IJRET: International Journal of Research in Engineering and Technology

eISSN: 2319-1163 | pISSN: 2321-7308

CONNECTED ROMAN DOMINATION IN GRAPHS

M. H. Muddebihal1, Sumangaladevi2
1, 2

Department of Mathematics Gulbarga University, Gulbarga-585106, Karnataka, India mhmuddebihal@yahoo.co.in, sumangaladevi.s@gmail.com

A Roman dominating function on a graph which value

f (V ) = f (v) . The Roman domination number R ( G ) of G is the minimum weight of a Roman dominating function on
vV

f ( u ) = 0 is adjacent to at least one vertex v V for which f (v ) = 2 . The weight of a Roman dominating function is the

Abstract G is a function f : V {0,1, 2} satisfying the condition that every vertex u V for

G . A Roman dominating function on G is connected Roman dominating function of G if either V1 V2 or V2 is connected.

The connected Roman domination number In this paper we establish the upper bounds, lower bounds and some equality results for RC ( G ) .

RC ( G )

of

G is the minimum weight of a connected Roman dominating function on G .

Keywords: Domination number, Roman domination number and Connected Roman domination number. Subject Classification number: 05C69, 05C70. ---------------------------------------------------------------------***-----------------------------------------------------------------------1. INTRODUCTION
Let called a head of a spider and the end vertices are called the foot vertices. Let S be a set of vertices and is a private neighbor of

G = (V , E ) be a simple

( p, q )

graph with

p=V

and q =

E . We denote open neighborhood of a vertex v of

set S
vS

G by N ( v ) and its closed neighborhood by N [ v ] . For a

vertex

V (G ) ,

N ( S ) = N (v)
vS

u S . We say that a vertex v u with respect to S if N [ v ] S = {u} . The private neighbor set of u with
S is the set pn [u , S ] = {v; N [ v ] S = {u}} .
dominating function (RDF) on a Roman graph

and

respect to A

N [ S ] = N [ v ] . The degree of a vertex x denotes the

number of neighbors of degree of G . Also set

(G )

x in G and ( G ) is the maximum

is the minimum degree of

G. A

condition that every vertex

S of vertices in G is a dominating set, if N [ S ] = V ( G ) . The domination number ( G ) of G is V ( G ) , then we denote by S , the subgraph induced by

u V for which f ( u ) = 0 is adjacent to at least one vertex v V for which f (v ) = 2 .

vV

G = (V , E ) is a function f : V {0,1, 2} satisfying the

The weight of a Roman dominating function is the value

f (V ) = f (v) . The Roman domination number

of

the minimum cardinality of a dominating set. If of

S is a subset

S . A subset S of vertices is independent, if S has no

edge. For notation and graph theory terminology in general we follow [2] or [6]. A Spider is a tree with the property that the removal of all the end paths of length two of T results in an isolated vertex

G is the minimum weight of a Roman dominating function on G .See [4] and [5].
A function

R (G )

f = (V0 ,V1 , V2 ) is called connected Roman

dominating function (CRDF) of

G if either V1 V2 or

__________________________________________________________________________________________
Volume: 02 Issue: 10 | Oct-2013, Available @ http://www.ijret.org 333

IJRET: International Journal of Research in Engineering and Technology

eISSN: 2319-1163 | pISSN: 2321-7308

V2 is connected. The connected Roman domination number

6.

RC ( G )

RC ( K m, n ) = 2 0 .

of

G is the minimum weight of a CRDF of G .

Theorem 2:
Let

Independent Roman dominating functions were studied by Adabi et.al in [1]. A Roman dominating function

f = (V0 ,V1 , V2 ) be a RC - function of G . Then V2 is a

f = (V0 , V1 , V2 ) in a graph G is independent RDF or

V1 V2 is independent. The independent

simply IRDF, if

-set of G if for each vertex v V1 is adjacent to at least one vertex of V2 or the set V1 = .
Proof: Let Further D =

Roman domination number weight of an IRDF of G .

iR ( G ) of G is the minimum

In this paper we establish the new concept called connected Roman domination number of G defined by M. H. Muddebihal and Sumangaladevi. The purpose of this paper is to initialize the study of CRDF which gives one of the direct application of minimal CRDF is to win the war. For this we need the continuous flow of communication between the army troops by supply of requirements with minimum cost, by placing weight 1 between the non adjacent vertices of V1 and

{v1 , v2 ,........., vn } , 1 n p be the -set and DC = {v1 , v2 ,......, vn } where 1 i p be the c -set of
If V1

f = (V0 ,V1 , V2 ) be a RC function of G .

