Scribd
Upload
15 views

T10 Solutions

This document contains solutions to tutorial problems about graph theory topics. It includes proofs showing that certain graphs do not admit planar embeddings and examples of identifying subgraphs that are non-planar Kuratowski minors.

Uploaded by

toaobmb
Copyright
© © All Rights Reserved
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
15 views

T10 Solutions

This document contains solutions to tutorial problems about graph theory topics. It includes proofs showing that certain graphs do not admit planar embeddings and examples of identifying subgraphs that are non-planar Kuratowski minors.

Uploaded by

toaobmb
Copyright
© © All Rights Reserved
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
You are on page 1/ 3

Tutorial 10 Solutions

MATH 239 Winter 2024

Week of March 25

T-10-1. For graphs G1 and G2 below, either find a planar embedding, or find a subgraph H that is an
edge subdivision of K5 or K3,3 . In the latter case, mark the edges in H.

G1 G2

Solution. □

1
MATH 239 Winter 2024 Tutorial 10 Solutions

T-10-2. (a) Prove that, for any e ∈ E(K5 ), the graph K5 − e admits a planar embedding.
(b) A planar embedding G is called outerplanar if every vertex of G lies on the boundary of
its outer face. Given an e ∈ E(K5 ), does K5 − e admit an outerplanar embedding?
Solution.Let V (K5 ) = {v1 , v2 , v3 , v4 , v5 }. (a) Note that, for any edges e1 , e2 ∈ E(K5 ), the
graphs K5 − e1 and K5 − e2 are isomorphic, so we choose an arbitrary e ∈ E(K5 ), say
e = v1 v5 , and it suffices to exhibit a planar embedding of K5 − e, such as the drawing below.

v2

v1

v3

v5 v4

(b) Suppose toward a contradiction that there is an outerplanar embedding of K5 − e, and,


for some s ≥ 1, let f1 , · · · , fs be the faces of this embedding, where f1 is the outer face. Thus,
deg(f1 ) ≥ 5. Since K5 − e is connected and |E(K5 − e)| = 9, it follows from Euler’s formula
that s = 11 − 5 = 6. For each i = 2, · · · , 6, we have deg(fi ) ≥ 3. Thus, by handshaking for
faces, we obtain 2|E(K5 − e)| ≥ 5 + 3(s − 1), so 18 ≥ 20, which is false. □

T-10-3. This question refers to the Petersen graph, see Figure 4.8 (page 99) of the course notes. Prove
in the following two ways that that the Petersen graph does not admit a planar embedding:

(a) Using Kuratowski’s Theorem


(b) Without using Kuratowski’s Theorem

2
MATH 239 Winter 2024 Tutorial 10 Solutions

Solution. (a) We produce a subgraph H of the Petersen graph which is an edge-subdivision


of K3,3 as indicated in the figure below, where the thick edges are the edges of the subgraph,
the red vertices of H form one bipartition class, the blue vertices of H form the other bipartite
class, and the remaining vertices of H have degree two in H. When we suppress the degree-
two vertices of H, we obtain a copy of K3,3 .
(b) Suppose toward a contradiction that there is a planar embedding G of the Petersen graph
and, for some s ≥ 1, let f1 , · · · , fs be the faces of this embedding. Note that the Petersen graph
has girth 5, it has no cycles of length either three or four, so deg(fi ) ≥ 5 for each i = 1, · · · , s.
Furthermore, |V (G)| = 10 and |E(G)| = 15, so, by Euler’s formula, s = 7. By handshaking
for faces, we have 2|E(G)| ≥ 5s, so 30 ≥ 35, which is false.

v1

w1

w5 w2
v5 v2

w4 w3

v4 v3

You might also like