(Brian Thomas Rhea HW10)
 
m (vertices, not nodes :p I'm done now, I promise! -Brian)
 
(One intermediate revision by the same user not shown)
Line 5: Line 5:
 
Start by noting the handshaking theorem: The sum of the degrees of all of the vertices in the graph -- call this number D -- is equal to twice the number of edges.  In other words, D = 2e.  Also, consider the degrees of each vertex in G; we will call them d_1, d_2, ..., d_v.  By definition, D = d_1 + d_2 + ... + d_v. (*)
 
Start by noting the handshaking theorem: The sum of the degrees of all of the vertices in the graph -- call this number D -- is equal to twice the number of edges.  In other words, D = 2e.  Also, consider the degrees of each vertex in G; we will call them d_1, d_2, ..., d_v.  By definition, D = d_1 + d_2 + ... + d_v. (*)
  
(It may be helpful for our intuition to note at this point that the average degree of a vertex is D/v = 2e/v.  It should be apparent, then, that we can't have all nodes with degrees higher than this (m > 2e/v) or all nodes with degrees lower than this (M < 2e/v).)
+
(It may be helpful for our intuition to note at this point that the average degree of a vertex is D/v = 2e/v.  It should be apparent, then, that we can't have all vertices with degrees higher than this (m > 2e/v) or all vertices with degrees lower than this (M < 2e/v).)
  
 
m = min(d_1, d_2, ..., d_v), and M = max(d_1, d_2, ..., d_v), by definition.
 
m = min(d_1, d_2, ..., d_v), and M = max(d_1, d_2, ..., d_v), by definition.
Line 12: Line 12:
  
 
b. Now, similar to a, let's consider M < 2e/v and prove that this cannot happen by contradiction.  d_1 + d_2 + ... + d_v < v * max(d_1, d_2, ..., d_v) = v * M < 2e = D.  --><-- (*).  Thus, M ≥ 2e/v.
 
b. Now, similar to a, let's consider M < 2e/v and prove that this cannot happen by contradiction.  d_1 + d_2 + ... + d_v < v * max(d_1, d_2, ..., d_v) = v * M < 2e = D.  --><-- (*).  Thus, M ≥ 2e/v.
 +
 +
--[[User:Thomas34|Thomas34]] 23:57, 5 November 2008 (UTC)

Latest revision as of 18:58, 5 November 2008

Who doesn't love proofs?!

So, we have a graph G with e edges and v vertices. Define M as the maximum degree of all of the vertices of G, and m as the minimum degree of all vertices of G. We want to show that (a.) 2e/v ≥ m and (b.) 2e/v ≤ M.

Start by noting the handshaking theorem: The sum of the degrees of all of the vertices in the graph -- call this number D -- is equal to twice the number of edges. In other words, D = 2e. Also, consider the degrees of each vertex in G; we will call them d_1, d_2, ..., d_v. By definition, D = d_1 + d_2 + ... + d_v. (*)

(It may be helpful for our intuition to note at this point that the average degree of a vertex is D/v = 2e/v. It should be apparent, then, that we can't have all vertices with degrees higher than this (m > 2e/v) or all vertices with degrees lower than this (M < 2e/v).)

m = min(d_1, d_2, ..., d_v), and M = max(d_1, d_2, ..., d_v), by definition.

a. First, let's consider m > 2e/v and prove that this cannot happen by contradiction. d_1 + d_2 + ... + d_v > v * min(d_1, d_2, ..., d_v) = v * m > 2e = D. --><-- (*). Thus, m ≤ 2e/v.

b. Now, similar to a, let's consider M < 2e/v and prove that this cannot happen by contradiction. d_1 + d_2 + ... + d_v < v * max(d_1, d_2, ..., d_v) = v * M < 2e = D. --><-- (*). Thus, M ≥ 2e/v.

--Thomas34 23:57, 5 November 2008 (UTC)

Alumni Liaison

BSEE 2004, current Ph.D. student researching signal and image processing.

Landis Huffman