Skip to main content
Springer logoLink to Springer
. 2018 Jul 13;2018(1):171. doi: 10.1186/s13660-018-1766-z

Some bounds on the distance-sum-connectivity matrix

Gülistan Kaya Gök 1,
PMCID: PMC6061528  PMID: 30137899

Abstract

The distance-sum-connectivity matrix of a graph G is expressed by δ(i) and δ(j) such that i,jV. δ(i) and δ(j) are represented by a sum of the distance matrices for i<v and j<v, respectively.

The purpose of this paper is to give new inequalities involving the eigenvalues, the graph energy, the graph incidence energy, and the matching energy. So, we have some results in terms of the edges, the vertices, and the degrees.

Keywords: Distance-sum-connectivity matrix, Bounds

Introduction

Let G be a simple, finite, connected graphs with the vertex set V(G) and the edge set E(G). By di we denote the degree of a vertex. Throughout this paper, the vertex degrees are assumed to be ordered non-increasingly. The maximum and the minimum vertex degrees in a graph are denoted by Δ and δ, respectively. If any vertices i and j are adjacent, then we use the notation ij.

The distance-sum-connectivity matrix is defined by the displacement of the vertex degrees and the distance sum. This matrix is denoted by δX and represented in [118] by

Xδ={(δ(i)δ(j))12if ij,0otherwise.

The distance sum is δ(i)=j=1v(vDij) such that D is the distance matrix. The distance-sum-connectivity matrix is an interesting matrix, and this paper deals with bounds of this matrix. We find some upper bounds and these bounds contain the edge numbers, the vertex numbers, and the eigenvalues. The eigenvalues of this matrix are λ1(δX),λ2(δX),,λn(δX) such that λ1(δX)λ2(δX)λn(δX). We will accept λ1(δX) as the spectral radius of the graph Xδ(G), and we will take λ1(δX) as λ1 for convenience. Basic properties of λi are i=1nλi=0, i=1nλi2=2m, and det(δX)=i=1nλi. G is a regular graph with order n if and only if λ12mn [3]. The energy of (δX) is described as E(δX)=i=1n|λi(G)|. Some properties about the graph energy may be found [7, 10]. The incidence energy IE of G is introduced by Joojondeh et al. [13] as the sum of singular values of the incidence matrix of G. The incidence matrix of a graph G is defined as

I(G)={1if vi is incident with vj,0otherwise.

The singular values are q1(δX), q2(δX),,qn(δX) such that q1(δX)q2(δX)qn(δX). We use qi(δX) as qi for brevity. The incidence energy of a graph is represented by IE=IE(G)=i=1nqi(G). See [8] and [9].

The number of k-matchings of a graph G is denoted by m(G,k). The matching polynomial of a graph is described by α(G)=α(G,λ)=k0(1)km(G,k)λn2k (see [6]).

The matching energy of a graph G is defined as

ME=ME(G)=2pio1x2ln[k0m(G,k)x2k]dx(see [11]).

The paper is planned as follows. In Sect. 2, we explain previous works. In the next section, we give a survey on upper bound for the first greatest eigenvalue λ1 and the second greatest eigenvalue λ2 using the edge number, the vertex number, and the degree. In Sect. 3.2, we focus on the upper bound for energy of Xδ(G) and are concerned with the vertex number, the distance matrix, and the determinant of δX. In addition, we deal with some results for the incidence energy of Xδ(G), and we find sharp inequalities of IE(δX(G)). In Sect. 3.3, we determine different results for the matching energy of a graph with some fixed parameters.

Preliminaries

In order to achieve our plan, we need the following lemmas and theorems.

Lemma 2.1

([12])

Let λ1(A) be a spectral radius and A=(aij) be an irreducible nonnegative matrix with Ri(A)=j=1maij. Then

(minRi(A):1in)λ1(A)(maxRi(A):1in). 2.1

Lemma 2.2

([4])

If G is a simple, connected graph and mi is the average degree of the vertices adjacent to viV, then

λ1(G)max(mimj:1i,jn,vi,vjE). 2.2

Ozeki established Ozeki’s inequality in [16]. This inequality holds some bounds for our graph energy. This inequality is as follows.

