1982
DOI: 10.1007/bf02189621
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Constructing cospectral graphs

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1
1
1

Citation Types

1
157
0

Year Published

1997
1997
2015
2015

Publication Types

Select...
6
2
2

Relationship

0
10

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 226 publications
(158 citation statements)
references
References 5 publications
1
157
0
Order By: Relevance
“…In the above example, as it was mentioned in [11], if H has 2m vertices and a trivial automorphism group, than all 2m m possible realisations of H are non-isomorphic. By Theorem 4 the graphs G and G (π) are cospectral.…”
Section: Theorem 4 ( [11]mentioning
confidence: 83%
“…In the above example, as it was mentioned in [11], if H has 2m vertices and a trivial automorphism group, than all 2m m possible realisations of H are non-isomorphic. By Theorem 4 the graphs G and G (π) are cospectral.…”
Section: Theorem 4 ( [11]mentioning
confidence: 83%
“…Proof Apply Godsil-McKay switching (cf. [3,7], 1.8.3, 14.2.3). Switch with respect to a 4-clique B such that every vertex outside B is adjacent to 0, 2 or 4 vertices inside.…”
Section: Cospectral Matesmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Previously, Godsil and McKay [8] and more recently Haemers and Spence [10] have shown that the laplacian matrix has more representational power than the adjacency matrix, in terms of resulting in less number of cospectral graphs. According to the results given in [10], of more than a billion graphs with 11 vertices characterized by the adjacency matrix, approximately 21% is cospectral, while this fraction is only 9% for the laplacian matrix.…”
Section: Definitions and Preliminariesmentioning
confidence: 99%