Homotopy Covers of Graphs
Abstract.
We develop a theory of -homotopy, fundamental groupoids and covering spaces that apply to non-simple graphs, generalizing existing results for simple graphs. We prove that -homotopies from finite graphs can be decomposed into moves which adjust at most one vertex at a time, generalizing the spider lemma of [CS1]. We define a notion of homotopy covering map and develop a theory of universal covers and deck transformations, generalizing [TardifWroncha, Matsushita] to non-simple graphs. We examine the case of reflexive graphs, where each vertex has at least one loop. We also prove that these homotopy covering maps satisfy a homotopy lifting property for arbitrary graph homomorphisms, generalizing path lifting results of [Matsushita, TardifWroncha].
1. Introduction
Covers of graphs were originally studied by viewing graphs as 1-dimensional topological spaces. From this perspective, many properties of basic topology have been extended to graphs, including the fundamental groupoid, covering spaces, universal covers and deck transformations [Angluin1, KwakNedela, Bass]. These results have been developed for non-simple graphs which allow loops and parallel edges.
Viewed as 1-dimensional topological spaces, the homotopies between graphs are limited. However, it is possible to develop theories of homotopies between graph homomorphisms that allow more interesting deformations and take into account more of the graph structure. There are two prominent theories of homotopies for graphs in the literature: -homotopy [Babson1, Barcelo1, BoxHomotopy, hardeman2019lifting] and -homotopy [CS1, CS2, Docht1, Docht2, CompGH, Kozlov1, Kozlov1, Kozlov3, KozlovShort]. Covers have been considered in the context of -homotopy in [hardeman2019lifting], where Hardeman shows that for graphs with no three or four cycles, graph covers lift -homotopies.
The goal of this paper is to understand what -homotopy, the fundamental group(oid) and covering maps of graphs look like in the context of graphs which allow loops and multiple parallel edges. We begin with some basic results about homotopies of graph homomorphisms between graphs with parallel edges in Section 2, showing that the spider lemma of [CS1] still holds, allowing us to decompose a -homotopy between finite graphs to a sequence of spider moves which adjust at most one vertex at a time. We then use this to define the fundamental groupoid of non-simple graphs in Section 3, following [CS2], and give a relationship between the fundamental groupoid of a reflexive graph and its unlooped counterpart in Propositon 3.8. In Section 4, we give a definition of homotopy covering maps for non-simple graphs and develop their properties, including a theory of deck transformations, for non-simple graphs. We again examine the case of reflexive graphs in particular. We conclude this section with proving that these homotopy covers satisfy the general homotopy lifting property for any graph homomorphism in Theorem 4.25. This last result generalizes results in the literature in two ways: in addition to extending to non-simple graphs, our result allows lifting of homotopies between any graph homomorphisms, and not just paths as in [Matsushita, TardifWroncha].
If we restrict to simple graphs, these results recover those in the literature in a few places. Our fundamental groupoid recovers that of Chih-Scull [CS2] when we allow loops but not parallel edges, and that of Sankar [Sankar] for simple graphs. Additionally, the spider lemma shows that the definition we use of -homotopy is equivalent to the definition of -homotopy in Matsushita [Matsushita] when , as this definiton allows homomorphisms to be shifted by edges (and hence vertices). For simple graphs, Matsushita develops covering space theory for -homotopy based on a neighbourhood complex. Lastly, for simple graphs Tardif-Wroncha [TardifWroncha] have a theory of -covers which lift any embedded 4-cycle, and in the appendix they give an alternate formulation which matches up with our Definition 4.4 of homotopy covers based on 2-neighbourhoods.
2. Graphs and Homotopy
We begin with the definition of our category of graphs, following [Bass, KwakNedela].
Definition 2.1.
The category of graphs is defined by:
-
•
An object is a graph , consisting of a set of vertices and a set of edges, with maps and an involution of such that .
-
•
A homomorphism of graphs is given by a vertex map and an edge map such that and .
This category of graphs allows loops and multiple parallel edges between the same vertices. Bass [Bass] requires that the involution be fixed point free, while Kwak-Nedela [KwakNedela] allows ’semi-edges’ such that .
In considering graphs which allow both loops and parallel edges, we will be comparing these to their single-edge and unlooped versions. Thus we will use the following notation.
Notation 2.2.
If is a graph, then:
-
•
refers to the graph with all loops deleted: and
. -
•
refes to the single-edge graph with parallel edges have been identified: and .