Theorem 2.3

(Ozeki’s inequality)

If ai,biR+, 1in, then

i=1nai2i=1nbi2(i=1naibi)2n24(M1M2m1m2)2,

where M1=max1inai, M2=max1inbi, m1=min1inai, and m2=max1inbi.

Polya–Szego found an interesting inequality in [17]. This inequality is set as follows.

Theorem 2.4

(Polya–Szego inequality)

If si,tiR+ for 1in, then

i=1nsi2i=1nti214(K1K2k1k2+k1k2K1K2)2(i=1nsiti)2,

where K1=max1insi, K2=max1inti, k1=min1insi, and k2=max1inti.

Let G be a simple graph and X and Y be any real symmetric matrices of G. Let us consider eigenvalues of these matrices. These eigenvalues hold in the following lemma.

Lemma 2.5

([5])

Let M and N be two real symmetric matrices and 1n, then

i=1λi(M+N)i=1λi(M)+i=1λi(N).

Let x1,x2,,xs be positive real numbers for 1ts. Mt is defined as follows:

M1=x1+x2++xss,M2=x1x2+x1x3++x1xs+x2x3++xs1xs12s(s1),Ms1=x1x2++xs1+x1x2++xs2xs++x2x3++xs1xss,Ms=x1x2xs.

Lemma 2.6

(Maclaurin’s symmetric mean inequality [2])

Let x1,x2,,xs be real nonnegative numbers, then

M1M212M313Ms1s.

This equality holds if and only if x1=x2==xs.

Theorem 2.7

Let G be a simple graph. Let zeros of the matching polynomial of this graph be μ1,μ2,,μn. Then

ME(G)=i=1n|μi|.

The zeros of the matching polynomial provide the equations i=1nμi2=2m and i<jμiμj=m.

Main results

Upper bounds on eigenvalues

A lot of bounds for the eigenvalues have been found. We now establish further bounds for λ1 and λ2 involving the n, m and d. Firstly we give some known bounds about graph theory.

In the reference [14] a lower bound is given:

E(G)2m

if and only if G consists of a complete bipartite graph Kx,y. In this note, xy=m.

Indeed, McClelland’s famous bound is [15] E(G)2mn.

We now will give an upper bound for the eigenvalues of Xδ(G).

Theorem 3.1

If G is a simple, connected graph and D is the distance matrix of G, then

λ1(G)1DinDjn4.

Proof

Let X=(x1,x2,,xn)T be an eigenvector of D(G)1(Xδ(G))D(G). Let one eigencomponent xi=1 and the other eigencomponent 0<xk1 for every k. Let xj=maxk(xk:vivkE,ik). We know (D(G)1(Xδ(G))D(G))X=λ1(G)X. If we take the ith equation of this equation, we obtain

λ1(G)xi=k(δ(i)δ(k))12xk 3.1
=k(j=1v(vDij)t=1v(vDkt))12xk 3.2
=k(1j=1v(vDij)1t=1v(vDkt))xk. 3.3

We can take each Dij’s as Din. So,

λ1(G)xi(1nDink(1t=1v(vDkt)))xk. 3.4

Using the Cauchy–Schwarz inequality,

λ1(G)xi=(1nDin)(nn)xk 3.5
=(1Din)xk. 3.6

From Lemmas 2.1 and 2.2, we have

λ1(G)1Din1Djn 3.7
1DinDjn4. 3.8

 □

Theorem 3.2

Let G be a simple, connected graph with m edges and n vertices. Let λ1,λ2,,λn be eigenvalues of the distance-sum-connectivity matrix δX and E(G) be an energy of δX, then

λ2(G)2m(2mnd1)n3d14m2n6d12+m,

where λ2 is the second greatest eigenvalue of δX.