G.

M = {v1 , v2 ,......., v j }

then

there where Hence

exists

vertex such

set that

1 j n

M V DC .
and N

V2 or V2 , which yields a minimal CRDF.

2. RESULTS
Specific values of Connected Roman domination numbers for some class of graphs In this section we illustrate the connected Roman domination number by determining the value of classes of graphs.

[ M ] (V0 V1 ) = V2 . Now for every vertex set S = {ui ;1 i n} and {ui } DC V2 , we have S = V1 .
there exists at such that N

M = V0

Suppose

{wi ;1 i n} V1
RC function of

( wi ) V2 . Then

least

one

vertex

of

f is a

RC ( G )

for several

G with V1 V2 as a -set of G , a contradiction. Hence for each vertex v S must be adjacent to at least one vertex of V2 , which gives f as a RC function with V2 as a -set of G . If V1 = .
Then

Theorem 1:
For the class of paths Pp , cycles C p , wheels W p , stars K1, p , complete graphs K p , and complete bipartite graphs K m ,n . We have 1.

D = DC Hence f is a RC -function with V2 as a -set of G .

Theorem 3
For any non-trivial tree T ,

RC ( Pp ) = p
=

if

p 2.

RC (T ) = 2 ( T )

if and only if

p +1 if p = 3 . 2 2. RC ( C p ) = p 1 if p = 3 .
=p 3. 4. 5.

every non end vertex of T is adjacent to at least one end vertex. Proof: Let

H1 = {vi ;1 i p} and H 2 = {v j ;1 j p} f = (V0 ,V1 , V2 ) be a RC -

RC (W p ) = 1 .

if

p 3.

be the set of non end vertices adjacent to at least one end vertex and the set of non end vertices which are not adjacent to end vertex respectively. Let function of G . Suppose H 2 and

RC ( K1, p ) = 0 + 1 .

. Let D and DC be a -set

RC ( K p ) = + 1 .

C -set of G

respectively. Then we have following cases.

Case 1: Suppose

H 2 = 1 or 2. Then we have two sub cases.

__________________________________________________________________________________________
Volume: 02 Issue: 10 | Oct-2013, Available @ http://www.ijret.org 334

IJRET: International Journal of Research in Engineering and Technology

eISSN: 2319-1163 | pISSN: 2321-7308

Subcase 1.1: Assume H 2

= 1 . Let

{u} N ( H1 ) . Then {u} V1 but that RC (T ) > 2 (T ) , a contradiction.

Subcase 1.2: Assume

{u} H 2 such that {u} D which gives

Proof: Let

f = (V0 ,V1 , V2 ) be a RC -function of G . Since

V2 dominates V0 , the connected induced subgraph of

(V1 V2 ) is a CRDF of G .

{v1 , v2 } H 2 such that {v1 , v2 } N ( H1 ) . Then {v1 , v2 } V1 but {v1 , v2 } D , which gives RC (T ) > 2 ( T ) , a contradiction.
H 2 = 2 and

Therefore,

( G ) V1 V2 V1 + 2 V2 RC ( G ) . RC ( G ) . Let D
and

Now we consider the following cases to establish the upper bound for

DC be a -set and C -set

Case 2: Suppose

{v {v }} D which
l 3l

{vl ;1 l n} {vk } , {vl } V1 . But

gives,

H 2 = k and {vk ;3 k n} H 2 . Then

respectively in

G . Then we have following cases.

{v3l } D and RC (T ) > (T ) again a

H 2 = . Then
Hence

Case 1: Suppose

S2 = {v1 , v2 ,......, vi } , 1 i n be the set of nonend

vertices which are adjacent to at least one end vertex and the set of nonend vertices which are not adjacent to end vertices respectively. Then

G is a tree. Let S1 = {v1 , v2 ,......, vn } and

contradiction. For the converse from the above all cases, let

S1 = V2

S2 = V1

and

vi = V2 = D = DC .

