Closure of an Undirected Graph

The name of the pictureThe name of the pictureThe name of the pictureClash Royale CLAN TAG#URR8PPP











up vote
2
down vote

favorite












$textbfDefinition:$ Let $G$ be a graph with $n$ vertices. The $cl(G)$ (i.e. the closure of $G$) is the graph obtained by adding edges between non-adjacent vertices whose degree sum is at least $n$, until this can no longer be done.
enter image description here




$textbfQuestion:$ I have $textbftwo$ separate graphs above (i.e. one on the left and one on the right). What is the closure of both of these graphs looking at them again separately? I am having a hard time understanding this definition and a description of where the edges would go would be very helpful between vertices.








share|cite|improve this question




















  • Is the closure of a graph saying that we add edges between every vertex so they touch? I am not concerned about using this definition in particular, just a definition that someone knows works for undirected graphs. I think for the graph on the left to add the following edges: $lbrace v_1, v_2rbrace$, $lbrace v_1, v_4rbrace$ just so all the vertices have endpoints between them, but I am not sure.
    – W. G.
    Aug 27 at 18:13







  • 1




    I get the impression that this definition is intended for simple graphs. because loops and multiple edges complicate the degree. That said, the definition should extend to non-simple graphs.
    – Kevin Long
    Aug 27 at 18:16











  • I got that impression as a possibility too. The reason I want this definition is to look at Ore's Theorem which does use simple graphs which makes sense as to what you are saying as the definition might only apply to simple graphs. It might be more generalizable too.
    – W. G.
    Aug 27 at 18:30














up vote
2
down vote

favorite












$textbfDefinition:$ Let $G$ be a graph with $n$ vertices. The $cl(G)$ (i.e. the closure of $G$) is the graph obtained by adding edges between non-adjacent vertices whose degree sum is at least $n$, until this can no longer be done.
enter image description here




$textbfQuestion:$ I have $textbftwo$ separate graphs above (i.e. one on the left and one on the right). What is the closure of both of these graphs looking at them again separately? I am having a hard time understanding this definition and a description of where the edges would go would be very helpful between vertices.








share|cite|improve this question




















  • Is the closure of a graph saying that we add edges between every vertex so they touch? I am not concerned about using this definition in particular, just a definition that someone knows works for undirected graphs. I think for the graph on the left to add the following edges: $lbrace v_1, v_2rbrace$, $lbrace v_1, v_4rbrace$ just so all the vertices have endpoints between them, but I am not sure.
    – W. G.
    Aug 27 at 18:13







  • 1




    I get the impression that this definition is intended for simple graphs. because loops and multiple edges complicate the degree. That said, the definition should extend to non-simple graphs.
    – Kevin Long
    Aug 27 at 18:16











  • I got that impression as a possibility too. The reason I want this definition is to look at Ore's Theorem which does use simple graphs which makes sense as to what you are saying as the definition might only apply to simple graphs. It might be more generalizable too.
    – W. G.
    Aug 27 at 18:30












up vote
2
down vote

favorite









up vote
2
down vote

favorite











$textbfDefinition:$ Let $G$ be a graph with $n$ vertices. The $cl(G)$ (i.e. the closure of $G$) is the graph obtained by adding edges between non-adjacent vertices whose degree sum is at least $n$, until this can no longer be done.
enter image description here




$textbfQuestion:$ I have $textbftwo$ separate graphs above (i.e. one on the left and one on the right). What is the closure of both of these graphs looking at them again separately? I am having a hard time understanding this definition and a description of where the edges would go would be very helpful between vertices.








share|cite|improve this question












$textbfDefinition:$ Let $G$ be a graph with $n$ vertices. The $cl(G)$ (i.e. the closure of $G$) is the graph obtained by adding edges between non-adjacent vertices whose degree sum is at least $n$, until this can no longer be done.
enter image description here




$textbfQuestion:$ I have $textbftwo$ separate graphs above (i.e. one on the left and one on the right). What is the closure of both of these graphs looking at them again separately? I am having a hard time understanding this definition and a description of where the edges would go would be very helpful between vertices.










