Prove that a simple graph $G$ with $n$ vertices, $n ge 2$; is complete if and only if $kappa(G)[vertex connctivity]=n - 1$:

Multi tool use
Clash Royale CLAN TAG#URR8PPP
up vote
0
down vote
favorite
Prove that a simple graph $G$ with $n$ vertices, $n ge 2$; is complete if and only if $kappa(G)[textvertex connctivity]=n - 1$:
proof. n=1. It is trivially true. Suppose we assume result hols for $n=k$, We need to prove this result hold for $n=k+1$. Consider $K_k+1$ complete graph, removal of one vertex resuts $K_k$. We know that the $k-1$ vertex required to remove the graph disconnected. So, $kappa(K_k-1)=k-1+1=k$. Hence, by induction, result holds for every $nin mathbb N$. Am I correct?
proof-verification graph-theory
add a comment |Â
up vote
0
down vote
favorite
Prove that a simple graph $G$ with $n$ vertices, $n ge 2$; is complete if and only if $kappa(G)[textvertex connctivity]=n - 1$:
proof. n=1. It is trivially true. Suppose we assume result hols for $n=k$, We need to prove this result hold for $n=k+1$. Consider $K_k+1$ complete graph, removal of one vertex resuts $K_k$. We know that the $k-1$ vertex required to remove the graph disconnected. So, $kappa(K_k-1)=k-1+1=k$. Hence, by induction, result holds for every $nin mathbb N$. Am I correct?
proof-verification graph-theory
It is hard to be sure, but I think you only proved it one way, that is "if the graph is complete than it has vertex connectivity such and such".
– Michal Adamaszek
Sep 10 at 9:16
How can I `write the converse argument?
– Math geek
Sep 10 at 9:21
1
You have to prove that if $G$ is not complete then it has v.c. at most $n-2$. I would start by looking at some missing edge.
– Michal Adamaszek
Sep 10 at 9:51
add a comment |Â
up vote
0
down vote
favorite
up vote
0
down vote
favorite
Prove that a simple graph $G$ with $n$ vertices, $n ge 2$; is complete if and only if $kappa(G)[textvertex connctivity]=n - 1$:
proof. n=1. It is trivially true. Suppose we assume result hols for $n=k$, We need to prove this result hold for $n=k+1$. Consider $K_k+1$ complete graph, removal of one vertex resuts $K_k$. We know that the $k-1$ vertex required to remove the graph disconnected. So, $kappa(K_k-1)=k-1+1=k$. Hence, by induction, result holds for every $nin mathbb N$. Am I correct?
proof-verification graph-theory
Prove that a simple graph $G$ with $n$ vertices, $n ge 2$; is complete if and only if $kappa(G)[textvertex connctivity]=n - 1$:
proof. n=1. It is trivially true. Suppose we assume result hols for $n=k$, We need to prove this result hold for $n=k+1$. Consider $K_k+1$ complete graph, removal of one vertex resuts $K_k$. We know that the $k-1$ vertex required to remove the graph disconnected. So, $kappa(K_k-1)=k-1+1=k$. Hence, by induction, result holds for every $nin mathbb N$. Am I correct?
proof-verification graph-theory
proof-verification graph-theory
edited Sep 10 at 9:04
asked Sep 10 at 8:49
Math geek
1346
1346
It is hard to be sure, but I think you only proved it one way, that is "if the graph is complete than it has vertex connectivity such and such".
– Michal Adamaszek
Sep 10 at 9:16
How can I `write the converse argument?
– Math geek
Sep 10 at 9:21
1
You have to prove that if $G$ is not complete then it has v.c. at most $n-2$. I would start by looking at some missing edge.
– Michal Adamaszek
Sep 10 at 9:51
add a comment |Â
It is hard to be sure, but I think you only proved it one way, that is "if the graph is complete than it has vertex connectivity such and such".
– Michal Adamaszek
Sep 10 at 9:16
How can I `write the converse argument?
– Math geek
Sep 10 at 9:21
1
You have to prove that if $G$ is not complete then it has v.c. at most $n-2$. I would start by looking at some missing edge.
– Michal Adamaszek
Sep 10 at 9:51
It is hard to be sure, but I think you only proved it one way, that is "if the graph is complete than it has vertex connectivity such and such".
– Michal Adamaszek
Sep 10 at 9:16
It is hard to be sure, but I think you only proved it one way, that is "if the graph is complete than it has vertex connectivity such and such".
– Michal Adamaszek
Sep 10 at 9:16
How can I `write the converse argument?
– Math geek
Sep 10 at 9:21
How can I `write the converse argument?
– Math geek
Sep 10 at 9:21
1
1
You have to prove that if $G$ is not complete then it has v.c. at most $n-2$. I would start by looking at some missing edge.
– Michal Adamaszek
Sep 10 at 9:51
You have to prove that if $G$ is not complete then it has v.c. at most $n-2$. I would start by looking at some missing edge.
– Michal Adamaszek
Sep 10 at 9:51
add a comment |Â
1 Answer
1
active
oldest
votes
up vote
0
down vote
For the statement $kappa(G) = n-1$ implies $G=K_n$, again use induction.
