Flips on homologous orientations of surface graphs with prescribed forbidden facial circuits
Abstract
Let be a graph embedded on an orientable surface. Given a class of facial circuits of as a forbidden class, we give a sufficient-necessary condition for that an -orientation (orientation with prescribed out-degrees) of can be transformed into another by a sequence of flips on non-forbidden circuits and further give an explicit formula for the minimum number of such flips. We also consider the connection among all -orientations by defining a directed graph , namely the -forbidden flip graph. We show that if , then has exactly components, each of which is the cover graph of a distributive lattice, where is the number of the -orientations that has no counterclockwise facial circuit other than that in . If , then every component of is strongly connected. This generalizes the corresponding results of Felsner and Propp for the case that consists of a single facial circuit.
Keywords: surface graph, orientation, flip, homology, forbidden facial circuit
1 Introduction
Graph orientation with certain degree-constraints on vertices is a natural focus in graph theory and has close connection with many combinatorial structures in graphs, such as the spanning trees [2], primal-dual orientations [1], bipolar orientations [4], transversal structures [5], Schnyder woods [6], bipartite perfect matchings (or more generally, bipartite -factors) [8, 10, 12] and -orientations of the dual of a plane graph [9, 12]. In general, all these constraints could be encoded in terms of -orientations [2], that is, the orientations with prescribed out-degrees.
To deal with the relation among orientations, circuit (or cycle) reversal has been shown as a useful method since it preserves the out-degree of each vertex and the connectivity of the orientations. Various types of cycle reversals were introduced subject to certain requirements. Circuit reversal for the orientations of plane graphs or, more generally, surface graphs (graphs embedded on an orientable surface) received particular attention [2, 6, 9, 10, 11]. For example, Nakamoto [11] considered the 3-cycle reversal to deal with those orientations in plane triangulations where each vertex on the outer facial cycle has out-degree 1 while each of the other vertices has out-degree 3. In [13], Zhang et al. introduced the Z-transformation to study the connection among perfect matchings in hexagonal systems, which was later extended to general plane bipartite graphs [14].
A natural considering of circuit reversal for orientations of a surface graph is to reverse a directed facial circuit (the circuit that bounds a face). However, an orientation of a surface graph does not always have such a directed facial circuit, even if it has many directed circuits. In [2], Felsner introduced a type of circuit reversals, namely the flip, defined on the essential cycles in plane graphs which reverses a counterclockwise essential cycle to be clockwise. In a strongly connected -orientation of a plane graph, every essential cycle is exactly an inner facial circuit. In this sense, the notion of essential cycle is a very nice generalization of that of facial circuit. Further, Felsner proved that any -orientation of a plane graph can be transformed into a particular -orientation by a flip sequence, and the set of all -orientations of the graph carries a distributive lattice by flips.
The notion of flip has been also extended to general surface graphs [6, 12] and oriented matroids [9]. Moreover, Propp proved the following result (where the notion of homology will be given in the next section).
Theorem 1.1.
[12] The set of all -orientations of a surface graph in the same homology class carries a distributive lattice by a sequence of flips taking on the facial circuits of with a prescribed forbidden facial circuit.
We note that the above theorem is an extension of the one given by Felsner for plane graphs since a plane graph can be regarded as a sphere graph where the outer facial circuit is treated as the forbidden circuit.
In this paper, in stead of a prescribed forbidden facial circuit, we consider the flips on surface graph with a class of prescribed forbidden facial circuits , and call such flips the -forbidden flips. In the third section, we give a sufficient and necessary condition for that an -orientation can be transformed into another by a sequence of -forbidden flips and, further, give an explicit formula for the minimum number of the flips needed in such a sequence. In particular, if is empty then an -orientation can be transformed into another by flips if and only if they are homologous. In our study, the idea of potential function [2], or depth function [11], plays an important role.
In the last section, we focus on the relationship among all -orientations in a surface graph . To this end, given a class of forbidden facial circuits, we define a directed graph, namely the -forbidden flip graph, whose vertex set is the class of all -orientations of and two orientations and are joined by an edge with direction from to provided can be transformed from by a -forbidden flip. We apply the technique of U-coloring and L-coloring introduced by Felsner and Knauer in [3], and show that the -forbidden flip graph admits both a U- and L-coloring for any class . This yields a generalization of Theorem 1.1. More specifically, if is not empty, then the flip graph has exactly components, each of which is the cover graph of a distributive lattice, where is the number of the -orientations that has no counterclockwise facial circuit other than that in . And if is empty, then every non-trivial component of the flip graph is strongly connected, and hence cyclic.
