``Graph''
In many problems (and theorems) the word ``graph'' has to be interpreted as ``simple graph''. I will try to point these out but I won't find all such places. If in doubt, ask me.
- In Exercise 1.5, the maze should have another identifying letter, say N, at the tail of the arrow pointing to L.
- In Exercise 3.5(v) (p. 20), the graph should be simple and the K4 should be K5.
- Definition of path (pp. 3-4 and 26-27): On pp. 26-27, the book defines a path as being either open (that means ``not closed''!) or closed. However, on pp. 3-4, it defines a path as being open. Also, when it uses paths it almost always means open paths. (Just one big example: in Theorem 9.1, which would be false if we allowed the paths to be closed.)
When I say ``path'' I always mean ``open path''. Thus for me (and for the book, mostly) a ``closed path'' does not count as a ``path'' (weird, isn't it!).
Of course, we all agree that a closed path is the same as a cycle.
- If you read very carefully on p. 29, you'll notice that in talking about the connectivity, that is, kappa(G), we always assume G is connected. However, in talking about the edge connectivity, lambda(G), we do not assume G is connected.
- Exercise 5.8: You must assume the graph is simple.
- Exercise 5.9(i): The vertex z must be different from v and w.
- Theorem 6.2: The easy half is due to Euler (1736). The hard half is due to Hierholzer (1873) (who died young; his article was written down after his death by friends).
- Exercise 6.4: G can have any number of vertices. The number that have odd degree is k (a positive number).
- Corollary 7.2 (Dirac's Theorem): The statement should say ``deg(v) >= n/2'', not ``deg(v) > n/2''.
- Exercise 7.7: In (i) assume G is simple. (If G is not simple, is the statement still true?) In (ii) your graph should be simple.
- The algorithm for shortest path on p. 39 is usually called Dijkstra's Algorithm. The algorithm is not stated completely in the book. In order to be able to recover the shortest paths from the starting vertex, you have to record, each time you change the number at a vertex, the edge you used to calculate the new number.
- P. 44 (bottom): In the discussion of the existence of (at least) two end vertices of a tree with n vertices, the condition ``n > 2'' should be ``n >= 2''.
- Theorem 10.1, first proof: For a complete proof it is also necessary to prove that, if you begin with a sequence and find the tree, then find the sequence associated with that tree, you always get the original sequence.
- P. 50, top formula: (n-1)n-k-1 should be (n-1)n-k-1. Also, the symbol ( n-2 over k-1) (impossible to type in HTML) is the binomial coefficient. You should be familiar with this from calculus (Hint! look it up in your calculus book.), but here is a definition for q > 0:
- ( p over q ) = p(p-1)···(p-q+1) / q! .
For q = 0, we define ( p over 0 ) = 1.
- Exercise 10.3: ``the number of labelled trees''.
- Exercise 10.5(i): The edge e must not be a loop.
- In Theorem 13.7, the second formula is really just a disguised form of the first one. You can safely ignore the second formula.
- Exercise 13.10 has two errors. (i) has a minor error: it is not valid if r + s = 2 (that is, r = s = 1). (ii), first part, is completely wrong: the ``= r'' should be ``<= r/2''.
- In Exercise 14.1, the vertical arrows are different from the horizontal arrows. The vertical arrows should be drawn as double arrows.
- In Figure 15.1, one of the edges that should have been dotted was printed solid by mistake.
- The proof of Corollary 15.4 requires that one assume G is connected.
- Exercise 17.9 may be hard to interpret. I understand what Wilson means in (i) but not in (ii). Here are good versions of the questions.
- In 17.8 replace the condition that G has no triangles by the condition that G has girth r. In the modified 17.8(i) prove that G has a vertex of degree at most d, where d is a number that you are supposed to figure out for yourself in such a way that the new result is interesting and worthwhile. In the modified 17.8(ii) the number of colors, 4, would be replaced by a number that you figure out for yourself, keeping in mind that the method used to prove it is probably similar to that used in 17.8(ii).
- Replace the condition that G is planar by the condition that G has thickness t. (It makes no sense to keep the condition that G is planar. If you did, there would be no point in talking about thickness.) Keep the condition that G has no triangles. Or maybe, don't keep that condition; just keep the assumption that G is simple. Thus you have two versions of this question; you may solve either or both, or further variants if you find interesting ones. Again, in whatever problem you come up with, there are two parts corresponding to the two parts of 17.8, but they may not be identical to those in 17.8. You are supposed to figure out how to modify 17.8 here, just as in 17.9(i).
- In Exercise 17.11, all k-critical graphs are simple. Also, as usual, you should prove the correctness of your answers.
- Maps: In Figure 19.5 the ``map'' is not 3-connected so it isn't really a map according to the book's definition. You can fix it by adding an edge from the left vertex to the right vertex around the top of the figure.
(N.B. Many books define a map as a plane graph that is connected and has no bridges. Then Figure 19.5 would be a map.)
- In Exercise 21.7(i), the formula should be k(k-1)n-1.
- In Exercise 25.5, you should assume G is not a null graph.
- Corollary 28.4 should say ``any two distinct non-adjacent vertices''.
- Theorem 28.7. The maximum number of internally disjoint paths from vertex v to vertex w in a digraph is equal to the minimum number of vertices in a vw-separating set. (See definitions.)
- In Exercise 28.2(i), there is nothing to verify for Theorem 28.2 because the theorem applies only to nonadjacent vertices. Watch out for the same problem in any similar exercise.
Connectivity
There should be some additional results stated in the book, to make it clearer what connectivity means. We discuss this in class, with some proofs. You should study that (at the appropriate time). Here are the theorem and corollaries. In them, G is a connected graph.
- Theorem. G is p-connected if and only if no set of fewer than p vertices can separate G. (Assuming p > 0.)
- Corollary. If G is (p+1)-connected, then it is p-connected. (Assuming p > 1.)
- Corollary. If kappa(G) = p, then G is p-connected but not (p+1)-connected.
- Examples.
- G is 1-connected iff it is connected.
- G is 2-connected iff it has no cut vertex.