1 Introduction
We consider only simple connected graphs G with vertex set and edge set , where is the order of G. The open neighborhood of a vertex is the set , and the degree of v is . A leaf is a vertex with degree one and its neighbor is called a stem. A strong stem is a stem adjacent to at least two leaves. The diameter of G, denoted by diam (G), is the maximum value among distances between all pairs of vertices of G.
A set is independent if no two vertices in S are adjacent. The independence number α (G) of a graph G is the maximum cardinality among the independent sets of vertices of G. A vertex cover of a graph G is a set of vertices such that each edge of the graph is incident to at least one vertex of the set. A minimum vertex cover is a vertex cover of smallest possible size. The vertex cover number α0 (G) is the minimum cardinality of a vertex cover of G.
In 2016, Beeler et al., Ref. 1, introduced the concept of double Roman domination and defined a double Roman dominating function (DRDF) on a graph G to be a function such that each vertex with label 0 is adjacent to a vertex labeled 3 or to at least two vertices labeled 2, and each vertex with label 1 is adjacent to a vertex labeled 2 or 3. The weight of a DRDF f is the value , and the double Roman domination number γdR (G) equals the minimum weight of a DRDF on G. Double Roman domination has been studied by several authors; see, for example, Refs. 2–14. For more details on Roman domination and its variations, we refer the reader to Refs. 15–18.
For double Roman domination, one can think of any vertex representing a location in the Roman Empire and any edge being a road between two locations. A location is said to be protected if at least one army is stationed in it or by sending to it two armies from neighboring location(s) having already more than two armies (according to the decree of Emperor Constantine the Great). A locality without an army is certainly vulnerable, and it will be even more vulnerable if one of its neighbors is without army too. Hence, the best situation for a location with no army is to be surrounded by locations where each with at least one army. This leads us to seek an DRDF , where is an independent set; that is, h is an OIDRDF.
Regarding this, Abdollahzadeh Ahangar et al., Ref. 19, introduced a new variation of double Roman domination called outer-independent double Roman domination. An outer-independent double Roman dominating function (OIDRD-function) of a graph G is a DRDF h such that the set of vertices assigned a 0 under h is independent. The outer-independent double Roman domination number (OIDRD-number for short) γoidR (G) is the minimum weight of an OIDRD-function on G. Clearly, γdR (G) ≤ γoidR (G) holds for every graph G. Recently, Mojdeh et al., Ref. 20, proved that the decision problem associated with γoidR (G) is NP-complete even when restricted to planar graphs with maximum degree at most four. They also characterized the families of all connected graphs with small outer-independent double Roman domination numbers.
In the following, we denote the set by [3].
The authors of Ref. 19 provided an upper bound for the OIDRD-number of trees in terms of the order and number of stems.
Theorem 1.1. For each tree T on n ≥ 3 vertices,
where is the number of stems of T.Since the number of stems of any tree does not exceed half the order of the tree, the next result is immediate from Theorem 1.1.
Proposition 1.2. For every tree T on n ≥ 4 vertices, γoidR (T) ≤ 5n/4.Moreover, it should be noted that the problem of characterizing the trees T attaining equality in the upper bound of Proposition 1.2 was raised in Ref. 19. This problem will be solved in this article, and additional bounds on the OIDRD-number will be given. In particular, we prove that, for any connected graph G of order n with minimum degree at least two in which the set of vertices with degree at least three is independent, γoidR (G) ≤ 4n/3.
2 Trees T of Order n With γoidR (T) = 5n/4
With the aim of characterizing the trees T of order n ≥ 3 with γoidR (T) = 5n/4, let be the family of trees defined as follows. Let be a path P4 whose vertices are labeled in order , and . For any integer , let be the family of trees T obtained from by adding edges between the stems of ’s so that the resulting graph is a tree. Beeler et al., Ref. 1, proved that, for every tree , which implies that .
Lemma 2.1. Letfor some integer t ≥ 1. Then, there is a γoidR (T) function f such that, for every leaf v of T, .
Proof. Let T be a tree of for some integer t ≥ 1. Then, . Since T is a bipartite graph, let X and Y be the partite sets of T. Let be the set of stems of T belonging to X, and likewise let be defined similarly. Clearly, , , and every leaf of T is either in or . Define the function f on by assigning a 2 to all vertices of Y, a 1 to all vertices in , and a 0 to vertices in X. Then, f is an OIDRD-function of T of weight , and thus f is a γoidR (T) function with desired property. □
Theorem 2.2. Let T be a tree on n ≥ 4 vertices. Then, γoidR (T) = 5n/4 if and only iffor some integer.
