2,882 research outputs found

    ์ƒํƒœ๊ณ„์—์„œ์˜ ๊ฒฝ์Ÿ ๊ด€์ ์œผ๋กœ ๊ทธ๋ž˜ํ”„์™€ ์œ ํ–ฅ๊ทธ๋ž˜ํ”„์˜ ๊ตฌ์กฐ ์—ฐ๊ตฌ

    Get PDF
    ํ•™์œ„๋…ผ๋ฌธ(๋ฐ•์‚ฌ) -- ์„œ์šธ๋Œ€ํ•™๊ต๋Œ€ํ•™์› : ์‚ฌ๋ฒ”๋Œ€ํ•™ ์ˆ˜ํ•™๊ต์œก๊ณผ, 2023. 2. ๊น€์„œ๋ น.In this thesis, we study m-step competition graphs, (1, 2)-step competition graphs, phylogeny graphs, and competition-common enemy graphs (CCE graphs), which are primary variants of competition graphs. Cohen [11] introduced the notion of competition graph while studying predator-prey concepts in ecological food webs.An ecosystem is a biological community of interacting species and their physical environment. For each species in an ecosystem, there can be m conditions of the good environment by regarding lower and upper bounds on numerous dimensions such as soil, climate, temperature, etc, which may be represented by an m-dimensional rectangle, so-called an ecological niche. An elemental ecological truth is that two species compete if and only if their ecological niches overlap. Biologists often describe competitive relations among species cohabiting in a community by a food web that is a digraph whose vertices are the species and an arc goes from a predator to a prey. In this context, Cohen [11] defined the competition graph of a digraph as follows. The competition graph C(D) of a digraph D is defined to be a simple graph whose vertex set is the same as V (D) and which has an edge joining two distinct vertices u and v if and only if there are arcs (u, w) and (v, w) for some vertex w in D. Since Cohen introduced this definition, its variants such as m-step competition graphs, (i, j)-step competition graphs, phylogeny graphs, CCE graphs, p-competition graphs, and niche graphs have been introduced and studied. As part of these studies, we show that the connected triangle-free m-step competition graph on n vertices is a tree and completely characterize the digraphs of order n whose m-step competition graphs are star graphs for positive integers 2 โ‰ค m < n. We completely identify (1,2)-step competition graphs C_{1,2}(D) of orientations D of a complete k-partite graph for some k โ‰ฅ 3 when each partite set of D forms a clique in C_{1,2}(D). In addition, we show that the diameter of each component of C_{1,2}(D) is at most three and provide a sharp upper bound on the domination number of C_{1,2}(D) and give a sufficient condition for C_{1,2}(D) being