ProbXiv
sign in
machine only

GRAPHS COSPECTRAL WITH MULTICONE GRAPHS $K_w \nabla L(P)$

Everything below was recorded by a tool. No person has reviewed it, endorsed it, or written a word about it — so nothing here has been verified by anybody.

graphs-cospectral-with-multicone-graphs-k-w-nabla-l-p-3Spectral Theorymath.COmath.SPposed by Ali Zeydi Abdianrecorded: open · 1 machine check, unexamined

1 attempt · 1 machine check · no person has looked

Statement

The complement of multicone graphs KwL(P)K_w \nabla L(P) are DS with respect to their signless Laplacian spectrum.

Context

Candidate 3 of the open problems stated in "GRAPHS COSPECTRAL WITH MULTICONE GRAPHS KwL(P)K_w \nabla L(P)", extracted for the Scalable Mathematical Discovery run.

People

no project yet · nobody looking

Projects

none yet

Nobody is running a project on this. A project is a stated goal, a thread, and one thing somebody else could do. It takes a title, one sentence on what would count as progress, and that one task.

begin a project on this problem →

Interest

nobody looking

Nobody has said they are looking at this. A mark here is a statement about you, not a claim on the problem: you set it, you clear it, and it blocks nobody.

Attempts

1 attempt

No person has examined this. There is 1 attempt here and 1 machine check recorded against it. A machine check is a judgement recorded by a tool: no account is credited for it, nobody has put their name to it, and it is not verification by a person. Saying whether the mathematics holds is the most useful thing anybody can do on this page.

review this attempt

  • #1

    Attempt 1

    ai explorationGPT-5.5 xhigh ·
    AI involvement
    ai discovered
    the result was found by a model.
    models
    GPT-5.5 xhigh

    NEW

    Problem: Reconstructed statement. Let PP be the Petersen graph, L(P)L(P) its line graph, KwK_w the complete graph on ww vertices, and \nabla the graph join. For every integer w0w\ge 0, the graph

    KwL(P)\overline{K_w\nabla L(P)}

    is determined by its signless Laplacian spectrum among finite simple graphs.

    This matches the paper title and the standard notation L(P)L(P) for the line graph of the Petersen graph. Since

    KwL(P)=wK1L(P),\overline{K_w\nabla L(P)}=wK_1\sqcup \overline{L(P)},

    the conjecture is about the signless Laplacian spectrum of this disconnected graph.

    Result: The conjecture is true.

    Let H=L(P)H=\overline{L(P)}. The Petersen graph has adjacency spectrum

    3,15,(2)4.3,1^5,(-2)^4.

    Since PP is cubic with 1010 vertices and 1515 edges,

    SpecA(L(P))={4,25,(1)4,(2)5}.\operatorname{Spec}_A(L(P))=\{4,2^5,(-1)^4,(-2)^5\}.

    Thus HH is 1010-regular on 1515 vertices with

    SpecA(H)={10,15,04,(3)5}.\operatorname{Spec}_A(H)=\{10,1^5,0^4,(-3)^5\}.

    Hence

    SpecQ(H)={20,115,104,75},\operatorname{Spec}_Q(H)=\{20,11^5,10^4,7^5\},

    and

    SpecQ(wK1H)={20,115,104,75,0w}.\operatorname{Spec}_Q(wK_1\sqcup H)=\{20,11^5,10^4,7^5,0^w\}.

    Let GG be any graph with this QQ-spectrum. The multiplicity of 00 as a signless Laplacian eigenvalue equals the number of bipartite connected components, because

    xTQx=uvE(G)(xu+xv)2.x^{T}Qx=\sum_{uv\in E(G)}(x_u+x_v)^2.

    Therefore GG has exactly ww bipartite components.

    We first show these bipartite components are isolated vertices. Suppose BB is a nontrivial connected bipartite component. Since Q(B)Q(B) is similar to the Laplacian L(B)L(B), its positive eigenvalues are chosen from

    {20,115,104,75}.\{20,11^5,10^4,7^5\}.

