Written on the Wall II

Ermelinda DeLaVina (delavinae@uhd.edu)

       Next List
   Lower bounds for maximum number of leaves over all spanning trees, Ls(G) 
    
O2. If G is a simple connected graph, then Ls(G) ≥ 2(average of l(v) - 1)definitions reference
   1996  
     
      Next List
   Lower bounds on the bipartite number of simple connected graphs, b(G). 
    
O 19.  If G is a simple connected graph, then b(G) ≥ FLOOR(average of ecc(v)+maximum of l(v)) definitions
    July 3, 2003. June 22, 2005, note: if average of ecc(v) <= diam -1, then this conjecture follows from wowII #13.    
    
O21.  If G is a simple connected graph, then b(G) ≥ CEIL(2distavg(B,V)) definitions
    July 3, 2003.  This is similar to Graffiti's #747 that  b(G) ≥ CEIL(2distavg(V)).

Note: March 2004 now that the program has the forest number this bound was made for it also. See wowII conjecture #42 below.

 

 
    
     
      Next List
    Lower bounds on the path number of simple connected graphs, path(G).  
       
O 34.  If G is a simple connected graph, then path(G) ≥ CEIL[distavg(C,V) + distavg(M,V)] definitions
    July 15, 2003.  
    
   
      Next List
  Lower bounds on the forest number of simple connected graphs, f(G).  
  Note: Clearly b(G)  ≥  f(G)  ≥ path(G), and note that f(G) and path(G) were not available to the program when lower bounds for b(G) were generated.

O (7), T(3), F(10) 

 
O 40. If G is a simple connected graph on more than one vertex, then f(G) ≥ CEIL[(p(G)+b(G)+1)/2] definitions
    Mar 05, 2004. Mar 6, 2004, DeLaVina: For a connected graph on more than one vertex it is easily shown that  f(G) ≥ b(G)/2 + 1. Thus, in the special case that path covering is one, the result follows. 
       
O 42.  If G is a simple connected graph, then f(G) ≥ CEIL(2distavg(B,V)) definitions reference
    Mar 05, 2004. Note #21 of wowII is b(G) ≥ CEIL(2distavg(B,V)).  
    
      Next List
  2nd run on Lower bounds on the forest number of simple connected graphs, f(G).  
  Note: Clearly b(G)  ≥  f(G)  ≥ tree(G) ≥ path(G), and note that this (for the second run) time b(G), tree(G) and path(G) were available to the program when lower bounds for f(G) were generated;  Also for the second run for forest should reflect the counterexamples listed above and now also includes the local independence invariants and the domination number.

conjectures 39 and, 47 were repeated with conjectures 57-67.

 
O 58. If G is a simple connected graph, then f(G) ≥ CEIL[ b(G)/average of l(v)] definitions
    Mar 25, 2004. This conjecture seems to be similar to conjecture 91. 
    
O 59. If G is a simple connected graph, then f(G) ≥ CEIL[sqrt[res(G)*b(G)]] definitions
    Mar 25, 2004. 
    
O 61. If G is a simple connected graph, then f(G) ≥ res(G)+ CEIL[diam(G)/3] definitions
    Mar 25, 2004. 
    
O 63. If G is a simple connected graph, then f(G) ≥ CEIL[(minimum of  disteven(v) + b(G) + 1)/3] definitions
    Mar 25, 2004.  
    
O 64. If G is a simple connected graph, then f(G) ≥ CEIL[(sqrt[a(G) * (1 + (n mod D(G))] ]definitions
    Mar 25, 2004.  
     
O 65. If G is a simple connected graph, then f(G) ≥ distmin(A) + CEIL(distmin(M)/3], where A is the set of vertices of minimum degree and M is the set of vertices of maximum degree. definitions
    Mar 25, 2004.  
       
O 66. If G is a simple connected graph, then f(G) ≥ 2*CEIL[even_modemin(G) /degavg(G)]definitions
    Mar 25, 2004.   
   