an interval graph. On the other hand, we study on phylogeny graphs and CCE graphs of degreebounded acyclic digraphs. An acyclic digraph in which every vertex has indegree at most i and outdegree at most j is called an (i, j) digraph for some positive integers i and j. If each vertex of a (not necessarily acyclic) digraph D has indegree at most i and outdegree at most j, then D is called an hi, ji digraph. We give a sufficient condition on the size of hole of an underlying graph of an (i, 2) digraph D for the phylogeny graph of D being a chordal graph where D is an (i, 2) digraph. Moreover, we go further to completely characterize phylogeny graphs of (i, j) digraphs by listing the forbidden induced subgraphs. We completely identify the graphs with the least components among the CCE graphs of (2, 2) digraphs containing at most one cycle and exactly two isolated vertices, and their digraphs. Finally, we gives a sufficient condition for CCE graphs being interval graphs.์ด ๋…ผ๋ฌธ์—์„œ ๊ฒฝ์Ÿ๊ทธ๋ž˜ํ”„์˜ ์ฃผ์š” ๋ณ€์ด๋“ค ์ค‘ m-step ๊ฒฝ์Ÿ๊ทธ๋ž˜ํ”„, (1, 2)-step ๊ฒฝ์Ÿ ๊ทธ๋ž˜ํ”„, ๊ณ„ํ†ต ๊ทธ๋ž˜ํ”„, ๊ฒฝ์Ÿ๊ณต์ ๊ทธ๋ž˜ํ”„์— ๋Œ€ํ•œ ์—ฐ๊ตฌ ๊ฒฐ๊ณผ๋ฅผ ์ข…ํ•ฉํ–ˆ๋‹ค. Cohen [11]์€ ๋จน์ด์‚ฌ์Šฌ์—์„œ ํฌ์‹์ž-ํ”ผ์‹์ž ๊ฐœ๋…์„ ์—ฐ๊ตฌํ•˜๋ฉด์„œ ๊ฒฝ์Ÿ๊ทธ๋ž˜ํ”„ ๊ฐœ๋…์„ ๊ณ ์•ˆํ–ˆ๋‹ค. ์ƒํƒœ๊ณ„๋Š” ์ƒํ˜ธ์ž‘์šฉํ•˜๋Š” ์ข…๋“ค๊ณผ ๊ทธ๋“ค์˜ ๋ฌผ๋ฆฌ์  ํ™˜๊ฒฝ์˜ ์ƒ๋ฌผํ•™์  ์ฒด๊ณ„์ด๋‹ค. ์ƒํƒœ๊ณ„์˜ ๊ฐ ์ข…์— ๋Œ€ํ•ด์„œ, ํ† ์–‘, ๊ธฐํ›„, ์˜จ๋„ ๋“ฑ๊ณผ ๊ฐ™์€ ๋‹ค์–‘ํ•œ ์ฐจ์›์˜ ํ•˜๊ณ„ ๋ฐ ์ƒ๊ณ„๋ฅผ ๊ณ ๋ คํ•˜์—ฌ ์ข‹์€ ํ™˜๊ฒฝ์„ m๊ฐœ์˜ ์กฐ๊ฑด๋“ค๋กœ ๋‚˜ํƒ€๋‚ผ ์ˆ˜ ์žˆ๋Š”๋ฐ ์ด๋ฅผ ์ƒํƒœ์  ์ง€์œ„(ecological niche)๋ผ๊ณ  ํ•œ๋‹ค. ์ƒํƒœํ•™์  ๊ธฐ๋ณธ๊ฐ€์ •์€ ๋‘ ์ข…์ด ์ƒํƒœ์  ์ง€์œ„๊ฐ€ ๊ฒน์น˜๋ฉด ๊ฒฝ์Ÿํ•˜๊ณ (compete), ๊ฒฝ์Ÿํ•˜๋Š” ๋‘ ์ข…์€ ์ƒํƒœ์  ์ง€์œ„๊ฐ€ ๊ฒน์นœ๋‹ค๋Š” ๊ฒƒ์ด๋‹ค. ํ”ํžˆ ์ƒ๋ฌผํ•™์ž๋“ค์€ ํ•œ ์ฒด์ œ์—์„œ ์„œ์‹ํ•˜๋Š” ์ข…๋“ค์˜ ๊ฒฝ์Ÿ์  ๊ด€๊ณ„๋ฅผ ๊ฐ ์ข…์€ ๊ผญ์ง“์ ์œผ๋กœ, ํฌ์‹์ž์—์„œ ํ”ผ์‹์ž์—๊ฒŒ๋Š” ์œ ํ–ฅ๋ณ€(arc)์„ ๊ทธ์–ด์„œ ๋จน์ด์‚ฌ์Šฌ๋กœ ํ‘œํ˜„ํ•œ๋‹ค. ์ด๋Ÿฌํ•œ ๋งฅ๋ฝ์—์„œ Cohen [11]์€ ๋‹ค์Œ๊ณผ ๊ฐ™์ด ์œ ํ–ฅ๊ทธ๋ž˜ํ”„์˜ ๊ฒฝ์Ÿ ๊ทธ๋ž˜ํ”„๋ฅผ ์ •์˜ํ–ˆ๋‹ค. ์œ ํ–ฅ๊ทธ๋ž˜ํ”„(digraph) D์˜ ๊ฒฝ์Ÿ๊ทธ๋ž˜ํ”„(competition graph) C(D) ๋ž€ V (D)๋ฅผ ๊ผญ์ง“์  ์ง‘ํ•ฉ์œผ๋กœ ํ•˜๊ณ  ๋‘ ๊ผญ์ง“์  u, v๋ฅผ ์–‘ ๋์ ์œผ๋กœ ๊ฐ–๋Š” ๋ณ€์ด ์กด์žฌํ•œ๋‹ค๋Š” ๊ฒƒ๊ณผ ๊ผญ์ง“์  w๊ฐ€ ์กด์žฌํ•˜์—ฌ (u, w),(v, w)๊ฐ€ ๋ชจ๋‘ D์—์„œ ์œ ํ–ฅ๋ณ€์ด ๋˜๋Š” ๊ฒƒ์ด ๋™์น˜์ธ ๊ทธ๋ž˜ํ”„๋ฅผ ์˜๋ฏธํ•œ๋‹ค. Cohen์ด ๊ฒฝ์Ÿ๊ทธ๋ž˜ํ”„์˜ ์ •์˜๋ฅผ ๋„์ž…ํ•œ ์ดํ›„๋กœ ๊ทธ ๋ณ€์ด๋“ค๋กœ m-step ๊ฒฝ์Ÿ๊ทธ๋ž˜ํ”„(m-step competition graph), (i, j)-step ๊ฒฝ์Ÿ๊ทธ๋ž˜ํ”„((i, j)-step competition graph), ๊ณ„ํ†ต๊ทธ๋ž˜ํ”„(phylogeny graph), ๊ฒฝ์Ÿ๊ณต์ ๊ทธ๋ž˜ํ”„(competition-common enemy graph), p-๊ฒฝ์Ÿ๊ทธ๋ž˜ํ”„(p-competition graph), ๊ทธ๋ฆฌ๊ณ  ์ง€์œ„๊ทธ๋ž˜ํ”„(niche graph)๊ฐ€ ๋„์ž…๋˜์—ˆ๊ณ  ์—ฐ๊ตฌ๋˜๊ณ  ์žˆ๋‹ค. ์ด ๋…ผ๋ฌธ์˜ ์—ฐ๊ตฌ ๊ฒฐ๊ณผ๋“ค์˜ ์ผ๋ถ€๋Š” ๋‹ค์Œ๊ณผ ๊ฐ™๋‹ค. ์‚ผ๊ฐํ˜•์ด ์—†์ด ์—ฐ๊ฒฐ๋œ m-step ๊ฒฝ์Ÿ ๊ทธ๋ž˜ํ”„๋Š” ํŠธ๋ฆฌ(tree)์ž„์„ ๋ณด์˜€์œผ๋ฉฐ 2 โ‰ค m < n์„ ๋งŒ์กฑํ•˜๋Š” ์ •์ˆ˜ m, n์— ๋Œ€ํ•˜์—ฌ ๊ผญ์ง“์ ์˜ ๊ฐœ์ˆ˜๊ฐ€ n๊ฐœ์ด๊ณ  m-step ๊ฒฝ์Ÿ๊ทธ๋ž˜ํ”„๊ฐ€ ๋ณ„๊ทธ๋ž˜ํ”„(star graph)๊ฐ€ ๋˜๋Š” ์œ ํ–ฅ๊ทธ๋ž˜ํ”„๋ฅผ ์™„๋ฒฝํ•˜๊ฒŒ ํŠน์ง•ํ™” ํ•˜์˜€๋‹ค. k โ‰ฅ 3์ด๊ณ  ๋ฐฉํ–ฅ์ง€์–ด์ง„ ์™„์ „ k-๋ถ„ํ•  ๊ทธ๋ž˜ํ”„(oriented complete k-partite graph)์˜ (1, 2)-step ๊ฒฝ์Ÿ๊ทธ๋ž˜ํ”„ C_{1,2}(D)์—์„œ ๊ฐ ๋ถ„ํ• ์ด ์™„์ „ ๋ถ€๋ถ„ ๊ทธ๋ž˜ํ”„๋ฅผ ์ด๋ฃฐ ๋•Œ, C_{1,2}(D)์„ ๋ชจ๋‘ ํŠน์ง•ํ™” ํ•˜์˜€๋‹ค. ๋˜ํ•œ, C_{1,2}(D)์˜ ๊ฐ ์„ฑ๋ถ„(component)์˜ ์ง€๋ฆ„(diameter)์˜ ๊ธธ์ด๊ฐ€ ์ตœ๋Œ€ 3์ด๋ฉฐ C_{1,2}(D)์˜ ์ง€๋ฐฐ์ˆ˜(domination number)์— ๋Œ€ํ•œ ์ƒ๊ณ„์™€ ์ตœ๋Œ“๊ฐ’์„ ๊ตฌํ•˜๊ณ  ๊ตฌ๊ฐ„๊ทธ๋ž˜ํ”„(interval graph)๊ฐ€ ๋˜๊ธฐ ์œ„ํ•œ ์ถฉ๋ถ„ ์กฐ๊ฑด์„ ๊ตฌํ•˜์˜€๋‹ค. ์ฐจ์ˆ˜๊ฐ€ ์ œํ•œ๋œ ์œ ํ–ฅํšŒ๋กœ๋ฅผ ๊ฐ–์ง€ ์•Š๋Š” ์œ ํ–ฅ๊ทธ๋ž˜ํ”„(degree-bounded acyclic digraph)์˜ ๊ณ„ํ†ต๊ทธ๋ž˜ํ”„์™€ ๊ฒฝ์Ÿ๊ณต์ ๊ทธ๋ž˜ํ”„์— ๋Œ€ํ•ด์„œ๋„ ์—ฐ๊ตฌํ•˜์˜€๋‹ค. ์–‘์˜ ์ •์ˆ˜๋“ค i, j์— ๋Œ€ํ•˜์—ฌ (i, j) ์œ ํ–ฅ๊ทธ๋ž˜ํ”„๋ž€ ๊ฐ ๊ผญ์ง“์ ์˜ ๋‚ด์ฐจ์ˆ˜๋Š” ์ตœ๋Œ€ i, ์™ธ์ฐจ์ˆ˜๋Š” ์ตœ๋Œ€ j์ธ ์œ ํ–ฅํšŒ๋กœ ๊ฐ–์ง€ ์•Š๋Š” ์œ ํ–ฅ๊ทธ๋ž˜ํ”„์ด๋‹ค. ๋งŒ์•ฝ ์œ ํ–ฅ๊ทธ๋ž˜ํ”„ D์— ๊ฐ ๊ผญ์ง“์ ์ด ๋‚ด์ฐจ์ˆ˜๊ฐ€ ์ตœ๋Œ€ i, ์™ธ์ฐจ์ˆ˜๊ฐ€ ์ตœ๋Œ€ j ์ธ ๊ฒฝ์šฐ์— D๋ฅผ hi, ji ์œ ํ–ฅ๊ทธ๋ž˜ํ”„๋ผ ํ•œ๋‹ค. D๊ฐ€ (i, 2) ์œ ํ–ฅ๊ทธ๋ž˜ํ”„์ผ ๋•Œ, D์˜ ๊ณ„ํ†ต๊ทธ๋ž˜ํ”„๊ฐ€ ํ˜„๊ทธ๋ž˜ํ”„(chordal graph)๊ฐ€ ๋˜๊ธฐ ์œ„ํ•œ D์˜ ๋ฐฉํ–ฅ์„ ๊ณ ๋ คํ•˜์ง€ ์•Š๊ณ  ์–ป์–ด์ง€๋Š” ๊ทธ๋ž˜ํ”„(underlying graph)์—์„œ ๊ธธ์ด๊ฐ€ 4์ด์ƒ์ธ ํšŒ๋กœ(hole)์˜ ๊ธธ์ด์— ๋Œ€ํ•œ ์ถฉ๋ถ„์กฐ๊ฑด์„ ๊ตฌํ•˜์˜€๋‹ค. ๊ฒŒ๋‹ค๊ฐ€ (i, j) ์œ ํ–ฅ๊ทธ๋ž˜ํ”„์˜ ๊ณ„ํ†ต๊ทธ๋ž˜ํ”„์—์„œ ๋‚˜์˜ฌ ์ˆ˜ ์—†๋Š” ์ƒ์„ฑ ๋ถ€๋ถ„ ๊ทธ๋ž˜ํ”„(forbidden induced subgraph)๋ฅผ ํŠน์ง•ํ™” ํ•˜์˜€๋‹ค. (2, 2) ์œ ํ–ฅ๊ทธ๋ž˜ํ”„ D์˜ ๊ฒฝ์Ÿ๊ณต์ ๊ทธ๋ž˜ํ”„ CCE(D)๊ฐ€ 2๊ฐœ์˜ ๊ณ ๋ฆฝ์ (isolated vertex)๊ณผ ์ตœ๋Œ€ 1๊ฐœ์˜ ํšŒ๋กœ๋ฅผ ๊ฐ–์œผ๋ฉด์„œ ๊ฐ€์žฅ ์ ์€ ์„ฑ๋ถ„์„ ๊ฐ–๋Š” ๊ฒฝ์šฐ์ผ ๋•Œ์˜ ๊ตฌ์กฐ๋ฅผ ๊ทœ๋ช…ํ–ˆ๋‹ค. ๋งˆ์ง€๋ง‰์œผ๋กœ, CCE(D)๊ฐ€ ๊ตฌ๊ฐ„๊ทธ๋ž˜ํ”„๊ฐ€ ๋˜๊ธฐ ์œ„ํ•œ ์„ฑ๋ถ„์˜ ๊ฐœ์ˆ˜์— ๋Œ€ํ•œ ์ถฉ๋ถ„์กฐ๊ฑด์„ ๊ตฌํ•˜์˜€๋‹ค.1 Introduction 1 1.1 Graph theory terminology and basic concepts 1 1.2 Competition graphs and its variants 6 1.2.1 A