Paper detail

The competition number of a graph with exactly two holes

Let D be an acyclic digraph. The competition graph of D is a graph which has the same vertex set as D and has an edge between x and y if and only if there exists a vertex v in D such that (x,v) and (y,v) are arcs of D. For any graph G, G together with sufficiently many isolated vertices is the competition graph of some acyclic digraph. The competition number k(G) of G is the smallest number of such isolated vertices. A hole of a graph is a cycle of length at least 4 as an induced subgraph. In 2005, Kim [5] conjectured that the competition number of a graph with h holes is at most h+1. Though Li and Chang [8] and Kim et al. [7] showed that her conjecture is true when the holes do not overlap much, it still remains open for the case where the holes share edges in an arbitrary way. In order to share an edge, a graph must have at least two holes and so it is natural to start with a graph with exactly two holes. In this paper, the conjecture is proved true for such a graph.

preprint2009arXivOpen access

Signal facts

What is known right now

Open access4 authors1 topic

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 map preview

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.