      Next List
  Lower bounds on the tree number of simple connected graphs, tree(G).  
  Note: Clearly b(G)  ≥  f(G)  ≥ tree(G) ≥ path(G). 
    
O 72. If G is a simple connected graph, then tree(G) ≥ CEIL[average of ecc(v) + maximum of l(v) /3] definitions
    Apr 04, 2004. 
    
O 76. If G is a simple connected graph, then tree(G) ≥ freq[Tmax(v)]/FLOOR[degavg(G)] definitions
    Apr 04, 2004. 
    
O 84.  If G is a simple connected graph, then tree(G) ≥ 2rad(G)/d(G) definitions
    Apr 04, 2004.  
     
O 85. If G is a simple connected graph, then tree(G) ≥ CEIL[sqrt(1 + 2*minimum of  disteven(v))] definitions
    Apr 04, 2004. 
   
      Next List
   Upper bounds on the bipartite number of simple connected graphs, b(G). 
     
O 91.  If G is a simple connected graph, then b(G) ≤ 1 + f(G) * (CEIL[average of l(v) ])/2 definitions
    April 10, 2004. This conjecture seems to be similar to conjecture 58, but tighter for large b.  
   
      Next List
   Upper bounds on the independence number of simple connected graphs, a(G). 
     
O 96.  If G is a simple connected graph, then a(G) ≤ 1 + minimum disteven(v)*(maximum of l(v) -1) definitions
    April 21, 2004.  
    
O 100.  If G is a simple connected graph, then a(G) ≤ CEIL[(maximum of l(v) + 0.5*length(G))/2] definitions
    April 21, 2004.
 
 
    
O 103.  If G is a simple connected graph, then a(G) ≤ FLOOR[b(G) - LN[average of ecc(v)] definitions
    April 21, 2004. July 2005, for large enough diameter this follows from the proposition listed below conjecture 17  
    
O 108.  If G is a simple connected graph, then a(G) ≤ maximum disteven(v) + 2*FLOOR[alphacore(G)/3] definitions
    April 21, 2004. 
 
 
    
O 109.  If G is a simple connected graph, then a(G) ≤ FLOOR[(residue(G)+2b(G))/3] definitions
    April 21, 2004. 
 
 
    
O 111.  If G is a simple connected graph, then a(G) ≤ CEIL[1 + |N(S)|* (average of l(v)- 1)], where S is the set of maximum degree vertices of the complement of the graph G the neighborhood is taken in the complement. definitions
    April 21, 2004.
 
 
       
   Lower bounds on the matching number of connected bipartite graphs, m(G). 
   note: Graffiti.pc was asked to focus on lower bounds for the matching number, which are sharp for some connected bipartite graphs and thus some conjectures were made for all graphs (see 113 & 127) 
O 129  Let G be a connected X,Y bigraph such that |X| £ |Y|,. Then m(G) |X|/(D(Y)-1) definitions 
    December 2004.  
    
 
 
O 130  Let G be a connected X,Y bigraph such that |X| £ |Y|,. Then m(G) |X|/(S(G)-1) definitions 
    December 2004.  
    
 
 
     
       
    Lower bounds on the path number of simple connected graphs, path(G). #'s 31, 31a, and 35 were repeated from 1st run for path.  
O 133. If G is a simple connected graph, then path(G) ≥ rad(G)+ [average of l(v)]^cC4 definitions 
    July 12, 2005.  
    
O 136.  If G is a simple connected graph, then path(G) ≥ (1+girth)/D(R) definitions 
    July 12, 2005.  
    
O 137. If G is a simple connected graph, then path(G) ≥ 4/p(G) definitions 
    July 12, 2005.  
     
O 138. If G is a simple connected graph, then path(G) ≥ (2+u(G))*distmin(M(G2)) definitions 
    July 12, 2005.  
     
