Home Mathematics Strong edge geodetic problem in networks
Article Open Access

Strong edge geodetic problem in networks

  • Paul Manuel EMAIL logo , Sandi Klavžar , Antony Xavier , Andrew Arokiaraj and Elizabeth Thomas
Published/Copyright: October 3, 2017

Abstract

Geodesic covering problems form a widely researched topic in graph theory. One such problem is geodetic problem introduced by Harary et al. [Math. Comput. Modelling, 1993, 17, 89-95]. Here we introduce a variation of the geodetic problem and call it strong edge geodetic problem. We illustrate how this problem is evolved from social transport networks. It is shown that the strong edge geodetic problem is NP-complete. We derive lower and upper bounds for the strong edge geodetic number and demonstrate that these bounds are sharp. We produce exact solutions for trees, block graphs, silicate networks and glued binary trees without randomization.

MSC 2010: 05C12; 05C70

1 Introduction

Covering problems are among the fundamental problems in graph theory, let us mention the vertex cover problem, the edge cover problem, and the clique cover problem. An important subclass of covering problems is formed by path coverings that include the edge covering problem, the geodesic covering problem, the induced path covering problem and the path covering problem. Of a particular importance are coverings with shortest paths (also known as geodesics), e.g. in the analysis of structural behavior of social networks. In particular, the optimal transport flow in social networks requires an intensive study of geodesics [24]. In this paper we introduce and study a related problem that we call strong edge geodetic problem. This problem is in part motivated by the following application to social transport networks.

Urban road network is modeled by a graph whose vertices are bus stops or junctions. The urban road network is patrolled and maintained by road inspectors, see Fig. 1 for an example of a network with road inspectors I1, I2, I3, and I4.

Fig. 1 
Urban road network patrolled by road inspectors I1, I2, I3, and I4.
Fig. 1

Urban road network patrolled by road inspectors I1, I2, I3, and I4.

A road patrolling scheme is prepared satisfying the following conditions:

  1. A road segment is a geodesic in the road network. It is patrolled by a pair of road inspectors by stationing one inspector at each end.

  2. One pair of road inspectors is not assigned to more than one road segment. However, one road inspector is assigned to patrol other road segments with other inspectors.

We point out that, under the assumption that the distances in a network between bus stops/junctions are integral, we may without loss of generality assume the network to be a simple graph. Indeed, to obtain an equivalent graph from the network, each edge may be subdivided by an appropriate number of times. From this reason, we are restricting ourselves in this paper to simple graphs.

An example of a patrolling scheme for the network of Fig. 1 is given below:

I1 and I2 patrol road segment 1234567;I1 and I3 patrol road segment 12348910212019;I1 and I4 patrol road segment 1234111213;I2 and I3 patrol road segment 710212019;I2 and I4 patrol road segment 7101716151413; andI3 and I4 patrol road segment 1918151413.

By condition 2., the restriction is that one pair of inspectors is assigned at most one road segment. For example, there are two road segments of equal length between inspectors I2 and I4, however these two inspectors are assigned a single road segment in the patrolling scheme. The strong edge geodetic problem is to identify a minimum number of road inspectors to patrol the urban road network.

We proceed as follows. In the next section we state definitions and notions needed in this paper, and formally introduce the strong edge geodetic problem as well as two closely related problems. Then, in Section 3, we prove that the strong edge geodetic problem is NP-complete. In the subsequent section we discuss upper bounds on the strong edge geodetic number and show that it can be bounded from above by the edge isometric path number. In Section 5, we observe that simplicial vertices are intimately related to the strong edge geodetic problem and deduce several consequences, in particular determine exactly the strong edge geodetic number of block graphs and silicate networks. In Section 6, we introduce non-geodesic edges and use them to prove another lower bound on the strong edge geodetic number. The bound is shown to be in particular exact on glued binary trees without randomization.

2 Preliminaries

Let x and y be vertices of a graph G. Then the interval I(G; x, y) (or I(x, y) for short if G is clear from the context) between x and y is the set of vertices u such that u lies of some shortest x, y-path. In addition, for SV(G) the geodetic closure I(S) of S is

I(S)={x,y}(s2)I(x,y).

S is called a geodetic set if I(S) = V(G). The geodetic problem, introduced by Harary et al. [1], is to find a geodetic set of G of minimum cardinality; this graph invariant is denoted with g(G). Since then the problem has attracted several researchers and has been studied from different perspectives [510].

If x and y are vertices of a graph G, then let Ie(G;x, y) denote the set of the edges e such that e lies on at least one shortest x, y-path. Again we will simply write Ie(x, y) when there is no danger of confusion. For a set SV(G), the edge geodetic closure Ie(S) is the set of edges defined as

Ie(S)={x,y}(s2)Ie(x,y).

A set S is called an edge geodetic set if Ie(S) = E(G). The edge geodetic problem, introduced and studied by Santhakumaran et al. [11], is to find a minimum edge geodetic set of G. The size of such a set is denoted with ge(G). Note that g(G) ≤ ge(G) holds for any graph G. As far as we know, the complexity status of the edge geodetic problem is unknown for the general case. On the other hand there are a significant number of theoretical results of the edge geodetic problem [1214].

We now formally introduce the strong edge geodetic problem. If G is a graph, then SV(G) is called a strong edge geodetic set if to any pair x, yS one can assign a shortest x, y-path Pxy such that

{x,y}(s2)E(Pxy)=E(G).

By definition, in a strong edge geodetic set S there are (|S|2) paths Pxy that cover all the edges of G. The cardinality of a smallest strong edge geodetic set S will be called the strong edge geodetic number G and denoted by sge(G). We will also say that the smallest strong edge geodetic set S is a sge(G)-set. The strong edge geodetic problem for G is to find a sge(G)-set of G. We emphasize that the strong edge geodetic problem requires, not only to determine a set SV(G), but also a list of specific geodesics, that is, precisely one geodesic between each pair of vertices from S.

