Series-parallel graph

A series-parallel graph is one of the following:

  • K 2 K_2 , a graph with two vertices and a single edge, such that one vertex is marked the source and the other vertex is marked the sink , or
  • a graph obtained from a series composition of two series-parallel graphs G , H G,H , where the sink of G G is identified (glued) to the source of H H , where the source of G G is the new source and the sink of H H is the new sink, or
  • a graph obtained from a parallel composition of two series-parallel graphs G , H G,H , where the two sources are identified, and so are the two sinks, which become the source and the sink of the new graph respectively.

The name comes because they model electric circuits, in particular series and parallel circuits. A series composition is simply putting two smaller circuits in series, and a parallel composition is simply putting two smaller circuits in parallel.

What is the maximum number of edges that a simple series-parallel graph with 2015 vertices can have?


The answer is 4027.

This section requires Javascript.
You are seeing this because something didn't load right. We suggest you, (a) try refreshing the page, (b) enabling javascript if it is disabled on your browser and, finally, (c) loading the non-javascript version of this page . We're sorry about the hassle.

1 solution

Ivan Koswara
Nov 24, 2015

Suppose that the maximum number of edges of a simple series-parallel graph is M ( n ) M(n) . We claim that for n 2 n \ge 2 , M ( n ) = 2 n 3 M(n) = 2n-3 .

This is trivially true for n = 2 , 3 n = 2, 3 . The complete graph on 2 , 3 2, 3 vertices has 1 , 3 1, 3 edges respectively, and they are series-parallel graphs (after assigning the source/sink). ( K 2 K_2 is trivial. K 3 K_3 is obtained by composing two K 2 K_2 's in series to form K 1 , 2 K_{1,2} , a path of two edges, then composing that with a K 2 K_2 in parallel.)

Suppose the claim is true for all n N n \le N , and we want to show that the claim is also true for n = N + 1 n = N+1 .

We will first prove a simple claim: if a simple series-parallel graph has the maximum number of edges for its number of vertices, then the source and the sink are connected by an edge. This is simple: if it isn't, then it can be composed with K 2 K_2 in parallel to give said edge, contradicting maximality.

Now that we have proved the claim, let G G be a simple series-parallel graph of n = N + 1 n = N+1 vertices. Also, assume that the source and the sink of G G are not connected by an edge. By the claim above, this implies that E ( G ) M ( n ) 1 |E(G)| \le M(n) - 1 ; G G has at most M ( n ) 1 M(n) - 1 edges. Also, one of the following is true:

Case 1: G G is formed from two simple series-parallel graphs G , H G', H' by composing them in series.

Let a = V ( G ) , b = V ( H ) a = |V(G')|, b = |V(H')| . Then n = a + b 1 n = a+b-1 ; all vertices of G , H G', H' are present, but a pair of them are glued together into one, so we're missing one vertex. Additionally, since they are series-parallel graphs, we know that a , b 2 a, b \ge 2 , which implies a , b n 1 a, b \le n-1 , and so we can apply induction to show that G , H G', H' has at most 2 a 3 , 2 b 3 2a-3, 2b-3 edges respectively. Thus G G has at most ( 2 a 3 ) + ( 2 b 3 ) = 2 ( a + b 1 ) 4 = ( 2 n 3 ) 1 (2a-3)+(2b-3) = 2(a+b-1)-4 = (2n-3) - 1 edges. Taking across all G G , we thus have max ( E ( G ) 1 ) = M ( n ) 1 ( 2 n 3 ) 1 \max (|E(G)|-1) = M(n)-1 \le (2n-3)-1 , or M ( n ) = 2 n 3 M(n) = 2n-3 .

Case 2: G G is formed from two simple series-parallel graphs G , H G', H' by composing them in parallel.

Let a = V ( G ) , b = V ( H ) a = |V(G')|, b = |V(H')| . Then n = a + b 2 n = a+b-2 ; all vertices of G , H G', H' are present, but two pairs are glued together respectively, so we're missing two vertices. Additionally, since they are series-parallel graphs, we know that a , b 2 a, b \ge 2 . In fact, if a = 2 a = 2 , then G = K 2 G' = K_2 , but this would mean the source and the sink of G G are connected by an edge (the edge of G G' ), contradiction. Likewise with b = 2 b = 2 . Thus a , b 3 a, b \ge 3 , which implies a , b n 1 a, b \le n-1 .