       
  2nd run for Lower bounds on the tree number of simple connected graphs, tree(G). See 68-85 for 1st run. Note: the program repeated some conjectures, but I do not repeat them here.  
  Note: Clearly b(G)  ≥  f(G)  ≥ tree(G) ≥ path(G). 
    
O 141.  If G is a simple connected graph, then tree(G) ≥ (1/2)*girth - 1+  maximum of l(v)definitions
    July 19, 2005. 
     
O 142.  If G is a simple connected graph, then tree(G) ≥  (2/3)*girth + ecc(B)definitions
    July 19, 2005. 
     
O 143.  If G is a simple connected graph, then tree(G) ≥ (girth + 1)/σ(G) definitions
    July 19, 2005. 
     
O 144.  If G is a simple connected graph, then tree(G) ≥ girth -1 + ecc(Centers)  definitions
    July 19, 2005. 
     
O 145.  If G is a simple connected graph, then tree(G) ≥ 2*ecc(B)/lmin(G)definitions
    July 19, 2005. 
     
O 146.  If G is a simple connected graph, then tree(G) ≥ 2*ecc(B)/rad(G2)definitions
    July 19, 2005. 
     
       Next List
    2nd Run for Lower bounds for maximum number of leaves over all spanning trees, Ls(G)

note: conjecture 5 was repeated from the first run for L.

 
       
O 154.  If G is a simple connected graph, then Ls(G) ≥ (1 + maximum order of radial circles)/ minimum order of radial circles. definitions
    Aug 8, 2005. Note that this conjecture proposes a sufficient condition for improvement of conjecture 5.  
       
O 155.  If G is a simple connected graph, then Ls(G) ≥ 1 + number of distinct orders of radial circles. definitions
    Aug 8, 2005.  
       
O 157.  If G is a simple connected graph, then Ls(G) ≥ (f1(G) + SQRT[2* maximum {|E(R(v))|: v is a center of G] definitions
    Aug 8, 2005.  
       
O 160.  If G is a simple connected graph, then Ls(G) ≥ maximum of l(v) + maximum T(v)*cC4(G). definitions
    Aug 8, 2005.      
       
O 161.  If G is a simple connected graph, then Ls(G) ≥ maximum of l(v) of G . definitions
    Aug 8, 2005.      
       
O 162.  If G is a simple connected graph, then Ls(G) ≥ freq of minimum of l(v)*FLOOR[1 /d(G)]. definitions
    Aug 8, 2005.      
       
O 165.  If G is a simple connected graph, then Ls(G) ≥ CEIL[Sqrt[2*|N(M)-M|]], where M is the set of vertices of maximum degree. definitions
    Aug 8, 2005. During the summer of 2005, the invariants Ls(G) and |N(M)-M| appeared in conjectures for Craig Foster's independent summer UHD student research project. The theme of those conjectures turned to the question is there a constant c such that Ls(G) ≥ c* |N(M)-M|. Craig's examples show that if a c exists, then c 1/4. He constructs graphs such that for k ≥ 1,  L(G) = k + 2.and |N(M)-M| = 4k.  
       
O 166.  If G is a simple connected graph, then Ls(G) ≥ |N(M)-M|]/SQRT[rad(G)], where M is the set of vertices of maximum degree. definitions
    Aug 8, 2005.       
       
O 169.  If G is a simple connected graph, then Ls(G) ≥ 1 + maximum  of  disteven(v) -  minimum of  disteven(v). definitions
    Aug 8, 2005.     
       
O 171.  If G is a simple connected graph, then Ls(G) ≥ (-1 +  maximum  of  disteven(v) )/distavg(B), where B is the set of boundary vertices. definitions
    Aug 8, 2005.      
       
O 172.  If G is a simple connected graph, then Ls(G) ≥  -1 +  D(B)+ distmin(M2), where B is the boundary and M2 is the set of maximum degree vertices of the second power graph of G. definitions
    Aug 8, 2005.     
       
