The Matching Equivalence Graphs with the Maximum Matching Root Less than or Equal to 2 ()
Received 23 March 2016; accepted 24 May 2016; published 27 May 2016

1. Introduction
Let G be a finite simple graph with vertex set
and edge set
. A spanning subgraph H is called a matching of G, if every connected component of H is isolated edge or isolated vertex. k-matching of G is a matching with k edges. A matching polynomial of G is defined as

where
is the number of k-matchings of G.
Two graphs G and H are called matching-equivalent if
, and denoted by
. A graph G is called matching unique if
implies that
. The union of two graphs G and H, denoted by
, is the graph with vertex set
and edge set
.
denotes the union of k graphs G.
More than 30 years ago E. J. Farrell in [1] introduced the concept of matching polynomials. Latterly, Godsil and Gutman in [2] gave another definition. Here we use the definition given by Godsil. Form then on, the research on the properties of matching polynomials has largely been done (see [3] - [13] ). But the research on matching-equivalent of graphs is few. In this paper, we give a necessary and sufficient condition of matching equivalence of two graphs with the maximum matching root less than or equal to 2.
Throughout the paper, by
and
, respectively, denote the path and the cycle with n vertices.
denotes the maximum degree of graph G. By
denote the star graph with 5 vertices. By
denote the tree which has one 3-degree vertex u and three 1-degree vertices
and the distance between u and
are
, respectively. A graph
is defined as the graph obtained by identifying one end of the path
with a vertex of the cycle
. Let
be a path with vertices; sequence
,
denotes the tree obtained by adding pendant edges at vertices 2 and
of
, respectively. The graphs
are shown in Figure 1.
2. Graphs with the Maximum Matching Root Less than or Equal to 2
Let G be a graph with order n. Since the roots of
are real numbers (see [7] ), the maximum root of
denoted by
, the characteristic polynomial of graph G denoted by
and the maximum root of
denoted by
(
is also called spectral radius of graph G), respectively. In this section, we determine graphs with the maximum matching root less than or equal to 2, we firstly give some useful lemmas as follows:
Lemma 2.1. [7] Let G be a graph with k components
. Then
![]()
Lemma 2.2. [7] Let G be a forest. Then
.
Lemma 2.3. [7] Let G be a connected graph and
. Then
1)
is a single root of
and
.
2)
is a single root of
and
.
Definition 2.1. Let G be a connected graph with a vertex u. The path-tree
is a tree with the paths in G which start at u as its vertices, and where two such paths are joined by an edge if one is a maximal subpath of the other.
Clearly, if G is a tree, then the path tree
.
Lemma 2.4. [7] Let u be a vertex in the graph G and
be the path tree of G with respect to u. Then
![]()
and
divides ![]()
Lemma 2.5. Let G is a connected graph and
. Then
is spectral radius of path-tree
. i.e., ![]()
Proof. By Lemmas 2.2 and 2.4, we have
, by Lemma 2.3, we have
and
, comparing with the maximum root of
and
, we can obtain
□Lemma 2.6. [14] Let T be a tree. Then
1)
if and only if
,
2)
if and only if
.
Theorem 2.1. Let G be a connected graph. Then
1)
if and only if
.
2)
if and only if
.
Proof. (1) Since the path-tree of
respect to an arbitrary vertex and
respect to the 3 degree vertex are
and
, respectively. By Lemmas 2.5 and 2.6 the sufficiency is obvious.
Necessity:
Case 1. If G is a tree.
Clearly,
. By Lemma 2.6,
.
Case 2. If G isn’t a tree.
By Lemma 2.5 and 2.6, the path-tree respect to an arbitrary vertex u of G is
. Then we get that the maximum degree
and the number of 3-degree vertex of G is at most 1 (otherwise,
).
Subcase 2.1. If
. It is clear that G has only one 3 degree vertex, thus
(otherwise,
or G is a tree). Clearly, the path-tree of G respect to the 3 degree vertex u is
, Since
, thus we have
, i.e.,
.
Subcase 2.2. If
.
Since G is connected and isn't a tree, then G is
. Thus
.
(2) Since the path-tree of
and
respect to the 3 degree vertex are
and
, respectively. By Lemmas 2.5 and 2.6 the sufficiency is clear.
Necessity:
Case 1. If G is a tree.
Clearly,
. By Lemma 2.6,
.
Case 2. If G isn’t a tree.
By Lemma 2.5, the path-tree respect to an arbitrary vertex u of G is
, thus
. Denote
. In order to complete the proof, we will divide four subcases as follows:
Subcase 2.1. If
.
Let u is a 4 degree vertex of G. Since
, then
, and thus
.
Subcase 2.2. If
and
.
It is clear that the number of 3 degree vertex of path-tree
respect to an arbitrary vertex u of G is also greater than 2. Hence
.
Subcase 2.3. If
and
, then G is one of the graphs
and
(see Figure 2) Clearly,
.
Subcase 2.4. If
and
.