share|cite|improve this question











share|cite|improve this question




share|cite|improve this question










asked Aug 27 at 18:00









W. G.

5961415




5961415











  • Is the closure of a graph saying that we add edges between every vertex so they touch? I am not concerned about using this definition in particular, just a definition that someone knows works for undirected graphs. I think for the graph on the left to add the following edges: $lbrace v_1, v_2rbrace$, $lbrace v_1, v_4rbrace$ just so all the vertices have endpoints between them, but I am not sure.
    – W. G.
    Aug 27 at 18:13







  • 1




    I get the impression that this definition is intended for simple graphs. because loops and multiple edges complicate the degree. That said, the definition should extend to non-simple graphs.
    – Kevin Long
    Aug 27 at 18:16











  • I got that impression as a possibility too. The reason I want this definition is to look at Ore's Theorem which does use simple graphs which makes sense as to what you are saying as the definition might only apply to simple graphs. It might be more generalizable too.
    – W. G.
    Aug 27 at 18:30
















  • Is the closure of a graph saying that we add edges between every vertex so they touch? I am not concerned about using this definition in particular, just a definition that someone knows works for undirected graphs. I think for the graph on the left to add the following edges: $lbrace v_1, v_2rbrace$, $lbrace v_1, v_4rbrace$ just so all the vertices have endpoints between them, but I am not sure.
    – W. G.
    Aug 27 at 18:13







  • 1




    I get the impression that this definition is intended for simple graphs. because loops and multiple edges complicate the degree. That said, the definition should extend to non-simple graphs.
    – Kevin Long
    Aug 27 at 18:16











  • I got that impression as a possibility too. The reason I want this definition is to look at Ore's Theorem which does use simple graphs which makes sense as to what you are saying as the definition might only apply to simple graphs. It might be more generalizable too.
    – W. G.
    Aug 27 at 18:30















Is the closure of a graph saying that we add edges between every vertex so they touch? I am not concerned about using this definition in particular, just a definition that someone knows works for undirected graphs. I think for the graph on the left to add the following edges: $lbrace v_1, v_2rbrace$, $lbrace v_1, v_4rbrace$ just so all the vertices have endpoints between them, but I am not sure.
– W. G.
Aug 27 at 18:13





Is the closure of a graph saying that we add edges between every vertex so they touch? I am not concerned about using this definition in particular, just a definition that someone knows works for undirected graphs. I think for the graph on the left to add the following edges: $lbrace v_1, v_2rbrace$, $lbrace v_1, v_4rbrace$ just so all the vertices have endpoints between them, but I am not sure.
– W. G.
Aug 27 at 18:13





1




1




I get the impression that this definition is intended for simple graphs. because loops and multiple edges complicate the degree. That said, the definition should extend to non-simple graphs.
– Kevin Long
Aug 27 at 18:16





I get the impression that this definition is intended for simple graphs. because loops and multiple edges complicate the degree. That said, the definition should extend to non-simple graphs.
– Kevin Long
Aug 27 at 18:16













I got that impression as a possibility too. The reason I want this definition is to look at Ore's Theorem which does use simple graphs which makes sense as to what you are saying as the definition might only apply to simple graphs. It might be more generalizable too.
– W. G.
Aug 27 at 18:30




I got that impression as a possibility too. The reason I want this definition is to look at Ore's Theorem which does use simple graphs which makes sense as to what you are saying as the definition might only apply to simple graphs. It might be more generalizable too.
– W. G.
Aug 27 at 18:30










2 Answers
2






active

oldest

votes

















up vote
4
down vote



accepted










In the first graph, no more edges can be added, because the pairs $(v_1,v_2)$ and $(v_1,v_4)$ have degree sum $3$, and every other pair is already adjacent. So this graph is its own closure.



For the second graph, we can add edges $v_1v_3$ and $v_2v_4$ immediately, since for both pairs the degree sum is $4$. Now the degree sum of $v_1,v_4$ is $5$, so we can add this edge too (note that we could not add this edge initially). There are no more non-adjacent pairs, so we've reached the closure.



