Vol 01, Issue 02, December 2012 International Journal of Data Mining Techniques and Applications

http://iirpublications.com ISSN: 2278-2419

Integrated Intelligent Research (IIR) 80

A NOTE ON NON SPLIT LOCATING EQUITABLE DOMINATION









Abstract - Let G = (V,E) be a simple, undirected, finite nontrivial graph. A non empty set DV of
vertices in a graph G is a dominating set if every vertex in V-D is adjacent to some vertex in D. The
domination number (G) of G is the minimum cardinality of a dominating set. A dominating set D is
called a non split locating equitable dominating set if for any two vertices u,wV-D, N(u)D
N(w)D, N(u)D=N(w)D and the induced sub graph V-D is connected.The minimum
cardinality of a non split locating equitable dominating set is called the non split locating equitable
domination number of G and is denoted by
nsle
(G). In this paper, bounds for
nsle
(G) and exact
values for some particular classes of graphs were found.

Keywords-Domination Number,non Split domination number

1. INTRODUCTION

For notation and graph theory terminology [2]
is followed. Specifically, let G=(V,E) be a
simple, undirected, finite nontrivial graph with
vertex set V and edge set E. For a vertex veV,
the open neighborhood of v is the set
N
G
(v)={u /uv e E}, N
G
(v) can be written as
N(v) and the closed neighborhood of v is the
set N
G
[v]= N(v){v} , N
G
[v] can be written as
N[v] . The degree of a vertex v is the number
of edges incident with v in G, i.e, d(v)
=|N(v)|. The maximum , minimum degree
among the vertices of G is denoted by A(G)
,o(G) respectively. If deg v = 0,then v is called
an isolated vertex of G. If deg v = 1 , then v is
called a pendant vertex of G.As usual K
n
, C
n
,
P
n
and K
1
,
n-1
denote the complete graph, the
cycle, the path and the star on n vertices,
respectively. The distance d
G
(u,v) or d (u,v)
between two vertices u and v in a graph G, is
the length of a shortest path connecting u and
v. The diameter of a connected graph G is the
maximum distance between two vertices of G
it is denoted by diam(G) . A non empty set
D_V of vertices in a graph G is a dominating
set if every vertex in V-D is adjacent to some
vertex in D. The domination number (G) of G
is the minimum cardinality of a dominating
set. A dominating set D of a graph G = (V,E)
is a non split dominating set if the induced
subgraph (V-D) is connected . The non split
domination number
ns
(G) of a graph G is the
minimum cardinality of a non split dominating
set. A set D is said be a
ns
-set if D is a
minimum non split dominating set.

Definition 1.1. A dominating set D is said to
be non split locating equitable dominating set
if for any two vertices u,weV-D, N(u)D =
N(w)D, |N(u)D|=|N(w)D| and the
induced sub graph (V-D) is connected . The
minimum cardinality of a non split locating
equitable dominating set is called the non split
locating equitable domination number of G
and is denoted by
nsle
(G). A set D is said to
be a
nsle
set if D is a minimum non split
locating equitable dominating set.

2. CHARACTERIZATION OF NON
SPLIT LOCATING EQUITABLE
DOMINATING SET.
Observation 2.1.
1. For any connected graph G, (G) s

nsle
(G).
2. For any connected spanning subgraph
H of G ,
nsle
( H ) s
nsle
( G ).
Example: (i)
nsle
( C
4
) =
nsle
( P
4
)=2.
(ii)
nsle
( K
4
) = 3,
nsle
( C
4
) = 2.

Proposition 2.2. Pendant vertices are
members of
every nsle-set.
P.Sumathi
1

1
Head & Associate Professor in Mathematics
1
C.K.N college for Men
1
Anna Nagar, Chennai-600102, India.
1
sumathipaul@yahoo.co.in
G.Alarmelumangai
2

2
Lecturer in Mathematics,
2
E.M.G Yadava womens college
2
Madurai-625014, India.
2
alarmelu.mangai@yahoo.com



Vol 01, Issue 02, December 2012 International Journal of Data Mining Techniques and Applications
http://iirpublications.com ISSN: 2278-2419
Integrated Intelligent Research (IIR) 81

Proof. Let v be vertex in G such that deg(v)
=1 and let D be a nsle-set. If veV-D, then a
vertex adjacent to v must be in D and hence
(V-D) is disconnected, which is a
contradiction.
Proposition 2.3.
nsle
(G) > e where e is the
number of
pendant vertices.
Proof. Since every pendant vertex is a
member of each non split locating equitable
dominating set.

