1. Introduction
We call a multiprocessor system fault-tolerant if it can keep working in case of failure. In the beginning, connectivity and edge connectivity of graph were used to measure the fault-tolerant of system. Later, people found that these two parameters had some defects since they assume that all adjacent vertices or edges of the same vertex may fail at the same time, which is unlikely in real networks. In 1996, Fàbrega and Fiol [1] made some improvements in the connectivity and proposed the concept of g-good neighbor connectivity to measure the fault-tolerant of the multiprocessor.
Let
be a given connected graph with vertices set
and edges set
. If u and v are vertices of a graph G, we say u is adjacent to v if there is an edge between u and v. We also say u and v are neighbors. For a vertex
, we by
denote the set of neighbors of v and by
denote the set of neighbors of every vertex in S. A set
is called a g-good-neighbor faulty set of G if
for every vertex v in
. A g-good- neighbor cut of G is a g-good-neighbor faulty set F such that
is disconnected. We call the minimum cardinality of g-good-neighbor cuts the g-good- neighbor connectivity of G, denoted by
. Clearly,
for any graph G.
In 2012, Peng et al. [2] determined the g-good-neighbor conditional diagnosability of hypercube under the PMC model. In 2016, Wang et al. [3] showed that 2-good-neighbor connectivity of bubble-Sort Star Graph BSn is
for
and the 2-good-neighbor connectivity of BS4 is 8. In 2017, Ren and Wang [4] [5] determined the 1-good-neighbor connectivity of locally twisted cubes and the g-good-neighbor diagnosability of locally twisted cubes, respectively. In 2018, Wei and Xu [6] determined the 1, 2-good-neighbor conditional diagnosabilities of regular graphs. In 2020, Wang and Wang [7] showed that the 3-good-neighbor connectivity of Modified Bubble-Sort Graphs MBn is
for
. Motivated by these researches, notice that the Cartesian product is an important method to obtain large graphs from smaller ones for designing large-scale interconnection networks [8] [9] [10]. In this paper, we plan to determine the g-good-neighbor connectivity of the Cartesian product of graphs.
The Cartesian product of two graphs
and
is the graph
whose vertex set is the Cartesian product of the sets
and
. Two vertices
and
are adjacent in
precisely when either
and
or
and
. In fact, many well-known networks can be constructed by the Cartesian products of some simple graphs and the Cartesian product preserves many nice properties such as regularity, existence of Hamilton cycles and Euler circuits, and transitivity of the initial graphs. See [11] [12] [13].
In this paper, we determine the g-good-neighbor connectivity of the Cartesian
product of two complete graphs
and
for
, mesh
for
, cylindrical grid
and torus
for
. As usual, we by
and
denote the maximum degree and the connectivity of a graph G, respectively. Use
,
and
denote path, cycle and complete graph with order n.
2. Main Results
In this section, we determine the g-good-neighbor connectivity of Cartesian product of two complete graphs
and
, mesh, cylindrical grid and torus.
Lemma 2.1. [14] Let G be a connected graph and g be an integer. Then
.
Theorem 2.2. Let
be Cartesian product of complete graph
and
with
and g be non-negative integer with
. Then the g-good-neighbor connectivity of
is
1) For
,
.
2)For
,
Proof. Let
with
for
and
. Consider G is
regular, thus, we have
. Suppose F is a g-good neighbor cut set of G with minimum cardinality and let
.
Now, we further show that
with
for
. In fact, it is enough if we show that whenever
, then
. On the contrary, if
, then we by the definition of
get
. Let
, then
is adjacent with
in
and
is a component of
such that
for every
. This implies
is also a g-good neighbor cut set of G with
. This contradicts to the fact F is of minimum cardinality. So, we have
with
for
. Further, we by the minimality of F know that
has exactly two components. This means
.
Notice that F is a g-good neighbor cut set of G, we have
and
. Combine this with
,
, we get
, then
. Thus, we have
Notice that
, we have
. By
and
,
, we get
. So
. Thus
.
