ISRNCOMBINATORICS ISRN Combinatorics 2090-8911 Hindawi Publishing Corporation 724049 10.1155/2013/724049 724049 Research Article On Metric Dimension of Some Rotationally Symmetric Graphs Ali M. 1 Rahim M. T. 1 Ali G. 1 Ali U. 2 Cossidente A. Zhou S. 1 Department of Mathematics National University of Computer and Emerging Sciences, FAST, Peshawar 25000 Pakistan nu.edu 2 Centre for Advanced Studies in Pure and Applied Mathematics Bahauddin Zakariya University Multan 60000 Pakistan bzu.edu.pk 2013 24 2 2013 2013 06 12 2012 03 01 2013 2013 Copyright © 2013 M. Ali et al. This is an open access article distributed under the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.

A family 𝒢 of connected graphs is a family with constant metric dimension if dim(G) is finite and does not depend upon the choice of G in 𝒢. In this paper, we show that the graph An and the graph Anp obtained from the antiprism graph have constant metric dimension.

1. Notation and Preliminary Results

For a connected graph G, the distance d(u,v) between two vertices u,vV(G) is the length of a shortest path between them. A vertex w of a graph G is said to resolve two vertices, u and v, of G if d(w,u)d(w,v). Let W={w1,w2,,wk} be an ordered set of vertices of G and let v be a vertex of G. The representation of the vertex v with respect to W denoted by r(vW) is the k-tuple (d(v,w1),d(v,w2),,d(v,wk)). If distinct vertices of G have distinct representations with respect to W, then W is called a resolving set, for V(G) . A resolving set of minimum cardinality is called a metric basis for G, and the cardinality of this set is the metric dimension of G, denoted by dim(G).

For a given ordered set of vertices W={w1,w2,,wk} of a graph G, the ith component of r(vW) is 0 if and only if v=wi. Thus, to show that W is a resolving set it suffices to verify that r(xW)r(yW) for each pair of distinct vertices x,yV(G)W.

Caceres et al.  found the metric dimension of fan fn, and Javaid et al.  found the metric dimension of Jahangir graph J2n.

In , Chartrand et al. proved that a graph has metric dimension 1 if and only if it is a path; hence paths on n vertices constitute a family of graphs with constant metric dimension. They also showed that cycles with n3 vertices also constitute such a family of graphs as their metric dimension is 2. In , Caceres et al. proved that (1)dim(pm×Cn)={2,  if  n,is  odd;  3,  otherwise.   Prisms Dn are the trivalent plane graphs obtained by the cartesian product of the path P2 with a cycle Cn. In , Javaid et al. proved that this family has constant metric dimension. In , Javaid et al. also proved that the antiprism graph An, constitutes a family of regular graphs with constant metric dimension as dim(An)=3, for every n5.

In this paper, we extend this study to antiprism-related graphs (see Figure 1). The graph An* is defined as follows: for each vertex bi, i=1,2,,n of the outer cycle of the antiprism graph, we introduce a new vertex ai, i=1,2,,n and join ai to bi and bi-1, i=1,2,,n, with n+i taken modulo n. Thus, V(An*)=i=1n{ai,bi,ci}. Here {ci}  i=1,2,,n are the inner cycle vertices, {bi}  i=1,2,,n are the outer cycle vertices, and {ai}  i=1,2,,n are adjacent vertices to the outer cycle. We define the graph Anp as follows: for each vertex bi, i=1,2,,n of the outer cycle of the antiprism graph, we introduce a new vertex ai and join ai to bi, i=1,2,,n. Thus, V(Anp)=i=1n{ai,bi,ci}. Here, {ci} are the inner cycle vertices, {bi} are the outer cycle vertices, {ai}i=1,2,,n are the pendant vertices adjacent to the outer cycle vertices.

Graphs A8* and A8p.

2. Antiprism-Related Graphs with Constant Metric Dimension

In this section, we show that An*, Anp have constant metric dimension.

Theorem 1.

Let n6 be an integer, then dim(An*)=3.

Proof

Case  1. Let n=2k, k3, k. Consider the set W={c1,c2,ck+1}V(An*). We show that W is a resolving set for V(An*). We find the representations of the vertices of V(An*)W with respect to W: (2)r(ciW)={(i-1,i-2,n+22-i),for3ik,(n-i+1,n+2-i,i-n+22),fork+2in,r(biW)={(1,1,n2),fori=1,(i,i-1,n+22-i),for2ik,(n2,n2,1),fori=k+1,(n+1-i,n+2-i,i-n2),fork+2in,r(aiW)={(2,2,n+22),fori=1,(2,2,n2),fori=2,(i,i-1,n+42-i),for3ik,(n+12,n2,2),fori=k+1,(n+2-i,n+3-i,i-n2),fork+2in. We note that there are no two vertices having the same representation, which implies that dim(An*)3.

