
Citation: Tammy M. Milillo, Gaurav Sinha, Joseph A. Gardella Jr.. Determining site-specific background level with geostatistics for remediation of heavy metals in neighborhood soils[J]. AIMS Environmental Science, 2017, 4(2): 323-347. doi: 10.3934/environsci.2017.2.323
[1] | Felipe Bastos, Adeildo Cabral, Perboyre Alcântara, Lino Maia . Study case about the production of masonry concrete blocks with CDW and kaolin mining waste. AIMS Materials Science, 2021, 8(6): 990-1004. doi: 10.3934/matersci.2021060 |
[2] | Hashem Al-Mattarneh, Musab Abuaddous, Rabah Ismail, Ahmad B. Malkawi, Yaser Jaradat, Hamsa Nimer, Mohanad Khodier . Performance of concrete paving materials incorporating biomass olive oil waste ash and nano-silica. AIMS Materials Science, 2024, 11(5): 1035-1055. doi: 10.3934/matersci.2024049 |
[3] | Salmia Beddu, Mushtaq Ahmad, Daud Mohamad, Muhamed Imran bin Noorul Ameen, Zarina Itam, Nur Liyana Mohd Kamal, Nur Amalina Nadiah Basri . Utilization of fly ash cenosphere to study mechanical and thermal properties of lightweight concrete. AIMS Materials Science, 2020, 7(6): 911-925. doi: 10.3934/matersci.2020.6.911 |
[4] | M. Achyutha Kumar Reddy, V. Ranga Rao, K. Naga Chaitanya, Veerendrakumar C. Khed . Optimization of Bentocrete parameters using Response Surface Methodology (RSM). AIMS Materials Science, 2021, 8(2): 221-246. doi: 10.3934/matersci.2021015 |
[5] | Stelladriana Volpe, Andrea Petrella, Valentino Sangiorgio, Michele Notarnicola, Francesco Fiorito . Preparation and characterization of novel environmentally sustainable mortars based on magnesium potassium phosphate cement for additive manufacturing. AIMS Materials Science, 2021, 8(4): 640-658. doi: 10.3934/matersci.2021039 |
[6] | Filipe Figueiredo, Pamela da Silva, Eriton R. Botero, Lino Maia . Concrete with partial replacement of natural aggregate by PET aggregate—An exploratory study about the influence in the compressive strength. AIMS Materials Science, 2022, 9(2): 172-183. doi: 10.3934/matersci.2022011 |
[7] | Grzegorz Ludwik Golewski . Mechanical properties and brittleness of concrete made by combined fly ash, silica fume and nanosilica with ordinary Portland cement. AIMS Materials Science, 2023, 10(3): 390-404. doi: 10.3934/matersci.2023021 |
[8] | M. Kanta Rao, Ch. N. Satish Kumar . Influence of fly ash on hydration compounds of high-volume fly ash concrete. AIMS Materials Science, 2021, 8(2): 301-320. doi: 10.3934/matersci.2021020 |
[9] | Aleksei V. Shiverskii, Aleksandr V. Kukharskii, Stepan V. Lomov, Sergey G. Abaimov . Recycling glass fiber-reinforced plastic in asphalt concrete production. AIMS Materials Science, 2024, 11(2): 231-242. doi: 10.3934/matersci.2024013 |
[10] | Temitope Awolusi, Marc Azab, Oussama Accouche, Precious Ajayi, Emeka Nnochiri . Effect of binder-aggregate ratio and glass powder on the performance of concrete cured in different media. AIMS Materials Science, 2025, 12(1): 68-84. doi: 10.3934/matersci.2025006 |
In recent years, there is an increased demand for the application of mathematics. Graph theory has proven to be particularly useful to a large number of rather diverse fields. As a useful tool for dealing with relations of events, graph theory has rapidly grown in theoretical results as well as its applications to real-life problems. One concept that pervades all the graph theory is that of distance, and distance is used in isomorphism testing, graph operations, maximal and minimal problems on connectivity and diameter. Several parameters related to distances in graphs are highly attracting the attention of several researchers. One of them, namely, the metric dimension, has specifically centered several investigations.
