The domination game played on unions of graphs

Abstract In a graph G, a vertex is said to dominate itself and its neighbors. The Domination game is a two player game played on a finite graph. Players alternate turns in choosing a vertex that dominates at least one new vertex. The game ends when no move is possible, that is when the set of chosen vertices forms a dominating set of the graph. One player (Dominator) aims to minimize the size of this set while the other (Staller) tries to maximize it. The game domination number, denoted by γg, is the number of moves when both players play optimally and Dominator starts. The Staller-start game domination number γ g is defined similarly when Staller starts. It is known that the difference between these two values is at most one We first describe a family of graphs that we call no-minus graphs, for which no player gets advantage in passing a move. While it is known that forests are no-minus, we prove that tri-split graphs and dually chordal graphs also are no-minus. Then, we show that the domination game parameters of the union of two no-minus graphs can take only two values according to the domination game parameters of the initial graphs. In comparison, we also show that in the general case, up to four values may be possible

Maker-Breaker domination number

The Maker-Breaker domination game is played on a graph $G$ by Dominator and Staller. The players alternatively select a vertex of $G$ that was not yet chosen in the course of the game. Dominator wins if at some point the vertices he has chosen form a dominating set. Staller wins if Dominator cannot form a dominating set. In this paper we introduce the Maker-Breaker domination number $\gamma_{{\rm MB}}(G)$ of $G$ as the minimum number of moves of Dominator to win the game provided that he has a winning strategy and is the first to play. If Staller plays first, then the corresponding invariant is denoted $\gamma_{{\rm MB}}'(G)$. Comparing the two invariants it turns out that they behave much differently than the related game domination numbers. The invariant $\gamma_{{\rm MB}}(G)$ is also compared with the domination number. Using the Erd\H{o}s-Selfridge Criterion a large class of graphs $G$ is found for which $\gamma_{{\rm MB}}(G) > \gamma(G)$ holds. Residual graphs are introduced and used to bound/determine $\gamma_{{\rm MB}}(G)$ and $\gamma_{{\rm MB}}'(G)$. Using residual graphs, $\gamma_{{\rm MB}}(T)$ and $\gamma_{{\rm MB}}'(T)$ are determined for an arbitrary tree. The invariants are also obtained for cycles and bounded for union of graphs. A list of open problems and directions for further investigations is given.Comment: 20 pages, 5 figure

Maker-Breaker total domination game

Maker-Breaker total domination game in graphs is introduced as a natural counterpart to the Maker-Breaker domination game recently studied by Duch\^ene, Gledel, Parreau, and Renault. Both games are instances of the combinatorial Maker-Breaker games. The Maker-Breaker total domination game is played on a graph $G$ by two players who alternately take turns choosing vertices of $G$. The first player, Dominator, selects a vertex in order to totally dominate $G$ while the other player, Staller, forbids a vertex to Dominator in order to prevent him to reach his goal. It is shown that there are infinitely many connected cubic graphs in which Staller wins and that no minimum degree condition is sufficient to guarantee that Dominator wins when Staller starts the game. An amalgamation lemma is established and used to determine the outcome of the game played on grids. Cacti are also classified with respect to the outcome of the game. A connection between the game and hypergraphs is established. It is proved that the game is PSPACE-complete on split and bipartite graphs. Several problems and questions are also posed.Comment: 21 pages, 5 figure

The Disjoint Domination Game

We introduce and study a Maker-Breaker type game in which the issue is to create or avoid two disjoint dominating sets in graphs without isolated vertices. We prove that the maker has a winning strategy on all connected graphs if the game is started by the breaker. This implies the same in the $(2:1)$ biased game also in the maker-start game. It remains open to characterize the maker-win graphs in the maker-start non-biased game, and to analyze the $(a:b)$ biased game for $(a:b)\neq (2:1)$. For a more restricted variant of the non-biased game we prove that the maker can win on every graph without isolated vertices.Comment: 18 page