Available online at www.sciencedirect.

com
Available online at www.sciencedirect.com
Procedia
Engineering
ProcediaProcedia
Engineering 00 (2011)
Engineering 000–000
24 (2011) 278 – 281
www.elsevier.com/locate/procedia

2011 International Conference on Advances in Engineering

Some new sufficient conditions and Hamiltonian connected

graphs
Kewen Zhao a, Deqin Chenb, Yue Linb, Zu Lib,Keyang Zengb,a*
a
Institute of Information Science and Mathematics, Qiongzhou University, Sanya, Hainan, 572022, P.R.China;
b
Department of Mathematics, Qiongzhou University, Sanya, Hainan, 572022, P.R.China;

Abstract

In 2005, Rahman and Kaykobad introduced the Rahman-Kaykobad condition for the research of Hamiltonian path
graphs and proved that if G is a 2-connected graph with n vertices and d(u)+d(v)+(u,v)≥n+1 for each pair of distinct
non-adjacent vertices u,v in G, then G has a Hamiltonian path. In 2006 Li proved that if G is a 3-connected graph
with n vertices and d(u)+d(v)+(u,v)≥n+3 for each pair of distinct non-adjacent vertices u,v in G, then G is
Hamiltonian-connected graphs. In this present paper, we consider some better conditions for the research of
Hamiltonian-connected graphs and prove that if G is a 2-connected graph with n vertices and d(u)+d(v)+(u,v)≥n+2
for each pair of distinct non-adjacent vertices u,v in G, then G is Hamiltonian-connected graphs or G belongs to a
class of well-structured graphs.

© 2011 Published by Elsevier Ltd. Open access under CC BY-NC-ND license.

Selection and/or peer-review under responsibility of ICAE2011.
Keywords: Hamiltonian-connected graphs, Hamiltonian path graphs, Rahman-Kaykobad condition.

1. Introduction

We consider only simple graphs, i.e., graphs with no multi-edges and no self loops, and every
reference to a cycle or a path, unless otherwise specified, indicates, respectively, a simple cycle or a
simple path. For a graph G, let V (G) be the vertex set of G and E(G) the edge set of G. The complete
graph of order n is denoted by Kn. For two vertices u and v, let d(u,v) be the length of a shortest path
between vertices u and v in G, that is, d(u, v) is the distance between u and v. The minimum degree of a
graph G is denoted by (G) (or  if the graph G under consideration is understood). For a subgraph H of a
graph G and a subset S of V (G), let NH(S) be the set of vertices in H that are adjacent to some vertex in S
and let the cardinality of NH(S) be N H ( S )  d H ( S ) . In particular, if H = G and s  {u} , then let
NG(S) = N(u), which is the neighborhood of u in G. In this case, the cardinality of NG(S) is denoted by
G (S )
d 
N (u ) d (u ) , which is the degree of u. Furthermore, let G-H and G[S] denote the subgraphs
* Corresponding author. Tel.: +86-13307623252
E-mail address: [email protected]

1877-7058 © 2011 Published by Elsevier Ltd. Open access under CC BY-NC-ND license.
doi:10.1016/j.proeng.2011.11.2641
2 Kewen ZhaoZhao
Kewen et al./ /Procedia
ProcediaEngineering
Engineering00
24(2011)
(2011)000–000
278 – 281 279