Proof

λ2 is the second largest eigenvalue of δX. Firstly, we show that λ12mn3d1. We know that (D(G)1(Xδ(G))D(G))X=λ1(G)X. So, λ1(G)xi=k((δ(i)δ(j))12dkd1)xk. Similar to Theorem 3.1, if we take the ith equation of this equation, we obtain

λ1(G)xi=(k(m=1v(vDim)s=1v(vDjs))12dkd1)xk 3.9
=(k(1m=1v(vDim))(1s=1v(vDjs))dkd1)xk 3.10

Using the Cauchy–Schwarz inequality and calculating the distance matrices of δX, we obtain

λ1(G)xi(1nn1nn)(k(dkd1))xk. 3.11

We know that k=1n=2m. Hence,

λ1(G)2md1n3. 3.12

Secondly, we will show that λ2(G)2m(2mnd1)n3d14m2n6d12+m.

We know that i=1nλi=0 and i=1n(λi)2=2m. So, λ1+λ2=i=3nλi. Hence,

λ2|λ1|+|i=3nλi|.

If we take the square of both sides, we obtain

(λ2)2(λ1)2+2|λ1||i=3nλi|+|i=3nλi|2.

By the Cauchy–Schwarz inequality with the above result, we have

(λ2)2(λ1)2+2|λ1|i=3n|λi|+i=3n(λi)2(λ1)2+2|λ1|(E(G)|λ1||λ2|)+2m(λ1)2(λ2)2.

If we make necessary calculations, we have

(λ2)2|λ1|(E(G))|λ1|2|λ1||λ2|+m.

Since λ1λ2 and λ1d1, then d1λ1λ2. So,

(λ2)2|λ1|(E(G))|λ1|2|λ1|d1+m|λ1|(E(G)d1)λ12+m.

Since E(G)2mn and λ12mn3d1, then

λ22mn3d1(E(G)d1)+m(2mn3d1)22m(2mnd1)n3d14m2n6d12+m.

 □

Upper and lower bounds on incidence energy

In the sequel of this paper, we expand bounds under the energy of Xδ(G) with n, D and det(δX(G)).

Theorem 3.3

Let G be a regular graph of order n with m edges. Let IE(G) be an incidence energy of Xδ(G) and σ1,σ2,,σn be singular values of Xδ(G). Then

IE(δX1)(G)+IE(δX2)(G)2Δ+(n1)(22mn4mn)+2|2mn2mn|).

Proof

Let σi and σj be singular values of (δX1)(G) and (δX2)(G), respectively. We will use that i=2n(σi)2=i=2n|λi|=E(G)|λ1|.

By Lemma 2.5,

i=1kσi(δX1+δX2)i=1kσi(δX1)+i=1kσi(δX1).

So,

i=2,j=2n(σi+σj)i=2nσi2+i=2nσj2+2i=2nσi2i=2nσj2=E(δX1)λ1+E(δX2)λ1+2(E(δX1)λ1)(E(δX2)λ1).

Since λ12mn and E(G)2mn, we get

i=2,j=2n(σi+σj)22mn4mn+2|2mn2mn|.

Since λ1Δ,

IE(δX1)(G)+IE(δX2)(G)=σ1+σ1+i=2,j=2n(σi+σj)=2λ1+(n1)i=2,j=2n(σi+σj)2.

Hence,

IE(δX1)(G)+IE(δX2)(G)2Δ+(n1)(22mn4mn)+2|2mn2mn|).

 □

Theorem 3.4

Let G be a graph with n nodes and m edges. Let the smallest and the largest positive singular values σ1 and σn of δX, respectively, and det(δX) be a determinant of the distance-sum-connectivity matrix δX of G. For n>1,

E(G)n22(n1)(1DinDjn4det(δX)i=2n1), 3.13

where E(G) is the energy of δX.

