Equivalence classes in matching covered graphs
Abstract
A connected graph , of order two or more, is matching covered if each edge lies in some \pema. The tight cut decomposition of a matching covered graph yields a list of bricks and braces; as per a theorem of Lov{\'a}sz~\cite{lova87}, this list is unique (up to multiple edges); denotes the number of bricks, and denotes the number of braces that are isomorphic to the cycle (up to multiple edges). Two edges and are mutually dependent if, for each perfect matching , if and only if ; Carvalho, Lucchesi and Murty investigated this notion in their landmark paper~\cite{clm99}. For any matching covered graph , mutual dependence is an equivalence relation, and it partitions into equivalence classes; this equivalence class partition is denoted by and we refer to its parts as equivalence classes of ; we use to denote the cardinality of the largest equivalence class. The operation of `splicing' may be used to construct bigger matching covered graphs from smaller ones; see~\cite{lckm18}; `tight splicing' is a stronger version of `splicing'. (These are converses of the notions of `separating cut' and `tight cut'.) In this article, we answer the following basic question: if a matching covered graph is obtained by `splicing' (or by `tight splicing') two smaller matching covered graphs, say~~and~, then how is related to and to (and vice versa)? As applications of our findings: firstly, we establish tight upper bounds on in terms of and ; secondly, we answer a recent question of He, Wei, Ye and Zhai~\cite{hwyz19}, in the affirmative, by constructing graphs that have arbitrarily high ~and~ simultaneously, where denotes the vertex-connectivity.
Cite
@article{arxiv.1902.09260,
title = {Equivalence classes in matching covered graphs},
author = {Fuliang Lu and Nishad Kothari and Xing Feng and Lianzhu Zhang},
journal= {arXiv preprint arXiv:1902.09260},
year = {2019}
}