The Cartesian product G1 □ ⋯ □ Gk of graphs G1, …, Gk has the vertex set V(G1) × ⋯ × V(Gk), vertices (g1, …, gk) and (g1,,gk) being adjacent if they differ in exactly one position, say in the ith, and gigi is an edge of Gi [15]. A vertex v of a graph G is simplicial if its neighborhood induces a clique. In other words, a vertex v is simplicial if only if v lies in exactly one maximal clique. Finally, for a positive integer n we will use the notation [n] = {1, …, n}.

3 Strong edge geodetic problem is NP-complete

In this section we prove:

Theorem 3.1

The strong edge geodetic problem is NP-complete.

If G is a graph, then a set S of its vertices is called a shortest path union cover if the shortest paths that start at the vertices of S cover all the edges of G. Here, we consider all the shortest paths that start at v for each vS. The shortest path union cover problem is to find a shortest path union cover of minimum cardinality. Boothe et al. [16] proved that the shortest path union cover problem is NP-complete. Now we show that the strong edge geodetic problem is NP-complete by a reduction from the shortest path union cover problem.

Given a graph G = (V, E), we construct a graph G′ = (V′, E′) with the vertex set V′ = VV1V2 and the edge set E′ = EE1E2E3. The vertex set V1 is {ui : uV, i ∈[deg(u)]} and V2 is { ui : uV, i ∈ [deg(u)]}. Hence, for each vertex u of G, vertices {u1, …, udeg(u)} are added to V1 and vertices {u1,...,udeg(u)} are added to V2. The edge set E1 is {uui : uV, i ∈ [deg(u)]}. The edge set E2 is {uivj : uV, i ∈ [deg(u)] and vV, j ∈ [deg(v)]} ∪ {uiuj:uV, i, j ∈ [deg(u)]}. The edge set E3 is {ui ui :uV, i ∈ [deg(u)], ij}. The construction is illustrated in Fig. 2. We can imagine that the graph G′ = (V′, E′) is composed of three layers where the top layer is the graph G, the middle layer is induced by the vertex set V1, and the bottom layer corresponds to the vertex set V2 which is an independent set.

Fig. 2 
Graphs G and G′.
Fig. 2

Graphs G and G′.

In the above construction, we thus create vertices w1,...,wdeg(w) in G′ for every vertex w of G. It is important to know the reason for this construction. Here is the explanation. It is easy to verify that in the example from Fig. 2 the singleton {v} is a shortest path union cover of G. Between the vertices v and z, there are two shortest paths vxz and vyz which cover the edges of G. See Fig. 3(a). Between one pair of vertices, more than one shortest path is allowed in the shortest path union cover problem. But in the strong edge geodetic problem between one pair of vertices v and z1 , two shortest paths vxzz1 z1 and vyzz1 z1 are not allowed. See Fig. 3(b). In order to avoid this conflict, for every vertex w of G, we create w1,...,wdeg(w) in G′. The shortest paths vxzz1 z1 and vyzz2 z2 that cover the edges of G′ do not violate the condition of the strong edge geodetic problem. See Fig. 3(c).

Fig. 3 
The reason for constructing 

w1′,...,wdeg(w)′
$\begin{array}{}
w_{1}', . . ., w_{{\text{deg}(w)}}'
\end{array} $ in G′ for every vertex w of G.
Fig. 3

The reason for constructing w1,...,wdeg(w) in G′ for every vertex w of G.

Here is a simple observation on the graph G′(V′, E′).

Observation 3.2

The vertex set V2 is a subset of any strong edge geodetic set Y of G′.

Proof

Suppose a vertex ui of V2 is not in Y. Then the edge ui ui is not covered by any shortest path generated by the vertices of Y. □

Property 3.3

For each strong edge geodetic set Y of G′, there exists a strong edge geodetic set Yof Gsuch that Y′ ⊆ Y and Y′ = XV2 where X is a subset of V.

Proof

Suppose that Y contains a member ui of V1. By Observation 3.2, its corresponding vertex ui of V2 is in Y. Then the vertex ui can be replaced by ui which is already in Y. Set Y′ = YV1. A shortest path uiP is a subpath of the shortest path ui ujP. Hence Y′ is is also a strong edge geodetic set of G′ and Y′ = XV2, where X is a subset of V. □

Property 3.4

X is a shortest path union cover of G if and only if XV2 is a strong edge geodetic set of G′.

Proof

Assuming that X is a shortest path union cover of G, we will prove that XV2 is a strong edge geodetic set of G′. First we cover an edge uivj of E2 by the shortest path ui uivj vj where ui and vj are in XV2. Note that this also holds true in the case when u = v. The described paths in addition cover all the edges of E3 too. Since X is a shortest path union cover of G, the edges of E are covered by the shortest paths uPv where uX, vV and P is a shortest path in G. Thus, the edges of E and E1 are covered by the shortest paths uPvvi vi where uPvvi vi is a shortest path generated by XV2. Thus XV2 is a strong edge geodetic set of G′.

Conversely, suppose that XV2 is a strong edge geodetic set of G′. Then, for each edge e of E, there exists a shortest path Pxy where x, yXV2 such that Pxy covers e. By the structure of graph G′, for any shortest path Puv, if both u and v are not in V, then Puv will not cover any edge of E. Thus either x or y is in V. Say xV. Thus a sub path of Pxy starting at x which is also a shortest path indeed covers e. Hence, X is a shortest path union cover of G. □

By Property 3.3 and 3.4, we have thus proved that a minimum shortest path union cover of G can be determined by finding a strong edge geodetic set of G′. Since G′ can clearly be constructed from G in polynomial time, the argument is complete.

4 Upper bounds of sge(G)

In this section an upper bound on sge(G) is given and another possible upper bound discussed. The upper bound given is in terms of (edge) isometric path covers, where an isometric path has the same meaning as a geodesic (alias a shortest path). Since the term isometric path cover is well-established, we use this terminology here.