The concept of metric dimension was introduced by Slater [23] in 1975 in which he used the term locating set in connection with some location problems in graphs. Harary and Melter [7] also studied the same concept and used the term resolving set. After these two pioneering papers, a lot of work on this invariant has been done concerning applications as well as theory. The families of graphs with constant metric dimensions have been characterized by many different authors, one can see [9,10]. There are a lot of variants of the standard metric dimension, such as local metric dimension, strong metric dimension, fractional metric dimension, fault-tolerant metric dimension and many more have been studied in [1,8,15,16,18]. In 2000, Chartrand et al. [3] determined all connected graphs of order n having metric dimension 1, n−1 or n−2. Some other interesting results on the metric dimension and references can be found in [5,11,17,19,21].
In 2018, the new parameter edge metric dimension has been introduced by Kelenc [12] in which they determined the value for wheel graphs and fan graphs. They studied that the wheel graphs of order n≥6 and the fan graphs of order n≥5 have edge metric dimension n−2. Nasir et al. [14] also determined the edge metric dimension for two families when G is an n-sunlet graph and a prism graph. Zubrilina et al. [25] characterized the graphs for which the edge metric dimension of graphs is n−1. They also proposed an open problem: For which graphs G of order n, the edge metric dimension is n−2? Recently, Wei et al. [24] gave the characterization of all connected bipartite graphs with edge metric dimension n−2, which partially answers an open problem of Zubrilina et al. [25]. They also investigated the relationship between the edge metric dimension and the clique number of a graph G.
In this paper, we consider the problem of computing the metric dimension and edge metric dimension of windmill graphs and certain generalizations of these graphs. Applications of this optimization problem arise in diverse areas. See [3] for an application of this problem in pharmaceutical chemistry, [22] for coin weighing problem, [13] for robot navigation, [2] for network discovery and verification, [20] for connected joins in graphs, and [4] for strategies for the mastermind game. See [6] for an application of windmill graphs in networks.
A graph G=(V,E) is an ordered pair consisting of a nonempty set V=V(G) of elements called vertices and a set E=E(G) of unordered pairs of vertices called edges. For distinct vertices v1 and v2, the distance between v1 and v2, denoted by d(v1,v2), is the length of the shortest path connecting v1 and v2. Let d(v,e) denotes the distance between edge e and vertex v, defined as d(v,e)=min{d(v,a),d(v,b)}, where e=ab. A vertex v distinguishes two edges e1 and e2, if d(e1,v)≠d(e2,v). G is called a complete graph if every pair of vertices is joined by exactly one edge. A complete graph of order n is denoted by Kn. A graph G with n vertices (n≥3) and n edges is called a cyclic graph if all its edges form a cycle of length n. It is denoted by Cn. G is a bipartite graph means that vertex sets can be partitioned into two subsets U and W, called partite sets, such that every edge of G joins a vertex of U and a vertex of W. If every vertex of U is adjacent to every vertex of W, G is called a complete bipartite graph, where U and W are independent. A star graph is a complete bipartite graph in which (n−1) vertices have a degree 1 and a single vertex has a degree (n−1). It is denoted by Sn.
Let R={r1,r2,…,rk} be an ordered set of vertices of G and let v be a vertex of G. The representation r(v|R) of v with respect to R is the k-tuple (d(v,r1),d(v,r2),…,d(v,rk)). If distinct vertices of G have distinct representation with respect to R, then R is called a resolving set for G. A resolving set of minimum cardinality is a metric basis for G, and its cardinality is called the metric dimension of G, denoted by dim(G).
Let RE={x1,x2,…,xk} be an ordered set in V(G) and let e∈E(G). The representation r(e|RE) of e with respect to RE is the k-tuple (d(e,x1),d(e,x2),...,d(e,xk)). If distinct edges of G have distinct representation with respect to RE, then RE is called an edge metric generator for G. An edge metric generator of minimum cardinality is an edge metric basis for G, and its cardinality is called edge metric dimension of G, denoted by edim(G).
