Search arXiv⌕ Search

arXiv · 2503.15453

Characterization of locally most split reliable graphs

Abstract

A two-terminal graph is a graph equipped with two distinguished vertices, called terminals. Let $T_{n,m}$ be the set of all nonisomorphic connected simple two-terminal graphs on $n$ vertices and $m$ edges. Let $G$ be any two-terminal graph in $T_{n,m}$. For every number $p$ in $[0,1]$ we let each of the edges in $G$ be independently deleted with probability $1-p$. The split reliability $SR_{G}(p)$ is the probability that the resulting spanning subgraph has precisely $2$ connected components, each one including one terminal. The two-terminal graph $G$ is uniformly most split reliable if $SR_G(p)\geq SR_{H}(p)$ for each $H$ in $T_{n,m}$ and every $p$ in $[0,1]$. We say $G$ is locally most split reliable if there exists $δ>0$ such that $SR_G(p)\geq SR_{H}(p)$ for each $H$ in $T_{n,m}$ and every $p$ in $(1-δ,1)$. Brown and McMullin showed that there exists uniformly most split reliable graphs in each class $T_{n,m}$ such that $m=n-1$, $m=\binom{n}{2}$, or $m=\binom{n}{2}-1$. The authors also proved that there is no uniformly most split reliable two-terminal graph in $T_{n,n}$ when $n\geq 6$ and specified in which classes $T_{n,m}$ such that $n\leq 7$ there exist uniformly most split reliable graphs. The existence or nonexistence of uniformly most split reliable graphs in the remaining cases is posed by Brown and McMullin as an open problem. In this work, the set $\mathcal{G}_{n,m}$ consisting of all locally most split reliable graphs is characterized in each nonempty class $T_{n,m}$. It is proved that a graph in $T_{n,m}$ is locally most split reliable if and only if its split reliability equals that of the balloon graph equipped with two terminals whose distance equals its diameter. Finally, it is proved that there is no uniformly most split reliable graph in $T_{n,m}$ when $n\geq 7$ and $n\leq m \leq \binom{n-3}{2}+3$.

Explore related subjects

Keep this discovery

Explore connections, maps & timelines

BibTeXRIS

Pablo Romero. 2025-03-19. Characterization of locally most split reliable graphs. https://arxiv.org/abs/2503.15453

Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.

KEEP EXPLORING

Related papers

Matching Complexes of Outerplanar Graphs

An outerplanar graph is a planar graph that has a planar drawing with all vertices on the unbounded face. The matching complex of a graph is the simplicial complex whose faces are subsets of disjoint edges of the graph. In this paper we prove that the matching complexes of outerplanar graphs are contractible or homotopy equivalent to a wedge of spheres. This extends known results about trees and polygonal line tilings.

math.CO↗

Awesome graph parameters

For a graph $G$, we denote by $α(G)$ the size of a maximum independent set and by $ω(G)$ the size of a maximum clique in $G$. Our paper lies on the edge of two lines of research, related to $α$ and $ω$, respectively. One of them studies $α$-variants of graph parameters, such as $α$-treewidth or $α$-degeneracy. The second line deals with graph classes where some parameters are bounded by a function of $ω(G)$. A famous example of this type is the family of $χ$-bounded classes, where the chromatic number $χ(G)$ is bounded by a function of $ω(G)$. A Ramsey-type argument implies that if the $α$-variant of a graph parameter $ρ$ is bounded by a constant in a hereditary class $\mathcal{G}$, then $ρ$ is bounded by a function of $ω$ in $\mathcal{G}$. If the reverse implication also holds, we say that $ρ$ is awesome. Otherwise, we say that $ρ$ is awful. In the present paper, we identify a number of awesome and awful graph parameters, derive some algorithmic applications of awesomeness, and propose a number of open problems related to these notions.

math.CO↗

Perfect matchings and $A_α$-spectral radius in 1-binding graphs

Let $G$ be a graph with vertex set $V(G)$ and edge set $E(G)$. For $α\in[0,1)$, we use $A_α(G)$ and $ρ_α(G)$ to denote the $A_α$-matrix and the $A_α$-spectral radius of $G$, respectively. The binding number $\mbox{bind}(G)$ of $G$ is defined by $\mbox{bind}(G)=\min\left\{\frac{|N_G(X)|}{|X|}:\emptyset\neq X\subseteq V(G),N_G(X)\neq V(G)\right\}$. If $\mbox{bind}(G)\geq1$, then $G$ is called 1-binding. A perfect matching in $G$ is a set of nonadjacent edges covering every vertex of $G$. Tutte proved that a graph $G$ of even order has a perfect matching if and only if $o(G-S)\leq|S|$ holds for every $S\subseteq V(G)$ [W. Tutte, The factorization of linear graphs, J. Lond. Math. Soc. 22 (1947) 107--111]. In this paper, we use Tutte's result to prove that a connected 1-binding graph $G$ of even order $n$ with $n\geq n(α)$ has a perfect matching unless $G=K_1\vee(K_{n-5}\cup K_3\cup K_1)$ if $ρ_α(G)\geqρ_α(K_1\vee(K_{n-5}\cup K_3\cup K_1))$, where $n(α)$ is defined as follows: $n(α)=\max\{18,\frac{2+8α}{1-2α}\}$ if $α\in[0,\frac{1}{2})$, and $n(α)=18$ if $α=\frac{1}{2}$.

math.CO↗