V0 = V ( S1 S2 ) .
Hence

Rc (T ) = 2 V2 + V1 = 2 DC + = 2 D = 2 (T ) .
Theorem 4:
For any connected graph with

RC ( G ) V1 V2 V1 + 2 V2 = 3 D 3 ( G ) .
G is not a tree and N = {v1 , v2 ,......, vn }

(G ) RC ( G ) + p +1 . 2
Proof: Let Further the

p3

vertices,

Case 2: Suppose

be the set of all end vertices. Then we have following subcases. Subcase2.1: Assume N , let

D = {vi ;1 i n} and DC = {v j ;1 j n} be

f = (V0 ,V1 , V2 ) be a RC -function of G .

H1 = {v1 , v2 ,......, vk } DC S2 be the set nonend

vertices with at least one private neighbor in

V DC and

{ui } D has at least one private neighbor in V D C . Then {ui } V2 and ( DC {ui }) V1 . Suppose there exists {vi } D with no neighbor in V D C . Then {vi } V1
Suppose

-set and C -set of G respectively such that D D C .

H 2 DC S 2 be the set of nonend vertices with no private

neighbor in Hence

V DC . Then ( S1 H1 ) V2 and H 2 V1 .

RC ( G ) V1 V2 = V1 + 2 V2 3 D = 3 ( G ) .
Assume N = . Then S1

Subcase2.2:

Let

(G ) Hence RC ( G ) + V1 + 2 V2 + 1 p + 1 2
Theorem 5:
For any graph G ,

H1 , H 2 DC S 2 such that H1 has at least one private

neighbor in

V DC and H 2 has no private neighbor in

V DC . Clearly H 2 V1 and H1 V2 .
Hence RC

( G ) RC ( G ) 3 ( G ) .

( G ) = V1 V2

= V1 + 2 V2 3 D = 3 ( G )

__________________________________________________________________________________________
Volume: 02 Issue: 10 | Oct-2013, Available @ http://www.ijret.org 335

IJRET: International Journal of Research in Engineering and Technology

eISSN: 2319-1163 | pISSN: 2321-7308

Theorem 6:
For any tree T ,

hence

there

exists

RC (T ) = iR (T )

if and only if every

nonend vertex of T is adjacent to exactly two end vertices or if every nonend vertex of T is adjacent to at least three vertices, then they are not adjacent. Proof: Suppose there exists at least one nonend vertex of T , which is adjacent to only one end vertex. Let I be the minimal independent Roman dominating set of T and

{w} V2 . Clearly RC (T ) = iR (T ) .
Theorem 7:

{w} N ( x ) N ( y )
V1 V2 = V V .
' 1 ' 2

such

that Hence

Let G = K m1 , m2 , m3 ,........, mn be the complete with a. If b. If

n -partite graph

f = (V0 , V1 , V2 ) be a RC -function of T . Further let

I 2 V2 in iR (T ) and RC (T ) . But I1 V1 and

m1 m2 ........ mn . m1 = 1 , then RC ( G ) = 2 .

I1 , I 2 I with I1 = V1 and I 2 = V2 . Then each vertex

of

m2 2 , then RC ( G ) = 4 . m1 and N = V M ,

RC (T ) , which gives RC (T ) > iR (T ) , a contradiction.

Suppose there exists a nonend vertex

N ( I1 ) V0 in iR (T ) , whereas N ( I1 ) V2 and I1 V0 in

Proof: a. This case is obvious. b. Let M be the partite set of size further

{vi ;1 i n} adjacent to at least three end vertices such that at least two vertices of {vi } are adjacent and { N} be the set of end vertices of T . Let A = {vi } . Then each vertex of A V2 in RC (T ) . But for the pair of adjacent vertices ( u, v ) A with deg u deg v , we have u V2 , v V0 and {N ( v ) { N }} V1 in iR ( T ) . Since each vertex of A is adjacent to at least three end vertices, deg ( v ) 3 which gives, RC ( T ) < iR ( T ) , a contradiction.
Conversely, let
'

set

u M and v N such that f ( u ) = f ( v ) = 2 . While every other vertex w is in either M or N , let f ( w ) = 0 . If there exists a vertex w M V0 , then there
must exists a vertex

RC ( G ) = 4 .
Theorem 8:
Let Then

z {V2 ( M {w})} . Since f is an CRDF, we have

y V0 ( N { x} ) , then there must exists a vertex

x N V2 . If there also exists a vertex

be

any

tree

with

and f = V0 , V1 , V2 be a
' ' '

iR (T ) - function of T . Assume statement of the Theorem holds. Let I be the minimal independent Roman dominating set of T . Further {n1} and

f = (V0 ,V1 , V2 ) be a RC -function of T

(T ) + t (T ) RC (T )

p>3

vertices.

