Difference between revisions of "The Degree Diameter Problem for Circulant Graphs"

From Combinatorics Wiki
Line 72: Line 72:
 
<center>
 
<center>
 
{| border="1"
 
{| border="1"
−
| '''<math>d</math>\<math>k</math>'''|| '''2''' || '''3''' ||  '''4'''|| '''5''' ||  '''6''' || '''7''' ||  '''8''' ||  '''9''' ||  '''10'''  
+
| '''<math>d</math>\<math>k</math>'''|| '''2''' || '''3''' ||  '''4'''|| '''5''' ||  '''6''' || '''7''' ||  '''8''' ||  '''9''' ||  '''10''' ||  '''11''' ||  '''12'''  
 
|-
 
|-
 
|'''3'''
 
|'''3'''
Line 120: Line 120:
 
{| border="2" style="background:rgb(180,180,255);"  
 
{| border="2" style="background:rgb(180,180,255);"  
 
|36
 
|36
 +
|-
 +
|'''100%'''
 +
|}
 +
| align="center" |
 +
{| border="2" style="background:rgb(180,180,255);"
 +
|44
 +
|-
 +
|'''100%'''
 +
|}
 +
| align="center" |
 +
{| border="2" style="background:rgb(180,180,255);"
 +
|48
 
|-
 
|-
 
|'''100%'''
 
|'''100%'''
Line 185: Line 197:
 
{| border="2" style="background:rgb(180,180,255);"  
 
{| border="2" style="background:rgb(180,180,255);"  
 
|221
 
|221
 +
|-
 +
|'''100%'''
 +
|}
 +
| align="center" |
 +
{| border="2" style="background:rgb(180,180,255);"
 +
|265
 +
|-
 +
|'''100%'''
 +
|}
 +
| align="center" |
 +
{| border="2" style="background:rgb(180,180,255);"
 +
|313
 
|-
 
|-
 
|'''100%'''
 
|'''100%'''
Line 244: Line 268:
 
{| border="2" style="background:rgb(180,180,255);"  
 
{| border="2" style="background:rgb(180,180,255);"  
 
|400
 
|400
 +
|-
 +
|'''100%'''
 +
|}
 +
| align="center" |
 +
{| border="2" style="background:rgb(180,180,255);"
 +
|484
 +
|-
 +
|'''100%'''
 +
|}
 +
| align="center" |
 +
{| border="2" style="background:rgb(180,180,255);"
 +
|576
 
|-
 
|-
 
|'''100%'''
 
|'''100%'''
Line 303: Line 339:
 
{| border="2" style="background:rgb(180,180,255);"  
 
{| border="2" style="background:rgb(180,180,255);"  
 
|1 393
 
|1 393
 +
|-
 +
|'''100%'''
 +
|}
 +
| align="center" |
 +
{| border="2" style="background:rgb(180,180,255);"
 +
|1 815
 +
|-
 +
|'''100%'''
 +
|}
 +
| align="center" |
 +
{| border="2" style="background:rgb(180,180,255);"
 +
|2 329
 
|-
 
|-
 
|'''100%'''
 
|'''100%'''
Line 364: Line 412:
 
|-
 
|-
 
|'''100%'''
 
|'''100%'''
 +
|}
 +
| align="center" |
 +
{| border="2" style="background:rgb(180,180,255);"
 +
|3 608
 +
|-
 +
|88%
 +
|}
 +
| align="center" |
 +
{| border="2" style="background:rgb(180,180,255);"
 +
|4 672
 +
|-
 +
|89%
 
|}
 
|}
 
|-
 
|-
Line 423: Line 483:
 
|-
 
|-
 
|76%
 
|76%
 +
|}
 +
| align="center" |
 +
{| border="2" style="background:#ABCDEF;"
 +
|11 969
 +
|-
 +
|76%
 +
|}
 +
| align="center" |
 +
{| border="2" style="background:#ABCDEF;"
 +
|16 641
 +
|-
 +
|75%
 
|}
 
|}
 
|-
 
|-
Line 480: Line 552:
 
{| border="2" style="background:#ABCDEF;"  
 
{| border="2" style="background:#ABCDEF;"  
 
|14 002
 
|14 002
 +
|-
 +
|74%
 +
|}
 +
| align="center" |
 +
{| border="2" style="background:#ABCDEF;"
 +
|20 330
 +
|-
 +
|74%
 +
|}
 +
| align="center" |
 +
{| border="2" style="background:#ABCDEF;"
 +
|28 610
 
|-
 
|-
 
|74%
 
|74%
Line 541: Line 625:
 
|-
 
|-
 
|63%
 
|63%
 +
|}
 +
| align="center" |
 +
{| border="2" style="background:#ABCDEF;"
 +
|56 695
 +
|-
 +
|63%
 +
|}
 +
| align="center" |
 +
{| border="2" style="background:#ABCDEF;"
 +
|85 305
 +
|-
 +
|62%
 
|}
 
|}
 
|-
 
|-
Line 598: Line 694:
 