To prove the theorem, it is sufficient to show that dim(An*)3. Contrarily, assume that there exists a resolving set W with |W|=2. We have the following possibilities.

Both vertices of W belong to {ci}V(An*). Without loss of generality, we suppose that one resolving vertex is c1 and the other is ct(2tk+1). For 2tk, we have r(cnW)=r(bnW)=(1,t). For t=k+1, r(b1W)=r(bnW)=(1,k), a contradiction.

Both vertices of W belong to {bi}V(An*). Without loss of generality, we suppose that one resolving vertex is b1 and the other is bt(2tk+1). For 2tk, we have r(bnW)=r(a1W)=(1,t). For t=k+1, r(a1W)=r(a2W)=(1,k), a contradiction.

Both vertices of W belong to {ai}V(An*). We suppose that one resolving vertex is a1 and the other is at(2tk+1). For 2tk, we have r(cnW)=r(anW)=(2,t+1). For t=k+1, r(b1W)=r(bnW)=(1,k), a contradiction.

One vertex belong to {ci}V(An*) and the other belong to {bi}V(An*). Consider one resolving vertex is c1 and the other is bt(1tk+1). For 1tk, we have r(bk+1W)=r(ck+1W)=(k,k+1-t). For t=k+1,  r(ck+1W)=r(ak+2W)=(k,1), a contradiction.

One vertex belong to {ci}V(An*) and the other belong to {ai}V(An*). Consider one resolving vertex is c1 and the other is at(1tk+1). For 1tk, we have r(ak+1W)=r(ck+1W)=(k,k-t+2). For t=k+1,r(bkW)=r(bk+1W)=(k,1), a contradiction.

One vertex belong to {bi}V(An*) and the other belong to {ai}V(An*). Consider one resolving vertex is b1 and the other is at(1tk+1). For this we have r(anW)=r(cnW)=(2,t+1), a contradiction.

Hence, from above it follows that there is no resolving set with two vertices for V(An*). Therefore, dim(An*)3, which implies that dim(An*)=3.

Case  2. Let n=2k+1, k3k. Consider the set W={c1,c2,ck+1}V(An*). We show that W is a resolving set for V(An*). We compute the representations of the vertices of V(An*)W with respect to W: (3)r(ciW)={(i-1,i-2,n+12-i),for3ik,(n-12,n-12,1),fori=k+2,(n+1-i,n+2-i,i-n+12),fork+3in,r(biW)={(1,1,n-12),fori=1,(i,i-1,n+12-i),for2ik,(n+12,n-12,1),fori=k+1,(n+1-i,n+2-i,i-n-12),fork+2in,r(aiW)={(2,2,n+12),fori=1,(2,2,n-12),fori=2,(i,i-1,n+32-i),for3ik,(n+22,n-12,2),fori=k+1,(n+12,n+12,2),fori=k+2,(n+1-i,n+2-i,i-n-12),fork+3in. We observe that there are no two vertices having the same representation, which implies that dim(An*)3.

We now show that dim(An*)3. Suppose contrarily W with |W|=2. Proceeding on the same way as in Case  1, it can be shown that no such W can be a resolving set. Finally, from Cases  1 and 2, we get dim(An*)=3, which completes the proof.

Theorem 2.

Let n6 be an integer, then dim(Anp)=3.

Proof

Case  1. Let n=2k,  k3, k. Consider the set W={b1,b2,bk+1}V(Anp). We show that W is a resolving set for V(Anp). We compute the representations of the vertices of V(Anp)W with respect to W: (4)r(biW)={(i-1,i-2,n+22-i),for3ik,(n-i+1,n+2-i,i-n+12),fork+2in,r(aiW)={(1,2,n+22),fori=1,(i,i-1,n+42-i),for2ik+1,(n+2-i,n+3-i,i-n2),fork+2in,r(ciW)={(1,1,n2),fori=1,(i,i-1,n+22-i),for2ik,(n2,n2,1),fori=k+1,(n+1-i,n+2-i,i-n2),fork+2in.

We observe that there are no two vertices having the same representations implying that dim(Anp)3.

To prove the theorem, it is sufficient to show that dim(Anp)3. Contrarily, assume that there exists a resolving set W with |W|=2. We have the following possibilities.