Proof: Let T be any tree with p > 3 vertices. Suppose

D = {v1 , v2 ,......, vn } and Dt = {v1 , v2 ,......, vi } where

{S1 , S2 } {n1} ' ' ' such that {S1} {V2 } and {S 2 } {V0 } . If {S1} V2 . ' Then {S1} {V2 } . If {S 2 } {V0 } . Then for each {ui } {S2 } , there exists exactly two neighbors ( x, y ) { N (ui ) { N }} such that ( x y ) V1' . Since ' each {ui } of {S2 } has exactly two neighbors ( x, y ) in V1 ,
respectively. Then or V0 . Let
'

{ N}

be the set of non end vertices and end vertices

{n1} V2'

{ui } D Dt of T adjacent to at least one end vertex such that {ui } V2 and also there may exists a nonend vertex set {vi } V ({ui } V0 ) which are not adjacent to end vertex such that {vi } V1 .Which gives, D + Dt V1 V2 . Hence (T ) + t (T ) RC (T ) .
there exists a vertex set

1 i n be the -set and t -set of G respectively. Then

__________________________________________________________________________________________
Volume: 02 Issue: 10 | Oct-2013, Available @ http://www.ijret.org 336

IJRET: International Journal of Research in Engineering and Technology

eISSN: 2319-1163 | pISSN: 2321-7308

Theorem 9:
Let

Subcase 1.2: Assume two vertices of

' 0

RC ( G ) = ( G ) + C ( G ) .

G be any graph with ( G ) = C ( G ) . Then

Proof: It is sufficient to prove this result for any connected graphs G . Let G be any connected graph with

( G ) = C ( G ) and D = {v1 , v2 ,......, vn } be the set of vertices of G which forms -set for G . Since ( G ) = C ( G ) . Hence D also forms a connected
G . Suppose f = (V0 ,V1 , V2 ) is a CRDF of

{uk } which are adjacent in G . Then {uk } V or V2' . If {uk } V0' . Then there exists {vi } { N ( uk ) (V DC )} such that {vi } V1' . But {uk } V2 and {vi } V0 , which gives, RC ( G ) > R ( G ) , ' a contradiction. If {uk } V2 , then there exists at least two ' vertices of {u j } { N ( uk ) DC } such that {u j } V0 .
But for every uk u j V1 ,

{uk ;1 k n} , there exists at least

dominating set of

G . Then V0 = V D , V1 = and D = V2 . Hence

RC ( G ) > R ( G ) , a contradiction.
Case 2: Suppose there exists at least one vertex has no neighbors in If

which

gives

RC ( G ) = V1 + 2 V2 = 2 D = D + D = ( G ) + C ( G )
. Observation: For any graph

G , R ( G ) RC ( G ) .

Theorem 10:
Let

be

any

connected

RC ( G ) = R ( G )
C -set of G .
Proof: Let

( p, q )

graph.

Then of

if and only if every vertex

{vi }

DC

has at least two private neighbors in

V DC , where DC is a

{wi } V0' . Then {wi } V1 , again RC ( G ) > R ( G ) , a ' ' contradiction. If {wi } V1 or V2 . Then there exists at least ' two vertices of {w j } N ( wi ) such that {w j } V0 . But {w j N ( w j )} V1 , which gives RC ( G ) > R (G ) , a
contradiction. Hence in all cases, we have

V DC . Then {wi } V0' or V1' or V2' .

{wi } which

f = {V0 ,V1 ,V2 } and g = {V , V , V

' 0 ' 1

' 2

RC ( G ) > R ( G ) ,
of

be a

contradiction. Conversely, let every vertex private neighbors in

RC -function

and

DC = {v1 , v2 ,.......vn } be a C -set of G . Then we consider

R -function

of

G respectively. Assume

{vi }
also

DC has at least two

Then

the following cases. Case 1: Suppose there exists at least one vertex with exactly one private neighbor in

V DC .

{ui } of

DC

{uk } {ui } , we consider following sub cases.

Subcase 1.1: Assume no two vertices of

V DC . Then for every

{ N (vi ) V DC } V0 , { N (vi ) V DC } V0' .

Hence

{vi } V2'

{vi } V2 and
and

RC ( G ) = V1 V2 = V1' V2' = R ( G ) .