Throughout this paper, the French star windmill graph is denoted by SWmn, French cyclic windmill graph by CWmn and French complete windmill graph by KWmn wherein the shared vertex of French windmill graph (Wmn) is replaced by star graph, cyclic graph and complete graph respectively. We also denote the Dutch star windmill graph by SDmn, Dutch cyclic windmill graph by CDmn and Dutch complete windmill graph by KDmn wherein the shared vertex of Dutch windmill graph (Dmn) is replaced by star graph, cyclic graph, and complete graph respectively.
In this section we discuss French windmill graph (see, Figure 1) and certain generalizations of this graph.
The French windmill graph, Wmn, n≥3,m≥2 is the graph obtained by taking m copies of the complete graph (Kn) joined at a shared universal vertex. It has m(n−1)+1 vertices and mn(n−1)/2 edges. For our purpose, we denote the complete subgraphs of Wmn by Win,i=1,2,…m, the shared vertex by c, the vertices of Win by {ai1,ai2,…,ain−1,c}, Vi, n∗, n∗∗ by {ai1,ai2,…,ain−1}, n,n,…,n⏟n−2 times, n,n,…,n⏟n−1 times respectively.
In the following theorems, we compute the metric dimension and edge metric dimension of French windmill graph.
Theorem 2.1. The metric dimension of French windmill graph is m(n−2).
Proof. Let R be the resolving set of French windmill graph (Wmn). We can assume that there exist some x,y∈Vi for some i, such that x,y∉R. Then r(x|R)=r(y|R), which is a contradiction. Now, let R0={ai1,ai2,…,ain−2}, i=1,2,…,m. Representation of vertices of Wmn with respect to R0 are
r(ain−1|R0)=(2∗,…,1∗⏟ith tuple,2∗,…,2∗),r(c|R0)=(1∗,1∗,…,1∗). |
Since there is no vertex having same representation, so R0 is a resolving set of Wmn. Hence dim(Wmn)=m(n−2).
Theorem 2.2. The edge metric dimension of French windmill graph is m(n−1)−1.
Proof. Let RE be the edge metric basis of Wmn. We claim that it contains all vertices from ⋃Vi except one. Suppose on the contrary that there exist x,y∈⋃Vi such that x,y∉RE. We have two cases:
1) when x∈Vi and y∈Vj, then r(cx|RE)=r(cy|RE)
2) when x,y∈Vi, then r(cx|RE)=r(cy|RE)
which is a contradiction. Now, let R′E=⋃iVi∖{a11}. Representation of edges of Wmn with respect to R′E are
r(a1ja11|R′E)=(1,…,0,1,…,1⏟1st tuple,2∗∗,…,2∗∗),r(aijc|R′E)=(1∗,…,1,…,0,1,…,1⏟ith tuple,1∗∗,…,1∗∗),r(a11c|R′E)=(1∗,1∗∗,…,1∗∗). |
Since there is no edge having same representation, so R′E is an edge metric generator of Wmn. Hence edim(Wmn)=m(n−1)−1.
The following lemmas show that the metric dimension and edge metric dimension of generalizations of French windmill graph (discussed in this section) is at least m(n−2).
Lemma 2.3. The metric dimension of SWmn, CWmn, andKWmn is at least m(n−2).
Proof. We can assume that there exist some x,y∈Vi for some i, such that x,y∉R. Then r(x|R)=r(y|R), which is a contradiction.
Lemma 2.4. The edge metric dimension of SWmn, CWmn, andKWmn is at least m(n−2).
Proof. We can assume that there exist x,y∈Vi for some i, such that x,y∉RE. Then r(ainx|RE)=r(ainy|RE), which is a contradiction.
Let SWmn be a graph obtained by replacing the shared vertex of French windmill graph with a star graph Sm (see, Figure 2). It has mn+1 vertices and mn(n−1)2+m edges. For our sake, we denote the complete subgraphs of SWmn by Win and its vertices as {ai1,ai2,…,ain−1,ain}. In the following results, we compute the metric dimension and edge metric dimension of this graph.
Theorem 2.5. The metric dimension of SWmn is m(n−2).