3. BOUNDS OF NON SPLIT
LOCATING EQUITABLE
DOMINATION NUMBER. n ber .

Observation 3.1. For any connected graph G
with
n > 2,
nsle
(G) s n -1.
This bound is sharp for K
n.


Theorem 3.2. For any connected (n,m) graph
G with o(G) > 2,
nsle
(G) > 3n- 2m-2.
Proof. Let D be a
nsle
set of G and let t be the
number of edges in G having one vertex in D
and the other in V-D. Number of vertices in
<V-D> is
n-
nsle
(G) and minimum number of edges in
<V-D> is n-
nsle
(G) -1 . Hence
vieD
deg (vi)
+ t. Since
|V-D|= n-
nsle
(G) , there are atleast n-
nsle
(G) edges from V-D to D. Also deg(vi ) >
o(G)
Therefore
o(G)
nsle
(G) + n-
nsle
(G) s 2 [ m (n--
nsle
(G) -1]. But o(G) > 2,
Hence,
2
nsle
(G) + n-
nsle
(G) s 2 [ m n +
nsle
(G)
+1]. Thus, 3n- 2m -2 s
nsle
(G)
Therefore
nsle
(G) > 3n- 2m-2.
Remark. This bound is attained if G ~ C
n
,
n > 3.
Theorem 3.3. Let G be a connected graph
and o(G) =1. Then,
nsle
(G) > 3n- 2m-e-2,
where e is the number of pendant vertices.
Proof. Let D be a
nsle
- set

of G , such that
|D|=
nsle
(G) and let t be the number of edges
in G having one vertex in D and the other in
V-D. As in Theorem 3.2,
2 [ m ( n -
nsle
(G) 1] =
vieD
deg ( v
i
) +
t
> e + 2 (
nsle
(G) e ) + n-

nsle
(G)
Hence ,
nsle
(G) > 3n- 2m-e-2.
Remark. This bound is attained if G ~ P
n
, n >
3.

Corollary 3.4 . If G is a connected k-regular
graph
( k > 3 ) with n vertices,
then
nsle
(G) s (n ( k -3) +2 ) / ( k 3 ).

Corollary 3.5. If o(G) > 3, then

nsle
(G) s ( 2m- 3n + 2) / (o(G) 3).

Theorem 3.6. Let G be a connected graph
with n > 2,
nsle
(G) = n-1 if and only if G is a
star and G is a complete graph on n vertices.
Proof. If G ~ K
1
,
n-1
then the set of all pendant
vertices of
,.
K
1
,
n-1
forms a minimal non split
locating equitable dominating set for G. Hence

nsle
(G) = n-1.
Conversely assume
nsle
(G) = n-1. Then
there exists a non split locating equitable
dominating set D containing n-1 vertices. Let
V- D = {v}. Since D is a dominating set of G,
v is adjacent to atleast one of the vertices in
D,say u . If u is adjacent to any of the vertices
in D, then the vertex u must be in V-D. Since
D is minimal, u is adjacent to none of the
vertices in D. Hence G ~ K
1
,
n-1
and K
n.

Theorem 3.7. Let G bea connected graph

nsle
(G) = n-2 if and only if G is isomorphic to
one of the following graphs. C
n
, P
n
or G is the
graph obtained from a complete graph by
attaching pendant edges at atmost one of the
vertices of the complete graph and atmost at n-
1 vertices.
Proof. For all graphs given in the theorem,

nsle
(G) = n-2.
Conversely, let G be a connected graph for
which

nsle
(G) = n-2. and let D be a non split
locating equitable dominating set of G such
that |D|= n 2 and V- D = {w
1
,w
2
} and < V
D > ~ K
2
.
Case (i) By Proposition on 2.2, all vertices of
degree 1 are in D and any vertex of degree 1 in
D are adjacent to atmost one vertex in V-D
since
< V D > ~ K
2
. Also each vertex in V- D is
adjacent to atmost on vertex in D. Let D = D
{ pendant vertices }. Then {w
1
,w
2
} D
will be a complete graph. Otherwise, there
exists a vertex u eD , such that u is not
adjacent to atleast one of the vertices of D
Vol 01, Issue 02, December 2012 International Journal of Data Mining Techniques and Applications
http://iirpublications.com ISSN: 2278-2419
Integrated Intelligent Research (IIR) 82