2 Preliminaries
In this section we introduce some elementary concepts involving graphs and graph embeddings on surfaces. For a graph (directed or undirected), we denote by and the vertex set and edge set of , respectively. A closed walk in a graph is a sequence such that and are adjacent and, for every , and are adjacent. A closed walk is called a cycle if it is edge disjoint and a circuit if it is vertex disjoint. The directed circuit and directed cycle are defined analogously. An orientation of a graph is an assignment of a direction to each edge of . Given a graph with vertices and an out-degree sequence , an orientation of is called an -orientation [2] if for all , where is the out-degree of in . It is well known that if an -orientation of is strongly connected, then every -orientation of is strongly connected. In this case, we call strongly connected. It is also known that each component obtained from an -orientation by deleting all those edges that have the same direction in every -orientation of (i.e., the rigid edges [2, 6]) is strongly connected [9]. So in this paper, we always assume that is strongly connected and, hence, is 2-edge connected.
A surface graph is a graph embedded on an orientable surface without boundary. The connected components of , when viewed as subsets of , are called the faces of . A closed walk that bounds a face is called a facial walk. A surface graph is called a 2-cell embedding [7] or map [6] if all its faces are homeomorphic to open disks. A cycle on a surface is separating if is disconnected and is contractible [7] if can be continuously transformed into a single point. We note that if a cycle is contractible, then it is separating and, moreover, one component of is homeomorphic to an open disc. In this paper, except where otherwise stated, we always assume that all the surface graphs are 2-cell embedded and every edge is on the boundary of two distinct faces. We note that, in such an embedding, a facial walk is exactly a facial circuit and, therefore, every edge is shared by two distinct facial circuits. Thus, our embedding is stronger than 2-cell embedding, but weaker than the one in which each facial circuit is contractible.
A directed facial circuit is called counterclockwise (resp., clockwise), or ccw (resp., cw) for short, if when we trace along with the orientation of , the face bounded by lies to the left (resp., right) side of . A flip taking on a ccw facial circuit is the reorientation of that reverses from ccw to cw [2]. The notion of flip was introduced initially for the essential circuits. As mentioned earlier, in a strongly connected -orientation of , every essential circuit is a facial circuit [9].
Let be a surface graph with edge set of edges and let be a fixed orientation of . Consider the -dimensional edge space of . It is clear that any oriented subgraph of can be represented as an -dimensional vector whose coordinate indexed by an edge is defined by
Moreover, all oriented even subgraphs (the in-degree of each vertex equals its out-degree) of form an -dimensional subspace of , called the (directed) cycle space of , where is the number of vertices in .
For a simple graph , a basis of the cycle space can be created by the elementary cycles associated with a given spanning tree of . For a graph (not necessarily simple) embedded on a surface, it would be more convenient to create a basis of the cycle space by the facial circuits in and a so-called basis for the homology, where and herein after, denotes the set of all facial circuits of and is an arbitrary facial circuit in . A common approach to create a basis for the homology is to choose a spanning tree in and a spanning tree in the dual graph of that contains no edge dual to . By Eulerโs formula, there are exactly edges in that are neither in nor dual to the edges in , where is the genus of the surface. Each of these edges forms a unique circuit with and all these circuits form a basis for the homology [6], denoted by . In a word, any oriented even subgraph of can be uniquely represented as a linear combination of the facial circuits in and circuits in , i.e.,
(1) |
In the following we always choose the orientation of each facial circuit in to be ccw. Let be the subspace of generated by . An oriented even subgraph is called null-homologous or 0-homologous [6] if , i.e.,
(2) |
For two -orientations and , we denote by the directed subgraph obtained from by removing those edges that has the same direction as that in . It is clear that is oriented even graph. Further, if then and are called homologous [6]. Equivalently, and are homologous if and only if their corresponding coefficients in (1) are the same for every . It is clear that homology is an equivalence relation on -orientations.
Example 1. Let be the Cartesian product graph of two circuits of length 2 embedded on torus and . For convenience, we draw in the form as indicated in Figure 1 (left), where the left side and right side (resp., lower side and upper side) are identified. By the method we introduced earlier, we can see that is a basis for the homology, where and are the two directed circuits as illustrated in Figure 1 (right).