Proof. By Lemma 2.3, we have dim(SWmn)≥m(n−2). Now, let R0={ai1,ai2,…,ain−2}, i=1,2,…,m. Representation of vertices of SWmn with respect to R0 are
r(ain−1|R0)=(4∗,…,1∗⏟ith tuple,4∗,…,4∗),r(ain|R0)=(3∗,…,1∗⏟ith tuple,3∗,…,3∗),r(c|R0)=(2∗,2∗,…,2∗). |
Therefore R0 is a resolving set of SWmn. Hence dim(SWmn)=m(n−2).
Theorem 2.6. The edge metric dimension of SWmn is m(n−2).
Proof. By Lemma 2.4, we have edim(SWmn)≥m(n−2). Now, let R′E={ai1,ai2,…,ain−2}, i=1,2,…,m. Representation of edges of SWmn with respect to R′E are
r(aijain−1|R′E)=(4∗,…,1,…,0,1,…,1⏟ith tuple,4∗,…,4∗),r(aijain|R′E)=(3∗,…,1,…,0,1,…,1⏟ith tuple,3∗,…,3∗),r(ain−1ain|R′E)={3∗,…,1∗⏟ith tuple,3∗,…,3∗},r(cain|R′E)={2∗,…,1∗⏟ith tuple,2∗,…,2∗}. |
which implies that edim(SWmn)≤m(n−2). Therefore, edim(SWmn)=m(n−2).
Let CWmn be a graph obtained by replacing the shared vertex of French windmill graph with a cycle graph (see, Figure 3). It has mn vertices and mn(n−1)2+m edges. For our sake, we denote the complete subgraphs of CWmn by Win and its vertices as ai1,ai2,…,ain−1,ain. Now we determine the metric dimension and edge metric dimension of this graph.
Theorem 2.7. The metric dimension of CWmn is m(n−2).
Proof. Let R0={ai1,ai2,…,ain−2}, i=1,2,…,m and xk=d(ain|akn). Then representation of vertices of CWmn are
r(ain−1|R0)=((x1+2)∗,(x2+2)∗,…,1∗⏟ith tuple,…,(xm+2)∗),r(ain|R0)=((x1+1)∗,(x2+1)∗,…,1∗⏟ith tuple,…,(xm+1)∗). |
It implies that dim(CWmn)≤m(n−2). Also, from Lemma 2.3, we have dim(CWmn)≥m(n−2). Therefore, dim(CWmn)=m(n−2).
Theorem 2.8. The edge metric dimension of CWmn is m(n−2).
Proof. Let R′E={ai1,ai2,…,ain−2}, i=1,2,…,m. Representation of edges of CWmn with respect to R′E are as follows
r(ain−1ain|R′E)=((x1+1)∗,(x2+1)∗,…,1∗⏟ith tuple,…,(xm+1)∗),r(ainai+1n|R′E)=((x′1+1)∗,(x′2+1)∗,…,1∗,1∗⏟ith and (i+1)th tuple,…,(x′m+1)∗), |
where x′k=min{(d(ain|akn)),(d(ai+1n|akn)). It implies that edim(CWmn)≤m(n−2). Also, from Lemma 2.4, we have edim(CWmn)≥m(n−2). Therefore, edim(CWmn)=m(n−2).
Let KWmn be a graph obtained by replacing the shared vertex of windmill graph with a complete graph Km (see, Figure 4). It has mn vertices and mn(n−1)2+m(m−1)2 edges. For our sake, we denote the complete subgraphs of KWmn by Win and its vertices as ai1,ai2,…,ain−1,ain. Now we determine the metric dimension and edge metric dimension of this graph.
Theorem 2.9. The metric dimension of KWmn is m(n−2).
Proof. By Lemma 2.3, we have dim(KWmn)≥m(n−2). Also, let R0={ai1,ai2,…,ain−2}, i=1,2,…,m. Representation of vertices of KWmn with respect to R0 are
r(ain−1|R0)=(3∗,…,1∗⏟ith tuple,3∗,…,3∗),r(ain|R0)=(2∗,…,1∗⏟ith tuple,2∗,…,2∗) |
which implies that R0 is a resolving set and dim(KWmn)≤m(n−2). Therefore, dim(KWmn)=m(n−2).