Proof. We prove only the necessity. Let T be a tree of n ≥ 4 such that γoidR (T) = 5n/4. Clearly, for some integer t ≥ 1. To prove that , we use an induction on t. If t = 1, then , and clearly, . Let t ≥ 2 and assume that the result is true for any tree T with γoidR (T) = 5n/4, where and . Let T be a tree with γoidR (T) = 5n/4 and . We deduce from that . Therefore, T is the corona of some tree and so T has no strong stem. Moreover, because t ≥ 2. Let be a diametral path in T and root T at . Then, , and there is a unique leaf w adjacent to . Denote by the subtree induced by a vertex x and its descendants in the rooted tree T. We claim that . Suppose, to the contrary, that and let be the children of with depth one. Since for each i, let be the leaf adjacent to for , and consider the tree obtained from T by removing every and for . Observe that the subtree rooted at is a path . Let f be a γoidR()-function, where, without loss of generality, . Then, f can be extended to an OIDRD-function of T by assigning a 0 to and a 2 to . It follows from Proposition 1.2 that
which leads to a contradiction. Hence, , and thus . Now, let . Clearly, any γoidR()-function f can be extended to an OIDRD-function of T by assigning a 3 to , 2 to , and a 0 to . Hence,
Therefore, by the induction hypothesis on , we have . By the construction of , we may assume that is a vertex of an induced path , where , , and . Now, if , then clearly , and we are done. Hence, we assume that . We claim that . Suppose, to the contrary, that . By Lemma 2.1, there is a -function f such that . If , then and the function h defined on by , , and for is an OIDRD-function of T of weight , a contradiction. If and , then as above we can get a contradiction. Hence, assume that and . Then, has a neighbor with weight at least two and the function defined on by , , , and for is an OIDRD-function of T of weight , a contradiction. Thus, , and thus as desired. This completes the proof. □
3 Slightly Improved Bounds for Trees
In this section, we present some sharp bounds on the OIDRD-number. We start with some classes of trees where the upper bound in Proposition 1.2 will be slightly improved.
Proposition 3.1. Let T be a tree of order n ≥ 3, where. If T contains a strong stem, then γoidR(T) ≤ 5n/4−1.
Proof. Let be a strong stem of T and let be the set of leaves adjacent to . Consider the forest and assume that it contains components each of order at least four . If , then be a γoidR(Ti)-function for each . Clearly, by Proposition 1.2, . Moreover, suppose that has components isomorphic to and components isomorphic to . Clearly, all ’s together can be extended to an OIDRD-function to T by assigning a 3 to s and to all center vertices of the components of order three, a 2 to each leaf at distance two from s belonging to a component of order two, and a 0 to the remaining vertices in the components of order at most three. Observe that if , then the total weight assigned to the vertices is at most p, and thus . Hence, we can assume that . Now, using the fact that , we obtain
as desired. □
A closer look at the proof of Proposition 3.1 shows that it can be used to obtain the next two results too.
Proposition 3.2. Let T be a tree of order n ≥ 3, where. If T contains one strong stem s such thatcontains a component isomorphic toor, then γoidR (T) ≤ 5n/4−1.
Proposition 3.3. Let T be a tree of order, where. If T contains a strong stem having at least three leaves, then γoidR (T) ≤ 5n/4−1.
Proposition 3.4. Let T be a tree of order n ≥ 3, where. If T contains more than one strong stem, then γoidR (T) ≤ 5n/4−1.
Proof. Let and be two strong stems of T and let be the set of leaves adjacent to for . Clearly, . If each component of is of order at most three, then assigning a 3 to and to the center vertex of each component of order three, a 2 to each leaf at distance two from that belongs to a component of order two in , and a 0 to the remaining vertices provides an OIDRD-function of T of weight at most . Therefore, . Hence, we may assume that contains at least one component of order at least four. Let be such components of of order at least four. Let be a γoidR (Ti) function for each i. In addition, let have components isomorphic to and components isomorphic to . Then, all fi’s together can be extended to an OIDRD-function of T by assigning a 3 to and to the center vertex of each component of order three, a 2 to each leaf at distance two from s that belongs to a component of order two in , a 3 to the center of all components of order three, for each and , and a 0 to the remaining vertices in the components of order at most three. Using the fact that , we obtain
as desired. □
4 Graphs With Minimum Degree Two
We begin by recalling the question, posed in Ref. 19, on whether the upper bound on the OIDRD-number for trees remains valid for arbitrary graphs. In this section, we restrict our attention to graphs with minimum degree at least two such that the set of vertices of degree at least three is independent set, where we shall show that the OIDRD-number is bounded above by . We will use the following result established in Ref. 19.
