Hamilton decompositions of 6-regular abelian Cayley graphs

In 1969, Lovasz asked whether every connected, vertex-transitive graph has a Hamilton path. This question has generated a considerable amount of interest, yet remains vastly open. To date, there exist no known connected, vertex-transitive graph that does not possess a Hamilton path. For the Cayley graphs, a subclass of vertex-transitive graphs, the following conjecture was made: Weak Lovász Conjecture: Every nontrivial, finite, connected Cayley graph is hamiltonian. The Chen-Quimpo Theorem proves that Cayley graphs on abelian groups flourish with Hamilton cycles, thus prompting Alspach to make the following conjecture: Alspach Conjecture: Every 2k-regular, connected Cayley graph on a finite abelian group has a Hamilton decomposition. Alspach’s conjecture is true for k = 1 and 2, but even the case k = 3 is still open. It is this case that this thesis addresses. Chapters 1–3 give introductory material and past work on the conjecture. Chapter 3 investigates the relationship between 6-regular Cayley graphs and associated quotient graphs. A proof of Alspach’s conjecture is given for the odd order case when k = 3. Chapter 4 provides a proof of the conjecture for even order graphs with 3-element connection sets that have an element generating a subgroup of index 2, and having a linear dependency among the other generators. Chapter 5 shows that if Γ = Cay(A, {s1, s2, s3}) is a connected, 6-regular, abelian Cayley graph of even order, and for some1 ≤ i ≤ 3, Δi = Cay(A/(si), {sj1 , sj2}) is 4-regular, and Δi ≄ Cay(ℤ3, {1, 1}), then Γ has a Hamilton decomposition. Alternatively stated, if Γ = Cay(A, S) is a connected, 6-regular, abelian Cayley graph of even order, then Γ has a Hamilton decomposition if S has no involutions, and for some s ∈ S, Cay(A/(s), S) is 4-regular, and of order at least 4. Finally, the Appendices give computational data resulting from C and MAGMA programs used to generate Hamilton decompositions of certain non-isomorphic Cayley graphs on low order abelian groups.

Cyclic automorphic graph decompositions

Chapter 1 introduces the tools and mechanics necessary for this report. Basic definitions and topics of graph theory which pertain to the report and discussion of automorphic decompositions will be covered in brief detail. An automorphic decomposition D of a graph H by a graph G is a G-decomposition of H such that the intersection of graph (D) @H. H is called the automorhpic host, and G is the automorphic divisor. We seek to find classes of graphs that are automorphic divisors, specifically ones generated cyclically. Chapter 2 discusses the previous work done mainly by Beeler. It also discusses and gives in more detail examples of automorphic decompositions of graphs. Chapter 2 also discusses labelings and their direct relation to cyclic automorphic decompositions. We show basic classes of graphs, such as cycles, that are known to have certain labelings, and show that they also are automorphic divisors. In Chapter 3, we are concerned with 2-regular graphs, in particular rCm, r copies of the m-cycle. We seek to show that rCm has a ρ-labeling, and thus is an automorphic divisor for all r and m. we discuss methods including Skolem type difference sets to create cycle systems and their correlation to automorphic decompositions. In the Appendix, we give classes of graphs known to be graceful and our java code to generate ρ-labelings on rCm.

ANALYSIS AND VISUALIZATION OF FLOW FIELDS USING INFORMATION-THEORETIC TECHNIQUES AND GRAPH-BASED REPRESENTATIONS

Three-dimensional flow visualization plays an essential role in many areas of science and engineering, such as aero- and hydro-dynamical systems which dominate various physical and natural phenomena. For popular methods such as the streamline visualization to be effective, they should capture the underlying flow features while facilitating user observation and understanding of the flow field in a clear manner. My research mainly focuses on the analysis and visualization of flow fields using various techniques, e.g. information-theoretic techniques and graph-based representations. Since the streamline visualization is a popular technique in flow field visualization, how to select good streamlines to capture flow patterns and how to pick good viewpoints to observe flow fields become critical. We treat streamline selection and viewpoint selection as symmetric problems and solve them simultaneously using the dual information channel [81]. To the best of my knowledge, this is the first attempt in flow visualization to combine these two selection problems in a unified approach. This work selects streamline in a view-independent manner and the selected streamlines will not change for all viewpoints. My another work [56] uses an information-theoretic approach to evaluate the importance of each streamline under various sample viewpoints and presents a solution for view-dependent streamline selection that guarantees coherent streamline update when the view changes gradually. When projecting 3D streamlines to 2D images for viewing, occlusion and clutter become inevitable. To address this challenge, we design FlowGraph [57, 58], a novel compound graph representation that organizes field line clusters and spatiotemporal regions hierarchically for occlusion-free and controllable visual exploration. We enable observation and exploration of the relationships among field line clusters, spatiotemporal regions and their interconnection in the transformed space. Most viewpoint selection methods only consider the external viewpoints outside of the flow field. This will not convey a clear observation when the flow field is clutter on the boundary side. Therefore, we propose a new way to explore flow fields by selecting several internal viewpoints around the flow features inside of the flow field and then generating a B-Spline curve path traversing these viewpoints to provide users with closeup views of the flow field for detailed observation of hidden or occluded internal flow features [54]. This work is also extended to deal with unsteady flow fields. Besides flow field visualization, some other topics relevant to visualization also attract my attention. In iGraph [31], we leverage a distributed system along with a tiled display wall to provide users with high-resolution visual analytics of big image and text collections in real time. Developing pedagogical visualization tools forms my other research focus. Since most cryptography algorithms use sophisticated mathematics, it is difficult for beginners to understand both what the algorithm does and how the algorithm does that. Therefore, we develop a set of visualization tools to provide users with an intuitive way to learn and understand these algorithms.

A SURVEY OF DISTANCE MAGIC GRAPHS

In this report, we survey results on distance magic graphs and some closely related graphs. A distance magic labeling of a graph G with magic constant k is a bijection l from the vertex set to {1, 2, . . . , n}, such that for every vertex x Σ l(y) = k,y∈NG(x) where NG(x) is the set of vertices of G adjacent to x. If the graph G has a distance magic labeling we say that G is a distance magic graph. In Chapter 1, we explore the background of distance magic graphs by introducing examples of magic squares, magic graphs, and distance magic graphs. In Chapter 2, we begin by examining some basic results on distance magic graphs. We next look at results on different graph structures including regular graphs, multipartite graphs, graph products, join graphs, and splitting graphs. We conclude with other perspectives on distance magic graphs including embedding theorems, the matrix representation of distance magic graphs, lifted magic rectangles, and distance magic constants. In Chapter 3, we study graph labelings that retain the same labels as distance magic labelings, but alter the definition in some other way. These labelings include balanced distance magic labelings, closed distance magic labelings, D-distance magic labelings, and distance antimagic labelings. In Chapter 4, we examine results on neighborhood magic labelings, group distance magic labelings, and group distance antimagic labelings. These graph labelings change the label set, but are otherwise similar to distance magic graphs. In Chapter 5, we examine some applications of distance magic and distance antimagic labeling to the fair scheduling of tournaments. In Chapter 6, we conclude with some open problems.