Proof

Suppose ai=1 and bi=σi, 1in. Apply Theorem 2.3 to show that

i=1n12i=1nσi2(i=1nσi)2n24(σnσ1)2. 3.14

Thus, it is readily seen that

nE(G)n24(σnσ1)2+(i=1nσi)2. 3.15

By the Cauchy–Schwarz inequality, we can express that

nE(G)n24(σnσ1)2+i=1nσi2 3.16
n24(σnσ1)2+E(G). 3.17

Then it suffices to check that

E(G)n24(n1)(σnσ1)2 3.18
n24(n1)(σn22σnσ1+σ12) 3.19
n24(n1)(λn2λnλ1+λ1) 3.20
n24(n1)(λn2det(δX)i=2n1+λ1). 3.21

Since λ1λ2λn and using Theorem 3.1, we obtain

E(G)n22(n1)(1DinDjn4det(δX)i=2n1). 3.22

 □

Upper and lower bounds for matching energy

We determine an upper bound for the matching energy applying the Polya–Szego inequality, and we give some results using Maclaurin’s symmetric mean inequality.

Theorem 3.5

Let G be a connected graph and ME(G) be a matching energy of G, then

ME(G)8mns1sn|s1|+|sn|, 3.23

where μi is the zero of its matching polynomial.

Proof

Let μ1,μ2,,μnbe the zeros of their matching polynomial. We suppose that si=|μi|, where s1s2sn and ti=1, 1in. By Theorem 2.4, we obtain

i=1n|μi|2i=1n1214(|μn||μ1|+|μ1||μn|)2(i=1n|μi|)2. 3.24

Since i=1nμi2=2m,

ni=1n|μi|214(|μn|+|μ1||μ1μn|)2(i=1n|μi|)2. 3.25

It is easy to see that

ME(G)8mn|μ1μn||μ1|+|μn|. 3.26

We can assume that the maximum |μi| is sn and the minimum |μi| is s1. So the bound can be sharpened, that is,

ME(G)8mns1sn|s1|+|sn|. 3.27

 □

Corollary 3.6

Let G be a k-regular graph. Then

ME(G)2nks1|s1|+k. 3.28

Proof

Since G is a k-regular graph, we can take sn=k and 2m=nk. By Theorem 3.5,

ME(G)4n2k2s1|s1|+k. 3.29

Hence,

ME(G)2nks1|s1|+k. 3.30

 □

Theorem 3.7

Let G be a connected graph with n vertices and m edges. Then

ME(G)n2mn1 3.31

if and only if μ1=μ2==μn.

Proof

Let us consider s=n and xi=|μi| for i=1,2,,n. Setting that in Lemma 2.6, we get

M1=i=1n|μi|n=ME(G)n. 3.32

Also,

M2=1n(n1)i=1nj=1,jin|μi||μj|. 3.33

Since i=1nμi2=2m and i<j|μi||μj|=m, then

M2=1n(n1)i=1nm2=m2n(n1). 3.34

We know that M1M212. So,

ME(G)mnn1. 3.35

The above equality holds if and only if μ1=μ2==μn. □

Theorem 3.8

Let G be a connected graph with n vertices and m edges. Then

ME(G)2(2m)n(n1)i=1n|μi|2n 3.36

if and only if μ1=μ2==μn.

Proof

Let us consider s=n and xi=|μi| for i=1,2,,n. By Lemma 2.6, we determine

M2=1n(n1)i=1nj=1,jin|μi||μj| 3.37
=1n(n1)((i=1n|μi||)2i=1n(|μj|)2). 3.38

Using the Cauchy–Schwarz inequality, we have

M21n(n1)((i=1n|μi|)2(i=1n|μj|)2). 3.39

It is clear that the above equality gives

M2=1n(n1)((2m)(ME(G))2). 3.40

Thus, it is pointed out that (ME(G))2(2m)n(n1)M2. Since M212Mn1n and Mn=i=1n|μi|, then

(ME(G))2(2m)n(n1)(i=1n|μi|)2n. 3.41

Hence,

ME(G)2(2m)n(n1)i=1n|μi|2n. 3.42

The above result holds if and only if μ1=μ2==μn. □

Conclusions

The main goal of this work is to examine distance-sum-connectivity matrix δX. We find some upper bounds for the distance-sum-connectivity matrix of a graph involving its degrees, its edges, and its eigenvalues. We also give some results for the distance-sum-connectivity matrix of a graph in terms of its energy, its incidence energy, and its matching energy.