{u} and hence D-{u} is a non split locating
equitable dominating set. Therefore G is the
graph obtained from a complete graph by
attaching pentant edges at atleast one of the
vertices.
Case (ii) o (G) = 2 . V-D ={w
1
,w
2
}. Let w be
vertex of degree > 3 in G and we V D and
w = w. Let each vertex of D be adjacent to
both w
1
and w
2
. If <D> is complete, then G is
complete. Assume < D > is not complete.
Then there exists atleast one pair of non-
adjacent vertices in D, say u,veD and
V { u, v, w
1
} is a non split locating
equitable dominating set of G containg (n-3 )
vertices, which is a contradiction.Therefore
there exists a vertex in D which is adjacent to
exactly one of w
1
and w
2
and again we get a
non split locating equitable dominating set
having (n-3) vertices and hence weD. Since
deg (w )>3, there exists atmost one vertex, say
veD, adjacent to w. Then either V { v,w,w
1
} or
V- {v,w, w
2
} will be a non split locating
equitable dominating set of G. Therefore there
exists no vertex of degree >3 in G and hence
each vertex in G of degree 2 and G is a cycle.
Case (iii) o (G) = 1, Let u,v be non adjacent
vertices in < D >. Then either V {u,v w
1
} or
V- { u,v,w
2
} will be a non split locating
equitable dominating set, which is a
contradiction. Therefore , < D {w
1
,w
2
}> is
path. Hence G ~ P
n.
.

Theorem 3.8. For a connected graph G,

nsle
(G) = e if and only if each vertex of degree
atleast 2 is a support, where e is the number of
pendant vertices in G.
Proof. Assume each vertex of degree atleast 2
is a support. If S is the set of all pendant
vertices in G , then S is a dominating set in G
and since <V-S> is connected, S is a
nsle
set
of G. Therefore

nsle
(G) s e By proposition 2.3 theorem
follows.
Conversely, let u be a vertex in G such that
deg (u) > 2 and Let D be a
nsle
set of G. If u
is not a support of G, then u is not adjacent to
any of the vertices in D, which is a
contradiction.

Theorem 3.9. If G is a connected graph which
is not a star, then
nsle
(G) s n-2.
Proof. Since G is not a star, there exists two
adjacent cut vertices u and v with deg (u),
deg(v) > 2. Then V- {u,v} is a non split
locating equitable dominating set of G.
Hence
nsle
(G) s n-2.

Theorem 3.10. Let T be a tree with n vertices
which is not a star. Then
nsle
(G) = n-2 if and
only if T is a path or T is obtained from a path
by attaching pendant edges at atleast one of
the end vertices.
Proof. Let T be a tree which is not a star. It
can be easily verified that for all trees stated in
the theorem
nsle
(G) = n-2.
Conversely, Assume
nsle
(G) = n-2. Let D be a

nsle
- set containing n-2 vertices and let
V-D= {w
1
,w
2
} and <V-D> ~ K
2
. Since T is a
tree, each vertex in D is adjacent to atmost one
vertex in V-D. Since D is a dominating set,
each vertex in V-D is adjacent to atleast one
vertex in D.
(i) If <D> is independent, then T ~ double star.
(ii) Assume <D> is not independent. Then
there exists a vertex u e<D> such that deg(u)
>1 in <D>. Also either |N
j
(u)|= 1, 1s j s
diam ( T ) 3 or if |N
j
(u)|> 2 for some j ,
j s diam ( T ) 4, Then < N
j
(u)> in D is
independent, since otherwise D- {u} is a non
split locating equitable dominating set of T. In
the first case T is a path. In the second case, T
is a tree obtained from a path by attaching
pendant edges at atleast one of the end vertices
of the path.

