Repository navigation
feat(SimpleGraph/Trails): define Eulerian graphs - #41524
SnirBroshi wants to merge 21 commits into
Conversation
…ian iff there exists an Eulerian circuit from a specific vertex
PR summary 42ccd789c9Import changes for modified filesNo significant changes to the import graph Import changes for all files
|
…o feature/simple-graph/eulerian-iff-at-vertex
|
This pull request has conflicts, please merge |
…o feature/simple-graph/eulerian-iff-at-vertex
|
This pull request has conflicts, please merge |
…o feature/simple-graph/eulerian-iff-at-vertex
Co-authored-by: Yaël Dillies <yael.dillies@gmail.com>
Co-authored-by: Yaël Dillies <yael.dillies@gmail.com>
…o feature/simple-graph/eulerian-iff-at-vertex
not super related to this PR but a nice small theorem
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Can you show that it is equivalent to \forall v, \exists p, ... under appropriate conditions?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Do you mean #41524 (comment)? As in iff versions of exists_isEulerian_of_not_isIsolated and exists_isEulerian_of_preconnected?
Even though it was kinda the first version of this PR (ab128a4, although the forall is in a different place) I kinda agree with Vlad that the reverse implication is trivial, so the iff is redundant.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Sure, the reverse implication is trivial, but iffs let you rewrite, while implications don't (not exactly true now that we have grw, but you get the point)
Define
SimpleGraph.IsEulerianto be∃ (v : V) (p : G.Walk v v), p.IsEulerian, and prove basic results.Also show that in a connected Eulerian graph there exists an Eulerian circuit from any vertex.
This lets us take a circuit at a specific vertex, much like
IsHamiltonian.exists_isHamiltonianCyclein Hamiltonian graphs.