MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4415556773 · doi:10.61091/jcmcc128-07

Cut vertex and unicyclic graphs with the maximum number of connected induced subgraphs

2025· article· W4415556773 on OpenAlexvenueno aff

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Combinatorial Mathematics and Combinatorial Computing · 2025
Typearticle
Language
FieldMathematics
TopicGraph theory and applications
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsWiener indexConnectivityGraphVertex (graph theory)Real numberTopological index

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

<p>Cut vertices are often used as a measure of nodes’ importance within a network. These are nodes whose failure disconnects a connected graph. Let <span class="math inline">\(N(G)\)</span> be the number of connected induced subgraphs of a graph <span class="math inline">\(G\)</span>. In this work, we investigate the maximum of <span class="math inline">\(N(G)\)</span> where <span class="math inline">\(G\)</span> is a unicyclic graph with <span class="math inline">\(n\)</span> nodes of which <span class="math inline">\(c\)</span> are cut vertices. For all valid <span class="math inline">\(n,c\)</span>, we give a full description of those maximal (that maximise <span class="math inline">\(N(.)\)</span>) unicyclic graphs. It is found that there are generally two maximal unicyclic graphs. For infinitely many values of <span class="math inline">\(n,c\)</span>, however, there is a unique maximal unicyclic graph with <span class="math inline">\(n\)</span> nodes and <span class="math inline">\(c\)</span> cut vertices. In particular, the well-known negative correlation between the number of connected induced subgraphs of trees and the Wiener index (sum of distances) fails for unicyclic graphs with <span class="math inline">\(n\)</span> nodes and <span class="math inline">\(c\)</span> cut vertices: for instance, the maximal unicyclic graph with <span class="math inline">\(n=3,4\mod 5\)</span> nodes and <span class="math inline">\(c=n-5>3\)</span> cut vertices is different from the unique graph that was shown by Tan et al. [<span><em>The Wiener index of unicyclic graphs given number of pendant vertices or cut vertices</em></span>. J. Appl. Math. Comput., 55:1–24, 2017] to minimise the Wiener index. Our main characterisation of maximal unicyclic graphs with respect to the number of connected induced subgraphs also applies to unicyclic graphs with <span class="math inline">\(n\)</span> nodes, <span class="math inline">\(c\)</span> cut vertices and girth at most <span class="math inline">\(g>3\)</span>, since it is shown that the girth of every maximal graph with <span class="math inline">\(n\)</span> nodes and <span class="math inline">\(c\)</span> cut vertices cannot exceed <span class="math inline">\(4\)</span>.</p>

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.010
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.014
GPT teacher head0.276
Teacher spread0.261 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designTheoretical or conceptual
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Combinatorial Mathematics and Combinatorial ComputingSame topicGraph theory and applicationsFrench-language works237,207