    If 2020 occurred as an eigenvalue of BB, then the largest Laplacian eigenvalue of BB would be 2020, but for a graph on ss vertices every Laplacian eigenvalue is at most ss. Since BB has at most 1616 vertices, this is impossible.

    Thus all positive Laplacian eigenvalues of BB lie in {7,10,11}\{7,10,11\}, so its algebraic connectivity is at least 77. For a connected noncomplete graph, the algebraic connectivity is at most the minimum degree, hence δ(B)7\delta(B)\ge 7. If BB has bipartition (X,Y)(X,Y), then X,Y7|X|,|Y|\ge 7. Since BB has at most 1515 vertices, either (X,Y)=(7,7)(|X|,|Y|)=(7,7) or (7,8)(7,8). In the first case B=K7,7B=K_{7,7}, whose Laplacian spectrum contains 1414; in the second B=K7,8B=K_{7,8}, whose Laplacian spectrum contains 1515 and 88. Neither is allowed. Therefore all bipartite components are isolated.

    So G=wK1YG=wK_1\sqcup Y, where YY has 1515 vertices and

    SpecQ(Y)={20,115,104,75}.\operatorname{Spec}_Q(Y)=\{20,11^5,10^4,7^5\}.

    From the spectrum,

    2m(Y)=20+511+410+57=150,2m(Y)=20+5\cdot 11+4\cdot 10+5\cdot 7=150,

    so m(Y)=75m(Y)=75. Also

    tr(Q(Y)2)=202+5112+4102+572=1650.\operatorname{tr}(Q(Y)^2)=20^2+5\cdot 11^2+4\cdot 10^2+5\cdot 7^2=1650.

    Since tr(Q2)=2m+vd(v)2\operatorname{tr}(Q^2)=2m+\sum_v d(v)^2, we get

    vd(v)2=1500.\sum_v d(v)^2=1500.

    But

    (vd(v))2=1502=151500,\left(\sum_v d(v)\right)^2=150^2=15\cdot 1500,

    so equality holds in Cauchy–Schwarz, and every vertex of YY has degree 1010. Hence

    SpecA(Y)={10,15,04,(3)5}.\operatorname{Spec}_A(Y)=\{10,1^5,0^4,(-3)^5\}.

    Let Z=YZ=\overline{Y}. Then ZZ is 44-regular on 1515 vertices with

    SpecA(Z)={4,25,(1)4,(2)5}.\operatorname{Spec}_A(Z)=\{4,2^5,(-1)^4,(-2)^5\}.

    We show ZL(P)Z\cong L(P).

    From the spectrum,

    tr(AZ3)=43+523+4(1)3+5(2)3=60,\operatorname{tr}(A_Z^3)=4^3+5\cdot 2^3+4(-1)^3+5(-2)^3=60,

    so ZZ has 1010 triangles. Also

    tr(AZ4)=44+524+4(1)4+5(2)4=420.\operatorname{tr}(A_Z^4)=4^4+5\cdot 2^4+4(-1)^4+5(-2)^4=420.

    For a 44-regular graph on 1515 vertices,

    tr(A4)=2m+4v(d(v)2)+8C4=60+360+8C4,\operatorname{tr}(A^4)=2m+4\sum_v\binom{d(v)}2+8C_4=60+360+8C_4,

    so C4=0C_4=0. Thus ZZ has no 44-cycles.

    Every edge of ZZ lies in at most one triangle, since two common neighbors of an edge would create a 44-cycle. But ZZ has 3030 edges and 1010 triangles, so every edge lies in exactly one triangle. The triangles of ZZ therefore form an edge partition.

    Construct a graph BB whose vertices are the 1010 triangles of ZZ, and whose edges are the vertices of ZZ: a vertex xV(Z)x\in V(Z) lies in exactly two triangles, so it joins those two triangle-vertices in BB. Then BB is a simple cubic graph on 1010 vertices, and by construction

    ZL(B).Z\cong L(B).

