1. Introduction
The book [
1] by Harary may be referred for basic terminologies in graph theory. A graph
G is an ordered pair
, where
V is a non-empty set whose elements are called vertices and
E is a collection of unordered pair of distinct vertices whose elements are called edges of the graph
G. We use
and
to denote the vertex set and the edge set of the graph
G. By a signature on a graph
G, we mean a function
. A graph
G together with a signature
is called a signed graph and will be denoted by
. The graph
G is referred as the underlying graph of the signed graph
. The signed graph with all positive (negative) edges having the underlying graph
G is denoted by
. By the vertex set of
, we refer to the vertex set of the underlying graph
G. For any edge
,
is referred to as the sign of the edge
e in
.
By the sign of a sub-graph
H of a signed graph
, we mean the product of the sign of the edges in
H, and it is denoted by
. The concept of a signed graph was first introduced by Harary in [
2] to model social problems. A signed graph is said to be balanced if every cycle in it has the sign
. In [
2], Harary characterized balanced signed graphs as the signed graph whose vertex set can be partitioned into
such that any negative edge connects a vertex from
to a vertex in
and a positive edge connects a pair of vertices either from
or from
. We refer to such a partition of a balanced signed graph as Harary’s partition.
The term “antipodal” was first coined by R. Singleton [
3] to refer to a pair of vertices, the distance between which is equal to the diameter of the graph. By antipodes of a vertex in a graph, we refer to the vertices that are antipodal to it. Given a graph
, by its antipodal graph
, we refer to the graph with vertex set
such that for
if
u and
v are antipodes in
G. The concept of an antipode was first used to establish regularity in Moore graphs, i.e., finite undirected graphs which are regular, connected with diameter
and girth
. D H Smith [
4] had used a version of antipodal graphs while studying distance transitive graphs to characterize primitive and imprimitive graphs. R Aravamudhan [
5] studied the behavior of antipodal graphs with regard to completeness, connectedness, etc., and they derived necessary and sufficient conditions for a graph to be an antipodal graph of a graph in terms of its compliment. Acharya and Acharya [
6] have studied self antipodal graphs and given important characterizations. Further works can be found in [
7]. S-antipodal graphs have been introduced by Nair and Vijaykumar [
8] as an induced sub-graph of antipodal graphs whose vertex set comprises those vertices having maximum eccentricity in which two vertices are joined by an edge if they are at a diametrical distance. P S K Reddy et al. [
9] introduced Smarandachely antipodal signed digraphs and obtained some structural characterizations. In [
10], Reddy and Prashanth have introduced the S-antipodal signed graph
of a signed graph
inspired by the complement of a graph in which the sign of an edge
is the product of canonical marking of
u and
v and reported several characterizations of the balanced S-antipodal signed graph of a signed graph.
In this article, the concept of a d-antipodal graph of a graph has been introduced. This has been inspired by real-life situations where we want to study the changes brought in the network by introducing antipodal edges while retaining the original edges of the network. Such a graph has many real-life applications in networking, defense, diplomatic relationships, etc. For example, consider a graph representing the diplomatic relationship among various countries. It might be interesting to investigate how the network will behave if diplomatic relationship develops between its antipodes.
2. Preliminaries
Given a graph G, its antipodal graph, , is a graph that has a vertex set that is the same as that of G, and two vertices in are adjacent if they are at a distance of in G. By the d-antipodal graph of a graph G, we refer to the union of the graphs G and .
Remark 1. The following are true for d-antipodal graphs:
The d-antipodal graph of an even cycle is 3-regular because each vertex in an even cycle has exactly one antipodal vertex.
The d-antipodal graph of an odd cycle is 4-regular because each vertex in an even cycle has exactly two antipodal vertices.
The d-antipodal graph of for is n-regular because every pair of pendant vertices in consists of antipodes.
and are the only Smith graphs whose d-antipodal graphs are regular.
Given a signed graph
, the
d-antipodal signed graph of
, denoted by
, is the signed graph
with sign function
defined as follows:
and
is the collection of all diametric paths in
connecting the end vertices of an antipodal edge
e in
.
Remark 2. Restriction of to is σ.
A marking on a graph G is a function . A graph G provided with a marking is called a marked graph. A signed graph provided with a marking is called a marked signed graph, and it is denoted by
Let
be a marking on a graph
G. By the mark of a sub-graph
H of
G, we mean the product of the marks of the vertices in
H, and it is denoted by
. The concept of a marked graph was first introduced by Harary and Cartwright in [
11] to model a social problem. A marked graph is said to be
consistent if every cycle in it has the mark
. The following theorem characterizes marked graphs.
