Paper detail

Digraph analogues for the Nine Dragon Tree Conjecture

The fractional arboricity of a digraph $D$, denoted by $γ(D)$, is defined as $γ(D)= \max_{H \subseteq D, |V(H)| >1} \frac {|A(H)|} {|V(H)|-1}$. Frank in [Covering branching, Acta Scientiarum Mathematicarum (Szeged) 41 (1979), 77-81] proved that a digraph $D$ decomposes into $k$ branchings, if and only if $Δ^{-}(D) \leq k$ and $γ(D) \leq k$. In this paper, we study digraph analogues for the Nine Dragon Tree Conjecture. We conjecture that, for positive integers $k$ and $d$, if $D$ is a digraph with $γ(D) \leq k + \frac{d-k}{d+1}$ and $Δ^{-}(D) \leq k+1$, then $D$ decomposes into $k + 1$ branchings $B_{1}, \ldots, B_{k}, B_{k+1}$ with $Δ^{+}(B_{k+1}) \leq d$. This conjecture, if true, is a refinement of Frank's characterization. A series of acyclic bipartite digraphs is also presented to show the bound of $γ(D)$ given in the conjecture is best possible. We prove our conjecture for the cases $d \leq k$. As more evidence to support our conjecture, we prove that if $D$ is a digraph with the maximum average degree $mad(D)$ $\leq$ $2k + \frac{2(d-k)}{d+1}$ and $Δ^{-}(D) \leq k+1$, then $D$ decomposes into $k + 1$ pseudo-branchings $C_{1}, \ldots, C_{k}, C_{k+1}$ with $Δ^{+}(C_{k+1}) \leq d$.

preprint2022arXivOpen 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.