{uk } are adjacent in ' G . Then {uk } V0 and { N ( uk ) (V DC )} V1' . But {uk } V2 and { N ( uk ) (V DC )} V0 , which gives, RC ( G ) > R ( G ) , a contradiction.

We need the following Theorem to prove further Theorem

Theorem A [2]:
For any connected graph

G with

(G ) t (G ) C (G ) .

(G ) < p 1 ,

__________________________________________________________________________________________
Volume: 02 Issue: 10 | Oct-2013, Available @ http://www.ijret.org 337

IJRET: International Journal of Research in Engineering and Technology

eISSN: 2319-1163 | pISSN: 2321-7308

Theorem 11:
Let

Proof: We consider a minimal connected dominating set of

DC

G be any connected graph with ( G ) < p 1 .

Then RC

(G ) C (G ) + t (G )
= {v1 , v2 ,......., vn }

G . Hence DC (V1 V2 ) . Suppose V1 = . Then

{DC } V2 ,
Suppose which gives . Hence

G . Since each vertex of DC connected dominating set of

V2 = DC . V1 + V2 = DC .
Clearly

Proof: Let Suppose DC

f = {V0 ,V1 , V2 } be a RC -function of G .

and

RC ( G ) = 2 V2 = 2 DC
V1 .

RC ( G ) = 2 C ( G ) .
Clearly

t -set respectively. Then t ( G ) C ( G ) . We consider the

following cases. Case 1: Suppose following subcases. Subcase 1.1: Assume

Dt = {v1 , v2 ,......., vi } , where 1 i n be the C -set and

Then

RC ( G ) = V1 + 2 V2 < 2 V1 + 2 V2 = 2 V1 + V2 = 2 DC . Hence RC ( G ) < 2 C ( G ) . Thus RC ( G ) 2 C ( G )

Theorem 13:

t (G ) = C (G ) .

Then

{DC } V2 or

(V1 V2 ) and {V DC } V0 . Again we consider the

DC = V2 . Then V1 = and

G be any connected graph. If DRC is a minimal connected Roman dominating function of G and for every {vi } DRC there exists at least one vertex of
Let

V DC = V0 .
Hence

N ( vi ) V DRC .

RC ( G ) = 2 V2 = 2 DC = DC + Dt = C ( G ) + t ( G )
DC = V1 V2 .

Then

V DRC is Roman dominating function of G

Proof: Let Subcase 1.2: Assume Then Thus . Case 2: Suppose Then function of

G . Suppose for each {vi } DRC , there exists at

DRC be a minimal connected Roman dominating

V DC = V0 .

least one vertex Then

RC ( G ) = 2 V2 + V1 2 V2 + V1 = 2 DC = DC + Dt

{ui } is not dominated by V DRC . Hence V DRC is not a RDF of G . Thus for each {vi } DRC , there exists at = C (G ) + t (G ) least one vertex of N ( vi ) V DRC . Clearly DRC is a
minimal

{ui } N ( vi )

such that

{ui } V DRC .

{vi } V2 or V1 and DC {vi } V1 . t ( G ) < C ( G ) . Hence there exists at least one {v j } {vi } and {v j } DC such that {v j } V1 .

t ( G ) < C ( G ) , let {vi } Dt DC .

Since vertex

V DRC

connected Roman dominating function is Roman dominating function of G .

and

Definition: A graph if

RC ( G ) = 2 ( G ) .

G is said to be Roman connected graph

Hence

RC ( G ) = 2 V2 + V1 DC + Dt = C ( G ) + t ( G ) .
f = (V0 ,V1 , V2 )

Now we characterize the Roman connected graphs in the following Theorem.

Theorem 14:
A graph

Theorem 12:
Let be a

RC -function

of

G.

G is Roman connected graph if and only if it has a RC -function f = (V0 ,V1 , V2 ) with V1 = . G be a graph and f = (V0 ,V1 , V2 ) be a RC G . If V1 = , by definition of RC ( G ) , V2
338

Then RC

( G ) 2 C ( G )

Proof: Let function of

__________________________________________________________________________________________
Volume: 02 Issue: 10 | Oct-2013, Available @ http://www.ijret.org

IJRET: International Journal of Research in Engineering and Technology

eISSN: 2319-1163 | pISSN: 2321-7308

dominates of

V V2 . Otherwise a connected induced subgraph

dominates

( G ) V1 V2 = V1 + V2 V1 + 2 V2 = Rc ( G ) .
We consider the following cases. Case 1: Suppose

V1 V2

V (V1 V2 )

V2 = ( G ) . Any other arrangement of weight 2 ( G )

would have For 1, since [3],

and

hence

V1 + V2 < 2 ( G ) .