Theorem 1 ([
12])
. Any marked graph with a mark of each vertex is consistent. Proof. Let be a marked graph with a mark of each vertex . Since in any cycle of , each vertex will have a mark , it will be consistent. Hence, is consistent. □
Theorem 2 ([
12])
. Any marked graph with a mark of each vertex is consistent if and only if its underlying graph is bipartite. Proof. Let be a marked graph with a mark of each vertex . Then, each cycle in will be consistent if and only if it has an even number of vertices. Since a graph is bipartite if and only if each of its cycles is even, so the result follows. □
The following corollary is immediate from Theorem 2.
Corollary 1. If a marked graph is consistent, then the sub-graph induced by its vertices with a mark is bipartite.
Furthermore, in [
13], it was noted that a marked graph is consistent if and only if for any spanning tree
T of it, all its fundamental cycles are positive and all common paths shared by a pair of fundamental cycles have end points with the same marking. For more literature on consistency, we refer to [
13,
14,
15,
16,
17,
18].
Given a signed graph
, we can associate a natural marking
as follows: For any vertex
where
is the set of all vertices adjacent to
v in
. This marking
is known as the
canonical marking of the signed graph
, and we use
to denote the corresponding marked signed graph. A signed graph
is said to be
canonically consistent if it is consistent with respect to the canonical marking.
Remark 3. All signed cycles are canonically consistent.
Unless otherwise stated, for a given signed graph , we use to represent the canonical marking on and to represent the canonical marking on
Throughout this article, edges of the underlying graph are represented by bold lines, antipodal edges are represented by dotted lines and paths are represented by dashed lines. A blue color used to represent edges with the sign, and a red color is used to represent edges with the sign of a signed graph.
4. Smith Signed Graphs
Let
. The
d-antipodal graph of a cycle does not have any new edge for
. However,
, where
stands for the greatest integer less than or equal to
. However
An immediate question is whether the d-antipodal signed graph of a balanced cycle is balanced or not? Here, we have characterized the d-antipodal signed graph of cycles and obtained some results on balancedness, consistency and regularity.
Proposition 1. Let . Then, is balanced if and only if .
Proof. Let the vertices of be labeled by in cyclic order. Then, and gives a partition of in which each edge of G connects a vertex from to a vertex from . Since is balanced, this partition also serves as Harary’s partition of the balanced graph . We note that if e is an antipodal edge in , then .
First, assume that is balanced. Then, the cycle in must be balanced. As this cycle contains n negative edges, so n must be even.
Conversely, suppose that n is even. Then, each antipodal edge in is positive and both the end vertices of such an edge is either from or from . So, forms a partition of such that each negative edge connects a vertex from to a vertex from and positive edges connect vertices within the same set. Hence, is balanced. □
Proposition 2. Let be a balanced cycle with Harary’s partition of . Then, is balanced if and only if are in the same partition for each .
Proof. First, suppose is balanced and let be Harary’s partition of . Then, each cycle in is balanced and hence is also balanced. Furthermore, since , so is also Harary’s partition of . Since has an even number of negative edges, so each antipodal edge in must have a sign of . As for each , the vertices , are antipodes, so both must be either in or in .
Conversely, since is balanced, so it has even number of negative edges. Hence each antipodal edges in must have sign . Since the antipodal vertices of are , for each , so also forms Harary’s partition of . So, is balanced. □
We have the following characterization for odd cycles.
Proposition 3. Let ; then, is balanced if and only if Σ is balanced.
Proof. First, suppose that is balanced with Harary’s partition of as , . In , each diametric path has a length of n and there is exactly one diametric path between each pair of antipodes. Let us label the vertices of using in cyclic order.
Each vertex has two antipodes . Without a loss of generality, suppose that and let be the two associated antipodal edges.
Case 1: Suppose, . Then, the number of negative edges in the diametric path joining the vertices and in must be even. Since each negative edge in joins a vertex from to a vertex from , so both the end vertices of e must be in the same part, i.e., .
Case 2: Suppose, . Then, the number of negative edges in the diametric path joining the vertices and in must be odd. Since each negative edge in joins a vertex from to a vertex from , so the two end vertices of e must be from different parts, i.e., .