       
       
    Lower bounds for Ls(G) + b(G)  
     
O 174.  If G is a simple connected graph on at least 2 vertices, then Ls(G) + b(G)  ≥ n + maximum of l(v) -1. definitions  reference
    Aug 8, 2005.  Since 2a(G) ≥ b(G), if 174 is correct then Graffiti's #7 on wowII would follow from 174. See reference for proof of Ls(G) + b(G)  ≥ n + CEIL[0.5*maximum of l(v)].  
       
O 176.  If G is a simple connected graph on at least 2 vertices, then Ls(G) + b(G)  ≥ n + distmin(M2), where M2 is the set of vertices of maximum degree of G2. definitions
    Aug 8, 2005.      
       
O 177.  If G is a simple connected graph on at least 2 vertices, then Ls(G) + b(G)  ≥ 2a(G) +σ(G). definitions  reference
    Aug 8, 2005.  Waller proved that Ls(G) + b(G)  ≥ 2a(G) + 1, see reference.  
     
O 178.  If G is a simple connected graph on at least 2 vertices, then Ls(G) + b(G)  ≥ maximum of l(v) + maximum of {|N(e)|: e an edge of G}. definitions
    Aug 8, 2005.  Note: Since Ls(G) ≥ maximum of {N(e): e an edge of G} -2 and b(G)  ≥ maximum of l(v) + 1, it follows that Ls(G) + b(G)  ≥ maximum of l(v) + maximum of {N(e): e an edge of G} -1, thus this conjecture proposes a slightly stronger bound that the one easily deduced.   
       
O 179.  If G is a simple connected graph on at least 2 vertices, then Ls(G) + b(G)  ≥ D(G) + domination(G) + maximum of l(v). definitions
    Aug 8, 2005.      
       
O 180.  If G is a simple connected graph on at least 2 vertices, then Ls(G) + b(G)  ≥ 1 + a(G) + maximum  of  disteven(v) . definitions
    Aug 8, 2005.      
     
O 181.  If G is a simple connected graph on at least 2 vertices, then Ls(G) + b(G)  ≥ a(G) + degavg(B(G2)) . definitions
    Aug 8, 2005.      
       
O 182.  If G is a simple connected graph on at least 2 vertices, then Ls(G) + b(G)  ≥ D(B(G2)) + diam(G) . definitions
    Aug 8, 2005.      
       
O 183.  If G is a simple connected graph on at least 2 vertices, then Ls(G) + b(G)  ≥ D(G2) + 2*rad(G2) . definitions
    Aug 8, 2005.      
       
O 184.  If G is a simple connected graph on at least 2 vertices, then Ls(G) + b(G)  ≥ D(G2) + 2*distavg(B(G2),V(G2)) . definitions
    Aug 8, 2005.      
       
O 185.  If G is a simple connected graph on at least 2 vertices, then Ls(G) + b(G)  ≥ D(G2) + 2*distavg(G2) . definitions
    Aug 8, 2005.      
       
O 186.  If G is a simple connected graph on at least 2 vertices, then Ls(G) + b(G)  ≥ |N(C(G2))| + 2*ecc(C(G2)), where C(G2 ) is the set of center vertices of the second power graph.. definitions
    Aug 8, 2005.      
       
O 187.  If G is a simple connected graph on at least 2 vertices, then Ls(G) + b(G)  ≥  |N(M2)-M2|+ minimum of l(v) + 2, where M2 is the set of vertices of maximum degree of G2.. definitions
    Aug 8, 2005.      
       
    Sophie Heuristic  
   Sufficient conditions on a simple graph G for the existence of a Hamiltonian path (also known as Traceable graph)  
   Note: the following conjectures were generated by a new heuristic for G.pc named Sophie. The program was queried for sufficient conditions for simple connected graphs on at least two vertices.