![[Uncaptioned image]](https://cdn.awesomepapers.org/papers/5e127281-4b20-4047-872e-9b5ab7aa8fbb/x1.jpg)
Figureย 1. The edges of are represented in thick lines; the four faces are labeled by .
We note that, since every vertex has out-degree 2, the directions of the four edges on are determined uniquely by that on , unless is a directed circuit (in this case must be directed and, therefore, has exactly two choices). This means that has totally 18 different -orientations , as illustrated in Figure 2. Since , we have , meaning that and are not homologous. Further, since and , and are homologous. In general, it can be seen that any two orientations and are homologous if and only if or . In other words, the -orientations of form 13 homologous classes: and .
![[Uncaptioned image]](https://cdn.awesomepapers.org/papers/5e127281-4b20-4047-872e-9b5ab7aa8fbb/x2.jpg)
Figureย 2.
3 Transform an -orientation into another by flips on non-forbidden facial circuits
Proposition 3.1.
Let be a surface graph and, for each , let be an integer associated with . Then for any integer ,
(3) |
Conversely, for each , if is an integer associated with such that
(4) |
then there exists an integer such that for every .
Proof.
Consider an edge of . By our assumption, is shared by two distinct facial circuits, say, and . Recall that every facial circuit in , when viewed as a basis circuit, is ccw. Therefore, has opposite orientations in and . Thus, and for any other than and . Thus, (3) follows directly.
Let and be two homologous -orientations of a surface graph . Following the idea of potential function [2] (or depth function [11]), we introduce an intuitive representation of as follows: define
to be the function which assigns an integer to each facial circuit of according to the following rule, see Figure 1:
1.ย ;
2.ย if and share a common edge then
(6) |
where, by โ lies to the left of โ we mean that lies to the left side of when we trace along with the direction of .
![[Uncaptioned image]](https://cdn.awesomepapers.org/papers/5e127281-4b20-4047-872e-9b5ab7aa8fbb/x3.jpg)
Figureย 3. The edges in are represented in thick lines and edges not in are represented in dotted lines.
Proposition 3.2.
For any two homologous -orientations and , is well defined and
Proof.
Since and are homologous, we have . Let be an arbitrary edge of , and let and be the two facial circuits that share . Then .
We first assume that the direction of in coincides with that in our initially fixed orientation , i.e., . In this case, we have and if lies to the left of , and and if lies to the right of . Therefore,
(7) |
We now assume that . In this case we have and if lies to the left of , and and if lies to the right of . This means that (7) still holds.
Lemma 3.3.
[6] Let and be two -orientations of a surface graph and let be an arbitrary facial circuit. If
and for all , then can be transformed from by a sequence of -forbidden flips.
Let
and let be a facial circuit for which .
Theorem 3.4.
Given a forbidden facial circuit class , an -orientation of a surface graph can be transformed from by a sequence of -forbidden flips if and only if and are homologous and for every . Moreover, the minimum number of flips needed to transform into equals
(10) |
Proof.
Assume firstly that can be transformed from by a sequence of -forbidden flips.
For a facial circuit , consider the number of the flips in taking on . Let be an edge on and let be the facial circuit which shares with . If , then the orientation of changes after being taken. Moreover, a flip to change the orientation of must take on the facial circuit which lies to the left side of . This implies that if lies to the left side of or if lies to the left side of . If , then the orientation of does not change after being taken. This means that, if a flip in takes on then there must be another flip that takes on to keep the orientation of invariant and, hence, . As a result, we have the following relation:
(11) |
Combining (11) with (6), we have , i.e., . Since the dual graph of is connected, we have
(12) |
for any . So by Proposition 3.1 and Proposition 3.2,
Hence, and are homologous.
Further, from (12) we can also see that attains the minimum value if and only if does, i.e., and . On the other hand, notice that for every and the minimum value 0 of is attained by every since the facial circuits in do not involve any flip in . Hence, for every . Therefore,
(13) |
for every .
Conversely, assume that and are homologous and for any . Then by Proposition 3.2 and Proposition 3.1, we have
Since for any , so by Lemma 3.3, can be transformed from by a sequence of -forbidden flips.
Let be an arbitrary sequence of -forbidden flips that transform into . For any facial circuit , consider the number of flips in taking on . By the definition of , we have .