Proposition 4.1. For n ≥ 3,
Proposition 4.2. For n ≥ 3, the pathhas an OIDRD-function f that assigns positive weight to the end-vertices ofand.
Proof. Let and define the function f on as follows. If , then for and otherwise, and if , then , for and otherwise. Clearly, and f is an OIDRD-function of assigning positive weight to the end-vertices of . □
For integers and s ≥ 1, let be the graph obtained from a cycle and a path by adding the edge . Applying Propositions 4.1 and 4.2, we derive the next result.
Proposition 4.3. For integersand s ≥ 1, the graphhas an OIDRD-function f that assigns a positive weight to vsand ω(f) ≤ 4(r+s)/3.
Proof. Assume first that . If , then assigning a 1 to , a 2 to , and a 0 to provides an OIDRD-function of satisfying the conditions. If and , then assigning a 1 to , a 2 to , and a 0 to and provides an OIDRD-function of with the desired properties. If and , then assigning a 2 to and a 0 to and provides as above an OIDRD-function of with the desired properties. Hence, assume that , and let f be a γoidR (Cr)function such that . If , then the function g defined on by and otherwise is an OIDRD-function of with desired properties. If , then the function g defined on by , , and otherwise is an OIDRD-function of with the desired properties. Henceforth, we can assume that .
Let g be an OIDRD-function of the path of weight assigning positive weights to (Proposition 4.2). Define h on by for each i and for each j. Clearly, h is an OIDRD-function of and we deduce from Proposition 4.1 that .□
Let be the family of all simple graphs obtained from some connected multigraph H without loops with by subdividing each edge of H at least once and at most five times. Clearly, any graph in has order at least 5. The next result shows that every graph G in of order n satisfies .
Proposition 4.4. For any graphof order n, there exists an OIDRD-function f of G such thatandfor each vertex x of degree at least three.
Proof. Let be a graph of order n. We use an induction on n. If n = 5, then and the function f that assigns a 2 to the vertices of degree 3 and a 0 to the remaining vertices satisfies the conditions as desired. Let and assume that the result holds for all graphs in of order , where . Let be a graph of order . Suppose that and let . In the sequel, we will call an induced path P of G an A-ear path if and P is connected to A by either its unique vertex (when ) or its two end-vertices (when ). For each , let be the set of all A-ear paths P of G of order i and let . Clearly, . Moreover, for each A-ear path P, let is adjacent to a vertex of . Hence, . Furthermore, since , we have for each , and therefore, .
First, let . Suppose and let , where . Let be the graph obtained from G by first removing all vertices of the path P except and then adding edges and . Clearly, of order less than . By the induction hypothesis on , there exists an OIDRD-function of such that and . It follows that . Now, if k = 1, then the function g defined on by , , and otherwise is an OIDRD-function of G such that for each and
If k = 2, then the function g defined on by , , and otherwise is an OIDRD-function of G such that for each and
From now on, we can assume that .
Next, assume that and let with and . Let be the graph obtained from G by deleting and adding the edge . Clearly, and thus by the induction hypothesis, there exists an OIDRD-function f of such that for each vertex and . Then, the function g defined on by , and otherwise is an OIDRD-function of G such that for each and .
Considering the above situations, we may assume that . Note that and , where for .
Assume first that and let . If , then let , where for each j. Moreover, if , then let . Define the function g on by for each j and otherwise. Then, g is an OIDRD-function of G such that for each and we have .
Henceforth, we can assume that . We consider the following cases.
Case 1..
Then, and G is obtained from a loopless multigraph by subdividing each edge of once. Since each vertex of has degree at least three, we have and so . Define f on by for and otherwise. Clearly, f is an OIDR-function of G such that for each and .
Case 2..
Let be a vertex with the most neighbors in A-ear paths of . We consider the following subcases.
Subcase 2.1.u is adjacent to at least two A-ear paths of .