It is clear that
and the path-tree respect to the 3 degree vertex u is
. Since
, thus
or
. i.e.,
or
.
By Theorem 2.1 and Lemma 2.1, we can easily obtain the following Theorem 2.2:
Theorem 2.2. Let G be a graph. Then
1)
if and only if every connected component of G belongs to
.
2)
and 2 is m multiple root of
if and only if m connected components of G belong to
and others belong to
.
![]()
Figure 2. Four connected graphs with
and
.
3. Sufficient and Necessary Condition for Matching Equivalence of Graphs
In this section, the sufficient and necessary condition for matching equivalence of graphs with the maximum matching root less than or equal to 2 is determined. Firstly, we give some lemmas as follows:
Lemma 3.1. [7] Let G be a connected graph and
. Then
![]()
where
is neighbor vertex set of u in graph G.
Lemma 3.2. 1) ![]()
2) ![]()
3) ![]()
4) ![]()
5) ![]()
6) ![]()
7) ![]()
8) ![]()
9) ![]()
10) ![]()
11) ![]()
12)
,
13) ![]()
Proof. (1) Let the vertices sequence of path
is
, by Lemma 3.1, consider
with
and
with any one vertex, thus (1) holds.
(2) Let v be the 3 degree vertex and u be a such pendant vertex of
that the distance between u and v is 1. By Lemma 3.1, consider
with u and
with any one vertex, thus (2) holds.
(3)-(12) The results (3)-(12) can easily obtained by the following equalities.
![]()
![]()
![]()
![]()
![]()
![]()
![]()
![]()
![]()
(13) By Lemma 3.1,
and
. Then
.
Now, by using mathematical induction to prove (13). Firstly, By (8) and
,
(13) holds for
. If
,
![]()
Hence (13) holds for
. □
Lemma 3.3. 1) ![]()
2) ![]()
3) ![]()
4) ![]()
5) ![]()
6) ![]()
Proof. Clearly, by Lemma 2.3, we obtain Lemma 3.3(1) immediately. And comparing with the maximum root of two sides of equalities in Lemma 3.2, other results in Lemma 3.3 is also obvious. □
Definition 3.1. Let G and
be graphs, if
![]()
where
be integers. Then G is called a linear combination of
, and denote
.
Note that some
is allowed to be negative. In fact, if all
are positive, then
is a graph. And when some
is negative for
doesn’t stand for a graph. In any case,
implies that polynomials
and
are equal. For example, since
, we can denote
.
By Lemma 3.2, the following representations are also obvious.
Lemma 3.4. 1)
2) ![]()
3)
4) ![]()
5)
6) ![]()
7)
8) ![]()
9)
10) ![]()
11)
12)
.
Lemma 3.5. If
. Then G can uniquely be represented as a linear combination of the form
![]()
and the non-vanishing coefficient
, with the greatest
, is positive. Furthermore, if
is the longest path with the non-vanishing coefficient
,
.
Proof. Since
, by Theorem 2.2, every connected component of G belongs to
. According to Lemma 3.4, we get that G can be represented as a linear combination of paths. Next, without loss of generality, assume that G can be represented as
(1)
where
and
.
Now by transposition terms from side to side of Equations (1) to (2) such that the coefficients of
and
are positive, without loss of generality, Assumes that the Equation (2) as follows:
(2)
where
,
and
.
Compare with the maximum root and its multiplicity of graphs in two sides of (2), we shall get
. Thus
![]()
Repeat this proceeding, we shall get
and
for
. That is, G can uniquely be represented as a linear combination of paths.
Furthermore, assume that G be represented as a linear combination
(3)
and
is the non-vanishing coefficient of the longest path in (3). Then
.
In fact, assume that
, then by transposition terms from side to side of Equation (3) such that the coefficients of
are positive, we can obtain Equation (4).
(4)
where
and
. By comparing with the maximum root of
and
, we can obtain
![]()
![]()
it is a contradiction. Thus
and then modify (4) as
![]()
compare with the maximum root of
and
we can obtain
□
Lemma 3.6. If
, then G can uniquely be represented as a linear combination of the form
and
equals to the multiplicity of root 2 of
.
Proof. Since
, by Theorem 2.2, every connected component of G belongs to
. According to Lemma 3.4, we easily obtain that G can be represented as a linear combination of
and some paths. Next, without loss of generality, assume that G can be represented as
![]()
By transposition terms and comparing with the multiplicity of root 2, we have
equal to the multiplicity of root 2 of
. Thus
![]()
Furthermore, we can obtain
and
for
.
By Lemmas 3.5, 3.6 and Definition 3.1 we immediately get. □
Theorem 3.1. Let
be graphs. Then
1) If
, then
if and only if G and H have the same linear combination repre- sentation of paths.
2) If
, then
if and only if G and H have the same linear combination repre- sentation of
and some paths.
Acknowledgements
This work is supported by National Natural Science Foundation of China (11561056), National Natural Science Foundation of Qinghai Provence (2011-Z-911), and Scientific Research Fund of Qinghai University for Nationalities (2015G02).