Similar to the proof of the necessity, (12) is also satisfied. Set in (12). Since and for every , we have for every . This implies that contains no flip taking on a facial circuit in . That is, is a -forbidden sequence.
Finally, by the arbitrariness of the sequence , we may assume that is shortest. Thus, by (12) and the fact that , we have
This completes our proof. โ
Corollary 3.5.
Let and be two -orientations of a surface graph. Then can be transformed from by a sequence of flips if and only if and are homologous.
Proof.
We now give an extension of Lemma 3.3 as follows.
Corollary 3.6.
Let and be two -orientations of a surface graph and be a class of facial circuits. If
(14) |
then can be transformed from by a sequence of -forbidden flips if and only if for all .
Proof.
We write (14) as
(15) |
where if . By Proposition 3.2, we have
So by Proposition 3.1, there exists an integer such that for all . Further, the condition for all implies that the minimum value of in (15) is 0 and attained by every . Hence, the minimum value of is attained by every . The corollary follows directly from Theorem 3.4. โ
4 Flip graph of -orientations
For a class of forbidden facial circuits of a surface graph , we define the -forbidden flip graph of as a directed graph, denoted by , whose vertex set is the class of all -orientations of , and two orientations and are joined by a directed edge from to provided can be transformed from by a -forbidden flip, or equivalently, is a ccw facial circuit and . Since the homology is an equivalence relation, the -orientations of can be partitioned into several equivalence classes, say . For , let be the subgraph of induced by . If consists of exactly one facial circuit, then by Theorem 1.1, is the cover graph of a distributive lattice.
In this section we consider the general case, in which the forbidden class consists of any number of facial circuits (in particular, may be empty). To this end, we apply the technique of U-coloring and L-coloring, which was introduced by Felsner and Knauer to characterize the cover graph of distributive lattices.
For a directed graph and two vertices , we use to denote the directed edge joining and with direction from to . An edge coloring of is called a U-coloring if for every with and , the following two rules hold [3]:
(U1). ;
(U2). There is a vertex and edges such that and .
An L-coloring is defined as the dual, in the sense of edge direction reversal, to a U-coloring, that is, every directed edge in the definition of U-coloring is replaced by .
Proposition 4.1.
[3] If a finite connected acyclic digraph admits a U- and an L-coloring then is the cover graph of a distributive lattice, and has a unique sink and a unique source.
We now turn to our flip graph. Let be the class of all facial circuits of . An edge of is called of type if it corresponds to a flip taking on . Let be the set of the edges of type and let be the edge coloring of such that for each .
Proposition 4.2.
is both a U-coloring and an L-coloring.
Proof.
Let with and . Therefore, (resp., ) can be transformed from by a flip taking on the ccw facial circuit (resp., ). Since , we have and, hence, the rule U1 holds. Further, since both and are ccw, they cannot share the same edge of , that is, and are independent. Let be the orientation of transformed from by taking a flip on . Then can also be transformed from by taking a flip on . This means that and, therefore, the rule U2 holds. The discussion for L-coloring is analogous. โ
For a set E of edges in , we denote by the directed graph obtained from by deleting all the edges in E. By the definition of the edge coloring , the following proposition is obvious.
Proposition 4.3.
For any , restricted on the subgraph is still a U-coloring and an L-coloring.
Proposition 4.4.
For any facial circuit class , we have
(16) |
Proof.
Notice that and have the same vertex set. If an edge is in some then is of type and therefore, is not in since is a forbidden facial circuit in . The converse is also true and thus (16) follows. โ
In contrast to the U- and L-colorings for the cover graph of a lattice, we will see that may be cyclic if , which gives a non-trivial example of cyclic directed graph that admits a U- and an L-coloring. As an example, let us consider the surface graph in Example 1. Recall that the equivalence classes, i.e., the homologous classes, of the -orientations of are
This means that the flip graph of consists of 12 isolated vertices and the subgraph induced by , where is illustrated as in Figure 4 and is cyclic. Further, by Proposition 4.4, we have and . Moreover, has one component and has three components, each of which is the cover graph of a distributive lattice, see Figure 4.
![[Uncaptioned image]](https://cdn.awesomepapers.org/papers/5e127281-4b20-4047-872e-9b5ab7aa8fbb/x4.jpg)
Figureย 4. For , the edges of type are represented by .
Recall that a directed graph is strongly connected if for any two vertices and , there is a directed path from to and a directed path from to . The maximum integer for which is strongly connected for any set of at most edges is called the strong edge-connectivity of and is denoted by .
