) = v V deg + G +(v) V o + = E + V o +. (4) Together inequalities (3) and (4) imply the desired inequality. We are now in a position to present the following lower bounds. Theorem 3.. Let G be a graph of order n, sizem, maximum degree and l leaves. Let V o = {v V deg(v) is odd}. Then ( ) +1 n + l (i) γ s (G), + +1

S.M. HOSSEINI MOGHADDAM ET AL. / AUSTRALAS. J. COMBIN. 61 (3) (015), 73 80 77 (ii) γ s (G) ( ) 3 3 +3 n +( l + V o ) 3. 3 + +3 Furthermore these bounds are sharp. Proof. (i) This is a straightforward result by Part (i) of Lemma 3.1, V + = n + γ s(g) and V = n γ s(g). (ii) We have E + = v V deg + G +(v) = v V deg(v) + ( v V deg + ) G (v) V + [V +,V ] V + +1 V. (5) and E = v V deg G (v) = v V deg(v) v V deg G +(v) V [V +,V ] V ( V + l). (6) Part (ii) of Lemma 3.1 and Inequalities (5) and (6) imply the desired lower bound. The bounds are sharp for the complete graph K n. The lower bound given in Part (i) of Theorem 3. was first found by Haas and Wexler [6] for a graph G with (G) using a longer proof. The lower bound given in Part (i) of Theorem 3. is an improvement of the lower bound found in [6] when (G) =1. As an application of the concepts of limited packing and tuple domination we give a sharp lower bound on γ s (G) in terms of the order of G, (G), (G) and domination number γ(g). Theorem 3.3. For any graph G of order n, minimum degree and maximum degree, { } + +γ(g) γ s (G) n +max, and this bound is sharp. Proof. We first prove the following claims. Claim 1. γ s (G) n + +. Let f : V { 1, 1} be a SDF of G with weight f(v (G)) = γ s (G). Since f(n[v]) 1, it follows that N[v] V for every vertex v V (G). Therefore V is a -limited packing set in G. Thus (n γ s (G))/ = V L (G). (7)

S.M. HOSSEINI MOGHADDAM ET AL. / AUSTRALAS. J. COMBIN. 61 (3) (015), 73 80 78 On the other hand, similar to the proof of Theorem.1, we have L (G) L +1 (G) 1... L +1(G) 1=n 1. Now Inequality (7) implies ( +1) n γs (G), as desired. +γ(g) Claim. γ s (G) n +. Since f(n[v]) 1, it follows that N[v] V + Therefore V + is a ( + 1)-tuple dominating set in G. Thus +1, for every vertex v V (G). (n + γ s (G))/ = V + γ ( (G). (8) +1) Now let D be a ( + 1)-tuple dominating set in G. Then N[v] D +1, for every vertex v V (G). Let u D. It is easy to see that N[v] (D \{u}), for all v V (G). Hence, D \{u} is a -tuple dominating set in G. Hence, γ ( +1) (G) γ (G) + 1. By repeating this process, we obtain γ ( +1) (G) γ (G)+1... γ 1(G)+ = γ(g)+. By Inequality (8), (n + γ s (G))/ γ(g)+. This completes the proof of Claim. The result now follows by Claim 1 and Claim. For sharpness consider the complete graph K n. We conclude this section by establishing a lower bound on the signed domination number of a tree. Dunbar et al. [] proved that for every tree of order n, γ s (T ) (n +4)/3, and showed that this bound is sharp. We now present a lower bound on γ s (T ), which is tighter than (n +4)/3. Theorem 3.4. Let T be a tree of order n with l leaves and s support vertices. Then ( ) 1 n +(l s +) γ s (T ) +1 and this bound is sharp. Proof. Let f : V { 1, 1} be a SDF of T with weight f(v (T )) = γ s (T ). If V =, then γ s (T )=n and the result follows. Suppose that V, andu V. Root the tree T at vertex u. For each vertex v V,letP v denote the set of vertices w satisfying (i) w belongs to V +,(ii) w is a descendent of v, and(iii) each vertex of the v-w path of T, except v, isinv +. We claim that the sets P v, v V, partition

S.M. HOSSEINI MOGHADDAM ET AL. / AUSTRALAS. J. COMBIN. 61 (3) (015), 73 80 79 the set V +. 1. Let v V. Since f[v] 1andT is a rooted tree at u, it follows that v has a child in V +. Hence, P v by (i).. Let v 1,v V and v 1 v.thenp v1 P v = by (ii). 3. Let w V +. Assume v V is the closest vertex to w on the path u-w. Then w P v by (iii). This proves our claim. Let S be the set of support vertices. We define W 0 = {v V \{u} P v S = } and W 1 = {v V \{u} P v S }. Since f(n[u]) 1, there are at least + 1 children of u that belong to V +. Moreover, each child of u has at least one child in V +, itself. Therefore ( ) P u +1 S P u + L P u, (9) where L is the set of leaves in T. Clearly, V \{u} = W 0 W 1. Every vertex v in V \{u} has at least children in V + and each child has at least one child in V +, itself. Hence, P v. (10) Now let v W 1. Note that each support vertex and all leaves adjacent to it belong to only one P v, necessarily. Also in this process we have counted just one leaf for every support vertex. This implies that P v W 1 S v W 1 P v + L v W 1 P v. (11) v W 1 Together inequalities (9), (10) and (11) lead to V + = P u + v W 0 P v + ( ) v W 1 P v +1 + W 0 + Using V \{u} = W 0 + W 1 we deduce that ( ) V + +1 + W 1 + l s. ( V 1) + (l s). Now by the facts that V + = n + γ s(g) lower bound. and V = n γ s(g) we obtain the desired

S.M. HOSSEINI MOGHADDAM ET AL. / AUSTRALAS. J. COMBIN. 61 (3) (015), 73 80 80 Since ( ) 1 n +(l s +) n +4+(l s), +1 3 we conclude the following lower bound as an immediate result. Corollary 3.5. Let T be a tree of order n, withl leaves and s support vertices. n +4+(l s) Then γ s (T ). 3 References [1] W. Chen and E. Song, Lower bound on several versions of signed domination number, Discrete Math. 308 (008), 1897 1846. [] J. E. Dunbar, S. T. Hedetniemi, M. A. Henning and P. J. Slater, Signed domination in graphs, Graph Theory, Combinatorics and Applications, (John Wiley & Sons, 1995) 311 3. [3] O. Favaran, Signed domination in regular graphs, Discrete Math. 158 (1996), 87 93. [4] R. Gallant, G. Gunther, B. L. Hartnell and D. F. Rall, Limited packing in graphs, Discrete Appl. Math. 158 (010), 1357 1364. [5] F. Harary and T. W. Haynes, Double domination in graphs, Ars Combin. 55 (000), 01 13. [6] R. Haas and T. B. Wexler, Bounds on the signed domination number of a graph, Electron. Notes Discrete Math. 11 (00), 74-750. [7] M. A. Henning and P. J. Slater, Inequalities relating domination parameters in cubic graphs, Discrete Math. 158 (1996), 87 98. [8] D. A. Mojdeh, B. Samadi and S. M. Hosseini Moghaddam, Limited packing vs tuple domination in graphs, Ars Combin. (to appear). [9] D. B. West, Introduction to Graph Theory (Second Edition), Prentice Hall, USA, 001. (Received 18 July 014)