1. Introduction
In this paper, we are concerned with simple graphs which are finite, undirected with no loops nor multiple edges. Throughout this paper, we let
and
. In a graph
, the degree of
denoted by
is the number of edges that incident with v. A path in G is an alternating sequence of distinct vertices. A path is an uphill path if for every
we have
[1].
The bistar graph
with
vertices is obtained by joining the non-pendant vertices of two copies of star graph
by new edge. The corona of two graphs
and
with
and
vertices, respectively, denoted by
is obtained by taking one copy of
and
copies of
and joining the ith vertex of
with an edge to every vertex in the ith copy of
. The corona
(in particular) is the graph constructed by a copy of G, where for each vertex
a new vertex
and a pendant edge
are added. The tadpole graph
is a graph consisting of a cycle graph
on at least three vertices and a path graph
on k vertices connected with bridge. The wheel graph
is a graph formed by connecting a single vertex to all vertices of a cycle graph
. The book graph is a Cartesian product
, where
is the star graph with
vertices and
is the path graph on two vertices. Also, the windmill graph
is a graph constructed for
and
by joining k copies of the complete graph
at a shared universal vertex. The dutch windmill graph
is the graph obtained by taking k copies of the cycle graph
with a vertex in common. Also, the friendship
is a graph that constructed by joining k copies of the cycle graph
and observes that
is a special case of
. Finlay, the firefly graph
with
and
vertices is defined by consisting of s triangles, t pendent paths of length 2 and k pendent edges, sharing a common vertex. Any terminology not mentioed here we refer the reader to [2].
A set
of vertices in a graph G is called a dominating set if every vertex
is either
or v is adjacent to an element of S, The uphill dominating set “UDS” is a set
having the property that every vertex
lies on an uphill path originating from some vertex in S. The uphill domination number of a graph G is denoted by
and is defined to be the minimum cardinality of the UDS of G. Moreover, it’s customary to denote the UDS having the minimum cardinality by
-set, for more details in domination see [3] and [4].
Representing a graph by using a polynomial is one of the algebraic representations of a graph to study some of algebraic properties and graph’s structure. In general graph polynomials are a well-developed area which is very useful for analyzing properties of the graphs.
The domination polynomial [5] and the uphill domination of a graph [6], motivated us to introduce and study the uphill domination polynomial and the uphill domination roots of a graph.
2. Uphill Domination Polynomial
Definition 2.1. For any graph G of n vertices, the uphill domination polynomial of G is defined by
where
is the number of uphill dominating sets of size i in G. The set of roots of
is called uphill domination roots of graph G and denoted by
.
Example 2.2. The uphill domination polynomial of House graph H (as shown in Figure 1) with 6 vertices and
is given by
. Furthermore,
.
The following theorem gives the sufficient condition for the uphill domination polynomial of r-regular graph.
Theorem 2.3. Let G be connected graph with
vertices. Then,
if and only if G is r-regular graph.
Proof. Let G be a connected graph of
vertices. Suppose that the uphill domination polynomial of G is given by
.
Since the first coefficient of the polynomial is n, then it is easily verified that for every
, the singleton vertex set
is an UDS in G. Assume that G is not r-regular graph. Hence there exists a vertex
such that
. Now, we have two cases:
Case 1: If
, then the set
is not UDS which contradict that every singleton vertex set is an UDS in G.
Case 2: If
, then for all
with
, we get the set
is not UDS which is also contradict that every singleton vertex set is an UDS in G.
Thus, G must be r-regular graph.
On the other hand, suppose that G is r-regular graph with
vertices. We have
, then there exist n UDS of size one, while for
there are
UDS and so on. Thus, we can write the uphill domination polynomial as
.
Corollary 2.4. Let G ba a graph with s vertices. If G is a cycle
or complete graph
, then
.
Corollary 2.5. The uphill domination polynomial for the regular graph
with sk vertices is given by
.
Corollary 2.6. [6] Let G be a graph with m components. Then,
Proposition 2.7. If a graph G with n vertices consists of m components
, then
Proof. By using mathematical induction we found that for
the statement is true and the proof is trivial. Suppose that the statement is true when
such that
Now, we prove that the statement is true when
. Let G consists of
components that mean
. If the set
represent the uphill domination number for the components of G respectively, such that
. Then, by Corollary (2.6) it easily to see that
Thus,
is exactly equal the number of way for choosing an UDS of size
in
and an UDS of size
in
and so on. Hence,
is the coefficient of
in
and in
. In the same argument we can proof for all
, where
that
Thus, for
the statement is true and the proof is done.
Theorem 2.8. For any path
with
vertices,
. Furthermore,
.
Proof. Let G be a path graph
with
. We know that
, then there is only one UDS of size two. For
there are
UDS of size three and so on. Thus, we get
Theorem 2.9. For any graph G.
if and only if
.
Proof. Let G be a graph with
. Since,
, then we can write that
Thus,
. On the other hand if
, then by Proposition (2.7) we get
.
Corollary 2.10. A graph G has one uphill domination root if and only if
.
Theorem 2.11. Let G be a bistar graph
with
vertices. Then,
. Furthermore,
.
Proof. Let G be a bistar graph
with
vertices, we have
. Then, there is only one UDS of size
and for
there are two UDS. Finally, for
there is only one UDS. Thus, the result will be as following
Theorem 2.12. For any graph
with
and
vertices,
. Furthermore,
.
Proof. Let G is a complete bipartite graph
with
, then we have
. There is only one UDS of size s. Now, for
there exist r UDS. For
there exist
UDS and so on. Thus, we get
Corollary 2.13. For any graph
with
vertices,
. Furthermore,
.
