New results on metric-locating-dominating sets of graphs

A dominating set $S$ of a graph is a metric-locating-dominating set if each vertex of the graph is uniquely distinguished by its distances from the elements of $S$, and the minimum cardinality of such a set is called the metric-location-domination number. In this paper, we undertake a study that, in general graphs and specific families, relates metric-locating-dominating sets to other special sets: resolving sets, dominating sets, locating-dominating sets and doubly resolving sets. We first characterize classes of trees according to certain relationships between their metric-location-domination number and their metric dimension and domination number. Then, we show different methods to transform metric-locating-dominating sets into locating-dominating sets and doubly resolving sets. Our methods produce new bounds on the minimum cardinalities of all those sets, some of them involving parameters that have not been related so far.Comment: 13 pages, 3 figure

New results on metric-locating-dominating sets of graphs

A dominating set S of a graph is a metric-locating-dominating set if each vertex of the graph is uniquely distinguished by its distanc es from the elements of S , and the minimum cardinality of such a set is called the metri c-location- domination number. In this paper, we undertake a study that, in general graphs and specific families, relates metric-locating-dominatin g sets to other special sets: resolving sets, dominating sets, locating-dominating set s and doubly resolving sets. We first characterize classes of trees according to cer tain relationships between their metric-location-domination number and thei r metric dimension and domination number. Then, we show different methods to tran sform metric- locating-dominating sets into locating-dominating sets a nd doubly resolving sets. Our methods produce new bounds on the minimum cardinalities of all those sets, some of them involving parameters that have not been related so farPostprint (published version

Metric-locating-dominating sets of graphs for constructing related subsets of vertices

© 2018. This manuscript version is made available under the CC-BY-NC-ND 4.0 license http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/A dominating set S of a graph is a metric-locating-dominating set if each vertex of the graph is uniquely distinguished by its distances from the elements of S , and the minimum cardinality of such a set is called the metric-location-domination number. In this paper, we undertake a study that, in general graphs and specific families, relates metric-locating-dominating sets to other special sets: resolving sets, dominating sets, locating-dominating sets and doubly resolving sets. We first characterize the extremal trees of the bounds that naturally involve metric-location-domination number, metric dimension and domination number. Then, we prove that there is no polynomial upper bound on the location-domination number in terms of the metric-location-domination number, thus extending a result of Henning and Oellermann. Finally, we show different methods to transform metric-locating-dominating sets into locating-dominating sets and doubly resolving sets. Our methods produce new bounds on the minimum cardinalities of all those sets, some of them concerning parameters that have not been related so farPeer ReviewedPostprint (author's final draft

Identification, location-domination and metric dimension on interval and permutation graphs. II. Algorithms and complexity

We consider the problems of finding optimal identifying codes, (open) locating-dominating sets and resolving sets (denoted Identifying Code, (Open) Open Locating-Dominating Set and Metric Dimension) of an interval or a permutation graph. In these problems, one asks to distinguish all vertices of a graph by a subset of the vertices, using either the neighbourhood within the solution set or the distances to the solution vertices. Using a general reduction for this class of problems, we prove that the decision problems associated to these four notions are NP-complete, even for interval graphs of diameter 2 and permutation graphs of diameter 2. While Identifying Code and (Open) Locating-Dominating Set are trivially fixed-parameter-tractable when parameterized by solution size, it is known that in the same setting Metric Dimension is W[2]-hard. We show that for interval graphs, this parameterization of Metric Dimension is fixed-parameter-tractable

