Paper detail

GI-graphs and their groups

The class of generalized Petersen graphs was introduced by Coxeter in the 1950s. Frucht, Graver and Watkins determined the automorphism groups of generalized Petersen graphs in 1971, and much later, Nedela and Škoviera and (independently) Lovrečič-Saražin characterised those which are Cayley graphs. In this paper we extend the class of generalized Petersen graphs to a class of GI-graphs. For any positive integer n and any sequence j_0,j_1,....,j_{t-1} of integers mod n, the GI-graph GI(n;j_0,j_1,....,j_{t-1}) is a (t+1)-valent graph on the vertex set Z_t x Z_n, with edges of two kinds: - an edge from (s,v) to (s&#39;,v), for all distinct s,s&#39; in Z_t and all v in Z_n, - edges from (s,v) to (s,v+j_s) and (s,v-j_s), for all s in Z_t and v in Z_n. By classifying different kinds of automorphisms, we describe the automorphism group of each GI-graph, and determine which GI-graphs are vertex-transitive and which are Cayley graphs. A GI-graph can be edge-transitive only when t < 4 or equivalently, for valence at most 4. We present a unit-distance drawing of a remarkable GI(7;1,2,3).

preprint2012arXivOpen 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.