Both vertices of W belong to {ci}V(Anp). Without loss of generality, we suppose that one resolving vertex is c1 and the other is ct(2tk+1). For 2tk, we have r(cnW)=r(b1W)=(1,t). For t=k+1  r(c2W)=r(cnW)=(1,k-1), a contradiction.

Both vertices of W belong to {bi}V(Anp). Without loss of generality, we suppose that one resolving vertex is b1 and the other is bt(2tk+1). For 2tk, we have r(cnW)=r(a1W)=(1,t). For t=k+1  r(ckW)=r(ck+1W)=(k,1), a contradiction.

Both vertices of W belong to {ai}V(Anp). We suppose that one resolving vertex is a1 and the other is at(2tk+1). For 2tk, we have r(cnW)=r(bnW)=(2,t+1). For t=k+1r(ckW)=r(ck+1W)=(k+1,2), a contradiction.

One vertex belong to {ci}V(Anp) and the other vertex belong to {bi}V(Anp). Consider one resolving vertex is c1 and the other is bt(1tk+1). For 1tk, we have r(a1W)=r(bnW)=(2,t). For t=k+1  r(ck+1W)=r(bk+2W)=(k,1), a contradiction.

One vertex belong to {ci}V(Anp) and the other vertex belong to {ai}V(Anp). Consider one resolving vertex is c1 and the other is at(1tk+1). For 1tk-1, we have r(anW)=r(bn-1W)=(3,t+2). For ktk+1r(b2W)=r(c2W)=(1,t-1), a contradiction.

One vertex belong to {bi}V(Anp) and the other vertex belong to {ai}V(Anp). Consider one resolving vertex is b1 and the other is at(1tk+1). For 1tk, we have r(bnW)=r(cnW)=(1,t+1). For t=k+1r(ckW)=r(ck+1W)=(k,2), a contradiction.

Hence, from above it follows that there is no resolving set with two vertices for V(Anp) implying that dim(Anp)=3.

Case  2. For n=2k+1, k3, k. Consider the set W={c1,c2,ck+1}V(Anp). We show that W is a resolving set for V(Anp). We compute the representations of the vertices of V(Anp)W with respect to W: (5)r(ciW)={(i-1,i-2,n+12-i),for3ik,(n-12,n-12,1),fori=k+2,(n+1-i,n+2-i,i-n+12),fork+3in,r(biW)={(1,2,n+12),fori=1,(1,1,n-12),fori=2,(i-1,i-2,n+32-i),for3ik+1,(n+12,n-12,1),fori=k+2,(n+2-i,n+3-i,i-n+12),fork+3in,r(aiW)={(2,3,n+32),fori=1,(2,2,n+12),fori=2,(i,i-1,n+52-i),for3ik+1,(n+32,n+12,2),fori=k+2,(n+3-i,n+4-i,i-n-12),fork+2in.

We observe that there are no two vertices having the same representation. Thus, dim(Anp)3.

We now show that dim(Anp)3. Assume that dim(Anp)=2. Proceeding on the same lines as in Case  1, we can show that dim(Anp)3. Finally, from Cases  1 and 2, we get dim(Anp)=3.

3. Conclusion

In this paper, we have studied the metric dimension of some families of graphs which are the extension of the antiprism graph. We have seen that the metric dimension of these graphs is finite and does not depend on the order of the graph and only three appropriately chosen vertices suffice to resolve all the vertices of these graphs.

Acknowledgments

The authors are indebted to the anonymous referees for their many valuable comments and suggestions on the earlier version of this paper. This research was partially supported by FAST-NU, Peshawar, and by the Higher Education Commission of Pakistan.

Chartrand G. Eroh L. Johnson M. A. Oellermann O. R. Resolvability in graphs and the metric dimension of a graph Discrete Applied Mathematics 2000 105 1–3 99 113 10.1016/S0166-218X(00)00198-0 MR1780464 ZBL0958.05042 Caceres J. Hernando C. Mora M. Pelayo I. M. Puertas M. L. Seara C. Wood D. R. On the metric dimension of some families of graphs Electronic Notes in Discrete Mathematics 2005 22 129 133 2-s2.0-34247107629 10.1016/j.endm.2005.06.023 Javaid I. Salman M. Chaudhry M. A. Shokat S. Fault-tolerance in resolvability Utilitas Mathematica 2009 80 263 275 MR2569783 ZBL1197.05041 Javaid I. Rahim M. T. Ali K. Families of regular graphs with constant metric dimension Utilitas Mathematica 2008 75 21 33 MR2389696 ZBL1178.05037