Location-domination in line graphs

A set $D$ of vertices of a graph $G$ is locating if every two distinct vertices outside $D$ have distinct neighbors in $D$; that is, for distinct vertices $u$ and $v$ outside $D$, $N(u) \cap D \neq N(v) \cap D$, where $N(u)$ denotes the open neighborhood of $u$. If $D$ is also a dominating set (total dominating set), it is called a locating-dominating set (respectively, locating-total dominating set) of $G$. A graph $G$ is twin-free if every two distinct vertices of $G$ have distinct open and closed neighborhoods. It is conjectured [D. Garijo, A. Gonzalez and A. Marquez, The difference between the metric dimension and the determining number of a graph. Applied Mathematics and Computation 249 (2014), 487--501] and [F. Foucaud and M. A. Henning. Locating-total dominating sets in twin-free graphs: a conjecture. The Electronic Journal of Combinatorics 23 (2016), P3.9] respectively, that any twin-free graph $G$ without isolated vertices has a locating-dominating set of size at most one-half its order and a locating-total dominating set of size at most two-thirds its order. In this paper, we prove these two conjectures for the class of line graphs. Both bounds are tight for this class, in the sense that there are infinitely many connected line graphs for which equality holds in the bounds.Comment: 23 pages, 2 figure

Resolving sets for breaking symmetries of graphs

This paper deals with the maximum value of the difference between the determining number and the metric dimension of a graph as a function of its order. Our technique requires to use locating-dominating sets, and perform an independent study on other functions related to these sets. Thus, we obtain lower and upper bounds on all these functions by means of very diverse tools. Among them are some adequate constructions of graphs, a variant of a classical result in graph domination and a polynomial time algorithm that produces both distinguishing sets and determining sets. Further, we consider specific families of graphs where the restrictions of these functions can be computed. To this end, we utilize two well-known objects in graph theory: $k$-dominating sets and matchings.Comment: 24 pages, 12 figure

The difference between the metric dimension and the determining number of a graph

We study the maximum value of the difference between the metric dimension and the determining number of a graph as a function of its order. We develop a technique that uses functions related to locating-dominating sets to obtain lower and upper bounds on that maximum, and exact computations when restricting to some specific families of graphs. Our approach requires very diverse tools and connections with well-known objects in graph theory; among them: a classical result in graph domination by Ore, a Ramsey-type result by Erdős and Szekeres, a polynomial time algorithm to compute distinguishing sets and determining sets of twin-free graphs, k-dominating sets, and matchings

Centroidal bases in graphs

We introduce the notion of a centroidal locating set of a graph $G$, that is, a set $L$ of vertices such that all vertices in $G$ are uniquely determined by their relative distances to the vertices of $L$. A centroidal locating set of $G$ of minimum size is called a centroidal basis, and its size is the centroidal dimension $CD(G)$. This notion, which is related to previous concepts, gives a new way of identifying the vertices of a graph. The centroidal dimension of a graph $G$ is lower- and upper-bounded by the metric dimension and twice the location-domination number of $G$, respectively. The latter two parameters are standard and well-studied notions in the field of graph identification. We show that for any graph $G$ with $n$ vertices and maximum degree at least~2, $(1+o(1))\frac{\ln n}{\ln\ln n}\leq CD(G) \leq n-1$. We discuss the tightness of these bounds and in particular, we characterize the set of graphs reaching the upper bound. We then show that for graphs in which every pair of vertices is connected via a bounded number of paths, $CD(G)=\Omega\left(\sqrt{|E(G)|}\right)$, the bound being tight for paths and cycles. We finally investigate the computational complexity of determining $CD(G)$ for an input graph $G$, showing that the problem is hard and cannot even be approximated efficiently up to a factor of $o(\log n)$. We also give an $O\left(\sqrt{n\ln n}\right)$-approximation algorithm

Locating and Total Dominating Sets of Direct Products of Complete Graphs

A set S of vertices in a graph G = (V,E) is a metric-locating-total dominating set of G if every vertex of V is adjacent to a vertex in S and for every u ≠ v in V there is a vertex x in S such that d(u,x) ≠ d(v,x). The metric-location-total domination number \gamma^M_t(G) of G is the minimum cardinality of a metric-locating-total dominating set in G. For graphs G and H, the direct product G × H is the graph with vertex set V(G) × V(H) where two vertices (x,y) and (v,w) are adjacent if and only if xv in E(G) and yw in E(H). In this paper, we determine the lower bound of the metric-location-total domination number of the direct products of complete graphs. We also determine some exact values for some direct products of two complete graphs