brief background of competition graphs 6 1.2.2 Variants of competition graphs 8 1.2.3 m-step competition graphs 10 1.2.4 (1, 2)-step competition graphs 13 1.2.5 Phylogeny graphs 14 1.2.6 CCE graphs 16 1.3 A preview of the thesis 17 2 Digraphs whose m-step competition graphs are trees 19 2.1 The triangle-free m-step competition graphs 23 2.2 Digraphs whose m-step competition graphs are trees 29 2.3 The digraphs whose m-step competition graphs are star graphs 38 3 On (1, 2)-step competition graphs of multipartite tournaments 47 3.1 Preliminaries 48 3.2 C1,2(D) with a non-clique partite set of D 51 3.3 C1,2(D) without a non-clique partite set of D 66 3.4 C1,2(D) as a complete graph 74 3.5 Diameters and domination numbers of C1,2(D) 79 3.6 Disconnected (1, 2)-step competition graphs 82 3.7 Interval (1, 2)-step competition graphs 84 4 The forbidden induced subgraphs of (i, j) phylogeny graphs 90 4.1 A necessary condition for an (i, 2) phylogeny graph being chordal 91 4.2 Forbidden subgraphs for phylogeny graphs of degree bounded digraphs 99 5 On CCE graphs of (2, 2) digraphs 122 5.1 CCE graphs of h2, 2i digraphs 128 5.2 CCE graphs of (2, 2) digraphs 134 Abstract (in Korean) 168 Acknowledgement (in Korean) 170๋ฐ•

    Almost complete and equable heteroclinic networks

    Get PDF
    Heteroclinic connections are trajectories that link invariant sets for an autonomous dynamical flow: these connections can robustly form networks between equilibria, for systems with flow-invariant spaces. In this paper we examine the relation between the heteroclinic network as a flow-invariant set and directed graphs of possible connections between nodes. We consider realizations of a large class of transitive digraphs as robust heteroclinic networks and show that although robust realizations are typically not complete (i.e. not all unstable manifolds of nodes are part of the network), they can be almost complete (i.e. complete up to a set of zero measure within the unstable manifold) and equable (i.e. all sets of connections from a node have the same dimension). We show there are almost complete and equable realizations that can be closed by adding a number of extra nodes and connections. We discuss some examples and describe a sense in which an equable almost complete network embedding is an optimal description of stochastically perturbed motion on the network