 

 
O 189.  If G is a simple connected graph with n > 1 such that

maximum { disteven(v) :  disteven(v) is the number of vertices at even distance from v }  1 + σ(G),

then G has a Hamiltonian path.

  definitions
    Jan 12, 2006.  
       
O 190.  If G is a simple connected graph with n > 1 such that 0.5(LS(G)+1) ≤ σ(G), then G has a Hamiltonian path.   definitions
    Jan 12, 2006.  Note that  LS(G) = n - gc. where gc is the connected domination number of G. Then this conjecture is equivalent to

If G is a simple connected graph with n > 1 such that [n - gc+ 1]/2 σ(G), then G has a Hamiltonian path.

 

 
       
O 190a.  If G is a simple connected graph with n > 1 such that LS(G)-1 ≤ σ(G), then G has a Hamiltonian path.   definitions
    Jan 12, 2006.  At some point in the program's execution, this conjecture (appeared together with #3) was eventually superseded by some combination of other conjectures, however, since we thought about this conjecture, it is included on this list. Note, the program may have made this conjecture because if L = 2 then must be a path or cycle, which has a Hamiltonian path, but the hypothesis of #3 is not satisfied for paths.  
       
O 191.  If G is a simple connected graph with n > 1 such that

2 * lower median of degree sequence of G - 1 ≤ min { deg(v) + deg(u) : v and u are not adjacent },

then G has a Hamiltonian path.

  definitions
    Jan 12, 2006.  
       
O 194.  If G is a simple connected graph with n > 1 such that a(G)  1 + λavg(G)  , then G has a Hamiltonian path.    definitions
    Jan 12, 2006.  
     
O 198.  If G is a simple connected graph with n > 1 such that b(G)2 + eccavg(M), then G has a Hamiltonian path, where M is the set of vertices of maximum degree of G.    definitions
    Jan 12, 2006.  
     
O 198a.  If G is a simple connected graph with n > 1 such that b(G)2 + eccavg(G), then G has a Hamiltonian path.    definitions
    Jan 12, 2006. This too was eventually superseded.  
     
O 199.  If G is a simple connected graph with n > 1 such that tree(G)  - 2 ≤  κ(G), then G has a Hamiltonian path.    definitions
    Jan 12, 2006.  
     
O 200.  If G is a simple connected graph with n > 1 such that tree(G) =CEIL[1 + λavg(G)], then G has a Hamiltonian path. definitions
    Jan 12, 2006.  
     
O 201.  If G is a simple connected graph with n > 1 such that path(G) = 2 + Σ(G), then G has a Hamiltonian path. definitions
    Jan 12, 2006.  
     
O 203.  If G is a simple connected graph with n > 1 such that  Σ(G) λmax(G), then G has a Hamiltonian path.    definitions
    Jan 12, 2006. Note that in G, the value of λmax(G) corresponds to the maximum of all co-clique numbers of vertices. For a vertex, v, compute the clique number of the subgraph induced by V(G) - N[v], this will be the co-clique number of a vertex. Note, N[v] is the vertex v together with its neighborhood.  Let us denote this value at wc(G). Then the conjecture can be rewritten as

n - (σ(G) + 1) ≤  wc(G),

which for σ(G) ≤ 3 is easily argued since the graph must have a large clique....

 
     
O 205.  If G is a simple connected graph with n > 1 such that

induced circumference(G)2(annihilation number -1),

then G has a Hamiltonian path.

definitions
    Jan 12, 2006.  
     
O 207.  If G is a simple connected graph with n > 1 such that (1/4)* [1 + 2*|E(G)| ]   ≤   modemax(G), then G has a Hamiltonian path. definitions
    Jan 12, 2006.  
     
O 208.  If G is a simple connected graph with n > 1 such that (1/2)* [1 + (2/3)*|E(G)| ]   ≤   matching(G), then G has a Hamiltonian path. definitions
    Jan 12, 2006.  
     