A similar argument holds for the end vertices of the antipodal edge .
Thus, each antipodal edge with a sign of connects vertices from the same part and an antipodal edge with a sign of connects a vertex from to a vertex from . Hence, and gives a partition of such that each negative edge of connects vertices from different sets and each positive edge connects vertices from the same set. That is, serves as Harary’s partition of the vertices in . Hence, is balanced. □
Remark 7. If the sign of each edge in a signed graph Σ is , then Σ and both are canonically consistent.
However,
being canonically consistent need not imply that its
d-antipodal marked graph is canonically consistent. For example, the graph in
Figure 2 is canonically consistent but its
d-antipodal is not canonically consistent. Hence, the conditions under which the canonical consistency of signed graphs is invariant under the
d-antipodal operation of canonically consistent signed graphs is essential. The following results give some characterization for signed cycles.
Proposition 4. If , then is canonically consistent for any .
Proof. We observe that for each i.
Case 1: n is even. Suppose for some . Then, ; hence, remains positive in . Thus, it is canonically consistent.
Case 2: n is odd. In this case, each antipodal edge in will have the same sign. Since each vertex is incident with exactly two antipodal edges, so each vertex in has a canonical marking of . Hence, the result follows.
□
Corollary 2. Let . Then, is balanced and canonically consistent if and only if .
Lemma 1. Let . If there exist antipodes such that , then is not canonically consistent.
Proof. Let have antipodes with . Since in , is the only edge that is incident with u or v apart from the edges that were present in , so the marks of u and v remain opposite in . At most, their marks may become interchanged depending on whether is balanced or not. Therefore, . Let and be the two diametric paths in joining u to v.
If possible, suppose that is canonically consistent. Let be the cycles in consisting of the edge and the paths , , respectively. Then, by the consistency of , each of the cycles has an even number of vertices with a mark of . However, these two cycles have exactly one vertex with the mark of in common, namely u or v. So, the cycle in which the symmetric difference of and has an odd number of vertices with a mark of . This contradicts our assumption that is consistent. Hence, the result follows. □
Proposition 5. Let be balanced. Then, is canonically consistent if and only if or .
Proof. First, assume that
or
. In each case, the number of negative edges in
is even. Since the two diametric paths connecting a pair of antipodes contain each edge of
exactly once, so the sign of an antipodal edge in
is
. Hence,
So,
is canonically consistent.
Conversely, suppose that has edges with a sign of as well as with a sign of . Since is balanced, so the total number of negative edges in both the diametric paths connecting a pair of antipodes is even. Hence, the sign of each antipodal edge in is positive. If we have antipodes such that , then by Lemma 1, is not canonically consistent.
So, let for each pair of antipodes , . Then, must have a pair of antipodes with negative marking.
If for all , , then the signs of the edges of are alternately or . Since is balanced and half of the edges in it are negative, so n must be even. Thus, both the cycles in that are generated by an antipodal edge consist of an odd number of vertices each with mark and so, is not canonically consistent.
Otherwise, let be antipodes such that . Then, both the edges incident with x are of the same sign and those with y are of same sign. We consider the following cases:
Case 1. The edges incident with
x and those incident with
y are opposite in sign, as shown in
Figure 3. In this case, each of the cycles in
generated by the antipodal edge
contains an odd number of vertices with a mark of
, and so, both are not consistent. Hence,
is not canonically consistent.
Case 2. The edges incident with x and those incident with y are of the same sign. As we move along the cycle clockwise, starting from x, let be the first vertex with . The existence of is guaranteed, because it has at least two edges with different signs. Furthermore, we must obtain such a vertex before reaching y, because antipodes have the same sign. Notice that the signs of all the edges in the x– path in not containing y are the same.
Let
be the vertices adjacent to
in
, as shown in
Figure 4. Let
be the antipodes of
in
, respectively. Since antipodal vertices have the same marking, the signs of all the edges in the
path in
not containing
x are the same sign as that of the edges incident with
x. So, the pair of edges
has the same sign and the pair of edges
has the same sign. Since
, each of the cycles generated by introducing the antipodal edge
in
will have an odd number of vertices with a mark of
in
, and hence, these cycles are not consistent in
. So,
is not canonically consistent. Hence, the proof is complete. □
Corollary 3. Let be balanced. Then, is balanced and canonically consistent if and only if either of the following holds:
- 1.
and n is even.
- 2.