Now, let
, the following we determine the minimum value of
in interval
.
By
, we have
. Thus
. By comparing the difference between
and
, we discuss the minimum value of
.
If
, let
, then
;
If
, then
.
By the above analysis, we get
This completes the proof.
Example 1. The 1-good-neighbor connectivity of
is 6 with
, which is shown in Figure 1.
Theorem 2.3. Let g, m and n be non-negative integers with
. Then the g-good-neighbor connectivity of mesh
is
1) For
,
.
2) For
,
3)For
,
Proof. Let
with
and
. Then
. Suppose F is a vertex cut set of G, notice that the minimum degree of
is always less than 3, so
and by the connectivity
we have
. The following we by distinguishing cases to determine
.
Case 1.
.
means
, so
.
Subcase 1.
.
By Lemma 2.1, we have
. On the other hand, let
for
or
. It is clear that
is disconnected and
for every
. By the definition of g-good- neighbor connectivity, we have
. Therefore, we get
.
Subcase 2.
.
First, let
. Clearly,
is disconnected and
for every
, so we have
. On the other hand, suppose
is a vertex cut set of G such that
for every
. Then
has a component C with
and the minimum degree of C is
. Further, we have
. In fact, if
, then
. This implies
. Therefore,
.
Case 2.
.
It is clear that
while
and
while
. Now, we discuss by distinguishing three subcases.
Subcase 1.
and
.
Let
for
. Notice that F is a cut set of G and
for every
, we have
for
. On the other hand, since
and
for
, so we have
for
. Thus
for
.
Similarly, consider the case for
. Suppose
be a 2-good- neighbor cut of G, then
is disconnected and
for each
. It is not difficult find that
and
for every component of
. Thus
. On the other hand, let
. Clearly,
is disconnected and
for
. So
. And thus we get
for
.
Subcase 2.
.
Let
for
,
and
,
. It is clear that
is disconnected and
for every
. Thus
. On the other hand, suppose
is a 2-good- neighbor cut of G, then
is disconnected and
for
. Then, we show
. If not, assume
, then by the structure of G, there must be
such that
, this contradicts to the choose of F. So
and thus
for
.
Subcase 3.
.
Let
. It is clear that
is disconnected and
for every
. Thus, we have
. On the other hand, suppose
is a 2-good-neighbor cut of G, then
is disconnected and
for
. Notice that each component C of
is 2-connected and
. So
and then get
.
This completes the proof.
Example 2. The 2-good-neighbor connectivity of
is 4 with
, which is shown in Figure 2.
Theorem 2.4. Let g, m and n be non-negative integers with
. Then the g-good-neighbor connectivity of cylindrical grid
is
1)For
,
.
2) For
,
3) For
,
4) For
,
for
.
Proof. Similarly, let
with
,
. Then
. Suppose F is a vertex cut set of G, consider the minimum degree of
is not more than 4, so
and 3. By
, we directly get
. Now we distinguish three cases to determine
for
.
Case 1.
.
Subcase 1.
.
Consider
and
, here
. First, let
. It is clear that
is disconnected and
for every
. Thus
. On the other hand, by Lemma 2.1, we have
. So
for
.
Subcase 2.
.
Let
for
. It is clear that
is disconnected and
for every
. Thus, we directly get
. On the other hand, suppose that
is a 1-good-neighbor cut of G, then
is disconnected and
for
. By the structure of G, we find that there exists a component C of
such that
and
. Further, we find
. Thus
.
Case 2.
.
Subcase 1.
.
Consider
and
, here
. First, let
for
. Clearly,
is disconnected and
for every
. Thus
for
. On the other hand, by
and
for
, we have
for
. Thus
for
.
Now, consider the case for
by Case 1, we directly get
. Further, we can show
. If not, assume
, then there exists a 2-good neighbor cut set
with
such that
is disconnected. Combine this with the structure of G, there always exists a vertex
satisfies
. This contradicts to the choose of
. Thus
and then
. So
for
.