For , let be the class of all the -orientations in that has no ccw facial circuit other than that in and let . Similarly, let be the class of all the -orientations in that has no cw facial circuit other than that in . We can see that, for any , the orientation obtained from by reversing the directions of all edges of is in , and vise versa. This means that . For instance, in the example above we have and , see Figure 2. Further, we can see that and are exactly the three sinks and three sources of , respectively, see Figure 4.
Theorem 4.5.
Let .
1). is strongly connected and ;
2). For any with , has exactly components, each of which is the cover graph of a distributive lattice with the unique sink in and a unique source in .
Proof.
1). By Corollary 3.5, is strongly connected and therefore, . Let be an arbitrary facial circuit and let be the lattice on the homology class with forbidden circuit , where two orientations and have the relation in if can be transformed from by a sequence of -forbidden flips. Then by Theorem 1.1, is the cover graph of . Recall that has a unique maximal element. Moreover, this maximal element clearly corresponds to an orientation of that contains no ccw facial circuit other than [6]. On the other hand, since , has at least one ccw facial circuit. Thus, itself must be ccw in . This means that is the unique ccw facial circuit in and therefore, .
2). We first prove that is acyclic. Suppose to the contrary that has a directed cycle . Without loss of generality, assume that the facial circuits sequence of the flips corresponding to is . Since is a directed cycle, the direction of every edge in is not changed after taking the above flips. This means that, for every edge in , the two facial circuits that share appear the same times in the sequence . Therefore, every facial circuit in must appear the same times in since the dual graph of is connected. This is a contradiction because the facial circuits in are forbidden to any flip.
Finally, by Proposition 4.2, Proposition 4.3 and Proposition 4.4, admits a U- and an L-coloring. So by Proposition 4.1, each component of is the cover graph of a distributive lattice (in particular, a single element) with a unique sink and a unique source. Moreover, if an orientation of is a sink of , then has no ccw facial circuit other than that in , meaning that . The discussion for being the source is analogous. This completes our proof. โ
Acknowledgments
This work is supported by National Natural Science Foundation of China under Grant No.โ11971406.
References
- [1] Y. Disser, J. Matuschke, Degree-constrained orientations of embedded graphs, J. Comb. Optim., 31:758-773, 2016.
- [2] S. Felsner, Lattice structures from planar graphs, Electron. J. Combin., 11:#R15, 2004.
- [3] S. Felsner, K. B. Knauer, ULD-Lattices and -Bonds, Combinatorics, Probability Computing, 18 (5):707-724, 2012.
- [4] H. de Fraysseix, P. Ossona de Mendez, P. Rosenstiehl, Bipolar orientations revisited, Discrete Appl. Math., 56:157-179, 1995.
- [5] E. Fusy, Transversal structures on triangulations: A combinatorial study and straight-line drawings, Discrete Math., 309:1870-1894, 2009.
- [6] D. Gonรงalves, K. B. Knauer, B. Lรฉvรชque, On the structure of Schnyder woods on orientable surfaces, arXiv: 1501.05475v2, 2016.
- [7] Joan P. Hutchinson, On short noncontractible cycles in embedded graphs, SIAM J. Discrete Math., 1(2):185-192, 1988.
- [8] R. Kenyon, J. Propp, D. B. Wilson, Trees and matchings, Electron. J. Combin., 7(1):#R25, 2000.
- [9] K. B. Knauer, Partial orders on orientations via cycle flips, Ph.D thesis, Technische Universitรคt Berlin, Berlin, 2007.
- [10] P. C. B. Lam, H.P. Zhang, A distributive lattice on the set of perfect matchings of a plane bipartite graph, Order, 20:13-29, 2003.
- [11] A. Nakamoto, K. Ota, T. Tanuma, Three-cycle reversions in oriented planar triangulations, Yokohama Math. J., 44:123-139, 1997.
- [12] J. Propp, Lattice structure for orientations of graphs, arXiv:math/ 0209005v2, 2020.
- [13] F. J. Zhang, X.F. Guo, R.S. Chen, -transformation graphs of perfect matchings of hexagonal systems, Discrete Math., 72:405-415, 1988.
- [14] H. P. Zhang, F.J. Zhang, Plane elementary bipartite graphs, Discrete Appl. Math., 105:291-311, 2000.