.
Theorem 4. Let and . Then, is canonically consistent if and only if for every vertex u in .
Proof. Let . If for every vertex u in , then obviously is consistent.
Conversely, let have a vertex u with . We need to show that is not consistent. We shall prove this by the method of contradiction. If possible, suppose that is consistent. Let be the antipodes of u. Let x be the vertex adjacent to v other than w and let y be the vertex adjacent to w other than v in .
Let be the cycle in consisting of the antipodal edge and let be the sub-path of containing x. Let be the cycle in consisting of the antipodal edge and let be the sub-path of containing y. Let be the triangle . As is consistent, each and are consistent. Now, is consistent, which implies Without a loss of generality, let . Then, and the sub-path in containing x should have an even number of vertices with a mark of in . In addition, the sub-path in containing y should have an even number of vertices with a mark of in . Therefore, the number of vertices in with a mark of is odd and hence , which is a contradiction. Hence, cannot be consistent. □
Proposition 6. Let be balanced and . If Σ has three consecutive edges with signs in the order or or , then is not consistent.
Proof. Consider four vertices
in
such that
Let the antipodes of be , respectively.
Let
Then, by Theorem 4
and so
If possible, let
be consistent.
Case 1.
. Since
is balanced, so
. Now,
implies that
and using the consistency of
, we conclude
. So,
. Hence,
, which is a contradiction to Theorem 4. Thus,
is not consistent. (
Figure 5 is a representation of this case.)
Case 2.
. Since
is balanced, so
. Now,
and
implies that
and using the consistency of
, we conclude
. So,
(Refer to the
Figure 6). Hence,
, which is a contradiction to Theorem 4. Thus,
is not consistent.
Let
Then, by Theorem 4
and so
If possible, let
be consistent.
Case 1: and . Since is balanced, so . Therefore, and a consistency of implies . Hence, , which in turn implies that . Therefore, .
Case 2: and . In this case also, applying an argument similar to Case 1, we can show that .
Hence, in either case, has a vertex with a sign of , which is a contradiction. So, is not consistent.
Let
Then, by Theorem 4
and so
If possible, let
be consistent. Since
is balanced, it has at least one edge with sign
.
Case 1: . In this case, since is balanced and each of the antipodal paths connecting and has an odd number of negative edges, so . Now, implies that the antipodal path connecting and c has an odd number of negative edges and hence the antipodal path joining and c has an even number of edges with a sign of . So, . Now, the consistency of implies that , which in turn implies that . Finally, implies that each of the antipodal paths connecting and has an aeven number of edges with a sign of . Since the union of the antipodal paths connecting and together with the edge is , so , which is a contradiction.
Case 2: . Proceeding in the way as we have taken in case 1, we can show that is not consistent, which is a contradiction.
Hence, is not consistent. □
Theorem 5. Let be balanced and . Then, is canonically consistent if and only if the signs of any three consecutive edges has the pattern either or or .
Proof. First, suppose that has three consecutive edges with a sign pattern different from ; and . Since is balanced, so it must have an edge with sign . So, must have three consecutive edges with a sign pattern of either or or . In each of these cases, is not consistent.
Conversely, let the sign of the edges follow the given patterns. Then, for every single edge with a sign of
in the graph, there will be two exclusive edges with a sign of
. This implies that
is a multiple of 3. Let
. Then,
k must be odd and the number of edges in
with a sign of
is
. We claim that
. On the contrary, assume that
for some
. Let
be the vertices adjacent to
v in
. Let
be the antipodes of
v, as shown in
Figure 7. We consider the following cases:
Case 1: . Then, by the assumption of sign pattern, . So, each of the diametric paths connecting and should have an odd number of edges with a sign of . Therefore, , which is a contradiction to our assumption that .
Case 2: and . Then, by the assumption of a sign pattern, . So, if the diametric path connecting v to x has an odd number of negative edges, then the diametric path connecting v to y should have an even number of negative edges and vice versa. Thus, either or . In either case, , which is a contradiction.
Thus, in each case, we have arrived at a contradiction. Hence, is canonically consistent. □
5. The Smith Graph
Consider the labeling of the vertices of
using
, as shown in
Figure 8. Let
. We shall investigate the conditions under which
is balanced and canonical consistent.
Proposition 7. If , then is balanced.
