• Corpus ID: 102352037

Minimum degree conditions for the existence of cycles of all lengths modulo $k$ in graphs

  title={Minimum degree conditions for the existence of cycles of all lengths modulo \$k\$ in graphs},
  author={Shuya Chiba and Tomoki Yamashita},
  journal={arXiv: Combinatorics},
Thomassen, in 1983, conjectured that for a positive integer $k$, every $2$-connected non-bipartite graph of minimum degree at least $k + 1$ contains cycles of all lengths modulo $k$. In this paper, we settle this conjecture affirmatively. 

Figures and Tables from this paper

A note on cycle lengths in graphs of chromatic number five and six

In this note, we prove that every non-complete (k+1)-critical graph contains cycles of all lengths modulo k, where k = 4, 5. Together with a result in [7], this completely gives an affirmative answer

A Unified Proof of Conjectures on Cycle Lengths in Graphs

In this paper, we prove a tight minimum degree condition in general graphs for the existence of paths between two given endpoints, whose lengths form a long arithmetic progression with common



Cycle lengths and minimum degree of graphs

Cycles in a graph whose lengths differ by one or two

Several problems concerning the distribution of cycle lengths in a graph have been proposed by P. Erdos and colleagues. In this note two variations of the following such question are answered. In a

Graph decomposition with applications to subdivisions and path systems modulo k

The existence of a function α(k) (where k is a natural number) is established such that the vertex set of any graph G has a decomposition A ∪ B ∪ C such that G has minimum degree at least k.

By adding a (b, y)-path in G − (V (C) ∪ V (B − b)) to each of the l − 1 (x, b)-paths, we can get l − 1 (x, y)-paths in G − V (C) satisfying the length condition

  • We next consider the case where (ii) holds. Then it follows from (6.1)

Repeating this argument we get N G (C) ⊆ V (B − b) since |V (C)| is odd. This implies that b is a cut vertex of G

    B − b) = ∅. Then again by applying (i) of Claim 6.3 for the vertex u +m and a neighbor of u +m in B − b instead of u and x, respectively