In this paper, we consider homotopy between graph homomorphisms described above, defined using the categorical product. This is sometimes referred to as -homotopy. This is the only version of homotopy that will appear in this paper, and we will refer to it simply as ‘homotopy’. It uses the following defintion.
Definition 2.3.
The categorical product is defined by and with and .
We define homotopy using the product with the interval graph .
Definition 2.4.
Let denote the looped path graph with vertices and edges for , where and .
Observe that for any , the vertices of the form and edges of the form define a subgraph of which is isomorphic to ; we denote this subgraph . The following definition is modeled on that of [Docht1].
Definition 2.5.
For , we say that is homotopic to , written , if there is a graph homomorphism such that and . We write .
The introduction of multiple edges allows for multiple graph homomorphisms which agree on vertex sets. We show that these are all homotopic.
Lemma 2.6.
If are graph homomomorphisms which agree on vertices, then .
Proof.
We can define a homotopy by and
∎
We can use this to show that is homotopy equivalent to the graph where all parallel edges have been identified.
Proposition 2.7.
Let is a graph, and the single-edge graph as in Notation 2.2. Then is a strong deformation retract of .
Proof.
Define the projection by the identity on vertices and the projection on edges. Define using the identity on vertices, and for each pair of edges choose an edge between the same vertices and define and . Then and by Lemma 2.6. ∎
Thus in any homotopy invariant construction, we may substitute instead of .
When working with homotopies between graph homomorphisms that do not neccesarily agree on vertices, the following is a useful tool.
Proposition 2.8.
If is finite and then if and only if is a finite sequence of spider moves connecting and , where each spider move changes the value of by at most a single vertex, with the additional condition that if vertex has a loop, then any spider move that changes the value on must change to a connected vertex.
Proof.
The proof of [CS1], Proposition 4.4 can by adapted to the multi-edge case as follows. If and agree on vertices, then by Lemma 2.6 there is a one step homotopy between them. If differ by a single vertex then we can create a homotopy by and , and
and
If has any loops , then we know there is an edge connecting to and we define and .
Conversely, suppose we have a homotopy ; it is sufficient to consider a one-step homotopy between and and then induct to get longer homotopies. Suppose that has vertex set . We define a homotopy on vertices by
and on edges by the following: if is an edge of with and then
This defines intermediate graph homomorphisms in which either agree on vertices or differ by a single vertex, and thus we get a sequence of spider moves joining to . ∎
3. The Fundamental Groupoid
In this section, we review the fundamental groupoid of [CS2] and extend it to the multi-edge case. We then consider the particular case of reflexive graphs.
Definition 3.1.
A walk of length is defined by a sequence of edges such that . If and we say that the walk starts at and ends at .
This is used to define what we refer to as the walk groupoid (called the fundamental groupoid in [KwakNedela, Bass]). We will present this in terms of the concept of ‘prunes’ from [CS2].
Definition 3.2.
When a walk satisfies , we refer to the walk that omits the pair as a prune of , and as an anti-prune of .
Definition 3.3.
The walk groupoid is a groupoid with:
-
•
objects given by vertices ,
-
•
arrows starting and ending at given by prune classes of walks, where we identify any walks that are connected by a sequence of prunes and anti-prunes
-
•
composition defined by concatenation of walks.
This is presented in [Bass] as reduced walks, in which no prunes are possible. This walk groupoid does not identify homotopic walks. There are several equivalent definitions of a fundamental groupoid which does. We extend Definition 4.1 of [CS2] to the following.
Definition 3.4.
Let be the fundamental groupoid of defined by the following:
-
•
an object of is a vertex of the graph ,
-
•
an arrow starting at and ending at in is given by a prune class of walks with the same start and end, up to homotopy rel endpoints,
-
•
composition of arrows is defined using concatenation of walks.
The results of Section 2 allow us to describe any homotopy of paths as a sequence of spider moves. Thus our fundamental groupoid consists of equivalence classes of walks, where two walks are equivalent if a sequence of prunes, anti-prunes and spider moves can transform one into the other.
Notation 3.5.
An arrow in is defined by a sequence of edges . However, Lemma 2.6 ensures that any choice of edges connecting the same sequence of vertices results in the same element of . Thus in the rest of this section, we will notate arrows in the fundamental groupoid via their sequence of vertices and not specify edges.
We have seen that the addition of parallel edges does not change the homotopy behaviour, so will not be interesting when examining . However, we are interested in the effect of including loops in our graphs.
Observation 3.6.
In the fundamental groupoid
-
•
Any loop satisfies via a prune.
-
•
There is a spider move from to .