The point of this definition is that a simple graph is Hamiltonian if and only if its closure is Hamiltonian - this is the Bondy-Chvátal theorem.






share|cite|improve this answer



























    up vote
    0
    down vote













    If I don't misunderstand the definition, the following graphs must be the closure of your graphs:



    enter image description here



    The first graph stays as it was because $d(v_1)+d(v_2) = 3 < 4$ and $d(v_1) + d(v_4) = 3 < 4$ and rest of the vertex pairs are already adjacent.



    In the second graph, my answer stays the same but with a little difference: Order of adding edges matters here because if we try to add $e_7$ first, then since $d(v_1) + d(v_4) = 3 < 4$, we can't do that. Therefore, we first add $e_5$ and $e_6$, then $e_7$ to get the graph above. After adding these three edges, since each vertex becomes adjacent to other vertices, we can no longer add an edge.






    share|cite|improve this answer


















    • 3




      I think that the definition means the degree before adding the new edges, not after. Hence, the graph on the left should already be closed.
      – Kevin Long
      Aug 27 at 18:18










    • But definition says at least so I think we can still add an edge unless we have all the vertices adjacent. But according to your understanding, my calculation on degree sums may change.
      – ArsenBerk
      Aug 27 at 18:20











    • I really like the picture :)
      – W. G.
      Aug 27 at 18:47






    • 3




      I found an example from some lecture notes on the front page of google, and if you look at figure 12.1 on page 4, it only adds an edge between the vertices which already have degree sum at least $n$. At the last stage, for example, vertices $3$ and $7$ have degrees $4$ and $1$ respectively, and adding an edge between them would make their degree sum $7$, but that edge is never added.
      – Kevin Long
      Aug 27 at 20:04











    • How do you justify adding either of the red edges to the left? No matter which one you start with, the sum of the degrees of $v_1$ and $v_4$ (or $v_1$ and $v_2$) is only $3$, which is not $ge n$, because $n=4$.
      – Henning Makholm
      Aug 27 at 21:45











    Your Answer




    StackExchange.ifUsing("editor", function ()
    return StackExchange.using("mathjaxEditing", function ()
    StackExchange.MarkdownEditor.creationCallbacks.add(function (editor, postfix)
    StackExchange.mathjaxEditing.prepareWmdForMathJax(editor, postfix, [["$", "$"], ["\\(","\\)"]]);
    );
    );
    , "mathjax-editing");

    StackExchange.ready(function()
    var channelOptions =
    tags: "".split(" "),
    id: "69"
    ;
    initTagRenderer("".split(" "), "".split(" "), channelOptions);

    StackExchange.using("externalEditor", function()
    // Have to fire editor after snippets, if snippets enabled
    if (StackExchange.settings.snippets.snippetsEnabled)
    StackExchange.using("snippets", function()
    createEditor();
    );

    else
    createEditor();

    );

    function createEditor()
    StackExchange.prepareEditor(
    heartbeatType: 'answer',
    convertImagesToLinks: true,
    noModals: false,
    showLowRepImageUploadWarning: true,
    reputationToPostImages: 10,
    bindNavPrevention: true,
    postfix: "",
    noCode: true, onDemand: true,
    discardSelector: ".discard-answer"
    ,immediatelyShowMarkdownHelp:true
    );



    );













     

    draft saved


    draft discarded


















    StackExchange.ready(
    function ()
    StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fmath.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f2896482%2fclosure-of-an-undirected-graph%23new-answer', 'question_page');

    );

    Post as a guest






























    2 Answers
    2






    active

    oldest

    votes








    2 Answers
    2






    active

    oldest

    votes









    active

    oldest

    votes






    active

    oldest

    votes








    up vote
    4
    down vote



    accepted










    In the first graph, no more edges can be added, because the pairs $(v_1,v_2)$ and $(v_1,v_4)$ have degree sum $3$, and every other pair is already adjacent. So this graph is its own closure.



    For the second graph, we can add edges $v_1v_3$ and $v_2v_4$ immediately, since for both pairs the degree sum is $4$. Now the degree sum of $v_1,v_4$ is $5$, so we can add this edge too (note that we could not add this edge initially). There are no more non-adjacent pairs, so we've reached the closure.



