Paper detail

Well-dominated graphs without cycles of lengths 4 and 5

Let $G$ be a graph. A set $S$ of vertices in $G$ dominates the graph if every vertex of $G$ is either in $S$ or a neighbor of a vertex in $S$. Finding a minimal cardinality set which dominates the graph is an NP-complete problem. The graph $G$ is well-dominated if all its minimal dominating sets are of the same cardinality. The complexity status of recognizing well-dominated graphs is not known. We show that recognizing well-dominated graphs can be done polynomially for graphs without cycles of lengths $4$ and $5$, by proving that a graph belonging to this family is well-dominated if and only if it is well-covered. Assume that a weight function $w$ is defined on the vertices of $G$. Then $G$ is $w$-well-dominated} if all its minimal dominating sets are of the same weight. We prove that the set of weight functions $w$ such that $G$ is $w$-well-dominated is a vector space, and denote that vector space by $WWD(G)$. We prove that $WWD(G)$ is a subspace of $WCW(G)$, the vector space of weight functions $w$ such that $G$ is $w$-well-covered. We provide a polynomial characterization of $WWD(G)$ for the case that $G$ does not contain cycles of lengths $4$, $5$, and $6$.

preprint2014arXivOpen 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.