Let be two A-ear paths such that . Assume that , where . Suppose that , and let be the graph obtained from G by removing first and then adding the edge and joining by an edge every vertex x in to either a or b provided a or b is not adjacent to the end-vertex of the A-ear path containing x. Clearly, , and by the induction hypothesis, there exists an OIDRD-function of such that and . Define the function g on by , , , and otherwise. Then, g is an OIDR-function of G such that for each and .
Suppose now that and let . Let be the graph obtained from G by removing first and then adding the edge and joining every vertex x in to either a or w provided a or w is not adjacent to the end-vertex of the A-ear path containing x. Clearly, , and thus by the induction hypothesis, there exists an OIDRD-function of such that and . Now, the function g defined above satisfies the desired conditions.
Subcase 2.2. All neighbors of u but one belong to A-ear paths of .
By the choice of u, we may assume that each vertex in A is adjacent to at most one A-ear path in . In that case, G is obtained from a multigraph H without loops with by subdividing any edge of H at least once and at most twice so that the set of edges of H subdivided twice is independent (in H). Hence, let be the edges of H subdivided twice and let be the set of all vertices in H for which all edges that are incident are subdivided once. Therefore, we have and (because , k edges of H are subdivided twice and the remaining edges are subdivided once). Hence, the order of G is
Assume that, for each i, the edge in H once subdivided twice produces the path in G. One can easily see that the function g defined on by for , for each and otherwise is an OIDRD-function of G such that for each and
This completes the proof. □
Theorem 4.5. If G is a connected n-vertex graph withsuch that the set of vertices with degree at least three is independent, then
This bound is sharp for .
Proof. We use an induction on the order n. Clearly, since . If , then and the result is true by Proposition 4.1, establishing the base cases. Let , and assume that the result holds for all graphs of order less than n with minimum degree at least two such that the set of vertices with degree at least three is independent. Let G be a graph of order n such that and the set of vertices with degree at least three is independent. If , then and the result follows from Proposition 4.1. Hence, we assume that , and let and . Consider the A-ear paths and keep the same notations as defined in the proof of Proposition 4.4. Note that , , and for each .
Assume first that there exists an A-ear path P such that . Since G is simple, this means that and some vertex of G of degree three is adjacent to the end-vertices of . Thus, . In that case, let and . Clearly, (since A is independent), and thus there is a unique A-ear path in which b is an end-vertex of . Let c be the other end-vertex of (possibly ). Let be the graph resulting from the deletion of vertex a and all vertices of P and . Then, and by the induction hypothesis, . On the other hand, since is isomorphic to , by Proposition 4.3, has an OIDRD-function g such that and . Now, for any function, the function h defined on by for all and for all is an OIDRD-function of . Therefore,
Next, we can assume that for each A-ear path . It follows that for each A-ear path . Assume that , and let . Note that, by Proposition 4.2, P has an OIDRD-function g such that and g assigns positive weight to the end-vertices of the path P. Now, let be the graph obtained from G by removing all vertices of P. By the induction hypothesis on , we have . Clearly, for every γoidR(G′)-function f, the function h defined on by for all and for all is an OIDRD-function of G, and thus . For the remaining part of the proof, we can assume that . Therefore, , and thus the result follows from Proposition 4.4. □
5 Conclusion
In this article, we continued the study of outer-independent double Roman domination number and we characterized the trees T of order , for which , answering a problem posed by Abdollahzadeh Ahangar et al., Ref. 19. Moreover, we showed that, for any connected graph G of order n with minimum degree at least two in which the set of vertices with degree at least three is independent, . Finding a sharp upper bound for the outer-independent double Roman domination number of connected graph G of order n with minimum degree remains open.
Data Availability Statement
The original contributions presented in the study are included in the article/Supplementary Material. Further inquiries can be directed to the corresponding author.
Author Contributions
All authors listed have made a substantial, direct, and intellectual contribution to the work and approved it for publication.
Funding
This work was supported by the National Key R&D Program of China (No. 2018YFB1005100).
Conflict of Interest
The authors declare that the research was conducted in the absence of any commercial or financial relationships that could be construed as a potential conflict of interest.
References
1. Beeler, RA, Haynes, TW, and Hedetniemi, ST. Double Roman domination. Discrete Appl Math (2016). 211:23–29. doi:10.1016/j.dam.2016.03.017
CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar
2. Abdollahzadeh Ahangar, H, Amjadi, J, Atapour, M, Chellali, M, and Sheikholeslami, SM. Double Roman trees. Ars Combinatoria (2019). 145:173–183.
