๐”– Bobbio Scriptorium
โœฆ   LIBER   โœฆ

Bounds on the bondage number of a graph

โœ Scribed by Bert L. Hartnell; Douglas F. Rall


Publisher
Elsevier Science
Year
1994
Tongue
English
Weight
317 KB
Volume
128
Category
Article
ISSN
0012-365X

No coin nor oath required. For personal study only.

โœฆ Synopsis


The bondage number b(G) of a graph G is the minimum cardinality of a set of edges of G whose removal from G results in a graph with domination number larger than that of G. Several new sharp upper bounds for b(G) are established. In addition, we present an infinite class of graphs each of whose bondage number is greater than its maximum degree plus one, thus showing a previously conjectured upper bound to be incorrect.


๐Ÿ“œ SIMILAR VOLUMES


On the bondage number of a graph
โœ Yue-Li Wang ๐Ÿ“‚ Article ๐Ÿ“… 1996 ๐Ÿ› Elsevier Science ๐ŸŒ English โš– 162 KB

The bondage number b(G) of a graph G is the minimum cardinality of a set of edges of G whose removal from G makes the domination number of G increase. There are several papers discussed the upper bound of b(G). In this paper, we shall give an improved upper bound of b(G).

The bondage number of a graph
โœ John Frederick Fink; Michael S. Jacobson; Lael F. Kinch; John Roberts ๐Ÿ“‚ Article ๐Ÿ“… 1990 ๐Ÿ› Elsevier Science ๐ŸŒ English โš– 654 KB
A counterexample to a conjecture on the
โœ Ulrich Teschner ๐Ÿ“‚ Article ๐Ÿ“… 1993 ๐Ÿ› Elsevier Science ๐ŸŒ English โš– 113 KB

The bondage number h(G) of a nonempty graph G was first introduced by Fink, Jacobson, Kinch and Roberts in [3]. They generalized a former approach to domination-critical graphs, In their publication they conjectured that b(G)<d(G)+ 1 for any nonempty graph G.

New bounds on the edge number of a k-map
โœ Zhi-Zhong Chen ๐Ÿ“‚ Article ๐Ÿ“… 2007 ๐Ÿ› John Wiley and Sons ๐ŸŒ English โš– 310 KB ๐Ÿ‘ 1 views

## Abstract It is known that for every integer __k__โ€‰โ‰ฅโ€‰4, each __k__โ€map graph with __n__ vertices has at most __kn__ โˆ’ 2__k__ edges. Previously, it was open whether this bound is tight or not. We show that this bound is tight for __k__โ€‰=โ€‰4, 5. We also show that this bound is not tight for large en