We can apply induction to show that G G' has at most 2 a 3 2a-3 edges. But we can do better: we know that if G G' has 2 a 3 2a-3 edges, then there is an edge between the source and the sink of G G' . But the source and the sink of G G are the same as that of G G' , so this would make an edge between the source and the sink of G G , contradiction. So G G' has at most 2 a 4 2a-4 edges. Likewise, H H' has at most 2 b 4 2b-4 edges. Thus G G has at most ( 2 a 4 ) + ( 2 b 4 ) = 2 ( a + b 2 ) 4 = ( 2 n 3 ) 1 (2a-4)+(2b-4) = 2(a+b-2)-4 = (2n-3) - 1 edges. Taking across all G G , we thus have max ( E ( G ) 1 ) = M ( n ) 1 ( 2 n 3 ) 1 \max (|E(G)|-1) = M(n)-1 \le (2n-3)-1 , or M ( n ) = 2 n 3 M(n) = 2n-3 .

In both cases, we have shown that M ( n ) = 2 n 3 M(n) = 2n-3 , proving the claim. Thus M ( 2015 ) = 4027 M(2015) = \boxed{4027} .

Moderator note:

Good detailed solution that keeps track of the details, in order to prove the bound by induction.

Here is a beautiful solution that I was shown in the past, which is worth sharing:
Define a 2-tree in the following manner:
- K 3 K_3 is 2-trees.
- Given a 2-tree, and an edge { x , y } \{ x, y \} of the 2-tree, we can add a new vertex z z that is adjacent to both x x and y y .


Fact: A 2-tree has exactly 2 n 3 2n - 3 edges by construction.

Claim: A (simple) series-parallel graph is a subgraph of a 2-tree. (In fact, another name for a series-parallel graph is partial 2-tree)

Hence, conclude that a series-parallel graph has at most 2 n 3 2n-3 edges.

Good detailed solution that keeps track of the details.

Here is a beautiful solution that I was shown in the past, which is worth sharing:
Define a 2-tree in the following manner:

  • K 3 K_3 is 2-tree.
  • Given a 2-tree, and an edge { x , y } \{ x, y \} of the 2-tree, we can add a new vertex z z that is adjacent to both x x and y y .

Fact: A 2-tree has exactly 2 n 3 2n - 3 edges by construction.

Claim: A series-parallel graph is a subgraph of a 2-tree. (In fact, another name for a series-parallel graph is partial 2-tree)

Hence, conclude that a series-parallel graph has at most 2 n 3 2n-3 edges.

Calvin Lin Staff - 5 years, 6 months ago

Log in to reply

That's an interesting claim. The claim as it is is actually false; you can compose many K 2 K_2 's in parallel to get a graph on two vertices and however many edges you want. However, replacing "series-parallel graph" with "simple series-parallel graph" makes it true.

Ivan Koswara - 5 years, 6 months ago

Log in to reply

Ah yes, generally in my universe, all graphs are simple, unless otherwise explicitly stated. Let me edit.

The backstory is that I came up with a similar approach as you did, of hunting down a necessary condition for the maximum (loop from source to sink), in order to prove the bound by induction. It was a really painful process like you demonstrated above, though it makes intuitive sense as a first approach. My friend then shared with me "actually, this is a subclass of a more general graph, with simpler properties", and I was wowed by this technique.

Calvin Lin Staff - 5 years, 6 months ago

Log in to reply

@Calvin Lin Ah, yes, I'm brainwashed with my Introduction to Graph Theory class to think that graphs are normally multigraphs (with parallel edges and loops allowed).

How would you prove that a (simple) series-parallel graph is a subgraph of some 2-tree?

Ivan Koswara - 5 years, 6 months ago

0 pending reports

×

Problem Loading...

Note Loading...

Set Loading...