of G induced by V(G)-V(H) and S, respectively. For each integer m3, let Pm(x1, xm)=x1x2xm denote a
path of order m and define
N+Pm(u)={xi+1V(Pm):xiNPm(u)}
N-Pm(u)={xi-1V(Pm):xiNPm(u)}
N±Pm(u)= N+Pm(u)N-Cm(u),
where subscripts are expressed as integers modulo m.
A path in a graph G that contains every vertex of G is called a Hamiltonian path in G. A graph G is
said to be Hamiltonian-connected if each pair of distinct vertices u,v of G has a [u,v]-path of length n-
1( i.e. Hamiltonian path ).
It no ambiguity can arise we sometimes write N(u) instead of NG(S),  instead of (G), etc. We refer to
the book [1] for graph theory notation and terminology not described in this paper.
It is well-known that the Hamiltonian graph problem is NP-complete [2]. In 2005, Rahman and
Kaykobad [3] established a sufficient condition for the research of Hamiltonian path graphs.
Theorem 1(Rahman and Kaykobad [3]). Let G be a 2-connected graph of order n≥3. If
d(u)+d(v)+(u,v)≥n+1 for each pair of distinct non-adjacent vertices u,v in G, then G has a Hamiltonian
path.
In 2009, we [5] considered the same condition of Theorem 1 for pancyclic graphs.
In 2006, Li [4] proposed conditions d(u)+d(v)+(u,v)≥n+3 for characterizing the 3-connected
Hamiltonian-connected graphs.
Theorem 2(Li[4] ). Let G be a 3-connected graph of order n≥3. If d(u)+d(v)+(u,v)≥n+3 for each pair
of distinct non-adjacent vertices u,v in G, then G is Hamiltonian-connected.
In this paper, we present the following three results, which all improve the above Theorem 2.
Theorem 3. Let G be a 2-connected graph of order n≥3. If d(x)+d(y)≥n for each pair of nonadjacent
vertices x,y with d(x,y)=2 in G, then G is Hamiltonian-connected or G{Hn/2∨KCn/2, H2∨*(Knm∪Hm2)).
Where Ht is graphs of order t, K(n+2)/2 is empty graph of order (n+2)/2. For graphs A and B the join
operator “A∨B” of A and B is the graph constructed from A and B by adding all edge joining the
vertices of A and the vertices of B. So, H2∨(Knm∪Hm2) is the graph obtained from each vertex of H2
adjacent to very vertex of two disjoint graphs Knm and Hm2. Furthermore, H2∨*(Knm∪Hm2) is the
graph obtained from H2∨(Knm∪Hm2) with removing its some edges of connecting to H2. Also, its
structure can be found in the proof of Case 2 of Theorem 3.
By the Theorem 3, we obtain the following two results on 2-connected and 3-connected Hamiltonian-
connected immediately.
Theorem 4. Let G be a 2-connected graph of order n≥3. If d(u)+d(v)+(u,v)≥n+2 for each pair of
distinct non-adjacent vertices u,v in G, then G is Hamiltonian-connected or G{Hn/2∨KCn/2,
H2∨*(Knm∪Hm2)).
Theorem 5. Let G be a 3-connected graph of order n≥3. If d(u)+d(v)+(u,v)≥n+2 for each pair of
distinct non-adjacent vertices u,v in G, then G is Hamiltonian-connected or G Hn/2∨KCn/2.

2. Proof of main result.

Proof of Theorem 3. Assume that G is not Hamiltonian-connected under the condition of Theorem 3,
i.e., there exists two distinct vertices x,y and Pm(x,y)=(x)x1x2…xm(y) is a longest path of G of two end-
vertices in x,y with mn. Then we shall prove that GPm is a complete subgraph.
First, we shall prove that every component of GPm is a complete subgraph. Otherwise, if there exists
a component G* of GPm that is not a complete subgraph, let u,v be two vertices in component G* with
d(u,v)=2. Since G is 2-connected, when n=3, 4, clearly, the Theorem holds. When n≥5 and under the
condition of Theorem 3, a Corollary in our Reference [5] shows that G has a Hamiltonian cycle Cn, this
implies m≥max{n/2+1, 4}. Hence |V(GPm)| ≤n/21.
Then, if u and v are not adjacent any vertex of Pm, then d(u)+d(v)≤2(n/21)=n2, a contradiction.
280 KewenZhao
Kewen Zhao/ Procedia
et al. / Procedia Engineering
Engineering 24 (2011)
00 (2011) 000–000278 – 281 3