The generalization of Theorem 0.12 is the following result.
Theorem 2.14. For any graph
where
with
vertices,
. Furthermore,
.
Proof. Let G be a complete k-partite graph
with
, we have
. There is only one UDS of size
for
there are
UDS of size
. Also, for
there are
and so on. Thus,
Proposition 2.15. For any graph
with
vertices we have the following:
1) If
, such that at least two partite sets of the same size, then
.
2) If
, then the graph is regular and
.
Theorem 2.16. For any graph
with
vertices, where
. Then,
Proof. Let G be a complete k-partite graph
with
, then we have
. Let divide the vertices of a graph into two sets
and
where
contains the vertices of
and
which means
is of cardinality
while
this implies that
is of cardinality
. Thus, we get
We have for
,
Also, for
we get
And so on we get for all
, where
Thus, the proof is done.
Theorem 2.17. For any graph
with
vertices and
, then
.
Proof. Let G be a wheel graph
(
), then we have
. There are s UDS of size one. For
there are
UDS of size two and so on. Thus,
Corollary 2.18. For any wheel graph
and
we have
3. Uphill Domination Polynomials of Graphs under Some Binary Operations
Theorem 3.1. Let
be a grid graph with rs vertices and
. Then,
.
Proof. Let G be a grid graph with rs vertices and
, then we have
. Note that, there is only one UDS of size four. For
, there are
UDS of size five and so on. Thus, we get
Theorem 3.2. Let
be a corona graph with
vertices. Then,
.
Proof. Let
with
vertices, we have
. For rs vertices, there is only one UDS of size rs. For
vertices, there are r UDS and so on. Thus, we get
Corollary 3.3. Let
be a corona graph with 2r vertices. Then,
.
Theorem 3.2 can generalize in the following result.
Theorem 3.4. For any nontrivial connected graph H with r vertices, if
, then,
.
Proof. The proof similarly to the proof of Theorem 3.2.
Theorem 3.5. Let G be a book graph
with
vertices. Then,
Proof. Suppose we have the book graph
with
vertices, then we have
. Let divide the vertices of
into
sets “as shown in Figure 2” let the set
i.e.,
while
. Since
, then for
we have to take one vertex from each
(
) so, there exist
UDS of size m. For
we have,
Also, for
we get
Therefore, for
we have
And so on, we use the same argument until
. After that, for
we have
Finally,
Thus, the proof is completed.
Theorem 3.6. Let G be a graph. If
with sk vertices, then
Proof. Let
with sk vertices, then we have
. We first divide the vertices of G into three sets called them
and
, where
(resp.
) is contains the vertices of the outer cycle (resp. inner cycle) which every vertex is of degree three. The third set
contains the vertices of the middle cycles, where every vertex is of degree four. Note that, any UDS should contain at least one vertex form
and one vertex from
. Thus, for
For
we have
And so on, we use the same argument for all
i.e.,
and the proof is done.
Theorem 3.7. Let G ba a tadpole graph
with
vertices. Then,
Proof. Let G be a tadpole graph
with
vertices, we have
. We first divide the vertices of
into three sets called them
and
such that
is a singleton set that contains the pendant vertex,
has k vertices each of them is of degree two except one vertex is of degree three while the last set
has
vertices each of them of degree two which are the vertices that lies in a cycle part of a graph. Notice that, any UDS of
should contains the pendant vertex and at least one vertex from
. Now, for
we have to take the pendant vertex with one vertex from
, so there exist
UDS of size two. For
we get
And so on, we use the same argument for all
i.e.,
and the proof is completed.
Theorem 3.8. Let G be a windmill graph
with
vertices. Then,
Proof. Let G be a windmill graph with center vertex w, we have
. Any minimum uphill domination set must contains one vertex from each copy of
without the center vertex w, that means, we have
uphill dominating set of size k. Suppose
be the set of vertices of the i-th copy of
without the center vertex w and
be the singleton, with the center vertex w. To get the number of uphill dominating sets of size
, where
, we need to select
vertices from each
, and
from
where
,
and
for all
. Hence,
Thus,
Proposition 3.9. Let G be a dutch windmill graph
with
and
vertices. Then,
Theorem 3.10. Let G be a firefly graph
with
,
vertices and
. Then,
Proof. Let G be a firefly graph
with n vertices and
. First, let us divide the vertices of G into
sets and let u be the shared vertex in G. Suppose that
contains the vertices of the first triangle without u, this implies
has two vertices each of them are of degree two, also we mean by
the set that contains the vertices of the second triangle without u and so on for all
, where
. Now, the subset
contains u in addition the t vertices of the pendant paths that adjacent to u which means
is of cardinality
. Finally,
contains all the leaves vertices of G which be exactly of cardinality
. Notice that, any UDS of G should contain all the vertices of
with at least one vertex from each
. Thus, for
we have
For
we get
And for
we have
In the same argument we can find all
, where
and the proof is completed.
Corollary 3.11. Let G be a friendship graph
with
vertices. Then,
4. Open Problems
Finally, for feature work we state the following definition.
Definition 4.1. Two graphs G and H are said to be uphill-equivalent if
. The uphill-equivalence classes of G noted by
.
Example 4.2.
1)
.
2) The windmill graph
and Dutch windmill graph
are uphill-equivalent.
We state the following open problems for feature work:
1) which graphs have two distinct uphill domination roots?
2) which families of graphs have only real uphill domination roots?
3) which graphs satisfy
?
4) determine the uphill-equivalence classes for some new families of graphs.