Let G = (V, E) be a graph. A set S of isometric paths of G is said to be an isometric path cover of G if every vertex vV belongs to at least one path from S. The cardinality of a minimum isometric path cover is called the isometric path number of G and denoted by ip(G)[17, 18]. We now introduce the edge version of the isometric path cover in the natural way. A set S of isometric paths of a graph G = (V, E) is an edge isometric path cover of G if every edge eE belongs to at least one path from S. The cardinality of a minimum edge isometric path cover is called the edge isometric path number and denoted by ipe(G). With this concept we have the following bounds.

Theorem 4.1

If G is a connected graph, then

1+(8×ipe(G)+1)2sge(G)2×ipe(G).

Proof

A strong edge geodetic cover S generates (|S|2) number of geodesics. Thus (|S|2) ipe(G) which in turn implies that |S|1+(8×ipe(G)+1)2. Since this inequality is true for every strong edge geodetic cover, we conclude that sge(G)1+(8×ipe(G)+1)2.

The inequality sge(G) ≤ 2 × ipe(G) follows from the fact that an edge isometric path cover of cardinality ipe(G) contains at most 2 × ipe(G) end-vertices. □

Remark 4.2

The upper bound of sge(G) ≤ 2 × ipe(G) is sharp. For instance, for the star graphs K1,2r, it is easy to veriffi that sge(K1,2r) = 2r = 2 × ipe(K1,2r). Additional sharpness examples can be constructed using tree-like graphs.

To conclude the section we note that the bound sge(G) ≤ |V(G)|–diam(G)+1 which one would be tempted to conjecture does not hold. For this sake consider the graph G obtained from the 6-cycle on the vertices v1, …, v6 with natural adjacencies, by adding the edges v1 V3 and v4v6. Then diam (G) = 3 yet it can be verified that sge(G) = 5.

5 Lower bound using simplicial vertices

In view of Theorem 3.1 it is natural to derive upper and lower bounds for the strong edge geodetic number. In this section we use simplicial vertices for this purpose and derive some related consequences.

Clearly, every simplicial vertex u belongs to every geodetic set, to every edge geodetic set, as well as to every strong edge geodetic set because u cannot be an inner vertex of a geodesic. We have already observed that g(G) ≤ ge(G) holds for any graph G. In addition, we also have ge(G) ≤ sge(G). In the next result we collect these observations for the latter use.

Lemma 5.1

Let X be the set of simplicial vertices of a graph G. Then

|X|g(G)ge(G)sge(G).

Using Lemma 5.1, we compute strong edge geodetic number for certain graphs. First we proceed with block graphs and trees. Recall that a graph G is a block graph if every block of G is a clique.

Proposition 5.2

The set of simplicial vertices of a block graph G on at least two vertices is a sge(G)-set of G.

Proof

Let X be the set of simplicial vertices of a block graph G. By Lemma 5.1, sge(G) ≤ |X|.

It remains to prove that X is a strong edge geodetic set of G. We proceed by induction on the number b of blocks of G. If b = 1 then G is a complete graph on at least two vertices, and the assertion clearly holds. Suppose now that b ≤ 2. Let Q be a pendant block of G and let V(Q) = {x1, …, xk}, k ≤ 2. We may without loss of generality assume that xk is the cut vertex of Q. Then xi, i ∈ [k−1], are simplicial vertices of G. The graph G′ induced by the vertices (V(G) ∖ V(Q)) ∪ {xk} is a block graph (on at least two vertices) with one block less than G, hence by the induction hypothesis the set of its simplicial vertices forms a sge(G)-set of G′. Let Y′ be the set of geodesics that correspond to a sge(G′)-set. Suppose first that xk is a simplicial vertex of G′. Then the set of paths {Pxi : PY′,P = xkP′,i ∈ [k−1]} ∪ { P : PY′ ,xk is not end vertex of P} ∪ {xixj : i,j ∈ [k−1],ij} forms a required strong edge geodetic set of G. Similarly, if xk is not a simplicial vertex of G′, then we replace every shortest path from Y′ that is of the form PxkR with shortest paths Pxkxi and xixkR for all i ∈ [k−1] to find a required strong edge geodetic set of G also in this case. □

Proposition 5.2 immediately implies:

Corollary 5.3

The set of leaves of a tree T is a unique sge(G)-set of T.

Next we determine the strong edge geodetic number of hexagonal silicate networks which are well-known chemical networks. A hexagonal silicate network [19] is shown in Fig. 4.

Fig. 4 
Silicate network.
Fig. 4

Silicate network.

Corollary 5.4

The simplicial vertices of the hexagonal silicate network G form a sge(G)-set of G.

Proof

The simplicial vertices of G are marked by white bullets in Fig. 4. It is easy to verify that the set of simplicial vertices forms a strong edge geodetic set of G. The result follows from Lemma 5.1. □

Corollary 5.4 considers only silicate networks of hexagonal type. This result can be extended to any type of silicate sheets. The verification is left to the reader.

6 Lower bound using convex components

For a different kind of a lower bound we introduce the following concept. We say that edges e and f of a graph G form a geodesic pair if they belong to some shortest path of G. Otherwise, e and f form a non-geodesic pair. Since (non)-geodesic pairs play a key role in Theorem 6.2, we next characterize such edges in the following result that might be of independent interest.

Proposition 6.1

Let e = uv and f = xy be edges of a connected graph G. Then e and f are geodesic if and only if|{d(u, x),d(u,y),d(v,x),d(v,y}| = 3.

Proof

Suppose that e and f are geodesic edges and let P be a shortest path containing these two edges. We may without loss of generality assume that d(v,x) = d(u,y)+2 and set d(v,x) = k. Then d(u,x) = d(v,y) = k+1, so that

{d(u,x),d(u,y),d(v,x),d(v,y)}={k,k+1,k+2}.