Subcase 2.
and
.
First, consider the case for
and
. Let
for
. Clearly,
is disconnected and
for every
. Thus, we have
. Notice that
, then
. So
for
.
Next, consider the case for
and
. Let
with
for
and
for
. It is clear that
and
are disconnected and
for every
for
. Thus, we have
. On the other hand, suppose that
is a 2-good-neighbor cut of G, then
is disconnected and
for
. This follows that each component C of
satisfies
and thus
. So, we have
and thus
while
and
.
Case 3.
.
Suppose
is a 3-good-neighbor cut of G,
means component of
is such as
for
, so here consider
. Notice that
for all
, if
for some j. Thus
and
. On the other hand, let
for
. Clearly,
is disconnected and
for every
. So we have
. Therefore, we get
.
This completes the proof.
Example: The 3-good-neighbor connectivity of
is 6 with
, which is shown in Figure 3.
Theorem 2.5 Let g, m and n be non-negative integers with
. Then the g-good-neighbor connectivity of torus
is
1) For
,
.
2) For
,
3) For
,
4) For
,
for
.
Proof. Let
and
,
. Then
. Suppose that F is a vertex cut set of G, it is not difficult find the minimum degree of
is not more than 4. So here, we only consider
and 3. Notice that G is 4-regular, so we directly get
. Now, we distinguish three cases to determine
by
.
Case 1.
.
Subcase 1.
.
Let
. It is clear that
is disconnected and
for every
. So we have
. On the other hand, it is clear that
. Further, we can show
. If not, assume
, then there exists a 1-good-neighbor cut
with
such that
is disconnected. Notice that G is 4-regular, there always exists a vertex
such that
. This contradicts to the choice of F. Thus, we get
. So
.
Subcase 2.
.
Let
. Then
is disconnected and
for every
. Thus, we get
. Now, we show
. Suppose
is a 1-good- neighbor cut of G, then
is disconnected and
for
. Thus, there exist a component C with
such that
. Notice that each pair nonadjacent vertices of G has at most two common neighbor vertices and two adjacent vertices of G has no common neighbor vertices in G, then we get
. This means
. So, we get
.
Case 2.
.
Subcase 1.
.
Consider
, so here
. Let
for
and
. Clearly,
is disconnected and
for every
. Thus
while
. On the other hand, suppose
is a 2-good-neighbor cut of G, then
has a component C with
and
. Notice that G is 4-regular and each pair nonadjacent vertices has at most two common neighbor vertices and two adjacent vertices has no common neighbor vertices in G, it follows that
for
. This means
and we get
. Thus
for
.
Subcase 2.
.
Let
for
while
and
while
. It is clear that
is disconnected and
for every
. So we get
. On the other hand, suppose
is a 2-good-neighbor cut of G, then
has a component C with
and
. Consider G is 4-regular, we similarly get
. Thus
. So, we get
.
Case 3.
.
Consider
, so here
. Let
for
and
. Then
is disconnected and
for every
. So, we have
for
. On the other hand, if
, by Lemma 2.1, we have
. Thus
for
. If
, suppose F is a 3-good-neighbor cut of G, it is not difficult find that
for all i if
for some i and j. Combine this with
for every
, we have
and
. So, we get
.
This completes the proof.
Example: The 3-good-neighbor connectivity of
is 12 with
, which is shown in Figure 4.
3. Concluding Remark
In this paper, we focus our attention on the g-good neighbor connectivity of some Cartesian product graphs. We have determined the g-good-neighbor connectivity of the Cartesian product of two complete graphs
and
for
, mesh
for
, cylindrical grid
and
torus
for
. But the g-good neighbor connectivity of the Cartesian product for the general graphs is still unknown, even for the bounds. In the future, we will devote ourselves to this research.
Acknowledgements
The authors would like to thank anonymous reviewers for their valuable comments and suggestions to improve the quality of the article. This work was supported by QHAFC No. 2022-ZJ-753.