A series-parallel graph is one of the following:
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?
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.
Suppose that the maximum number of edges of a simple series-parallel graph is M ( n ) . We claim that for n ≥ 2 , M ( n ) = 2 n − 3 .
This is trivially true for n = 2 , 3 . The complete graph on 2 , 3 vertices has 1 , 3 edges respectively, and they are series-parallel graphs (after assigning the source/sink). ( K 2 is trivial. K 3 is obtained by composing two K 2 's in series to form K 1 , 2 , a path of two edges, then composing that with a K 2 in parallel.)
Suppose the claim is true for all n ≤ N , and we want to show that the claim is also true for 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 in parallel to give said edge, contradicting maximality.
Now that we have proved the claim, let G be a simple series-parallel graph of n = N + 1 vertices. Also, assume that the source and the sink of G are not connected by an edge. By the claim above, this implies that ∣ E ( G ) ∣ ≤ M ( n ) − 1 ; G has at most M ( n ) − 1 edges. Also, one of the following is true:
Case 1: G is formed from two simple series-parallel graphs G ′ , H ′ by composing them in series.
Let a = ∣ V ( G ′ ) ∣ , b = ∣ V ( H ′ ) ∣ . Then n = a + b − 1 ; all vertices of 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 , which implies a , b ≤ n − 1 , and so we can apply induction to show that G ′ , H ′ has at most 2 a − 3 , 2 b − 3 edges respectively. Thus G has at most ( 2 a − 3 ) + ( 2 b − 3 ) = 2 ( a + b − 1 ) − 4 = ( 2 n − 3 ) − 1 edges. Taking across all G , we thus have max ( ∣ E ( G ) ∣ − 1 ) = M ( n ) − 1 ≤ ( 2 n − 3 ) − 1 , or M ( n ) = 2 n − 3 .
Case 2: G is formed from two simple series-parallel graphs G ′ , H ′ by composing them in parallel.
Let a = ∣ V ( G ′ ) ∣ , b = ∣ V ( H ′ ) ∣ . Then n = a + b − 2 ; all vertices of 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 . In fact, if a = 2 , then G ′ = K 2 , but this would mean the source and the sink of G are connected by an edge (the edge of G ′ ), contradiction. Likewise with b = 2 . Thus a , b ≥ 3 , which implies a , b ≤ n − 1 .
We can apply induction to show that G ′ has at most 2 a − 3 edges. But we can do better: we know that if G ′ has 2 a − 3 edges, then there is an edge between the source and the sink of G ′ . But the source and the sink of G are the same as that of G ′ , so this would make an edge between the source and the sink of G , contradiction. So G ′ has at most 2 a − 4 edges. Likewise, H ′ has at most 2 b − 4 edges. Thus G has at most ( 2 a − 4 ) + ( 2 b − 4 ) = 2 ( a + b − 2 ) − 4 = ( 2 n − 3 ) − 1 edges. Taking across all G , we thus have max ( ∣ E ( G ) ∣ − 1 ) = M ( n ) − 1 ≤ ( 2 n − 3 ) − 1 , or M ( n ) = 2 n − 3 .
In both cases, we have shown that M ( n ) = 2 n − 3 , proving the claim. Thus M ( 2 0 1 5 ) = 4 0 2 7 .