If u or v is adjacent to some vertex of Pm, we assume without loss of generality that u is adjacent to
xiV(Pm), then we have d(u,xi+1)=2 if xixm or d(u,xi-1)=2 if xix1.
We assume without loss of generality that d(u,xi+1)=2, then we have (1).if xhV(Pm\{xm})={x1,x2,…xm-
1} is adjacent to u, then xh+1 is not adjacent to xi+1(Otherwise, if xh+1xi+1E(G), without loss of generality,
assume hi, then we will obtain a (x,y)-path x1x2…xhuxixi-1…xh+1xh+2…xi+1xi+2…xm which is longer than
Pm, a contradiction ).
(2). if wV(GPm) is adjacent to u, clearly w is not adjacent to xi+1(Otherwise, we also obtain a longer
(x,y)-path, a contradiction ). By (1) and (2), we can check that
d(xi+1)≤n|N(u)\{xm}||{u,v}|,
this implies d(xi+1)+d(u)≤n1, a contradiction.
Next, we claim that GPm is connected. Otherwise, if GPm has two components G*,G**. Then there
must exist xi+1,xj+1Npm(G*)( or xi+1,xj+1Npm(G**)) or xi-1,xj-1Npm(G*)(or xi-1,xj-1Npm(G**))
(Otherwise, every vertex of V(Pm\{x1,xm}) is not adjacent to any vertex of GPm. In this case, G* has a
vertex denoted by u and G** has a vertex denoted by v such that x1 is adjacent to u and v, since
m≥max{n/2+1, 4}, then we can check
d(u)+d(v)≤|V(G)|-(|V(Pm)|-2|{x1,xm}|)|{u,v}|≤n-m+2≤n-1, a contradiction).
Without loss of generality, we assume xi+1,xj+1Npm(G*), then (1) if there exist two vertices in G**
that are adjacent to xi+1,xj+1, respectively. In this case let P* be a path in G* that two end-vertices are
adjacent to xi,xj, respectively, and let P** be a path in G** that two end-vertices are adjacent to xi+1,xj+1,
respectively, and without loss of generality say ij, then we obtain a (x,y)-path x1x2…xiP*xjxj-
1…xi+1P**xj+1…xm is longer than Pm, a contradiction.
(2) If none of V(G**) are adjacent to xi+1 or xj+1. Without loss of generality, assume none of V(G**)
are adjacent to xi+1. Let uV(G*) be adjacent to xi, since GPm is a complete subgraph, then when
xj+1Npm(u)\{xi+1}, xj+1 is not adjacent to xi+1, hence we can check that d(xi+1)≤n(|Npm(u)\{xi+1}|-
|{xm}|)-|{u,xi+1}|-|V(G**)|, this implies d(xi+1)+d(u)≤n1, a contradiction.
Thus, GPm=G* is a complete subgraph.
Then, we consider the following two cases.
Case 1. If there exists xiPm\{x1,xm}such that xi is adjacent to some vertex of G *.
In this case there must exist xi+1,xj+1Npm(G*) or xi-1,xj-1Npm(G*). Without loss of generality, say
xi+1,xj+1Npm(G*). Then we claim |V(GPm)|=1.
For otherwise, if |V(GPm)|≥2. Since GPm is a complete subgraph, let u(V(GPm) be adjacent to xi,
then when xj+1Npm(u)\{xi+1}, since |V(GPm)|≥2 and Pm(x,y) is a longest path of G, so xj+1 and xj+2 all
are not adjacent to xi+1, hence we can check that d(xi+1)≤n(|Npm(u)\{xi+1}|-|{xm}|)-|{u,xi+1,xj+2}|, this
implies. d(xi+1)+d(u)≤n1, a contradiction.
Therefore, |V(GPm)|=1.
Let GPm={u}. If d(u)＜n/2. By the condition of Theorem that d(u)+d(xi+1)≥n and d(u)+d(xj+1)≥n, then
we have d(xi+1)|{xi}|＞n/2 and d(xj+1) |{xj}|＞n/2. This implies d(xi+1)+d(xj+1)≥n+3. On the other hand,
we assume without loss of generality that ij, since Pm(x,y) is a longest path of G, so (1).when xh (h≤i) is
adjacent to xi+1, then xh+1 is not adjacent to xj+1; (2).When xh (i+1≤h≤j) is adjacent to xi+1, then xh-1 is not
adjacent to xj+1; (3).When xh (j+1≤h) is adjacent to xi+1, then xh+1 is not adjacent to xj+1. Hence we can
check d(xi+1)+d(xj+1)≤n+2, this contradicts d(xi+1)+d(xj+1)≥n+3.
If d(u)＞n/2. Then there must exist two vertices xi,xi+1 on Pm such that u is adjacent to xi and xi+1, then
we get Hamiltonian path Pn(x,y), a contradiction.
Thus, d(u)=n/2. In this case, since there does not exist Pn(x,y), then u must be adjacent to every vertex
of {x1,x3,…,xn1}. Clearly, {u,x2,x4,…,xn2} is a independent set. Thus we have GGn/2∨KCn/2.
Case 2. If none of V(Pm\{x1,xm}) are adjacent to some vertex of G*.
In this case, since GPm is a complete subgraph Knm. Let G[{x1,xm}]=H2 and G[{x2,x3,…,xm1}]=Hm-2.
In this case, we denote the graphs G by H2∨*(Knm∪Hm2), where H2∨*(Knm∪Hm2) is the graph
obtained from H2∨(Knm∪Hm2) with removing its some edges of connecting to H2, and if vertex
uV(Hm2) is adjacent to some V(H2) then u must be adjacent every vertex of Hm2\{u}.
4 Kewen ZhaoZhao
Kewen et al./ /Procedia
ProcediaEngineering
Engineering00
24(2011)
(2011)000–000
278 – 281 281

This complete the proof of Theorem 3.