O 209.  If G is a simple connected graph with n > 1 such that (1/6)* [1 + (2)*|E(G)|]   ≤   frequency of λmax(G), then G has a Hamiltonian path. definitions
    Jan 12, 2006.  
     
O 210.  If G is a simple connected graph with n > 1 such that (2/3)*lower median of degree sequence of Gλmin(G), then G has a Hamiltonian path.    definitions
    Jan 12, 2006.  
     
O 211.  If G is a simple connected graph with n > 1 such that 2*( the lower median of degree sequence of G ) ≤ |N(A)|, then G has a Hamiltonian path, where A is the set of vertices of minimum degree.    definitions
    Jan 12, 2006.  
     
O 212.  If G is a simple connected graph with n > 1 such that 2*(the median of degree sequence of G  - 1) ≤ |N(A) - A|, then G has a Hamiltonian path, where A is the set of vertices of minimum degree.    definitions
    Jan 12, 2006.  
     
O 213.  If G is a simple connected graph with n > 1 such that 2 + the lower median of degree sequence of G  ≤ g2 (G), then G has a Hamiltonian path.    definitions
    Jan 12, 2006.  
     
O 217.  If G is a simple connected graph with n > 1 such that  L(G)    4*cresidue=2(G) + 2,  then G has a Hamiltonian path.    definitions
    Jan 12, 2006.  
     
    Dalmatian Heuristic  
    Lower bounds for Total Domination gt  
O 232. If G is a simple connected graph, then gt(G) 0.5*[radius(G) + ecc(B) ]
 
definitions
    Feb. 23, 2007.   
     
O 233. If G is a simple connected graph, then gt(G) (2/3) * (1+ecc(B) )
 
definitions
    Feb. 23, 2007.   
     
O 235. If G is a simple connected graph, then gt(G) (2/3) ecc(B) + cbipartite(G).
 
definitions
    Feb. 23, 2007.   
     
O 239. If G is a simple connected C4-free graph, then gt(G)   number of components(<N(S)>), where <N(S)> is the subgraph induced by the neighborhood of the set of vertices of degree two.
 
definitions
    Feb. 23, 2007.   
       
O 240. If G is a tree, then gt(G)   number of components(<N(S)-S>), where S is the set of vertices of degree two.
 
definitions
    Feb. 23,  2007.   
     
O 241. If G is a tree, then gt(G)   FLOOR[number of components(<N[S]>) + distavg(C)], where <N[S]> is the subgraph induced by the closed neighborhood of the set of vertices of degree two and C is the set of center vertices.
 
definitions
    Feb. 23,  2007.   
     
O 242. If G is a tree, then gt(G)   (1/2)[number of components(<N[S]> + eccavg(G)], where <N[S]> is the subgraph induced by the closed neighborhood of the set of vertices of degree two.
 
definitions
    Feb. 23,  2007.   
     
O 243. If G is a simple connected C4-free graph, then gt(G) 1 + number of components(<M>), where <M> is the subgraph induced by the set of vertices of maximum degree.
 
definitions
    Feb. 23,  2007.   
     
O 244. If G is a simple connected graph, then gt(G) [1 + components(<M>)]/median(G), where <M> is the subgraph induced by the set of vertices of maximum degree.
 
definitions
    Feb. 23, 2007.   
     
O 247. If G is a  simple connected degree-regular graph, then gt(G)   2* p(G)
 
definitions reference
    Feb. 23,  2007.  May 2007: Qi Liu and Doug West proved this in case the degree is at most 3, see reference.   
     
O 248. If G is a  simple connected graph such that girth(G)   6, then gt(G)   SQRT[2* p(G)]
 
definitions
    Feb. 23,  2007.   
     
O 251. If G is a  simple connected graph such that girth(G) 5, then gt(G) 1 + upper_median(G).
 
definitions
    Feb. 23,  2007.   
     
O 252. If G is a  simple connected C4-free graph, then gt(G)   modemin(G)