The platform will undergo maintenance on Sep 14 at about 7:45 AM EST and will be unavailable for approximately 2 hours.
2019
DOI: 10.1515/spma-2019-0022
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Achievable multiplicity partitions in the inverse eigenvalue problem of a graph

Abstract: Associated to a graph G is a set S(G) of all real-valued symmetric matrices whose off-diagonal entries are non-zero precisely when the corresponding vertices of the graph are adjacent, and the diagonal entries are free to be chosen. If G has n vertices, then the multiplicities of the eigenvalues of any matrix in S(G) partition n; this is called a multiplicity partition.We study graphs for which a multiplicity partition with only two integers is possible. The graphs G for which there is a matrix in S(G) with pa… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1
1
1

Citation Types

0
12
0

Year Published

2020
2020
2023
2023

Publication Types

Select...
5
3

Relationship

0
8

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 10 publications
(14 citation statements)
references
References 15 publications
(35 reference statements)
0
12
0
Order By: Relevance
“…It is straightforward to see that 2K 2 and 3K 1 do not have compatible multiplicity matrices, hence q(2K 2 ∨ 3K 1 ) ≠ 2. This gives an explicit counterexample to the claim in [1,Lemma 3.4], which was later retracted in [2]. In contrast, we will see in Section 4 that q(2K 2 ∨ 2K 1 ) = q(2K 2 ∨ 4K 1 ) = 2.…”
Section: Proof Decompose G and H Into Their Connected Components Asmentioning
confidence: 75%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…It is straightforward to see that 2K 2 and 3K 1 do not have compatible multiplicity matrices, hence q(2K 2 ∨ 3K 1 ) ≠ 2. This gives an explicit counterexample to the claim in [1,Lemma 3.4], which was later retracted in [2]. In contrast, we will see in Section 4 that q(2K 2 ∨ 2K 1 ) = q(2K 2 ∨ 4K 1 ) = 2.…”
Section: Proof Decompose G and H Into Their Connected Components Asmentioning
confidence: 75%
“…The same authors also proved that q(G ∨ G) = 2 for any connected graph G. Later, this result was generalized by Monfared and Shader [18], who proved that q(G ∨ H) = 2 for any connected graphs G and H with the same number of vertices. Recently, joins of disconnected graphs were investigated in [1,2], where particular attention was given to joins of unions of complete graphs.…”
mentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Let M(t) ∶= M f,G (t) be the smooth family of manifolds of m × m symmetric matrices defined in (1). Note that M(0) is the set of diagonal matrices.…”
Section: Generic Realisability Of 0-1 Matricesmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…For some specific families of connected graphs, several ordered multiplicity vectors have been determined (see e.g. [1,5,18]). Moreover, Monfared and Shader proved the following theorem in [19], showing that (1, 1, .…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…It remains an open question (see [2]) whether the implication holds for graphs Γ with msr(Γ) > 2. In particular, since |L (K n )| = 1 2 n(n − 1), it remains to be determined whether L (K n ) is a tight frame graph for H d for n ≤ d ≤ ⌊ 1 4 n(n − 1)⌋.…”
Section: Line Graphsmentioning
confidence: 99%