    The point of this definition is that a simple graph is Hamiltonian if and only if its closure is Hamiltonian - this is the Bondy-Chvátal theorem.






    share|cite|improve this answer
























      up vote
      4
      down vote



      accepted










      In the first graph, no more edges can be added, because the pairs $(v_1,v_2)$ and $(v_1,v_4)$ have degree sum $3$, and every other pair is already adjacent. So this graph is its own closure.



      For the second graph, we can add edges $v_1v_3$ and $v_2v_4$ immediately, since for both pairs the degree sum is $4$. Now the degree sum of $v_1,v_4$ is $5$, so we can add this edge too (note that we could not add this edge initially). There are no more non-adjacent pairs, so we've reached the closure.



      The point of this definition is that a simple graph is Hamiltonian if and only if its closure is Hamiltonian - this is the Bondy-Chvátal theorem.






      share|cite|improve this answer






















        up vote
        4
        down vote



        accepted







        up vote
        4
        down vote



        accepted






        In the first graph, no more edges can be added, because the pairs $(v_1,v_2)$ and $(v_1,v_4)$ have degree sum $3$, and every other pair is already adjacent. So this graph is its own closure.



        For the second graph, we can add edges $v_1v_3$ and $v_2v_4$ immediately, since for both pairs the degree sum is $4$. Now the degree sum of $v_1,v_4$ is $5$, so we can add this edge too (note that we could not add this edge initially). There are no more non-adjacent pairs, so we've reached the closure.



        The point of this definition is that a simple graph is Hamiltonian if and only if its closure is Hamiltonian - this is the Bondy-Chvátal theorem.






        share|cite|improve this answer












        In the first graph, no more edges can be added, because the pairs $(v_1,v_2)$ and $(v_1,v_4)$ have degree sum $3$, and every other pair is already adjacent. So this graph is its own closure.



        For the second graph, we can add edges $v_1v_3$ and $v_2v_4$ immediately, since for both pairs the degree sum is $4$. Now the degree sum of $v_1,v_4$ is $5$, so we can add this edge too (note that we could not add this edge initially). There are no more non-adjacent pairs, so we've reached the closure.



        The point of this definition is that a simple graph is Hamiltonian if and only if its closure is Hamiltonian - this is the Bondy-Chvátal theorem.







        share|cite|improve this answer












        share|cite|improve this answer



        share|cite|improve this answer










        answered Aug 27 at 21:03









        Especially Lime

        19.4k22252




        19.4k22252




















            up vote
            0
            down vote













            If I don't misunderstand the definition, the following graphs must be the closure of your graphs:



            enter image description here



            The first graph stays as it was because $d(v_1)+d(v_2) = 3 < 4$ and $d(v_1) + d(v_4) = 3 < 4$ and rest of the vertex pairs are already adjacent.



            In the second graph, my answer stays the same but with a little difference: Order of adding edges matters here because if we try to add $e_7$ first, then since $d(v_1) + d(v_4) = 3 < 4$, we can't do that. Therefore, we first add $e_5$ and $e_6$, then $e_7$ to get the graph above. After adding these three edges, since each vertex becomes adjacent to other vertices, we can no longer add an edge.






            share|cite|improve this answer


















            • 3




              I think that the definition means the degree before adding the new edges, not after. Hence, the graph on the left should already be closed.
              – Kevin Long
              Aug 27 at 18:18










            • But definition says at least so I think we can still add an edge unless we have all the vertices adjacent. But according to your understanding, my calculation on degree sums may change.
              – ArsenBerk
              Aug 27 at 18:20











            • I really like the picture :)
              – W. G.
              Aug 27 at 18:47






            • 3




              I found an example from some lecture notes on the front page of google, and if you look at figure 12.1 on page 4, it only adds an edge between the vertices which already have degree sum at least $n$. At the last stage, for example, vertices $3$ and $7$ have degrees $4$ and $1$ respectively, and adding an edge between them would make their degree sum $7$, but that edge is never added.
              – Kevin Long
              Aug 27 at 20:04











            • How do you justify adding either of the red edges to the left? No matter which one you start with, the sum of the degrees of $v_1$ and $v_4$ (or $v_1$ and $v_2$) is only $3$, which is not $ge n$, because $n=4$.
              – Henning Makholm
              Aug 27 at 21:45















            up vote
            0
            down vote













            If I don't misunderstand the definition, the following graphs must be the closure of your graphs:



            enter image description here



            The first graph stays as it was because $d(v_1)+d(v_2) = 3 < 4$ and $d(v_1) + d(v_4) = 3 < 4$ and rest of the vertex pairs are already adjacent.