Proof. Since is acyclic, so it is balanced. Let and be Harary’s partition of vertices. We claim that and also serve as Harary’s partition of vertices for . Let and be the antipodal edges joining the pair of antipodal vertices and , respectively. Now, implies that the path in joining and has an odd number of edges with a sign of and so and belongs to different partitions. In addition, implies that the path in joining and has an even number of edges with a sign of and so and belong to the same partition. Hence, , serves as the desired Harary’s partition of and so it is balanced. □
Lemma 2. If has an edge with a sign of , then there exists a vertex in with a mark of .
Proof. Consider the labeling of
, as shown in
Figure 8. Let
e be any edge in
with
. If possible, let
for all
. We consider the following cases:
Case 1: e is a pendant edge. Without loss of generality, let . Then, , otherwise , and hence, exactly one of the edges has a sign of ; otherwise, . Without a loss of generality, assume that and . Then, and ; otherwise, at least one of will have a mark of . In this case, both the antipodal edges incident with has a sign of and so , which is a contradiction.
Case 2: e is a non-pendant edge. Without a loss of generality, let . Then, ; otherwise, . Since is a pendant edge, so as in case 1, it will lead to a contradiction.
Hence, the result follows. □
Theorem 6. If , then is balanced and canonically consistent if and only if .
Proof. By Proposition 7,
is always balanced. So, first suppose that
is canonically consistent. First, we show that
. On the contrary, let us assume that
. Since
is canonically consistent, so
, and this in turn implies that
. Similarly,
Consequently,
. Then
This implies that
is not consistent, which is a contradiction. So, the only possibility is
We now claim that the canonical marking of each of the vertices is . Without a loss of generality, let . Since is canonically consistent, so the mark of the cycle must be , and hence . Then, at least one of the pairs of cycles , or , has an opposite canonical marking. So, is not consistent, which is a contradiction. This proves our claim.
We now claim that the canonical marking of each of the vertices is . Without a loss of generality, let . The canonical consistency of implies that . Now, implies that or . If , then . Since , so and . This in turn implies that and . However, . Therefore, , a contradiction. If , then because . Without a loss of generality, let and . Then, the cycles , will have opposite canonical markings, which is a contradiction. So, the canonical marking of each of the vertices must be .
Thus, each of the vertices in has a canonical marking of and so, by the Lemma 2, . □
Remark 8. If , then will have exactly one cycle, and so it is always balanced. However, will be canonically consistent if and only if the non-diametric edge in Σ has a sign of .
Double-Headed Snake
In this section, we consider the
d-antipodal graph of the Smith graph
. We label the vertices of
using
, as shown in
Figure 9. The antipodal pairs in
are
and the antipodal edges are represented by dotted lines. Let
be the antipodal edge joining a pair of antipodes
.
The following remark about the d-antipodal graph of the Smith graph follows from Theorem 3.
Remark 9. Let , for . Then, is balanced.
Proposition 8. If , then is canonically consistent if and only if all the six edges incident with both the vertices of degree 3 in Σ are of the same sign.
Proof. First, assume that is canonically consistent. If possible, let there be a pair of edges among the six edges incident with the two vertices of degree 3 in that have opposite signs. We consider the following two cases:
Case 1:
e and
are pendant edges with a vertex in common. Without a loss of generality, let
and
. In this case,
and
. Therefore,
Since
is consistent, both the cycles
and
should have a mark of
, and this is possible only if
. Hence,
which is a contradiction. Therefore,
—that is, pendant edges in
sharing a common vertex should have the same sign.
Case 2:
e and
are pendant edges with no vertex in common. Without a loss of generality, let
and
. By case 1,
and
, which in turn implies that all the antipodal edges have the same sign. Hence,
and
. However,
Since the mark of the cycle
is
, so
. In addition, the mark of the cycle
is
, so
. Therefore, the mark of the cycle
is −1, which is a contradiction. Hence, all the four pendant edges should have the same sign in
.
Case 3: e and have a vertex in common, and only one of these edges is a pendant. Without a loss of generality, let and . By case 2, all pendant edges have the same sign and all the four vertices have the same marking. Therefore, and so the mark of the cycle is , which is a contradiction. Hence, the result follows.
Conversely, let all the edges in
incident with both the vertices of degree 3 have the same sign. Then,
Since each cycle in
consists of either an even number of vertices entirely from the set
or an even number of vertices from the set
and the vertices on the path connecting
to
, so the mark of each cycle in
must be positive. Hence,
is canonically consistent. □