    Branching Process in a Stochastic Extremal Model

    Full text link
    We considered a stochastic version of the Bak-Sneppen model (SBSM) of ecological evolution where the the number MM of sites mutated in a mutation event is restricted to only two. Here the mutation zone consists of only one site and this site is randomly selected from the neighboring sites at every mutation event in an annealed fashion. The critical behavior of the SBSM is found to be the same as the BS model in dimensions dd =1 and 2. However on the scale-free graphs the critical fitness value is non-zero even in the thermodynamic limit but the critical behavior is mean-field like. Finally has been made even smaller than two by probabilistically updating the mutation zone which also shows the original BS model behavior. We conjecture that a SBSM on any arbitrary graph with any small branching factor greater than unity will lead to a self-organized critical state.Comment: 6 pages, 7 figure

    Network models of innovation and knowledge diffusion

    Get PDF
    Much of modern micro-economics is built from the starting point of the perfectly competitive market. In this model there are an infinite number of agents โ€” buyers and sellers, none of whom has the power to influence the price by his actions. The good is well-defined, indeed it is perfectly standardized. And any interactions agents have is mediated by the market. That is, all transactions are anonymous, in the sense that the identities of buyer and seller are unimportant. Effectively, the seller sells โ€œto the marketโ€ and the buyer buys โ€œfrom the marketโ€. This follows from the standardization of the good, and the fact that the market imposes a very strong discipline on prices. Implicit here is one (or both) of two assumptions. Either all agents are identical in every relevant respect, apart, possibly, from the prices they ask or offer; or every agent knows every relevant detail about every other agent. If the former, then obviously my only concern as a buyer is the prices asked by the population of sellers since in every other way they are identical. If the latter, then each seller has a unique good, and again what I am concerned with is the price of it. In either case, we see that prices capture all relevant information and are enough for every agent to make all the decisions he needs to make....economics of technology ;
    • โ€ฆ
    corecore