Conversely, suppose that |{d(u, x),d(u,y),d(v,x),d(v,y}| = 3. We may without loss of generality assume that k = d(u,x) is the minimal among the four distances. If also d(v,x) = k, then d(u,y) ≤ k+1 and d(v,y) ≤ k+1 which is not possible. Therefore, d(v,x) = k+1. Since d(u,y) ≤ k+1 it follows that d(v,y) = k+2. It now readily follows that e and f are geodesic edges. □

We recall that a subgraph H of a graph G is convex, if for any vertices x, yV(H), every shortest x, y-path in G lies completely in H.

Theorem 6.2

Let F be a set of pairwise non-geodesic edges of a graph G. If GF consists of t ≥ 2 convex components, then

sge(G)t×2|F|t(t1)t.

Proof

Let G[X1], …, G[Xt] be the convex components of GF. Let U be an arbitrary strong edge geodetic set of G and set Ui = UXi, i ∈ [t]. Clearly, U=i=1tUi and UiUj = ∅ for ij. As G[Xi] is convex, no shortest path between two vertices of Ui contains an edge from F. Since in addition a shortest path between a vertex from Ui and a vertex from Uj, ij, contains at most one edge from F, if follows that

ij|Ui||Uj||F|. (1)

Using the fact that for any non-negative real numbers their arithmetic mean is at least as large as their geometric mean, we get

|U|=k=1t|Uk|t×k=1t|Uk|t. (2)

Since |Uk| ≤ 1 for k ∈ [t], the following inequality is straightforward:

k=1t|Uk||Ui||Uj|,i,j[t]. (3)

Applying Inequality (3) for all t2 pairs {i, j} we get

t2k=1t|Uk|ij|Ui||Uj|. (4)

Using (2), (4), and (1) in that order, we can now estimate as follows:

|U|t×k=1t|Uk|tt×1(2t)ij|Ui||Uj|tt×1(2t)|F|t.

Since U is an arbitrary strong edge geodetic set we conclude that

sge(G)t×2|F|t(t1)t.

Since sge(G) is an integral, the result follows. □

To show that the bound of Theorem 6.2 is sharp, let us say that a graph G is r-good if it contains vertices u and v such that I(u,v) contains r shortest u, v-paths which cover all the edges of G. For example, uniform theta graphs [20] are r-good graphs. To specify the vertices u and v we will denote such a graph with Guv . Clearly, an r-good graph Guv is necessarily bipartite and u and v are diametrical vertices of G.

Proposition 6.3

Let Guivi , i ∈ [n], be (n−1)-good graphs, n ≥ 2. Let V(Kn) = [n] and let X be the graph obtained from the disjoint union of Kn and Guivi , i ∈ [n], by connecting ui with i for i ∈ [n]. Then sge(X) = n.

Proof

Clearly, a strong edge geodetic set of X must contain at least one vertex from each of the subgraphs Guivi , hence sge(X) ≤ n.

To prove the other inequality it suffices to show that {vi : i ∈ [n]} is a sge(G)-set of X. Let Pji , j ∈ [n] ∖ i, be the shortest vi, ui -paths in Guivi that cover all the edges. (Such paths exist because Guivi . is an (n−1)-good graph.) For any ij let Pij be the path in X that is a concatenation of the paths Pji and Pij , and the edges iui, ij, and juj. It is straightforward to verify that each Pij is a shortest vi, vj -path in G and that the paths Pij, i,j ∈ [n], ij, cover all the edges of X. Hence sge(X) ≤ n. □

Consider the graph X of Proposition 6.3 and let F = E(Kn). Then F is a set of pairwise non-geodesic edges and XF consists of n convex components. Since |F| = n2 , it follows that the bound of Theorem 6.2 is sharp for X.

An important special case of Theorem 6.2 is the following. A set F of edges of a connected graph G is a convex edge-cut if GF consists of two convex components. Note that the edges of a convex edge-cut are pairwise non-geodesic for otherwise at least one of the components of GF would not be convex. Hence Theorem 6.2 immediately implies:

Corollary 6.4

If F is a convex edge-cut of a graph G, then sge(G)2|F|.

We next give an application of Corollary 6.4. Glued binary trees were introduced by physicists as a tool to design quantum algorithms [21] and quantum circuits [22]. It plays a significant role in Quantum Information Theory [23]. It is also used to study the transmission properties of continuous time quantum walks in quantum physics [24, 25]. Lockhart et al. [26] designed glued tree algorithm using glued binary trees.

An r-level complete binary tree T(r) has 2r leaves. An r-level glued binary tree GT(r) is formed by connecting the leaves of two r-level complete binary trees T1(r) and T2(r). Fig. 5 displays two 3-level glued binary trees GT(3). In general, the vertex set of GT(r) is the union of the vertex sets of complete binary trees T1(r) and T2(r). Let L1 and L2 denote the vertex sets of leaves of T1(r) and T2(r) respectively. Notice that each set L1 and L2 is an independent set. The sets L1 and L2 induce a bipartite graph in GT(r). Feder [23] classifies glued binary trees into those without randomization and those with randomization. If the edges of the bipartite subgraph induced by the sets L1 and L2 are in some fixed order, then they are called the glued binary trees without randomization, while if the sets L1 and L2 induce an arbitrary bipartite graph, then they are called the glued binary trees with randomization. Fig. 5(a) shows a 3-level glued binary tree without randomization. Fig. 5(b) displays a 3-level glued binary tree with randomization.

Fig. 5 
(a) Glued binary trees without randomization GTc(r) and (b) glued binary trees with randomization.
Fig. 5

(a) Glued binary trees without randomization GTc(r) and (b) glued binary trees with randomization.

Using Corollary 6.4, we can solve the strong edge geodetic problem for certain classes of glued binary trees without randomization. We define two graphs GTp(r) and GTc(r) which are glued binary trees without randomization. The graph GTp(r) is obtained from T1(r) and T2(r) by adding straight edges between the corresponding leaves, see Fig. 6(a) for GTp(4). The graph GTc(r) is obtained from GTp(r) by adding additional cross edges between the leaves as shown in Fig. 5(a) for the case GTc(3).

