possibly nonisomorphic graphs

44 Views Asked by At

Determine which pairs of graphs below are isomorphic, if there are any. If two graphs are not isomorphic, explain why using known properties of isomorphic graphs.

enter image description here

I know that two graphs are isomorphic iff they have the same number of cycles, same degree sequence, etc. If I can find a different number of cycles of length $4$ in $J$ than in $G$, then that suffices to show they're not isomorphic. I think there is $1$ cycle of length $4$ in $J$ and there are $2$ cycles of length $4$ in $H$, though I'm not sure how to ascertain this (mathematically, not using a computer algorithm). Clearly, for graph J, if the vertices of a cycle are all consecutive (so that they can be ordered in clockwise order and differ by at most one outermost edge), then the only cycle is (E D C B E). If they're not consecutive, then there should be some reason why they can't form a cycle.

Graph $G$ also seems to have $2$ cycles of length $4$. It has at least $6$ cycles of length $5$: (3 2 1 8 9 3), (4 10 7 6 5 4), (4 10 1 2 3 4), (2 1 8 7 6 2), (2 3 4 5 6 2), (5 6 7 8 9 5). However, I can only seem to find $4$ cycles in $H$ of length $5$: (G F E D C G), (F G H J K F), (G H A B C G), (E F K A B E). Alternatively, one can see that vertex $10$ in graph G is part of at least $3$ cycles of length $5$ and a cycle of length $4$, but there is such vertex in graph $H$, so $10$ cannot be mapped by an isomorphism to an element of $V(H)$ and hence $G$ and $H$ are not isomorphic.

Graph $G$ seems like it's not isomorphic to graph $J$ since there seems to be a different number of cycles of length $4$ in both graphs.

So it seems that $H$ and $J$ are not isomorphic and that $G$ and $H$ are not isomorphic and $G$ and $J$ are not isomorphic.

Is it even correct that no two of the graphs are isomorphic? And if so, would there be a better approach that doesn't involve counting cycles?

1

There are 1 best solutions below

0
On

The $4$-cycles in the graphs are

  • $3,4,5,9$ and $1,8,7,10$ in $G$;
  • $A,H,J,K$ and $B,C,D,E$ in $H$;
  • $a,g,f,k$ and $b,c,d,e$ and $c,d,j,h$ in $J$.

So $J$ is immediately not isomorphic to either of the others: too many $4$-cycles.

To prove that $G$ and $H$ are isomorphic, we can start building up an isomorphism. In $G$, vertices $2,6$ are not part of any $4$-cycle; in $H$, vertices $F$ and $G$ are not part of any $4$-cycle. There seems to be enough symmetry that we can just map $2$ to $F$ and $6$ to $G$ (but we might need to backtrack).

Let's try mapping $3$ ($2$'s neighbor) to $E$ ($F$'s neighbor). Then cycle $3,4,5,9$ must be mapped to cycle $B,C,D,E$ somehow; in particular, $5$ must be mapped to $C$, the other vertex on the cycle.

Also, $1$ is now forced to map to $K$ and $7$ to $H$, because those are the only neighbors left of $2$ and $6$ (and $F$ and $G$) respectively.

There is a final arbitrary choice to be made; $4$ must be mapped to a neighbor of $C$ and $E$, which can be either $B$ or $D$, but let's pick $B$. Then $9$ is mapped to $D$, $10$ must be mapped to $B$'s neighbor $A$, and $8$ must be mapped to the remaining vertex $J$.

We can check that mapping $1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9,10$ to $K,F,E,B,C,G,H,J,D,A$ respectively is an isomorphism by checking any edges we haven't checked.

As intuition for proving that $G$ and $H$ are not isomorphic, I looked at what happens when we delete edges $26$ and $FG$ in them (these are identifiable graph-theoretically in both as "the only edge between the two vertices not part of any $4$-cycle", so doing this should preserve isomorphism). This leaves two vertices of degree $2$; if we replace those by edges, we get a cube graph in both cases.