Researcher profile

Wayne Goddard

Wayne Goddard contributes to research discovery and scholarly infrastructure.

ResearcherAffiliation not importedOpen to collaborate

math.CO

Trust snapshot

Quick read

Trust 15 - Baseline

3works

0followers

1topics

4close collaborators

Actions

Decide how to stay connected

Follow researcher0

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.

preprint2016arXiv

Thoroughly Distributed Colorings

We consider (not necessarily proper) colorings of the vertices of a graph where every color is thoroughly distributed, that is, appears in every open neighborhood. Equivalently, every color is a total dominating set. We define $\td(G)$ as the maximum number of colors in such a coloring and $\FTD(G)$ as the fractional version thereof. In particular, we show that every claw-free graph with minimum degree at least~$2$ has~$\FTD(G)\ge 3/2$ and this is best possible. For planar graphs, we show that every triangular disc has $\FTD(G) \ge 3/2$ and this is best possible, and that every planar graph has $\td(G) \le 4$ and this is best possible, while we conjecture that every planar triangulation has $\td(G)\ge 2$. Further, although there are arbitrarily large examples of connected, cubic graphs with $\td(G)=1$, we show that for a connected cubic graph $\FTD(G) \ge 2-o(1)$, and conjecture that it is always at least~$2$. We also consider the related concepts in hypergraphs.

preprint2016arXiv

Vertex Colorings without Rainbow or Monochromatic Subgraphs

This paper investigates vertex colorings of graphs such that some rainbow subgraph~$R$ and some monochromatic subgraph $M$ are forbidden. Previous work focussed on the case that $R=M$. Here we consider the more general case, especially the case that $M=K_2$.

preprint1994arXiv

Counting pairs of lattice paths by intersections

On an $r\times (n-r)$ lattice rectangle, we first consider walks that begin at the SW corner, proceed with unit steps in either of the directions E or N, and terminate at the NE corner of the rectangle. For each integer $k$ we ask for $N_k^{n,r}$, the number of {\em ordered\/} pairs of these walks that intersect in exactly $k$ points. The number of points in the intersection of two such walks is defined as the cardinality of the intersection of their two sets of vertices, excluding the initial and terminal vertices. We find two explicit formulas for the numbers $N_k^{n,r}$. Next we note that $N_1^{n,r}= 2 N_0^{n,r}$, i.e., that {\em exactly twice as many pairs of walks have a single intersection as have no intersection\/}. Such a relationship clearly merits a bijective proof, and we supply one. We discuss a number of related results for different assumptions on the two walks. We find the probability that two independent walkers on a given lattice rectangle do not meet. In this situation, the walkers start at the two points $(a,b+x+1)$ and (a+x+1,b)$ in the first quadrant, and walk West or South at each step, except that when a walker reaches the $x$-axis (resp. the $y$-axis) then all future steps are constrained to be South (resp. West) until the origin is reached. We find that if the probability $p(i,j)$ that a step from $(i,j)$ will go West depends only on $i+j$, then the probabilty that the two walkers do not meet until they reach the origin is the same as the probability that a single (unconstrained) walker who starts at $(a, b+x+1)$ and and takes $a+b+x$ steps, finishes at one of the points $(0,1), (-1,2), \ldots, (-x,1+x)$.