Fig. 6 
Glued binary tree GTp(4).
Fig. 6

Glued binary tree GTp(4).

Theorem 6.5

sge(GTp(r)) = 22r .

Proof

The set of straight edges (dotted edges in Fig. 6(b)) between the leaves forms a convex edge-cut of cardinality 2r. By Corollary 6.4, sge(GTp(r)) ≤ 22r .

Let k = 22r .The vertex set of GTp(r) is the union of the vertex sets of complete binary trees T(r) and T2(r). Starting from the root of T1(r), select k/2 vertices of T1(r) in a breadth first search (BFS) traversal order. Name this set as S1. In the same way, build a set S2 by selecting another k/2 vertices from T2(r). Set S = S1S2. The red bullets in Fig. 6(b) represent this set S. It is a simple exercise to verify that the set S of vertices forms a strong edge geodetic set. Thus sge(GTp(r)) = 22r . □

Using an approach from the proof of Theorem 6.5 we can also deduce the following result.

Theorem 6.6

sge(GTc(r))=22×2r.

Further research is to identify the classes of glued binary trees without randomization for which the strong edge geodetic problem can be solved. The strong edge geodetic problem for glued binary trees with randomization is left as an open problem.

7 Further research

The vertex version of the strong edge geodetic problem is the strong geodetic problem defined analogously as follows. A set SV(G) is a strong geodetic set if for any pair x, yS there exists a shortest x, y-path Pxy such that

x,y(s2)V(Pxy)=V(G).

The strong geodetic problem is to find a smallest strong geodetic set of G. To our knowledge, there is no literature yet on the strong geodetic problem. We believe it is also NP-complete, similar to the edge version of the problem. As already mentioned in Section 4, Fitzpatrick et al. [17] have studied the isometric path problem. It would be interesting to investigate relationships between the strong geodetic problem and the isometric path problem. Fitzpatrick et al. [17] have derived the isometric path number for two dimensional grids. Further research would be to design techniques to derive the strong geodetic number for grid-like architectures and similar architectures.

8 Conclusion

By modeling the urban road network problem as a graph combinatorial problem we proved that the urban road network problem is NP-complete. Naming this problem as the strong edge geodetic problem, we have studied the properties and characteristics of the strong edge geodetic problem from the perspectives of graph theory. We have derived some sharp lower bounds for strong edge geodetic number. Using these lower bounds, we have computed the strong edge geodetic number of certain classes of graphs such as trees, block graphs, silicate networks and some glued binary trees without randomization. The complexity of the problem is unknown for other graphs such as gridlike architectures, intersection graphs, Cayley graphs, chordal graphs and some of their subclasses (interval graphs, split graphs, k-tree, …), bipartite graphs and planar graphs.

Acknowledgements

This work was supported and funded by Kuwait University, Research Project No. (QI 01/16). We thank Xuding Zhu for suggesting the term “strong edge geodetic problem”.

References

[1] Harary F., Loukakis E., Tsouros C., The geodetic number of a graph, Math. Comput. Modelling, 1993, 17, 89–95.10.1016/0895-7177(93)90259-2Search in Google Scholar

[2] Appert M., Laurent C., Measuring urban road network vulnerability using graph theory : the case of Montpellier’s road network, HAL Archives-Ouvertes, 2007, HAL Id : halshs-00841520, 89p.Search in Google Scholar

[3] Jiang B., Claramunt C., A structural approach to the model generalization of an urban street network, GeoInformatica, 2004, 8, 157–171.10.1023/B:GEIN.0000017746.44824.70Search in Google Scholar

[4] Thomson R.C., Richardson D.E., A graph theory approach to road network generalization, in: Proceedings of the 16th International Cartographic Conference, Barcelona, Spain, 3–9 September 1995 (Ed. by the Institut Cartogràfic de Cataluny), 1871–1880.Search in Google Scholar

[5] Ahangar H.A., Samodivkin V., Sheikholeslami S.M., Khodkar A., The restrained geodetic number of a graph, Bull. Malays. Math. Sci. Soc. 2015, 38, 1143–1155.10.1007/s40840-014-0068-ySearch in Google Scholar

[6] Brešar B., Klavžar S., Tepeh Horvat A., On the geodetic number and related metric sets in Cartesian product graphs, Discrete Math. 2008, 308, 5555–5561.10.1016/j.disc.2007.10.007Search in Google Scholar

[7] Chartrand G., Harary F., Zhang P., Geodetic sets in graphs, Discuss. Math. Graph Theory, 2000, 20, 129–138.10.7151/dmgt.1112Search in Google Scholar

[8] Chartrand G., Harary F., Zhang P., On the geodetic number of a graph, Networks, 2002, 39, 1–6.10.1002/net.10007Search in Google Scholar

[9] Dourado M.C., Protti F., Rautenbach D., Szwarcfiter J.L., Some remarks on the geodetic number of a graph, Discrete Math. 2010, 310, 832–837.10.1016/j.disc.2009.09.018Search in Google Scholar

[10] Tong L.-D., Geodetic sets and Steiner sets in graphs, Discrete Math. 2009, 309, 4205–4207.10.1016/j.disc.2008.10.010Search in Google Scholar

[11] Santhakumaran A.P., John J., Edge geodetic number of a graph, J. Discrete Math. Sci. Cryptogr. 2007, 10, 415–432.10.1080/09720529.2007.10698129Search in Google Scholar

[12] Raj S.A.A., Victor S.P., Algorithms to find geodetic numbers and edge geodetic numbers in graphs, Indian J. Sci. Tech. 2015, 8(13), 5pp.10.17485/ijst/2015/v8i13/53160Search in Google Scholar