Theorem 2.10. The edge metric dimension of KWmn is m(n−2).
Proof. By Lemma 2.4, we have edim(KWmn)≥m(n−2). Also, let R′E={ai1,ai2,…,ain−2}, i=1,2,…,m, we claim that R′E is an edge metric generator of KWmn. Representation of edges of KWmn with respect to R′E are
r(aijain−1|R′E)=(3∗,…,1,…,0,1,…,1⏟ith tuple,3∗,…,3∗),r(aijain|R′E)=(2∗,…,1,…,0,1,…,1⏟ith tuple,2∗,…,2∗),r(ain−1ain|R′E)=(3∗,…,1∗⏟ith tuple,3∗,…,3∗),r(ainakn|R′E)=(2∗,…,1∗⏟ith tuple,2∗,…,1∗⏟kth tuple,2∗,…,2∗). |
which implies that R′E is an edge metric generator and edim(KWmn)≤m(n−2). Therefore, edim(KWmn)=m(n−2).
In this section, Dutch windmill graph (see, Figure 5) and certain generalizations of this graph are discussed.
The Dutch windmill graph, Dmn, n≥3,m≥2 is the graph obtained by taking m copies of the cycle graph Cn joined at a shared universal vertex. It has m(n−1)+1 vertices and mn edges. For our purpose, we denote the cycle subgraphs of Dmn by Din,i=1,2,…m, the shared vertex by c, and the vertices of Din by ai1,ai2,…,ain−1,c. In the following theorems, we compute the metric dimension and edge metric dimension of Dutch windmill graph.
Theorem 3.1. The metric dimension of Dutch windmill graph is:
dim(Dmn)={m,if n is odd2m−1,otherwise. |
Proof. 1). When n is odd: Let R be any resolving set of Dmn. Assume that there exist some Vi with no vertex in R, then
r(ai1|R)=r(ain−1|R) |
which is a contradiction. Therefore, dim(Dmn)≥m. Let R0={ai⌈n2⌉}, i=1,2,…,m. We have,
d(aij|ak⌈n2⌉})={⌊n2⌋+j,j<⌈n2⌉n−j+⌊n2⌋j>⌈n2⌉d(aij|ai⌈n2⌉})={⌈n2⌉−j,if j<⌈n2⌉j−⌈n2⌉,if j>⌈n2⌉ |
Representation of vertices of Dmn with respect to R0 are
r(aij|R0)={(⌊n2⌋+j,…,⌈n2⌉−j⏟ith tuple,⌊n2⌋+j,…,⌊n2⌋+j),if j<⌈n2⌉(n−j+⌊n2⌋,…,j−⌈n2⌉⏟ith tuple,n−j+⌊n2⌋,…,n−j+⌊n2⌋),if j>⌈n2⌉r(c|R0)=(⌊n2⌋,⌊n2⌋,…,⌊n2⌋). |
Let aj1,aj2∈Dmn be any two vertices, then we have the following cases:
Case 1. When the vertices belong to different sets, say Vi and Vk, then r(aij1|R0)≠r(akj2|R0)
Case 2. When vertices belong to same sets, then we have two subcases
a) when j1,j2<⌈n2⌉(or>⌈n2⌉) then r(aij1|R0)≠r(aij2|R0)
b) when j1<⌈n2⌉, j2>⌈n2⌉. Suppose r(aij1|R0)=r(aij2|R0), then ⌊n2⌋+j1=n−j2+⌊n2⌋ and ⌈n2⌉−j1=j2−⌈n2⌉, which implies n=j1+j2 and n=j1+j2−1, which is a contradiction. Therefore r(aij1|R0)≠r(aij2|R0) for all j1,j2. Since every vertex of Dmn has unique representation with respect to R0 which implies that dim(Dmn)≤m. Therefore, dim(Dmn)=m.