4. RELATION BETWEEN NON
SPLIT LOCATING EQUITABLE
DOMINATION NUMBERAND OTHER
PARAMETER
Theorem 4.1. For any tree with n vertices,

c (
T) +
nsle (
T ) s n.
Proof. If D
1
is the set of all cut vertices of T
with |D
1
|= n
1
, then
c
( T) = n
1
. If D
2
is the
set of all pendant vertices of T with |D
2
|= n
2
,
then

nsle
( T ) > n
2
. But |V ( T
1
)|= n
1
+ n
2
implies
that

c
( T) +
nsle
( T ) s n.
By theorem 3.6 , equality holds if and only if
each vertex of degree atleast 2 is a support.
Proposition 4.5. For any connected (n,m)
graph G,

nsle
( G ) + A (G) s 2n-2.

Proof . For any graph with n vertices, A (G) s
n-1.
Vol 01, Issue 02, December 2012 International Journal of Data Mining Techniques and Applications
http://iirpublications.com ISSN: 2278-2419
Integrated Intelligent Research (IIR) 83


By observation 3.1, the proposistion follows.
Proposition 4.6 For any connected (n,m)
graph G,
nsle
( G ) + A (G) = 2n-2 if and only
if G ~ K
1
,
n-1
or K
n.
Proof. When G ~ K
1
,
n-1
or K
n.,

nsle
(G) + A (G) = 2n-2.
Conversely,
nsle
(G) + A (G) = 2n-2. is
possible if
nsle
(G) = n-1 and A (G) = n-1.
But,
nsle
( G ) = n-1 is possible if and only if
G is a star and G is a complete graph.

Theorem 4.2. For any connected (n,m)
graph G ,

nsle
(G) + A (G) > 2n-3 and

nsle
(G) + A (G) < 2n-3 if and only if G is one
of the following.
(i) C
3
,P
3
,K
n
, or G is the graph obtained from
a complete graph by attaching pendant edges
at exactly one of the vertices of complete
graph.
(ii) C
4
, P
4
or G is the graph obtained from a
cycle or path by attaching pendant edges at
exactly one of the vertices of cycle or path.
Proof. For the graphs given in the theorem,

nsle
(G) + A (G) > 2n-3 and

nsle
(G) + A (G) < 2n-3 .
Conversely,
nsle
(G) + A (G) > 2n-3 is
possible if
nsle
(G) = n-1 and A (G) = n-1 and

nsle
(G) + A (G) < 2n-3 possible if .
nsle
(G) =
n-2 and A (G) = n-2.
In the first case,
nsle
(G) = n-1 if and only if G
is a star on n vertices .But for a star
A (G) = n-1 and hence this case is possible.In
the second case,
nsle
(G) = n-2 if and only if G
is isomorphic to one of the following graphs.
(a) C
n
, P
n
or G is obtained from a path by
attaching pendant edges at atleast one of the
end vertices.Let G ~ Cn, then .
nsle
(G) = n-2
and
A (G) = n-2 and
nsle
(G) + A (G) < 2n-3
implies n=4.Hence, G ~ C4. Let G be the
graph obtained from a cycle by attaching
pendant edges at atleast one of the vertices of
the cycle. Let n be the number of vertices in
the cycle and e be the maximum number of
pendant edges attached.
Hence A (G) = n 5 +e, Therefore

nsle
(G) + A (G) < 2n-3.
Let G ~ P
n
,
nsle
(G) + A (G) < 2n-3
implies n =4 . Hence G ~ P
4
. Let G be a graph
obtained from a path by attaching pendant
edges at atleast one of the end vertices. Let e
be the number of pendant edges attacted , e >
2. Hence,
nsle
(G) + A (G) < 2n-3 .
REFERENCS:
[1] J. Cyman, The outer-connected domination
number of a graph. Australasian J. Comb. 38
(2007), 35-46.
[2] T.W. Haynes, S.T.Hedetniemi, and P.J. Slater,
Fundamentals of domination Graphs, Marcel
Dekker, New York, 1998.
[3] V.R. Kulli and B. Janakiram, The non split
domination number of a graph. India J. Pure
Appl.math; 31(2000)545-550.
[4] P. Sumathi , G.Alarmelumangai, Non split
locating equitable domination, Proceedings.Of the
International Conference on Mathematics in
Engineering & Business Management, March 9-
10,2012.ISBN: 978-81-8286-015-5.
[5] Hongxing Jiang, Erfang shan, outer-connected
domination in graphs, Utilitas Mathematics
81(2010).