-
•
If all vertices in a path starting at , and ending at are looped, we can always move the loops through the path and write the path as for containing no loops and or .
In the remainder of this section, we examine the case of reflexive graphs, which we take here to mean that every vertex has at least one loop. Triangles play a particular role here, so we make the following definition.
Definition 3.7.
For a graph and its fundamental groupoid , we define to be the quotient of the fundamental groupoid by the relation generated by triangles defined by an embedded . Explicitly, we declare that if we have any embedded defined by , then if in then in . Thus we can insert or delete triangles from any path in .
Recall from Notation 2.2 that refers to the unlooped graph obtained by removing all loops from .
Proposition 3.8.
Let be a reflexive graph. Then .
Proof.
The product groupoid is defined as the product of categories, interpreting as a category with a single object. Explicitly, has the same objects as , with arrows defined by for in and . The composition is defined by .
We define the functor by on objects and on arrows, where denotes the walk with all loops removed, and is the length of the walk (mod 2).
To show that is well defined, we suppose that in . Then and are connected by a sequence of prunes, anti-prunes, and spider moves, all of which preserve the parity of the length. It is easy to see that any prune, anti-prune, or spider move not involving any loops has a corresponding move on the unlooped version, and that a prune involving a loop must just insert or delete a pair of loops, leaving the unlooped walk the same. So we consider the case when we have a spider move involving a loop. Unlooping and both result in . If we replace with , then while since is a triangle. Hence the in . respects composition since .
We define an inverse functor again using the identity on objects, and on arrows defining where denotes the loop on the ending vertex of , and where is the mod 2 length of . This ensures that the parity of matches the parity of .
We check that this is well-defined: again, any prune, anti-prune, or spider move of gives a corresponding move on , so we just need to check what happens when we insert or remove a triangle. Suppose that we have two walks in defined by and where , so that we obtain by inserting a triangle into . Then the length of and have opposite parities, and so when we apply to and to , one will be concatenated with a loop and the other will not. Assume that and . Then we use Observation 3.6 to get the following in : . Therefore . A similar argument verifies well-definedness when puts the loop on , and migrating loops through out paths ensures that respects the concatenation operation.
Because all loops can be moved to the end of any walk in , and are inverse functors, giving the desired isomorphism of groupoids.
∎
Corollary 3.9.
Suppose that is a reflexive graph with no embbedded . Then the fundamental groupoid .
Example 3.10.
Consider the following graph and its unlooped subgraph :
The arrows of are walks in up to edge shuffles, since these are the only possible spider moves. Therefore the closed walks do not commute in . When we add the loops and move to the graph , we introduce loops into our walks and the relations and . Thus we have commuting closed walks and and .
4. Homotopy Covers of Graphs
This section builds on the fundamental groupoids of Section 3 to develop the theory of homotopy covers of graphs. We define homotopy covering maps and show that they satisfy a version of the classical theory of universal covers and deck transformations, and describe the homotopy covers of reflexive graphs. We close by showing that these maps satisfy the homotopy lifting property for any graph homomorphisms in Theorem 4.25. Throughout this section, we will assume that all graphs are connected.
We begin with the classical definition of graph covers.
Definition 4.1.
[KwakNedela] A covering map is a graph morphism such that
-
•
is an surjection on vertices and edges,
-
•
induces a bijection on neighbourhoods: let denote the set of edges with . Then for any vertex , with , induces a bijection .
This reduces to the definition given by [Angluin1] for simple graphs, since in that case for if and only if .
An important property of covering maps is the following path lifting result.
Lemma 4.2.
[Angluin1, Hatcher, KwakNedela] Suppose that is a covering map. Then given a walk in starting at defined by and any , there exists a unique walk in starting at defined by such that .
The covers of Definition 4.1 do not incorporate the notion of homotopy of graphs. Thus we consider the following adaptation of the idea, which requires bijections on 2-neighbourhoods and not just neighbourhoods.
Definition 4.3.
For any vertex we define the extended neighborhood to be the walks of length which start at .
Our homotopy covering maps induce bijections on these 2-neighbourhoods.
Definition 4.4.
A surjective graph morphism between graphs is a homotopy covering map if given any and such that , then induces a bijection . Furthermore, this bijection respects endpoints in the sense that two walks in have in if and only if in .
In working with these homotopy covering maps, we will find the following elementary observations extremely useful.
Observation 4.5.
Suppose that is a homotopy covering map.
-
•
If a 2-walk in is of the form , then the lift must have the same form, since if we have a lift then defines a 2-walk which also projects down to and so by uniqueness of lifting we must have .