            In the second graph, my answer stays the same but with a little difference: Order of adding edges matters here because if we try to add $e_7$ first, then since $d(v_1) + d(v_4) = 3 < 4$, we can't do that. Therefore, we first add $e_5$ and $e_6$, then $e_7$ to get the graph above. After adding these three edges, since each vertex becomes adjacent to other vertices, we can no longer add an edge.






            share|cite|improve this answer


















            • 3




              I think that the definition means the degree before adding the new edges, not after. Hence, the graph on the left should already be closed.
              – Kevin Long
              Aug 27 at 18:18










            • But definition says at least so I think we can still add an edge unless we have all the vertices adjacent. But according to your understanding, my calculation on degree sums may change.
              – ArsenBerk
              Aug 27 at 18:20











            • I really like the picture :)
              – W. G.
              Aug 27 at 18:47






            • 3




              I found an example from some lecture notes on the front page of google, and if you look at figure 12.1 on page 4, it only adds an edge between the vertices which already have degree sum at least $n$. At the last stage, for example, vertices $3$ and $7$ have degrees $4$ and $1$ respectively, and adding an edge between them would make their degree sum $7$, but that edge is never added.
              – Kevin Long
              Aug 27 at 20:04











            • How do you justify adding either of the red edges to the left? No matter which one you start with, the sum of the degrees of $v_1$ and $v_4$ (or $v_1$ and $v_2$) is only $3$, which is not $ge n$, because $n=4$.
              – Henning Makholm
              Aug 27 at 21:45













            up vote
            0
            down vote










            up vote
            0
            down vote









            If I don't misunderstand the definition, the following graphs must be the closure of your graphs:



            enter image description here



            The first graph stays as it was because $d(v_1)+d(v_2) = 3 < 4$ and $d(v_1) + d(v_4) = 3 < 4$ and rest of the vertex pairs are already adjacent.



            In the second graph, my answer stays the same but with a little difference: Order of adding edges matters here because if we try to add $e_7$ first, then since $d(v_1) + d(v_4) = 3 < 4$, we can't do that. Therefore, we first add $e_5$ and $e_6$, then $e_7$ to get the graph above. After adding these three edges, since each vertex becomes adjacent to other vertices, we can no longer add an edge.






            share|cite|improve this answer














            If I don't misunderstand the definition, the following graphs must be the closure of your graphs:



            enter image description here



            The first graph stays as it was because $d(v_1)+d(v_2) = 3 < 4$ and $d(v_1) + d(v_4) = 3 < 4$ and rest of the vertex pairs are already adjacent.



            In the second graph, my answer stays the same but with a little difference: Order of adding edges matters here because if we try to add $e_7$ first, then since $d(v_1) + d(v_4) = 3 < 4$, we can't do that. Therefore, we first add $e_5$ and $e_6$, then $e_7$ to get the graph above. After adding these three edges, since each vertex becomes adjacent to other vertices, we can no longer add an edge.







            share|cite|improve this answer














            share|cite|improve this answer



            share|cite|improve this answer








            edited Aug 28 at 7:28

























            answered Aug 27 at 18:16









            ArsenBerk

            6,7361933




            6,7361933







            • 3




              I think that the definition means the degree before adding the new edges, not after. Hence, the graph on the left should already be closed.
              – Kevin Long
              Aug 27 at 18:18










            • But definition says at least so I think we can still add an edge unless we have all the vertices adjacent. But according to your understanding, my calculation on degree sums may change.
              – ArsenBerk
              Aug 27 at 18:20











            • I really like the picture :)
              – W. G.
              Aug 27 at 18:47






            • 3




              I found an example from some lecture notes on the front page of google, and if you look at figure 12.1 on page 4, it only adds an edge between the vertices which already have degree sum at least $n$. At the last stage, for example, vertices $3$ and $7$ have degrees $4$ and $1$ respectively, and adding an edge between them would make their degree sum $7$, but that edge is never added.
              – Kevin Long
              Aug 27 at 20:04