Google Scholar
3. Abdollahzadeh Ahangar, H, Amjadi, J, Chellali, M, Nazari-Moghaddam, S, and Sheikholeslami, SM. Trees with double Roman domination number twice the domination number plus two. Iran J Sci Technol Trans A Sci (2019). 43:1081–1088. doi:10.1007/s40995-018-0535-7
CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar
4. Abdollahzadeh Ahangar, H, Chellali, M, and Sheikholeslami, SM. On the double Roman domination in graphs. Discrete Appl Math (2017). 232:1–7. doi:10.1016/j.dam.2017.06.014
CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar
5. Amjadi, J, Nazari-Moghaddam, S, Sheikholeslami, SM, and Volkmann, L. An upper bound on the double Roman domination number. J Combin Optim (2018). 36:81–89. doi:10.1007/s10878-018-0286-6
CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar
6. Hao, G, Volkmann, L, and Mojdeh, DA. Total double Roman domination in graphs. Commun Comb Optim (2020). 5:27–39. doi:10.22049/CCO.2019.26484.1118
Google Scholar
7. Jafari Rad, N, Azvin, F, and Volkmann, L. Bounds on the outer-independent double Italian domination number. Commun Comb Optim (2021). 6:123–136. doi:10.22049/CCO.2020.26928.1166
Google Scholar
8. Khoeilar, R, Chellali, M, Karami, H, and Sheikholeslami, SM. An improved upper bound on the double Roman domination number of graphs with minimum degree at least two. Discrete Appl Math (2019). 270:159–167. doi:10.1016/j.dam.2019.06.018
CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar
9. Klobučar, A, and Klobučar, A. Properties of double Roman domination on cardinal products of graphs. Ars Math Contemp (2020). 19:337–349. doi:10.26493/1855-3974.2022.44a
CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar
10. Maimani, HR, Momeni, M, Nazari-Moghaddam, S, Rahimi Mahid, F, and Sheikholeslami, SM. Independent double Roman domination in graphs. Bull Iranian Math Soc (2020). 46:543–555. doi:10.1007/s41980-019-00274-8
CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar
11. Volkmann, L. The double Roman domatic number of a graph. J Combin Math Combin Comput (2018). 104:205–215.
Google Scholar
12. Volkmann, L. Double Roman domination and domatic numbers of graphs. Commun Comb Optim (2018). 3:71–77. doi:10.22049/CCO.2018.26125.1078
Google Scholar
13. Yue, J, Wei, M, Li, M, and Liu, G. On the double Roman domination of graphs. Appl Math Comput (2018). 338:669–675. doi:10.1016/j.amc.2018.06.033
CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar
14. Zhang, X, Li, Z, Jiang, H, and Shao, Z. Double Roman domination in trees. Inf Process Lett (2018). 134:31–34. doi:10.1016/j.ipl.2018.01.004
CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar
15. Abdollahzadeh Ahangar, H, Álvarez, MP, Chellali, M, Sheikholeslami, SM, and Valenzuela-Tripodoro, JC. Triple Roman domination in graphs. Appl Math Comput (2021). 391:125444. doi:10.1016/j.amc.2020.125444
CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar
16. Chellali, M, Jafari Rad, N, Sheikholeslami, SM, and Volkmann, L. Roman domination in graphs In: TW Haynes, ST Hedetniemi, and MA Henning, editors Topics in domination in graphs. Springer International Publishing (2020). doi:10.1007/978-3-030-51117-3
Google Scholar
17. Chellali, M, Jafari Rad, N, Sheikholeslami, SM, and Volkmann, L. Varieties of Roman domination. In: TW Haynes, ST Hedetniemi, and MA Henning, editors Structures of domination in graphs. Springer International Publishing (2021). doi:10.1007/978-3-030-58892-2
Google Scholar
18. Chellali, M, Jafari Rad, N, Sheikholeslami, SM, and Volkmann, L. Varieties of Roman domination II. AKCE Int J Graphs Comb (2020). 17:966–984. doi:10.1016/j.akcej.2019.12.001
CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar
19. Abdollahzadeh Ahangar, H, Chellali, M, and Sheikholeslami, SM. Outer independent double Roman domination. Appl Math Comput (2020). 364:124617. doi:10.1016/j.amc.2019.124617
CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar
20. Mojdeh, DA, Samadi, B, Shao, Z, and Yero, IG. Outer independent double Roman domination number of graphs. Appl Math Comput (2020). 364:124617. doi:10.1016/j.amc.2019.124617
CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar