2016
DOI: 10.1007/978-3-319-19680-0_2
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Inherited Properties of Descendants

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2

Citation Types

0
2
0

Year Published

2019
2019
2019
2019

Publication Types

Select...
1
1

Relationship

1
1

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 2 publications
(2 citation statements)
references
References 12 publications
0
2
0
Order By: Relevance
“…Therefore, in Γ * g,3 , each subgraph functions equivalently to a vertex, and therefore the Petersen graph shares its non-Hamiltonicity with Γ * g,3 . An alternative proof using results Baniasadi and Haythorpe [2] arises from noticing that Γ * g,3 has the non-Hamiltonian Petersen graph as an ancestor gene, violating the necessary condition for Γ * g,3 to be Hamiltonian. Lemma 3.2.…”
Section: Non-bridge Constructionsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Therefore, in Γ * g,3 , each subgraph functions equivalently to a vertex, and therefore the Petersen graph shares its non-Hamiltonicity with Γ * g,3 . An alternative proof using results Baniasadi and Haythorpe [2] arises from noticing that Γ * g,3 has the non-Hamiltonian Petersen graph as an ancestor gene, violating the necessary condition for Γ * g,3 to be Hamiltonian. Lemma 3.2.…”
Section: Non-bridge Constructionsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Since it is not possible to visit all three subgraphs with a simple cycle, the graph is non-Hamiltonian. An alternative proof of non-Hamiltonicity for graphs of this type is given in Baniasadi and Haythorpe [2].…”
Section: Non-bridge Constructionsmentioning
confidence: 99%