Note. The following two results have been completed by only Kewen Zhao himself: If G is bipartite
Hamiltonian graph of order 2r and if there exists a vertex x in one partite such that d(x)+d(y)≥r+1 for
each y in another partite with xyE(G), then G has C2t, t=2,3,…r.
Proof. Let C2r=x1x2…x2rx1 be a Hamiltonian cycle of G and S={x1,x3,…} and T={x2,x4,…}. Set
2i=min{2k: x2kN(x1)\{x2}}. If x1x4E(G), then G has C4; if x1x4E(G), by d(x1)+d(x4)≥r+1, d(x1) or
d(x4)≥(r+1)/2. WLOG, Assume d(x1)≥(r+1)/2, then x1 is adjacent to some consecutive x2r,x2r+2, so G also
has C4. Then, for any x2j, if G does not have C2j, then x1x2jE(G). (i) When i≤j-1. for any x2k-1, if x2k-
1x2jE(G), since G does not have C2j, so x1x2j+(2j-2k)E(G) for 1≤k≤i and x1x2kE(G) for i≤k≤j and
x1x2k+(2i-4)E(G) for j≤k (For example, if x1x2kE(G), then C2j= x2jx2k-1x2k-2…x1x2kx2k+1…x2j). This
implies d(x1)≤|T|-d(x2j), which contradicts d(x1)+d(x2j)≥r+1. (ii) When ij, then x1x2j-2E(G). For any x2k-
1, if x2k-1x2j-2E(G), then x1x2kE(G). So d(x1)≤r-d(x2j-2), this contradicts d(x1)+d(x2j-2)≥r+1. Thus, G is
bipancyclic.
Kewen Zhao also proved that if Pm=x1x2…xm is a longest path in 2-connected graph G of order n. Then
c(G)≥min{n, d(x1)+d(xm) }, where c(G) is the circumference of G.
Proof. Let Pm=x1x2…xm be a longest path of G. Then x1 and xm are not adjacent to any of V(G-Pm), and
when xm is adjacent to some xj of Pm, then x1 is not adjacent to xj+1(Otherwise, we get cycle x1xj+1xj+2…xmxjxj-1…x1
of order m connected to G-Pm, this contradicts that Pm is a longest path), so we can check that d(x1)≤m-
d(xm)-|{x1}|. Assume d(x1)+d(xm)=m-r, r≥1. If c(G)min{n, d(x1)+d(xm)}, we consider two cases. (i).If xm is
adjacent to some xj of Pm and x1 is adjacent to some xj+k, k≥1. Then x1 is not adjacent to xj +t for
1≤t≤r(Otherwise, we get a cycle of length at least d(x1)+d(xm)), so we can check that d(x1)≤m-d(xm)-|{x1}|-
r, this contradicts d(x1)+d(xm)=m-r. (ii). i≤j for any xiN(x1) and xjN(xm). Since G is 2-connected, so there
exists xlN(x1) and xsN(xm) and there exist two vertices u,v of each component of G-Pm that are adjacent
to some two vertices xl-k-1,xs+h+1, resp.. Then clearly, k+h≤r(Otherwise, we get a cycle of length at least
d(x1)+d(xm)), so we can check d(x1)+d(xm)≤m-r-|{x1, xm }|+|N(x1)∩N(xm)|=m-r-1, a contradiction, so
completing the proof.

3. Conclusion.

Recently, Li [4] investigated Rahman-Kaykobad type conditions d(u)+d(v)+(u,v)≥n+3 for a graph to

be Hamiltonian-connected. In this paper we find that Rahman-Kaykobad type conditions
d(u)+d(v)+(u,v)≥n+2 is also sufficient for characterizing of Hamiltonian-connected in all graphs
excepting one well-structured class of graphs, so our work provides a further understanding of
Hamiltonian-connected graphs following Rahman and Kaykobad type conditions. Since the concept of
shortest paths demands lesser number of edges than that required by Ore’s conditions to ensure
Hamiltonicity of a graph. It would be interesting to investigate the possibility of applying all pairs
shortest path matrix to formulate better conditions.

References

[1] J.A. Bondy and U. S. R. Murty, Graph Theory with Applications, Macmillan, London and Elsevier,New York, 1976.
[2] M. R. Garey, D. S. Johnson, Computers and Intractability: A Guide to the Theory of NP-Completeness, W. H. Freeman and
Company, New York , 1979.
[3]M. S. Rahman , M. Kaykobad, On Hamiltonian cycles and Hamiltonian paths, Information Processing Letters, v.94(2005),1,
37-41.
[4] Rao Li, A new sufficient condition for Hamiltonicity of graphs. Information Processing Letters. 98 (2006), 4, 159-161.
[5] Kewen Zhao, Yue Lin, Ping Zhang, A Sufficient Condition for Pancyclic Graphs, Information Processing Letters,109
(2009),no.16,991-996