Undirected graph proof, Set intersection

In summary: So once I prove that the graph is diameter <=2, how does that lead to it being connected?The diameter of a graph is the smallest number of edges between any two vertices in the graph. So if a graph is diameter <=2, then it is connected.
  • #1
c4nn3t
3
0
Hello all, I'm a bit stumped when it comes to formal proofs. I

PART A: "Let A,B ⊆{1,2...n} be two sets with A,B > n/2. Prove that the intersection of A ∩ B is nonempty."
This part I used contradiction, but didn't get everything. I assumed that if the intersection of A and B was empty, then A∪B is A+B, which is n>2 + n>2 = n. A∪B⊆{1,2,...n}, so therefore A∪B must be <= |{1,2...n}| = n. Then, n >= |A∪B| > n, which results in a contradiction.
Is this enough of a formal proof, or is there a step I missed?PART B: "Let Z=(J,K) be an undirected graph on x vertices. Each vertex has degree >x/2. Prove that Z is connected."
I wasn't sure how to start off proving this one. Supposedly solving part A helps solve this. Any two nodes are adjacent to more than >x/2 of the nodes, but I'm not sure how to turn this into a formal proof.

I'd really appreciate some input to get going, thanks so much in advance!
 
Physics news on Phys.org
  • #2
c4nn3t said:
Hello all, I'm a bit stumped when it comes to formal proofs. I

PART A: "Let A,B ⊆{1,2...n} be two sets with A,B > n/2. Prove that the intersection of A ∩ B is nonempty."
This part I used contradiction, but didn't get everything. I assumed that if the intersection of A and B was empty, then A∪B is A+B, which is n>2 + n>2 = n. A∪B⊆{1,2,...n}, so therefore A∪B must be <= |{1,2...n}| = n. Then, n >= |A∪B| > n, which results in a contradiction.
Is this enough of a formal proof, or is there a step I missed?PART B: "Let Z=(J,K) be an undirected graph on x vertices. Each vertex has degree >x/2. Prove that Z is connected."
I wasn't sure how to start off proving this one. Supposedly solving part A helps solve this. Any two nodes are adjacent to more than >x/2 of the nodes, but I'm not sure how to turn this into a formal proof.

I'd really appreciate some input to get going, thanks so much in advance!

Hi c4nn3t, :)

The idea behind your first proof is correct. What you have used is the fact that for any two finite sets $A,\,B\subseteq \{1,\,2,\,\cdots,\,n\}$,

\[|A\cup B|=|A|+|B|-|A\cap B|\]

Supposing $|A\cap B|=0$ we have,

\[|A\cup B|=|A|+|B|>n\]

Also since, $A\cup B\subseteq \{1,\,2,\,\cdots,\,n\}\Rightarrow |A\cup B|\leq n$

Both of these conditions cannot be true.
 
  • #3
c4nn3t said:
PART B: "Let Z=(J,K) be an undirected graph on x vertices. Each vertex has degree >x/2. Prove that Z is connected."
Hint: Prove that not only the graph is connected, but its diameter is $\le 2$. Here the diameter is the greatest distance between any pair of vertices, and the distance between two vertices is the length of a shortest path between them. In other words, diameter 2 means that one can go from one vertex to any other vertex in at most two steps.
 
  • #4
AH, okay, now that first part makes sense, thanks so much for that!

I'm not still sure if I've grasped the second part. Also, I forgot to mention, J is the number of vertices, and E is the number of edges in the graph, I'll update the original post to reflect that. So I'd start out saying for a graph Z, each vertex J has degree greater than x/2. This must mean that K is also > x/2. I want to show that K is <= 2 between any two vertices, which I think is the step I'm having difficulty finding.
So once I prove that the graph is diameter <=2, how does that lead to it being connected? Ultimately, I state that the G is connected if J has connectivity n-1. Do I need to consider if the graph is Eulerian?

Still quite confused with this one, maybe I'm not picking at my brain hard enough... (Fubar)
 
  • #5
c4nn3t said:
Also, I forgot to mention, J is the number of vertices, and E is the number of edges in the graph
But post #1 says that $J$ is the set of vertices, and $K$ (and not $E$) is the set of edges. Meanwhile, the number if vertices is $x$, i.e., $|J|=x$.

You shouldn't confuse sets and their cardinalities, i.e, the number of elements. These are entities of different type. The cardinality of $A$ is often denoted by $|A|$. For example, the phrase "A∪B is A+B, which is n" in post #1 should in fact say, "$|A\cup B|$ is $|A|+|B|$, which is $n$".

c4nn3t said:
So I'd start out saying for a graph Z, each vertex J has degree greater than x/2. This must mean that K is also > x/2. I want to show that K is <= 2 between any two vertices
You cannot say, "$K$ between two vertices" because $K$ is the set of all edges. Picking two concrete vertices does not change $K$; it is defined once for all in the scope of this problem.

c4nn3t said:
So once I prove that the graph is diameter <=2, how does that lead to it being connected?
Hmm, if I can walk from any vertex to any other vertex in at most two steps, why does it follow that I can walk from any vertex to any other vertex in any number of steps?

c4nn3t said:
Ultimately, I state that the G is connected if J has connectivity n-1. Do I need to consider if the graph is Eulerian?
No.

Pick two vertices $u$ and $v$. Let $U$ be the set of vertices adjacent to $u$, and let $V$ be the set of vertices adjacent to $v$. Then by assumption $|U|>x/2$ and $|V|>x/2$ where $x=|J|$. Obviously, $U\subseteq J$ and $V\subseteq J$. Do you think you can apply Part A from post #1 to this situation?
 

FAQ: Undirected graph proof, Set intersection

What is an undirected graph?

An undirected graph is a mathematical representation of a set of objects (vertices) connected by edges. The edges do not have a direction, meaning they can be traversed in both directions.

How is an undirected graph typically represented?

An undirected graph is typically represented using a visual diagram, with vertices represented as dots and edges as lines connecting the dots. Alternatively, it can also be represented using an adjacency matrix or an adjacency list.

What is a proof in the context of undirected graphs?

A proof in the context of undirected graphs is a logical argument or demonstration that shows the validity of a statement or theorem related to undirected graphs. This can involve using mathematical techniques and properties to show that a statement is true.

What is set intersection in the context of undirected graphs?

Set intersection in the context of undirected graphs refers to finding the common vertices or edges between two or more undirected graphs. This can be useful in determining the similarity or overlap between different graphs.

How is set intersection related to the proof of undirected graphs?

Set intersection is often used as a technique in the proof of undirected graphs. It can help to simplify the problem by identifying common elements and can also provide important insights into the structure and properties of the graphs being studied.

Similar threads

Back
Top