Paper detail

Circular Backbone Colorings: on matching and tree backbones of planar graphs

Given a graph $G$, and a spanning subgraph $H$ of $G$, a circular $q$-backbone $k$-coloring of $(G,H)$ is a proper $k$-coloring $c$ of $G$ such that $q\le \lvert c(u)-c(v)\rvert \le k-q$, for every edge $uv\in E(H)$. The circular $q$-backbone chromatic number of $(G,H)$, denoted by $CBC_q(G,H)$, is the minimum integer $k$ for which there exists a circular $q$-backbone $k$-coloring of $(G,H)$. The Four Color Theorem implies that whenever $G$ is planar, we have $CBC_2(G,H)\le 8$. It is conjectured that this upper bound can be improved to 7 when $H$ is a tree, and to 6 when $H$ is a matching. In this work, we show that: 1) if $G$ is planar and has no $C_4$ as subgraph, and $H$ is a linear spanning forest of $G$, then $CBC_2(G,H)\leq 7$; 2) if $G$ is a plane graph having no two 3-faces sharing an edge, and $H$ is a matching of $G$, then $CBC_2(G,H)\leq 6$; and 3) if $G$ is planar and has no $C_4$ nor $C_5$ as subgraph, and $H$ is a mathing of $G$, then $CBC_2(G,H)\leq 5$. These results partially answer questions posed by Broersma, Fujisawa and Yoshimoto (2003), and by Broersma, Fomin and Golovach (2007). It also points towards a positive answer for the Steinberg's Conjecture.

preprint2016arXivOpen access
0citations
0reviews
0saves
Nocode
Nodataset
0institutions

Next steps

Decide what to do with this paper

Use like or dislike for the fast social read. The more specific scholarly feedback stays available below when needed.

Log in to curate

Reading frame

Keep the important context close to the paper

Keep the important signals around this paper in one place: votes, save state, collection context, reviews and the metadata you need before deciding what to do next.

Institutions

Add specific reaction

Move through the context

Research map

Open full explorer

Move through nearby people, institutions, topics and adjacent work without leaving the paper page.

Building this graph slice

BZPEER is loading the nearby papers, people, topics and institutions for this page.

Structured reviews

0 review(s)

ContributeLeave structured feedbackUse the review template when you have a concrete strength, concern or method question.Open review form

No structured reviews yet. High-signal critique starts here.

Work discussion

0 comment(s)

DiscussAdd a high-signal commentKeep quick notes, caveats and replication pointers separate from formal reviews.Open comment form

No discussion yet. The first strong comment sets the tone.