2). When n is even: First, we claim that any resolving set R of Dmn contains at least two vertices from each set Vi except one. Suppose on the contrary that there exist two sets say Vi and Vj with only one vertex in R. Without loss of generality, suppose ai1,aj1∈R, then r(ain−1|R)=r(ajn−1|R), which is a contradiction. Therefore, dim(Dmn)≥2m−1. Let R0={a11,a21,…,am1,a1n−1,a2n−1,…,am−1n−1}. We show that R0 is resolving set of Dmn. Representation of vertices of Dmn with respect to R0 are
r(aij|R0)={(j+1,…,j−1⏟ith tuple,j+1,…,j+1),if j<n2(n2+1,…,n2−1⏟ith tuple,n2+1,…,n2−1⏟(m+i)th tuple,n2+1,…,n2+1),if j=n2(n−j+1,…,n−j−1⏟(m+i)th tuple,n−j+1,…,n−j+1),if j>n2r(amn−1|R0)=(2,2,…,2),r(c|R0)=(1,1,…,1). |
Let aj1,aj2∈Dmn be any two vertices, then we have the following cases:
Case 1. When the vertices belong to different sets, say Vi and Vk, then r(aij1|R0)≠r(akj2|R0).
Case 2. When vertices belong to same sets, then we have two subcases:
a) when j1,j2<n2(or>n2) then r(aij1|R0)≠r(aij2|R0)
b) when j1<n2, j2>n2. Suppose r(aij1|R0)=r(aij2|R0), then j1−1=n−j2+1 and j1+1=n−j2+1 which implies n=j1+j2 and n=j1+j2−2, which is a contradiction. Therefore, r(aij1|R0)≠r(aij2|R0) for all j1,j2. Since every vertex of Dmn has unique representation with respect to R0 which implies that dim(Dmn)≤2m−1. Therefore, dim(Dmn)=2m−1.
Theorem 3.2. The edge metric dimension of Dmn is 2m−1.
Proof. Assume that there exist two sets say Vi and Vj with only one vertex in RE. Without loss of generality, suppose ai1,aj1∈RE. Then r(ain−1ain|RE)=r(ajn−1ajn|RE), which is a contradiction. Therefore edim(Dmn)≥2m−1. Let R′E={a11,a21,…,am1,a1n−1,a2n−1,…,am−1n−1}. We show that R′E is an edge metric generator of Dmn. Representation of edges of Dmn with respect to R′E are
When n is odd:
r(aijaij+1|R′E)={(j+1,…,j−1⏟ith tuple,j+1,…,j+1),if j<⌊n2⌋(⌊n2⌋+1,…,⌊n2⌋−1⏟ith tuple,⌊n2⌋+1,…,⌊n2⌋−1⏟(m+i)th tuple,⌊n2⌋+1,…,⌊n2⌋+1),if j=⌊n2⌋(n−j,…,n−j−2⏟(m+i)th tuple,n−j,…,n−j),if j>⌊n2⌋.r(amn−1c|R′E)=(1,1,…,1). |
When n is even:
r(aijaij+1|R′E)={(j+1,…,j−1⏟ith tuple,j+1,…,j+1),if j<n2−1(n2,…,n2−2⏟ith tuple,n2,…,n2−1⏟(m+i)th tuple,n2,…,n2),if j=n2−1(n2,…,n2−1⏟ith tuple,n2,…,n2−2⏟(m+i)th tuple,n2,…,n2),if j=n2(n−j,…,n−j−2⏟(m+i)th tuple,n−j,…,n−j),if j>n2.r(amn−1c|R′E)=(1,1,…,1). |
Therefore, edim(Dmn)=2m−1.
The following two lemmas show that the metric dimension and edge metric dimension of generalizations of Dutch windmill graph (as discussed in this section) is at least m.
Lemma 3.3. The metric dimension of SDmn, CDmn, andKDmn is at least m.
Proof. We can assume that there exist some Vi with no vertex in R, then r(ai1|R)=r(ain−1|R), which is a contradiction.
Lemma 3.4. The metric dimension of SDmn,CDmn, and KDmn is at least m.