-
•
Any homotopy cover is a cover, since is in bijection with 2-walks of the form .
-
•
Parallel edges lift to parallel edges, since if both have and then is a 2-walk and so lifts to a 2-walk from to . Then is the unique lift of .
We show that the classical theory of universal covers and deck transformations can be extended to homotopy covers. We will present these results in terms of the following groupoid notion.
Definition 4.6.
[Higgins] If is an object of a groupoid , the star of is the set of all arrows with source and is denoted . Then is a covering of groupoids if induces a bijection on stars for all objects of .
When we apply this definition to the fundamental groupoid, we get another equivalent definition of homotopy covering map. We denote the star of at a vertex by .
Proposition 4.7.
A graph homomorphism is a homotopy covering map if and only if is a cover as in Definiton 4.1 and the induced functor is a covering of groupoids.
Proof.
Suppose that is a homotopy covering map. To show that it induces a bijection on stars , we observe that since is a covering by Observation 4.5, Lemma 4.2 allows us to lift paths and so is surjective. To see that is also injective, we recall that equivalences in are generated by prunes, anti-prunes and spider moves. We again use Observation 4.5 to see that any prunable section of a walk lifts to a similarly prunable section , and that any spider move that changes edges but not vertices will lift to a similar edge move since parallel edges lift to parallel edges. Lastly, any spider move that adjusts one vertex will lift to a similar spider move because the bijection on second neighbourhoods respects endpoints.
Conversely, suppose is a graph cover which induces a covering of groupoids . We know that we can lift any 2-walk uniquely by Lemma 4.2. This lift must respect endpoints because if two 2-walks have the same endpoint, then they represent the same arrow in and then the bijecton on stars ensures that their lifts represent the same arrow of and hence have the same target vertex.
∎
Definition 4.8.
Given a graph and , we define a graph and graph homomorphism as follows:
-
•
vertices of are arrows in
-
•
edges between arrows are defined by the edges between their endpoints: if and then the edges with and are given by the set .
-
•
the map is defined on vertices by the endpoint and on edges by .
Observation 4.9.
With this constrution, is in fact a universal homotopy cover in the sense that it satisfies the appropriate universal properties.
Theorem 4.10.
Suppose that is a homotopy cover and . Then there is a unique homotopy cover such that and .
Sketch of Proof.
The proof of the above follows standard arugments as in [Angluin1, Bass, Hatcher]. Any walk in lifts uniquely to a walk starting at in , and so we define to be the endpoint of this lift. This is easily extended to edges. ∎
The previous result implies that are covers of both , so they cover each other canonically and thus are isomorphic. Thus we also obtain the following result.
Corollary 4.11.
If is a homotopy cover, then the universal homotopy cover of is also the universal homotopy cover for .
We also have a theory of deck transformations of homotopy covering maps for non-simple graphs.
Definition 4.12.
Given a graph and the universal homotopy covering map , a deck transformation is an automorphsim such that . These form a subgroup of , which we denote by .
We will show that this group is isomorphic to the isotropy group of the fundamental groupoid.
Definition 4.13.
Let denote the isotropy group of at , given by the arrows of starting and ending at . Explicitly, this is the group formed by walks that start and end at defined up to prunes and homotopy, under concatenation.
Because is a connected groupoid, all the isotropy groups are isomorphic, and it does not matter which vertex we choose to look at. For , we define a deck transformation as follows.
Definition 4.14.
Let . Define by for vertices , and on edges by observing that the edges between and are both in bijection with the edge set between the endpoints of and so we define for from to .
Each is deck transformation. In fact, every deck transformation is of this form, and thus we may identify the deck transformations of with .
Theorem 4.15.
The map defined by is an isomorphism of groups.
Proof.
The map is a group homomorphism because . To show that is injective, suppose that such that . Then and so .
To check that is surjective, we let and define . Since , the walk ends at and hence is defined with . We claim that . We prove this by induction on the length of a walk representing a vertex in , starting with our base case length walk . Let have a representative of length , of the form for an edge and a length walk , and assume that . We know that defines an edge from to in , and since is a graph homomorphism that commutes with we have an edge from to . Therefore . Uniqueness of path lifting ensures that . Thus and so is surjective, completing the proof.
∎
Given a subgroup , we define as the quotient graph where we identify vertices and edges for any . We can show that any cover is the quotient of by some subgroup of the deck transformation group . Our proof uses groupoid coverings and Proposition 4.7. We start by showing that the resulting quotient is a homotopy cover.
Theorem 4.16.