The base case is simple.
The induction hypothesis is then that if $G$ has $k-1$ vertices and $kappa(G) = k -2$, then $G = K_k-1$.
Now, take a graph $G$ with vertex connectivity $kappa(G) = k-1$. Pick an arbitrary vertex $v$, now $kappa(G-v) = k-2$ and has $k-1$ vertices, so that $G-v$ is the complete graph on $k-1$ vertices by the induction hypothesis. We can see that $operatornamedeg(v) = k-1$, because otherwise, the deletion of less that $k-1$ vertices from $G$ would disconnect $v$ from $G$, contradicting the fact that $kappa(G) = k-1$. Therefore, $G-v$ is $K_k-1$ and $v$ is connected to every vertex in it. Thus $G = K_k$.
add a comment |Â
1 Answer
1
active
oldest
votes
1 Answer
1
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
up vote
0
down vote
For the statement $kappa(G) = n-1$ implies $G=K_n$, again use induction.
The base case is simple.
The induction hypothesis is then that if $G$ has $k-1$ vertices and $kappa(G) = k -2$, then $G = K_k-1$.
Now, take a graph $G$ with vertex connectivity $kappa(G) = k-1$. Pick an arbitrary vertex $v$, now $kappa(G-v) = k-2$ and has $k-1$ vertices, so that $G-v$ is the complete graph on $k-1$ vertices by the induction hypothesis. We can see that $operatornamedeg(v) = k-1$, because otherwise, the deletion of less that $k-1$ vertices from $G$ would disconnect $v$ from $G$, contradicting the fact that $kappa(G) = k-1$. Therefore, $G-v$ is $K_k-1$ and $v$ is connected to every vertex in it. Thus $G = K_k$.
add a comment |Â
up vote
0
down vote
For the statement $kappa(G) = n-1$ implies $G=K_n$, again use induction.
The base case is simple.
The induction hypothesis is then that if $G$ has $k-1$ vertices and $kappa(G) = k -2$, then $G = K_k-1$.
Now, take a graph $G$ with vertex connectivity $kappa(G) = k-1$. Pick an arbitrary vertex $v$, now $kappa(G-v) = k-2$ and has $k-1$ vertices, so that $G-v$ is the complete graph on $k-1$ vertices by the induction hypothesis. We can see that $operatornamedeg(v) = k-1$, because otherwise, the deletion of less that $k-1$ vertices from $G$ would disconnect $v$ from $G$, contradicting the fact that $kappa(G) = k-1$. Therefore, $G-v$ is $K_k-1$ and $v$ is connected to every vertex in it. Thus $G = K_k$.
add a comment |Â
up vote
0
down vote
up vote
0
down vote
For the statement $kappa(G) = n-1$ implies $G=K_n$, again use induction.
The base case is simple.
The induction hypothesis is then that if $G$ has $k-1$ vertices and $kappa(G) = k -2$, then $G = K_k-1$.
Now, take a graph $G$ with vertex connectivity $kappa(G) = k-1$. Pick an arbitrary vertex $v$, now $kappa(G-v) = k-2$ and has $k-1$ vertices, so that $G-v$ is the complete graph on $k-1$ vertices by the induction hypothesis. We can see that $operatornamedeg(v) = k-1$, because otherwise, the deletion of less that $k-1$ vertices from $G$ would disconnect $v$ from $G$, contradicting the fact that $kappa(G) = k-1$. Therefore, $G-v$ is $K_k-1$ and $v$ is connected to every vertex in it. Thus $G = K_k$.
For the statement $kappa(G) = n-1$ implies $G=K_n$, again use induction.
The base case is simple.
The induction hypothesis is then that if $G$ has $k-1$ vertices and $kappa(G) = k -2$, then $G = K_k-1$.
Now, take a graph $G$ with vertex connectivity $kappa(G) = k-1$. Pick an arbitrary vertex $v$, now $kappa(G-v) = k-2$ and has $k-1$ vertices, so that $G-v$ is the complete graph on $k-1$ vertices by the induction hypothesis. We can see that $operatornamedeg(v) = k-1$, because otherwise, the deletion of less that $k-1$ vertices from $G$ would disconnect $v$ from $G$, contradicting the fact that $kappa(G) = k-1$. Therefore, $G-v$ is $K_k-1$ and $v$ is connected to every vertex in it. Thus $G = K_k$.
edited Sep 10 at 9:58
answered Sep 10 at 9:53
Slugger
2,64111024
2,64111024
add a comment |Â
add a comment |Â
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
StackExchange.ready(
function ()
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fmath.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f2911697%2fprove-that-a-simple-graph-g-with-n-vertices-n-ge-2-is-complete-if-and-o%23new-answer', 'question_page');
);
Post as a guest
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
It is hard to be sure, but I think you only proved it one way, that is "if the graph is complete than it has vertex connectivity such and such".
– Michal Adamaszek
Sep 10 at 9:16
How can I `write the converse argument?
– Math geek
Sep 10 at 9:21
1
You have to prove that if $G$ is not complete then it has v.c. at most $n-2$. I would start by looking at some missing edge.
– Michal Adamaszek
Sep 10 at 9:51