[13] Santhakumaran A.P., Ullas Chandran S.V., The edge geodetic number and Cartesian product of graphs, Discuss. Math. Graph Theory, 2010, 30, 55–73.10.7151/dmgt.1476Search in Google Scholar

[14] Santhakumaran A.P., Ullas Chandran S.V., The 2-edge geodetic number and graph operations, Arabian J. Math. 2012, 1, 241–249.10.1007/s40065-012-0016-3Search in Google Scholar

[15] Hammack R., Imrich W., Klavžar S., Handbook of Product Graphs. Second Edition, CRC Press, Boca Raton, 2011.10.1201/b10959Search in Google Scholar

[16] Boothe P., Dvořák Z., Farley A., Proskurowski A., Graph covering via shortest paths, Congr. Numer. 2007, 87, 145–155.Search in Google Scholar

[17] Fitzpatrick S.L., The isometric path number of the Cartesian product of paths, Congr. Numer. 1999, 137, 109–119.Search in Google Scholar

[18] Pan J.-J., Chang G.J., Isometric path numbers of graphs, Discrete Math. 2006, 306, 2091–2096.10.1016/j.disc.2006.04.003Search in Google Scholar

[19] Manuel P., Rajasingh I., Minimum metric dimension of silicate networks, Ars Combin. 2011, 98, 501–510.Search in Google Scholar

[20] Carraher J.M., Mahoney T., Puleo G.J., West D.B., Sum-paintability of generalized theta-graphs, Graphs Combin. 2015, 31, 1325–1334.Search in Google Scholar

[21] Childs A.M., Cleve R., Deotto E., Farhi E., Gutmann S., Spielman D.A., Exponential algorithmic speedup by quantum walk, Proc. 35th ACM Symposium on Theory of Computing (STOC 2003), 59–68.10.1145/780542.780552Search in Google Scholar

[22] Ide Y., Konno N., Segawa E., Xu X.-P., Localization of discrete time quantum walks on the glued trees, Entropy, 2014, 16, 1501–1514.10.3390/e16031501Search in Google Scholar

[23] Feder D., Graphs in Quantum Information Theory, Manuscript, University of Calgary, Alberta, Canada, 2015.Search in Google Scholar

[24] Douglas B.J., Wang J.B., Efficient quantum circuit implementation of quantum walks, Phys. Rev. A, 2009, 79, 052335, 5pp.10.1103/PhysRevA.79.052335Search in Google Scholar

[25] Li Z.-J., Wang J.B., An analytical study of quantum walk through glued-tree graphs, J. Phys. A, 2015, 48, 355301, 15 pp.10.1088/1751-8113/48/35/355301Search in Google Scholar

[26] Lockhart J., Di Franco C., Paternostro M., Glued trees algorithm under phase damping, Physics Lett, A, 2014, 378, 338–343.10.1016/j.physleta.2013.11.034Search in Google Scholar

Received: 2017-2-15
Accepted: 2017-8-16
Published Online: 2017-10-3

© 2017 Manuel et al.

This work is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 3.0 License.