Let be a graph with universal homotopy cover , and let . Define on vertices by and on edges . Then is a homotopy covering map.
Proof.
We first note that is well-defined on equivalence classes forming the vertices because for any , we have ; and hence is surjective on vertices because is. The map is similarly well-defined on edges, and moreover since the edges from to are still in bijection with edges from their endpoints in . Thus induces a bijection from to . Therefore is a cover as in Defintion 4.1.
We now show that induces a covering map on fundamental groupoids , meaning that it is bijective on stars. By definition, where is the projection map . Functoriality ensures that . Now is surjective on stars: given a walk in , we know that there are representatives in and such that . By applying the in turn to the end of the walk, we obtain a walk in that maps to by .
Since is surjective on stars and is bijective on stars, we conclude that is bijective on stars. By Proposition 4.7, is a homotopy covering map.
∎
Proposition 4.17.
Let be a graph, and be its universal cover. Then any connected homotopy cover is of the form for some subgroup .
Proof.
Suppose that is a homotopy covering map. Theorem 4.10 states that is also the universal homotopy cover of and there exists a homotopy covering map such that . Define . We wish to show that . In fact, , and thus it suffcies to consider the case and prove that .
Let be defined by . Then is a homotopy covering map by Theorem 4.16, and hence surjective. We will show that it is also injective. Suppose that for vertices . Since have the same endpoint, define , giving a walk starting and ending at , and let as in Definition 4.14. Then and and so in . Therefore is a bijection of vertices, and also a cover which gives a bijection on neighbourhoods. So is also a bijection on edges and hence an isomorphism.
∎
Observation 4.18.
Since all homotopy covers of are isomorphic to quotients of , Observation 4.9 ensures that any homotopy cover of a graph is isomorphic to a supergraph of a homotopy cover of , where vertices in have the same number of parallel edges between them as do.
We can use Propostion 3.8 to give a description of the universal homotopy cover of a reflexive graph as it relates to the universal homotopy cover of its unlooped subgraph.
Notation 4.19.
Let be a reflexive graph. Let be a homotopy covering map of the unlooped graph . We define to be the graph with a loop appended to a vertex for each loop incident to the vertex in the graph .
With this definition, we get the following.
Theorem 4.20.
Suppose that is a reflexive graph. We define the cover of its unlooped graph by , the quotient of the universal cover of by the the subgroup generated by 3-cycles. Then the universal cover of satisfies
Proof.
We know that has vertices which are defined by walks from in . We apply the isomorphism of Proposition 3.8 to get an arrow in the groupoid starting at , giving an isomorphism between the vertices of and . We then define the mapping on edges. Any edge corresponds to extending a walk by a single edge to . In this case, the parity of and are opposite, and so and are mapped to and in . If then was a loop, and we define the image of to be the edge with . Otherwise we have and there is an edge , . We then map . It is straightforward to check that this gives a bijective map on edges in which . Thus we get an isomorphism of graphs.
∎
Corollary 4.21.
Let be reflexive and -free graph, and let denote its universal homotopy cover. Then .
Proof.
We know that and since is free, and so the parity of a walk in is well-defined. Define a homomorphism by where is the length of (mod 2). Since and always have opposite parity, the vertices and are always mapped to the same layer in the box product and this gives a graph homomorphism. It is straightforward to see that is bijective on vertices and edges and thus is an isomorphism.
∎
Example 4.22.
We consider the graph from Example 3.10. In this case, the cover is a quotient of the universal homotopy cover by the triangle . The result is drawn below, with covering map defined by :
Following Theorem 4.20, we obtain with vertices given by ordered pairs where and edges defined by for each edge from to in .
Proposition 4.23.
Let be a reflexive graph. Then any homotopy cover of is related to a homotopy cover of the unlooped graph that lifts 3-cycles to 3-cycles, and has one of the following forms:
-
•
the reflexive graph , or
-
•
an unlooped graph of the form .
Proof.
By Proposition 4.17, any homotopy cover of has the form for . And by Theorem 4.15 and Proposition 3.8, . So has the form or , where is a subgroup of which contains . We can define the homotopy cover of the unlooped graph to be . Then if is of the form we obtain a reflexive homotopy cover of the first form, and if is of the form we obtain containing no loops of the second form.
∎
Example 4.24.
We finish out our discussion of homotopy covers by showing that the they satisfy a general homotpy lifting property.
Theorem 4.25.
Let be a homotopy covering map, and suppose we have which are homotopic via a homotopy . Suppose that we can lift to a map such that . Then there is a lift such that and . In particular, this will ensure that is a lift of such that .