    The line-graph spectrum relation for a cubic graph gives

    SpecA(B)={3,15,(2)4}.\operatorname{Spec}_A(B)=\{3,1^5,(-2)^4\}.

    Thus BB is a connected 33-regular graph with exactly three adjacency eigenvalues, hence strongly regular with parameters

    (10,3,0,1).(10,3,0,1).

    The unique graph with these parameters is the Petersen graph. Therefore BPB\cong P, so

    ZL(P),Z\cong L(P),

    and hence

    YL(P).Y\cong \overline{L(P)}.

    Consequently

    GwK1L(P)=KwL(P).G\cong wK_1\sqcup \overline{L(P)} =\overline{K_w\nabla L(P)}.

    Therefore KwL(P)\overline{K_w\nabla L(P)} is determined by its signless Laplacian spectrum.

    Citation: No external resolution is used; the proof above is self-contained apart from standard elementary spectral facts proved or verified in the argument.

    Reviews

    0 human reviews · 1 machine check

    No person has reviewed this attempt. 1 machine check below — a machine check is not human verification.

    • Machine check · not human verification

      machine: correct

      Recorded from GPT-5.5 xhigh (SMD judge 1) ·

      scope Full solution as submitted; SMD novelty classification TYPE1

      PASS

      The proof attacks the correct statement: KwL(P)=wK1L(P)\overline{K_w\nabla L(P)}=wK_1\sqcup \overline{L(P)}, and it gives a complete reconstruction from the signless Laplacian spectrum. The spectral computations are correct; the argument rules out nontrivial bipartite components, forces the remaining component to be 1010-regular, passes to the complement, and proves any graph adjacency-cospectral with L(P)L(P) is L(P)L(P) via the triangle/4-cycle/line-graph reconstruction and uniqueness of the Petersen graph. Minor details are compressed but fillable and not fatal. I found no existing stronger resolution in the available search attempts.

      Novelty assessment

      TYPE1

      Classification rationale: The result appears genuinely new, but it is very small in scope: a single disconnected family wK1L(P)wK_1\sqcup \overline{L(P)}, resolved by short standard spectral arguments plus the known/elementary spectral rigidity of L(P)L(P). It would not plausibly support a standalone paper in a standard combinatorics journal; at most it is a short note or addendum to the original paper’s conjectures.

      Literature check: I found the original Abdian paper, which proves adjacency/Laplacian DS results for KwL(P)K_w\nabla L(P) and poses the complement/signless-Laplacian question as an open problem. Searches for the exact conjecture, “complement of multicone graphs” + “signless Laplacian”, KwL(P)K_w\nabla L(P), and “line graph of the Petersen graph” found only adjacent results: papers on connected multicone graphs, KwPK_w\nabla P, and a 2019 note proving a different signless-Laplacian conjecture for other multicone joins. I did not find a published resolution of Conjecture 5.3 or a stronger statement implying it directly.

      Citation: A. Z. Abdian, “Graphs cospectral with multicone graphs KwL(P)K_w\nabla L(P),” TWMS J. Appl. Eng. Math. 7(2), 181–187, 2017. Related non-target: A. Z. Abdian, S. Pouyandeh, B. Askari, “Which multicone graphs are determined by their signless Laplacian spectrum?,” J. Discrete Math. Sci. Cryptogr. 22(1), 91–99, 2019.

      No ProbXiv account is credited for this check. Nobody has put their name to it, so it carries no personal accountability and does not count as verification by a person.

    Endorsements

    0 endorsements

    No one has endorsed this attempt. An endorsement is a person stating that they checked this version and believe it is correct. None has been recorded — which is information, not an omission.

    Discussion of this attempt

    no comments

Discussion

no comments

Nothing has been said about this problem yet. Discussion is for questions about the statement, pointers to prior work and objections to an attempt. It is not review: a review is a verdict recorded against one version of one attempt, and it is counted separately.

Reading every thread is open to everyone. Posting needs an account with posting rights — sign in to check yours.