{| border="2" style="background:#ABCDEF;"  
 
{| border="2" style="background:#ABCDEF;"  
 
|58 728
 
|58 728
 +
|-
 +
|61%
 +
|}
 +
| align="center" |
 +
{| border="2" style="background:#ABCDEF;"
 +
|93 060
 +
|-
 +
|61%
 +
|}
 +
| align="center" |
 +
{| border="2" style="background:#ABCDEF;"
 +
|142 000
 
|-
 
|-
 
|61%
 
|61%
Line 657: Line 765:
 
{| border="2" style="background:#ABCDEF;"  
 
{| border="2" style="background:#ABCDEF;"  
 
|134 245
 
|134 245
 +
|-
 +
|52%
 +
|}
 +
| align="center" |
 +
{| border="2" style="background:#ABCDEF;"
 +
|227 305
 +
|-
 +
|52%
 +
|}
 +
| align="center" |
 +
{| border="2" style="background:#ABCDEF;"
 +
|369 305
 
|-
 
|-
 
|52%
 
|52%
Line 718: Line 838:
 
|-
 
|-
 
|51%
 
|51%
 +
|}
 +
| align="center" |
 +
{| border="2" style="background:#ABCDEF;"
 +
|361 550
 +
|-
 +
|51%
 +
|}
 +
| align="center" |
 +
{| border="2" style="background:#ABCDEF;"
 +
|596610
 +
|-
 +
|50%
 
|}
 
|}
 
|-
 
|-
Line 777: Line 909:
 
|-
 
|-
 
|45%
 
|45%
 +
|}
 +
| align="center" |
 +
{| border="2" style="background:#ABCDEF;"
 +
| 795 455
 +
|-
 +
|44%
 +
|}
 +
| align="center" |
 +
{| border="2" style="background:#ABCDEF;"
 +
| 1 392 065
 +
|-
 +
|43%
 
|}
 
|}
 
|-
 
|-
Line 834: Line 978:
 
{| border="2" style="background:#ABCDEF;"  
 
{| border="2" style="background:#ABCDEF;"  
 
| 658 048
 
| 658 048
 +
|-
 +
|42%
 +
|}
 +
| align="center" |
 +
{| border="2" style="background:#ABCDEF;"
 +
| 1 229 360
 +
|-
 +
|42%
 +
|}
 +
| align="center" |
 +
{| border="2" style="background:#ABCDEF;"
 +
| 2 187 520
 
|-
 
|-
 
|42%
 
|42%
Line 896: Line 1,052:
 
|38%
 
|38%
 
|}
 
|}
 +
| align="center" |
 +
{| border="2" style="background:#ABCDEF;"
 +
| 2 485 825
 +
|-
 +
|37%
 +
|}
 +
| align="center" |
 +
{| border="2" style="background:#ABCDEF;"
 +
| 4 673 345
 +
|-
 +
|36%
 +
|}
 +
 
|}
 
|}
 
</center>
 
</center>

Revision as of 19:03, 8 March 2019

Table of the orders of the largest known circulant graphs

[math]d[/math]\[math]k[/math] 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12
3 8 12 16 20 24 28 32 36 40 44 48
4 13 25 41 61 85 113 145 181 221 265 313
5 16 36 64 100 144 196 256 324 400 484 576
6 21 55 117 203 333 515 737 1 027 1 393 1 815 2 329
7 26 76 160 308 536 828 1 232 1 764 2 392 3 180 4 144
8 35 104 248 528 984 1 712 2 768 4 280 6 320 9 048 12 552
9 42 130 320 700 1 416 2 548 4 304 6 804 10 320 15 004 21 192
10 51 177 457 1 099 2 380 4 551 8 288 14 099 22 805 35 568 53 025
11 56 210 576 1 428 3 200 6 652 12 416 21 572 35 880 56 700 87 248
12 67 275 819 2 120 5 044 10 777 21 384 39 996 69 965 117 712 190 392
13 80 312 970 2 676 6 256 14 740 30 760 57 396 106 120 182 980 295 840
14 90 381 1 229 3 695 9 800 23 304 49 757 103 380 196 689 350 700 593 989
15 96 448 1 420 4 292 12 232 32 092 68 944 142 516 276 928 514 580 908 480
16 112 518 1 788 5 847 17 733 44 328 107 748 232 245 479 255 924 420 1 702 428
17 130 6 468 20 360 57 684 136 512 321 780 659 464 1 350 820 2 479 104

