Counting Finite Topologies
In this paper we study the number of finite topologies on an $n$-element set subject to various restrictions.
Researcher profile
Johann A. Makowsky
Johann A. Makowsky contributes to research discovery and scholarly infrastructure.
ResearcherAffiliation not importedOpen to collaborate
Trust snapshot
Quick read
Trust 21 - EmergingVerification L1Unclaimed author
8works
0followers
5topics
4close collaborators
Actions
Decide how to stay connected
Identity and collaboration
How to connect with this researcher
Claiming links this public author record to a researcher profile and unlocks direct collaboration workflows.
Log in to claimDirect collaboration
Open a focused conversation when the fit is right
Claim this author entity first to unlock direct invitations.
Research graph
See the researcher in context
Inspect adjacent work, topics, institutions and collaborators without jumping out to a separate graph page.
Building this graph slice
BZPEER is loading the nearby papers, people, topics and institutions for this page.
Published work
8 published item(s)
preprint2022arXiv
Extensions and Limits of the Specker-Blatter Theorem
The original Specker-Blatter Theorem (1983) was formulated for classes of structures $\mathcal{C}$ of one or several binary relations definable in Monadic Second Order Logic MSOL. It states that the number of such structures on the set $[n]$ is modularly C-finite (MC-finite). In previous work we extended this to structures definable in CMSOL, MSOL extended with modular counting quantifiers. The first author also showed that the Specker-Blatter Theorem does not hold for one quaternary relation (2003). If the vocabulary allows a constant symbol $c$, there are $n$ possible interpretations on $[n]$ for $c$. We say that a constant $c$ is {\em hard-wired} if $c$ is always interpreted by the same element $j \in [n]$. In this paper we show: 1. The Specker-Blatter Theorem also holds for CMSOL when hard-wired constants are allowed. The proof method of Specker and Blatter does not work in this case. 2. The Specker-Blatter Theorem does not hold already for $\mathcal{C}$ with one ternary relation definable in First Order Logic FOL. This was left open since 1983. Using hard-wired constants allows us to show MC-finiteness of counting functions of various restricted partition functions which were not known to be MC-finite till now. Among them we have the restricted Bell numbers $B_{r,A}$, restricted Stirling numbers of the second kind $S_{r,A}$ or restricted Lah-numbers $L_{r,A}$. Here $r$ is an non-negative integer and $A$ is an ultimately periodic set of non-negative integers.
0 citations0 reviewsNo code linkedOpen access
preprint2020arXiv
Harary polynomials
Given a graph property $\mathcal{P}$, F. Harary introduced in 1985 $\mathcal{P}$-colorings, graph colorings where each colorclass induces a graph in $\mathcal{P}$. Let $χ_{\mathcal{P}}(G;k)$ counts the number of $\mathcal{P}$-colorings of $G$ with at most $k$ colors. It turns out that $χ_{\mathcal{P}}(G;k)$ is a polynomial in $\mathbb{Z}[k]$ for each graph $G$. Graph polynomials of this form are called Harary polynomials. In this paper we investigate properties of Harary polynomials and compare them with properties of the classical chromatic polynomial $χ(G;k)$. We show that the characteristic and Laplacian polynomial, the matching, the independence and the domination polynomial are not Harary polynomials. We show that for various notions of sparse, non-trivial properties $\mathcal{P}$, the polynomial $χ_{\mathcal{P}}(G;k)$ is, in contrast to $χ(G;k)$, not a chromatic, and even not an edge elimination invariant. Finally we study whether Harary polynomials are definable in Monadic Second Order Logic.
0 citations0 reviewsNo code linkedOpen access
preprint2013arXiv
On the location of roots of graph polynomials
Roots of graph polynomials such as the characteristic polynomial, the chromatic polynomial, the matching polynomial, and many others are widely studied. In this paper we examine to what extent the location of these roots reflects the graph theoretic properties of the underlying graph.
0 citations0 reviewsNo code linkedOpen access
preprint2013arXiv
Recurrence Relations for Graph Polynomials on Bi-iterative Families of Graphs
We show that any graph polynomial from a wide class of graph polynomials yields a recurrence relation on an infinite class of families of graphs. The recurrence relations we obtain have coefficients which themselves satisfy linear recurrence relations. We give explicit applications to the Tutte polynomial and the independence polynomial. Furthermore, we get that for any sequence $a_{n}$ satisfying a linear recurrence with constant coefficients, the sub-sequence corresponding to square indices $a_{n^{2}}$ and related sub-sequences satisfy recurrences with recurrent coefficients.
0 citations0 reviewsNo code linkedOpen access
preprint2013arXiv
Weighted Automata and Monadic Second Order Logic
Let S be a commutative semiring. M. Droste and P. Gastin have introduced in 2005 weighted monadic second order logic WMSOL with weights in S. They use a syntactic fragment RMSOL of WMSOL to characterize word functions (power series) recognizable by weighted automata, where the semantics of quantifiers is used both as arithmetical operations and, in the boolean case, as quantification. Already in 2001, B. Courcelle, J.Makowsky and U. Rotics have introduced a formalism for graph parameters definable in Monadic Second order Logic, here called MSOLEVAL with values in a ring R. Their framework can be easily adapted to semirings S. This formalism clearly separates the logical part from the arithmetical part and also applies to word functions. In this paper we give two proofs that RMSOL and MSOLEVAL with values in S have the same expressive power over words. One proof shows directly that MSOLEVAL captures the functions recognizable by weighted automata. The other proof shows how to translate the formalisms from one into the other.
0 citations0 reviewsNo code linkedOpen access
preprint2008arXiv
Graph Polynomials: From Recursive Definitions To Subset Expansion Formulas
Many graph polynomials, such as the Tutte polynomial, the interlace polynomial and the matching polynomial, have both a recursive definition and a defining subset expansion formula. In this paper we present a general, logic-based framework which gives a precise meaning to recursive definitions of graph polynomials. We then prove that in this framework every recursive definition of a graph polynomial can be converted into a subset expansion formula.
0 citations0 reviewsNo code linkedOpen access
preprint2007arXiv
A most general edge elimination graph polynomial
We look for graph polynomials which satisfy recurrence relations on three kinds of edge elimination: edge deletion, edge contraction and deletion of edges together with their end points. Like in the case of deletion and contraction only (W. Tutte, 1954), it turns out that there is a most general polynomial satisfying such recurrence relations, which we call $ξ(G,x,y,z)$. We show that the new polynomial simultaneously generalizes the Tutte polynomial, the matching polynomial, and the recent generalization of the chromatic polynomial proposed by K.Dohmen, A.Pönitz and P.Tittman (2003), including also the independent set polynomial of I. Gutman and F. Harary, (1983) and the vertex-cover polynomial of F,M. Dong, M.D. Hendy, K.T. Teo and C.H.C. Little (2002). We establish two definitions of the new polynomial: first, the most general confluent recursive definition, and then an explicit one, using a set expansion formula, and prove their identity. We further expand this result to edge-labeled graphs as was done for the Tutte polynomial by T. Zaslavsky (1992) and B. Bollobás and O. Riordan (1999). The edge labeled polynomial $ξ_{lab}(G,x,y,z, \bar{t})$ also generalizes the chain polynomial of R.C. Read and E.G. Whitehead Jr. (1999). Finally, we discuss the complexity of computing $ξ(G,x,y,z)$.
0 citations0 reviewsNo code linkedOpen access