Articles in the same Issue

  1. Regular Articles
  2. Integrals of Frullani type and the method of brackets
  3. Regular Articles
  4. Edge of chaos in reaction diffusion CNN model
  5. Regular Articles
  6. Calculus using proximities: a mathematical approach in which students can actually prove theorems
  7. Regular Articles
  8. An investigation on hyper S-posets over ordered semihypergroups
  9. Regular Articles
  10. The Leibniz algebras whose subalgebras are ideals
  11. Regular Articles
  12. Fixed point and multidimensional fixed point theorems with applications to nonlinear matrix equations in terms of weak altering distance functions
  13. Regular Articles
  14. Matrix rank and inertia formulas in the analysis of general linear models
  15. Regular Articles
  16. The hybrid power mean of quartic Gauss sums and Kloosterman sums
  17. Regular Articles
  18. Tauberian theorems for statistically (C,1,1) summable double sequences of fuzzy numbers
  19. Regular Articles
  20. Some properties of graded comultiplication modules
  21. Regular Articles
  22. The characterizations of upper approximation operators based on special coverings
  23. Regular Articles
  24. Bi-integrable and tri-integrable couplings of a soliton hierarchy associated with SO(4)
  25. Regular Articles
  26. Dynamics for a discrete competition and cooperation model of two enterprises with multiple delays and feedback controls
  27. Regular Articles
  28. A new view of relationship between atomic posets and complete (algebraic) lattices
  29. Regular Articles
  30. A class of extensions of Restricted (s, t)-Wythoff’s game
  31. Regular Articles
  32. New bounds for the minimum eigenvalue of 𝓜-tensors
  33. Regular Articles
  34. Shintani and Shimura lifts of cusp forms on certain arithmetic groups and their applications
  35. Regular Articles
  36. Empirical likelihood for quantile regression models with response data missing at random
  37. Regular Articles
  38. Convex combination of analytic functions
  39. Regular Articles
  40. On the Yang-Baxter-like matrix equation for rank-two matrices
  41. Regular Articles
  42. Uniform topology on EQ-algebras
  43. Regular Articles
  44. Integrations on rings
  45. Regular Articles
  46. The quasilinear parabolic kirchhoff equation
  47. Regular Articles
  48. Avoiding rainbow 2-connected subgraphs
  49. Regular Articles
  50. On non-Hopfian groups of fractions
  51. Regular Articles
  52. Singularly perturbed hyperbolic problems on metric graphs: asymptotics of solutions
  53. Regular Articles
  54. Rings in which elements are the sum of a nilpotent and a root of a fixed polynomial that commute
  55. Regular Articles
  56. Superstability of functional equations related to spherical functions
  57. Regular Articles
  58. Evaluation of the convolution sum involving the sum of divisors function for 22, 44 and 52
  59. Regular Articles
  60. Weighted minimal translation surfaces in the Galilean space with density
  61. Regular Articles
  62. Complete convergence for weighted sums of pairwise independent random variables
  63. Regular Articles
  64. Binomials transformation formulae for scaled Fibonacci numbers
  65. Regular Articles
  66. Growth functions for some uniformly amenable groups
  67. Regular Articles
  68. Hopf bifurcations in a three-species food chain system with multiple delays
  69. Regular Articles
  70. Oscillation and nonoscillation of half-linear Euler type differential equations with different periodic coefficients
  71. Regular Articles
  72. Osculating curves in 4-dimensional semi-Euclidean space with index 2
  73. Regular Articles
  74. Some new facts about group 𝒢 generated by the family of convergent permutations
  75. Regular Articles
  76. lnfinitely many solutions for fractional Schrödinger equations with perturbation via variational methods
  77. Regular Articles
  78. Supersolvable orders and inductively free arrangements
  79. Regular Articles
  80. Asymptotically almost automorphic solutions of differential equations with piecewise constant argument
  81. Regular Articles
  82. Finite groups whose all second maximal subgroups are cyclic
  83. Regular Articles
  84. Semilinear systems with a multi-valued nonlinear term
  85. Regular Articles
  86. Positive solutions for Hadamard differential systems with fractional integral conditions on an unbounded domain
  87. Regular Articles
  88. Calibration and simulation of Heston model
  89. Regular Articles
  90. One kind sixth power mean of the three-term exponential sums
  91. Regular Articles
  92. Cyclic pairs and common best proximity points in uniformly convex Banach spaces
  93. Regular Articles
  94. The uniqueness of meromorphic functions in k-punctured complex plane
  95. Regular Articles
  96. Normalizers of intermediate congruence subgroups of the Hecke subgroups
  97. Regular Articles
  98. The hyperbolicity constant of infinite circulant graphs
  99. Regular Articles
  100. Scott convergence and fuzzy Scott topology on L-posets
  101. Regular Articles
  102. One sided strong laws for random variables with infinite mean
  103. Regular Articles
  104. The join of split graphs whose completely regular endomorphisms form a monoid
  105. Regular Articles
  106. A new branch and bound algorithm for minimax ratios problems
  107. Regular Articles
  108. Upper bound estimate of incomplete Cochrane sum
  109. Regular Articles
  110. Value distributions of solutions to complex linear differential equations in angular domains
  111. Regular Articles
  112. The nonlinear diffusion equation of the ideal barotropic gas through a porous medium
  113. Regular Articles
  114. The Sheffer stroke operation reducts of basic algebras
  115. Regular Articles
  116. Extensions and improvements of Sherman’s and related inequalities for n-convex functions
  117. Regular Articles
  118. Classification lattices are geometric for complete atomistic lattices
  119. Regular Articles
  120. Possible numbers of x’s in an {x, y}-matrix with a given rank
  121. Regular Articles
  122. New error bounds for linear complementarity problems of weakly chained diagonally dominant B-matrices
  123. Regular Articles
  124. Boundedness of vector-valued B-singular integral operators in Lebesgue spaces
  125. Regular Articles
  126. On the Golomb’s conjecture and Lehmer’s numbers
  127. Regular Articles
  128. Some applications of the Archimedean copulas in the proof of the almost sure central limit theorem for ordinary maxima
  129. Regular Articles
  130. Dual-stage adaptive finite-time modified function projective multi-lag combined synchronization for multiple uncertain chaotic systems
  131. Regular Articles
  132. Corrigendum to: Dual-stage adaptive finite-time modified function projective multi-lag combined synchronization for multiple uncertain chaotic systems
  133. Regular Articles
  134. Convergence and stability of generalized φ-weak contraction mapping in CAT(0) spaces
  135. Regular Articles
  136. Triple solutions for a Dirichlet boundary value problem involving a perturbed discrete p(k)-Laplacian operator
  137. Regular Articles
  138. OD-characterization of alternating groups Ap+d
  139. Regular Articles
  140. On Jordan mappings of inverse semirings
  141. Regular Articles
  142. On generalized Ehresmann semigroups
  143. Regular Articles
  144. On topological properties of spaces obtained by the double band matrix
  145. Regular Articles
  146. Representing derivatives of Chebyshev polynomials by Chebyshev polynomials and related questions
  147. Regular Articles
  148. Chain conditions on composite Hurwitz series rings
  149. Regular Articles
  150. Coloring subgraphs with restricted amounts of hues
  151. Regular Articles
  152. An extension of the method of brackets. Part 1
  153. Regular Articles
  154. Branch-delete-bound algorithm for globally solving quadratically constrained quadratic programs
  155. Regular Articles
  156. Strong edge geodetic problem in networks
  157. Regular Articles