Acknowledgements

The author would like thank for the valuable suggestions of referees.

Authors’ contributions

All authors read and approved the final manuscript.

Funding

Not applicable.

Competing interests

The author reports that she has no competing interests.

Footnotes

Publisher’s Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

References

  • 1.Bapat R.B. Graphs and Matrices. New Delhi: Indian Statistical Institute; 2010. [Google Scholar]
  • 2.Biler P., Witkowski A. Problems in Mathematical Analysis. New York: Marcel Dekker; 1990. [Google Scholar]
  • 3.Cvetkovic D., Doob M., Sachs H. Spectra of Graphs-Theory and Application. New York: Academic Press; 1980. [Google Scholar]
  • 4.Das K.C., Kumar P. Some new bounds on the spectral radius of graphs. Discrete Math. 2004;281:149–161. doi: 10.1016/j.disc.2003.08.005. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 5.Fan K. On a theorem Weyl concerning eigenvalues of linear transformation I. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA. 1949;35:652–655. doi: 10.1073/pnas.35.11.652. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 6.Farrell E.J. An introduction to matching polynomials. J. Comb. Theory, Ser. B. 1979;27:75–86. doi: 10.1016/0095-8956(79)90070-4. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 7.Gutman I. The energy of a graph: old and new results. In: Betten A., Kohnert A., Laue R., Wassermann A., editors. Algebraic Combinatorics and Applications. Berlin: Springer; 2001. pp. 196–211. [Google Scholar]
  • 8.Gutman I., Kiani D., Mirzakhah M. On incidence energy of graphs. MATCH Commun. Math. Comput. Chem. 2009;62:573–580. [Google Scholar]
  • 9.Gutman I., Kiani D., Mirzakhah M., Zhou B. On incidence energy of a graph. Linear Algebra Appl. 2009;431:1223–1233. doi: 10.1016/j.laa.2009.04.019. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 10.Gutman I., Li X., Zhang J. Graph energy. In: Dehmer M., Emmert Streib F., editors. Analysis of Complex Networks. From Biology to Linguistics. Weinheim: Wiley-VCH; 2009. pp. 145–174. [Google Scholar]
  • 11.Gutman I., Matelijević M. Note on the Coulson integral formula. J. Math. Chem. 2006;39:259–266. doi: 10.1007/s10910-005-9032-2. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 12.Horn R.A., Johnson C.R. Matrix Analysis. New York: Cambridge University Press; 1985. [Google Scholar]
  • 13.Joojandeh M.R., Kiani D., Mirzakhah M. Incidence energy of a graph. MATCH Commun. Math. Comput. Chem. 2009;62:561–572. [Google Scholar]
  • 14.Li X., Shi Y., Gutman I. Graph Energy. New York: Springer; 2012. [Google Scholar]
  • 15.McClelland B.J. Properties of the latent roots of a matrix: the estimation of π electron energies. J. Chem. Phys. 1971;54:640–643. doi: 10.1063/1.1674889. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 16.Ozeki N. On the estimation of inequalities by maximum and minimum values. J. Coll. Arts Sci., Chiba Univ. 1968;5:199–203. [Google Scholar]
  • 17.Polya G., Szego G. Problems and Theorems in Analysis. Series. Integral Calculus. Theory of Functions. Berlin: Springer; 1972. [Google Scholar]
  • 18.Vasudev C. Graph Theory with Applications. (1) New Delhi: New Age International Publishers; 2006. [Google Scholar]

Articles from Journal of Inequalities and Applications are provided here courtesy of Springer

RESOURCES