The following table is the key to the colors in the table presented above:

Color Details
* Numbers in bold indicate graphs known to be optimal.
* Optimal graphs.
* Optimal graphs found by E. Monakhova.
* Graphs found by H. Macbeth, J. Šiagiová, J. Širáň and T. Vetrík.
* Graphs found by R. Dougherty and V. Faber and independently for d=6 by E. Monakhova.
* Graphs found by B. McKay.
* Graphs found by R. Lewis.
* Graphs found by R. Lewis and independently by R. Feria-Puron, H. Pérez-Rosés and J. Ryan.
* Graphs found by R. Feria-Puron, H. Pérez-Rosés and J. Ryan.
* Graphs found by D. Bevan, G. Erskine and R. Lewis.
* Graphs found by O. Monakhov and E. Monakhova.

Table of the lowest upper bounds known at present, and the percentage of the order of the largest known graphs

[math]d[/math]\[math]k[/math] 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12
3
8
100%
12
100%
16
100%
20
100%
24
100%
28
100%
32
100%
36
100%
44
100%
48
100%
40
100%
4
13
100%
25
100%
41
100%
61
100%
85
100%
113
100%
145
100%
181
100%
221
100%
265
100%
313
100%
5
16
100%
36
100%
64
100%
100
100%
144
100%
196
100%
256
100%
324
100%
400
100%
484
100%
576
100%
6
21
100%
55
100%
117
100%
203
100%
333
100%
515
100%
737
100%
1 027
100%
1 393
100%
1 815
100%
2 329
100%
7
26
100%
76
100%
160
100%
308
100%
536
100%
828
100%
1 232
100%
1 764
100%
2 392
100%
3 608
88%
4 672
89%
8
35
100%
104
100%
248
100%
528
100%
984
100%
1 712
100%
3 649
76%
5 641
76%
8 361
76%
11 969
76%
16 641
75%
9
42
100%
130
100%
320
100%
700
100%
1 416
100%
3 530
72%
5 890
73%
9 290
73%
14 002
74%
20 330
74%
28 610
74%
10
51
100%
177
100%
681
67%
1 683
65%
3 653
65%
7 183
63%
13 073
63%
22 363
63%
36 365
63%
56 695
63%
85 305
62%
11
56
100%
210
100%
912
63%
2 364
60%
5 336
60%
10 836
61%
20 256
61%
35 436
61%
58 728
61%
93 060
61%
142 000
61%
12
67
100%
275
100%
1 289
64%
3 653
58%
8 989
56%
19 825
54%
40 081
53%
75 517
53%
134 245
52%
227 305
52%
369 305
52%
13
80
100%
312
100%
1 666
58%
4 942
54%
12 642
49%
28 814
51%
59 906
51%
115 598
50%
209 762
51%
361 550
51%
596610
50%
14
90
100%
381
100%
2 241
55%
7 183
51%
19 825
49%
48 639
48%
108 545
46%
224 143
46%
433 905
45%
795 455
44%
1 392 065
43%
15
96
100%
448
100%
2 816
50%
9 424
46%
27 008
45%
68 464
47%
157 184
44%
332 688
43%
658 048
42%
1 229 360
42%
2 187 520
42%
16
112
100%
833
62%
3 649
49%
13 073
45%
40 081
44%
108545
41%
265 729
41%
598 417
39%
1 256 465
38%
2 485 825
37%
4 673 345
36%

References

  • D. Bevan, G. Erskine, and R. Lewis. Large circulant graphs of fixed diameter and arbitrary degree. ArXiv
  • R. Feria-Puron, J. Ryan, and H. Perez-Roses. Searching for Large Multi-Loop Networks. Electronic Notes in Discrete Mathematics, vol. 46 (2014), pp. 233-240. doi:10.1016/j.endm.2014.08.031. Link to journal
  • R.R. Lewis. The Degree/Diameter Problem for Circulant Graphs of Degree 8 and 9. The Electronic Journal of Combinatorics, vol. 21(4) (2014), #P4.50. Link to journal
  • E.A. Monakhova, Synthesis of optimal Diophantine structures, Comput. Syst. Novosibirsk , 80 (1979), p.18--35. (in Russian).
  • E. Monakhova, Optimal Triple Loop Networks with Given Transmission Delay: Topological Design and Routing, Inter. Network Optimization Conference, (INOC'2003), Evry/Paris, France, (2003), p.410--415.
  • E.A. Monakhova . On synthesis of multidimensional circulant graphs of diameter two, Bulletin of the Tomsk Polytechnic University. 323(2) (2013), p.25--28. (in Russian). Link to journal
Retrieved from ‘http://combinatoricswiki.org/index.php?title=The_Degree_Diameter_Problem_for_Circulant_Graphs&oldid=399’