            • How do you justify adding either of the red edges to the left? No matter which one you start with, the sum of the degrees of $v_1$ and $v_4$ (or $v_1$ and $v_2$) is only $3$, which is not $ge n$, because $n=4$.
              – Henning Makholm
              Aug 27 at 21:45













            • 3




              I think that the definition means the degree before adding the new edges, not after. Hence, the graph on the left should already be closed.
              – Kevin Long
              Aug 27 at 18:18










            • But definition says at least so I think we can still add an edge unless we have all the vertices adjacent. But according to your understanding, my calculation on degree sums may change.
              – ArsenBerk
              Aug 27 at 18:20











            • I really like the picture :)
              – W. G.
              Aug 27 at 18:47






            • 3




              I found an example from some lecture notes on the front page of google, and if you look at figure 12.1 on page 4, it only adds an edge between the vertices which already have degree sum at least $n$. At the last stage, for example, vertices $3$ and $7$ have degrees $4$ and $1$ respectively, and adding an edge between them would make their degree sum $7$, but that edge is never added.
              – Kevin Long
              Aug 27 at 20:04











            • How do you justify adding either of the red edges to the left? No matter which one you start with, the sum of the degrees of $v_1$ and $v_4$ (or $v_1$ and $v_2$) is only $3$, which is not $ge n$, because $n=4$.
              – Henning Makholm
              Aug 27 at 21:45








            3




            3




            I think that the definition means the degree before adding the new edges, not after. Hence, the graph on the left should already be closed.
            – Kevin Long
            Aug 27 at 18:18




            I think that the definition means the degree before adding the new edges, not after. Hence, the graph on the left should already be closed.
            – Kevin Long
            Aug 27 at 18:18












            But definition says at least so I think we can still add an edge unless we have all the vertices adjacent. But according to your understanding, my calculation on degree sums may change.
            – ArsenBerk
            Aug 27 at 18:20





            But definition says at least so I think we can still add an edge unless we have all the vertices adjacent. But according to your understanding, my calculation on degree sums may change.
            – ArsenBerk
            Aug 27 at 18:20













            I really like the picture :)
            – W. G.
            Aug 27 at 18:47




            I really like the picture :)
            – W. G.
            Aug 27 at 18:47




            3




            3




            I found an example from some lecture notes on the front page of google, and if you look at figure 12.1 on page 4, it only adds an edge between the vertices which already have degree sum at least $n$. At the last stage, for example, vertices $3$ and $7$ have degrees $4$ and $1$ respectively, and adding an edge between them would make their degree sum $7$, but that edge is never added.
            – Kevin Long
            Aug 27 at 20:04





            I found an example from some lecture notes on the front page of google, and if you look at figure 12.1 on page 4, it only adds an edge between the vertices which already have degree sum at least $n$. At the last stage, for example, vertices $3$ and $7$ have degrees $4$ and $1$ respectively, and adding an edge between them would make their degree sum $7$, but that edge is never added.
            – Kevin Long
            Aug 27 at 20:04













            How do you justify adding either of the red edges to the left? No matter which one you start with, the sum of the degrees of $v_1$ and $v_4$ (or $v_1$ and $v_2$) is only $3$, which is not $ge n$, because $n=4$.
            – Henning Makholm
            Aug 27 at 21:45





            How do you justify adding either of the red edges to the left? No matter which one you start with, the sum of the degrees of $v_1$ and $v_4$ (or $v_1$ and $v_2$) is only $3$, which is not $ge n$, because $n=4$.
            – Henning Makholm
            Aug 27 at 21:45


















             

            draft saved


            draft discarded















































             


            draft saved


            draft discarded














            StackExchange.ready(
            function ()
            StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fmath.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f2896482%2fclosure-of-an-undirected-graph%23new-answer', 'question_page');

            );

            Post as a guest













































































            這個網誌中的熱門文章

            How to combine Bézier curves to a surface?

            Mutual Information Always Non-negative

            Why am i infinitely getting the same tweet with the Twitter Search API?