V2 = . Then V1 = V . By a Theorem of Ore

V1 and D be a -set of G . Let

Then

v V1

and v D .

2 ( G ) < 2 V1 V2 ,

contradiction. Case 2: Suppose

V1 and v D . Then there exists at

p for a connected graph G on p vertices. 2 p Thus p = ( G ) + 1 + 1 , which implies that p 2 . It 2 is easily verified that RC ( P 2 ) = 2 = 2 ( P 2 ) and P 2 has a

(G )

least two neighbors of

{ui } D ,
Since

which

{ui } N ( v ) such that {ui } V1 and gives again, 2 ( G ) < 2 V1 V2 , a

vertex of degree 1. For 2, Let weight

contradiction.

2 ( G ) with V1 = and V2 = ( G ) . Since

f = {V0 ,V1 , V2 } be a RC -function for G of

G is Roman connected. Then V1 = .

f = (V0 ,V1 , V2 ) be a RC -function of G

V1 = , each edge of

deg(v) = V0 = p V1 V2 = p V2 = p ( G ) .

G joins V2 and V2 . Hence

Conversely, let with

V1 = . Therefore RC ( G ) = 2 V2 . Since V1 = ,

Theorem 16:
Let T be any tree with every nonend vertex of T is adjacent to at least one end vertex. Then the set of cut vertices of T .

by Theorem 2, Thus

RC ( G ) = 2 V2 = 2 ( G ) .

V2 is a -set of G such that V2 = ( G ) .

Hence

RC (T ) = 2C , where C

is

G is

Roman

connected graph.

Theorem 15:
For any connected graph

G with

RC ( G ) = 2 ( G )
p (G ) .

p 2 vertices,

f = (V0 ,V1 , V2 ) be a RC -function of T . Since each nonend vertex of T is adjacent to at least one end vertex. By definition of RC ( G ) , there exists a connected Roman
Proof: Let dominating set that

if and only if

v V with degree

V1 = , where C and { N} are the set of cut vertices and

DRC V2 and N ( DRC ) { N } V0 such

Proof: Suppose such that

V0 = V {v} . Then V2 is a -set of

v V ( G ) . If

G has a vertex v with degree p ( G )

V2 = {v} ,
V1 =
and

end vertices of T respectively. Clearly

C = V2 . Hence

RC (T ) = 2 V2 = 2C .
REFERENCES [1]
M. Adabi, E. Ebrahimi Targhi, N. Jafari and M. Said Moradi, Properties of independent Roman domination in graphs, Australasian Journal of Combinatorics, 52(2012),11-48. T.W. Haynes, S. T. Hedetniemi and P. J. Slater, Fundamentals of Domination in graphs, Marcel Dekker, New York, (1998). O. Ore, Theory of graphs, Amer. Math. Soc. Colloq. Publ.,38, providence, (1962).

G and

RC ( G ) 2 ( G ) function of G .
In order to CRDF either 1.

f = {V0 ,V1 ,V2 } is an CRDF with f (V ) = 2 ( G ) . Since

for connected graphs,

f is a RC [2]
[3]

V1 = ( G ) + 1 and V2 = or 2. V1 = and

f = {V0 ,V1 ,V2 } to have weight 2 ( G )

__________________________________________________________________________________________
Volume: 02 Issue: 10 | Oct-2013, Available @ http://www.ijret.org 339

IJRET: International Journal of Research in Engineering and Technology [4] [5] [6]

eISSN: 2319-1163 | pISSN: 2321-7308

C. S Revelle, K. E. Rosing, Defendens imperium Romanum; a classical problem in military strategy, Amer. Math. Monthly,107(2007),585-594. I. Stewart, Defend the Roman Empire!, Sci. Amer, 281(6)(1999), 136-139. D. B. West, Introduction to graph theory, ( 2 Prentice Hall, USA (2001).
nd

edition),

__________________________________________________________________________________________
Volume: 02 Issue: 10 | Oct-2013, Available @ http://www.ijret.org 340