  158. Ricci solitons on almost Kenmotsu 3-manifolds
  159. Regular Articles
  160. Uniqueness of meromorphic functions sharing two finite sets
  161. Regular Articles
  162. On the fourth-order linear recurrence formula related to classical Gauss sums
  163. Regular Articles
  164. Dynamical behavior for a stochastic two-species competitive model
  165. Regular Articles
  166. Two new eigenvalue localization sets for tensors and theirs applications
  167. Regular Articles
  168. κ-strong sequences and the existence of generalized independent families
  169. Regular Articles
  170. Commutators of Littlewood-Paley gκ -functions on non-homogeneous metric measure spaces
  171. Regular Articles
  172. On decompositions of estimators under a general linear model with partial parameter restrictions
  173. Regular Articles
  174. Groups and monoids of Pythagorean triples connected to conics
  175. Regular Articles
  176. Hom-Lie superalgebra structures on exceptional simple Lie superalgebras of vector fields
  177. Regular Articles
  178. Numerical methods for the multiplicative partial differential equations
  179. Regular Articles
  180. Solvable Leibniz algebras with NFn Fm1 nilradical
  181. Regular Articles
  182. Evaluation of the convolution sums ∑al+bm=n lσ(l) σ(m) with ab ≤ 9
  183. Regular Articles
  184. A study on soft rough semigroups and corresponding decision making applications
  185. Regular Articles
  186. Some new inequalities of Hermite-Hadamard type for s-convex functions with applications
  187. Regular Articles
  188. Deficiency of forests
  189. Regular Articles
  190. Perfect codes in power graphs of finite groups
  191. Regular Articles
  192. A new compact finite difference quasilinearization method for nonlinear evolution partial differential equations
  193. Regular Articles
  194. Does any convex quadrilateral have circumscribed ellipses?
  195. Regular Articles
  196. The dynamic of a Lie group endomorphism
  197. Regular Articles
  198. On pairs of equations in unlike powers of primes and powers of 2
  199. Regular Articles
  200. Differential subordination and convexity criteria of integral operators
  201. Regular Articles
  202. Quantitative relations between short intervals and exceptional sets of cubic Waring-Goldbach problem
  203. Regular Articles
  204. On θ-commutators and the corresponding non-commuting graphs
  205. Regular Articles
  206. Quasi-maximum likelihood estimator of Laplace (1, 1) for GARCH models
  207. Regular Articles
  208. Multiple and sign-changing solutions for discrete Robin boundary value problem with parameter dependence
  209. Regular Articles
  210. Fundamental relation on m-idempotent hyperrings
  211. Regular Articles
  212. A novel recursive method to reconstruct multivariate functions on the unit cube
  213. Regular Articles
  214. Nabla inequalities and permanence for a logistic integrodifferential equation on time scales
  215. Regular Articles
  216. Enumeration of spanning trees in the sequence of Dürer graphs
  217. Regular Articles
  218. Quotient of information matrices in comparison of linear experiments for quadratic estimation
  219. Regular Articles
  220. Fourier series of functions involving higher-order ordered Bell polynomials
  221. Regular Articles
  222. Simple modules over Auslander regular rings
  223. Regular Articles
  224. Weighted multilinear p-adic Hardy operators and commutators
  225. Regular Articles
  226. Guaranteed cost finite-time control of positive switched nonlinear systems with D-perturbation
  227. Regular Articles
  228. A modified quasi-boundary value method for an abstract ill-posed biparabolic problem
  229. Regular Articles
  230. Extended Riemann-Liouville type fractional derivative operator with applications
  231. Topical Issue on Topological and Algebraic Genericity in Infinite Dimensional Spaces
  232. The algebraic size of the family of injective operators
  233. Topical Issue on Topological and Algebraic Genericity in Infinite Dimensional Spaces
  234. The history of a general criterium on spaceability
  235. Topical Issue on Topological and Algebraic Genericity in Infinite Dimensional Spaces
  236. On sequences not enjoying Schur’s property
  237. Topical Issue on Topological and Algebraic Genericity in Infinite Dimensional Spaces
  238. A hierarchy in the family of real surjective functions
  239. Topical Issue on Topological and Algebraic Genericity in Infinite Dimensional Spaces
  240. Dynamics of multivalued linear operators
  241. Topical Issue on Topological and Algebraic Genericity in Infinite Dimensional Spaces
  242. Linear dynamics of semigroups generated by differential operators
  243. Special Issue on Recent Developments in Differential Equations
  244. Isomorphism theorems for some parabolic initial-boundary value problems in Hörmander spaces
  245. Special Issue on Recent Developments in Differential Equations
  246. Determination of a diffusion coefficient in a quasilinear parabolic equation
  247. Special Issue on Recent Developments in Differential Equations
  248. Homogeneous two-point problem for PDE of the second order in time variable and infinite order in spatial variables
  249. Special Issue on Recent Developments in Differential Equations
  250. A nonlinear plate control without linearization
  251. Special Issue on Recent Developments in Differential Equations
  252. Reduction of a Schwartz-type boundary value problem for biharmonic monogenic functions to Fredholm integral equations
  253. Special Issue on Recent Developments in Differential Equations
  254. Inverse problem for a physiologically structured population model with variable-effort harvesting
  255. Special Issue on Recent Developments in Differential Equations
  256. Existence of solutions for delay evolution equations with nonlocal conditions
  257. Special Issue on Recent Developments in Differential Equations
  258. Comments on behaviour of solutions of elliptic quasi-linear problems in a neighbourhood of boundary singularities
  259. Special Issue on Recent Developments in Differential Equations
  260. Coupled fixed point theorems in complete metric spaces endowed with a directed graph and application
  261. Special Issue on Recent Developments in Differential Equations
  262. Existence of entropy solutions for nonlinear elliptic degenerate anisotropic equations
  263. Special Issue on Recent Developments in Differential Equations
  264. Integro-differential systems with variable exponents of nonlinearity
  265. Special Issue on Recent Developments in Differential Equations
  266. Elliptic operators on refined Sobolev scales on vector bundles
  267. Special Issue on Recent Developments in Differential Equations
  268. Multiplicity solutions of a class fractional Schrödinger equations
  269. Special Issue on Recent Developments in Differential Equations
  270. Determining of right-hand side of higher order ultraparabolic equation
  271. Special Issue on Recent Developments in Differential Equations
  272. Asymptotic approximation for the solution to a semi-linear elliptic problem in a thin aneurysm-type domain
  273. Topical Issue on Metaheuristics - Methods and Applications
  274. Learnheuristics: hybridizing metaheuristics with machine learning for optimization with dynamic inputs
  275. Topical Issue on Metaheuristics - Methods and Applications
  276. Nature–inspired metaheuristic algorithms to find near–OGR sequences for WDM channel allocation and their performance comparison
  277. Topical Issue on Cyber-security Mathematics
  278. Monomial codes seen as invariant subspaces
  279. Topical Issue on Cyber-security Mathematics
  280. Expert knowledge and data analysis for detecting advanced persistent threats
  281. Topical Issue on Cyber-security Mathematics
  282. Feedback equivalence of convolutional codes over finite rings
Downloaded on 4.2.2026 from https://www.degruyterbrill.com/document/doi/10.1515/math-2017-0101/html
Scroll to top button