Proof. We can assume that there exist a set Vi with no vertex in RE, then r(ain−1ain|RE)=r(ai1ain|RE), which is a contradiction. Therefore, edim(SDmn)≥m.
Let SDmn be a graph obtained by replacing the shared vertex of Dutch windmill graph with a star graph Sm (see, Figure 6). It has mn+1 vertices and m(n+1) edges. For our purpose, we denote the cycle subgraphs of SDmn by Din, its vertices by ai1,ai2,…,ain−1,ain and vertices of Sm by a1n,a2n,…,amn,c. In the following results, we discuss the metric dimension and edge metric dimension of this graph.
Theorem 3.5. The metric dimension of SDmn is m.
Proof. By Lemma 3.3, we have dim(SDmn)≥m. Also, let R0={ai1}, i=1,2,…,m. We claim that R0 is a resolving set of SDmn. Now,
d(aij|ak1})={j+3,j<⌈n2⌉n−j+3j≥⌈n2⌉.d(aij|ai1})={j−1,if j≤⌈n2⌉n−j+1,if j>⌈n2⌉. |
Representation of vertices of SDmn with respect to R0 are:
r(aij|R0)={(j+3,…,j−1⏟ith tuple,j+3,…,j+3),if j<⌈n2⌉(n−j+3,…,j−1⏟ith tuple,n−j+3,…,n−j+3),if j=⌈n2⌉(n−j+3,…,n−j+1⏟ith tuple,n−j+3,…,n−j+3),if j>⌈n2⌉.r(c|R0)=(2,…,2). |
Clearly, we have dim(SDmn)≤m. Therefore, dim(SDmn)=m.
Theorem 3.6. The edge metric dimension of SDmn is m.
Proof. By Lemma 3.4, we have edim(SDmn)≥m. Also, let R′E={ai1}, i=1,2,…,m. We claim that R′E is an edge metric generator of SDmn. Representation of edges of SDmn with respect to R′E are:
r(aijaij+1|R′E)={(j+3,…,j−1⏟ith tuple,j+3,…,j+3),if j<⌈n2⌉(n−j+2,…,j−1⏟ith tuple,n−j+2,…,n−j+2),if j=⌈n2⌉(n−j+2,…,n−j⏟ith tuple,n−j+2,…,n−j+2),if j>⌈n2⌉.r(cain|R′E)=(2,…,1⏟ith tuple,2,…,2). |
Clearly, we have edim(SDmn)≤m. Hence edim(SDmn)=m.
Let CDmn be a graph obtained by replacing the shared vertex of Dutch windmill graph with a cycle graph (Cm) (see, Figure 7). It has mn vertices and m(n+1) edges. For our sake, we denote the cycle subgraphs of CDmn by Din and its vertices as ai1,ai2,…,ain−1,ain. Now, we determine the metric dimension and edge metric dimension of this graph.
Theorem 3.7. The metric dimension of CDmn is m.
Proof. By Lemma 3.3, we have dim(CDmn)≥m. Also, let R0={ai1}, i=1,2,…,m. We show that R0 is a resolving set of CDmn. Now,
d(aij|ai1)={j−1,if j<⌊n2⌋⌊n2⌋−1,if j=⌊n2⌋n−j+1,ifj>⌊n2⌋d(aij|ak1)={j+xk+1,if j<⌊n2⌋⌈n2⌉+xk+1,if j=⌊n2⌋n−j+xk+1,if j>⌊n2⌋ |
where xk=d(ain|akn). Representation of vertices with respect to R0 are
={(j+x1+1,j+x2+1,…,j−1⏟ith tuple,…,j+xm+1),if j<⌊n2⌋(n−j+x1+1,n−j+x2+1,…,n−j+1⏟ith tuple,…,n−j+xm+1),if j>⌊n2⌋(⌈n2⌉+x1+1,⌈n2⌉+x2+1,…,⌊n2⌋−1⏟ith tuple,…,⌈n2⌉+xm+1),if j=⌊n2⌋. |
Since every vertex of CDmn has unique representation with respect to R0. Therefore, dim(CDmn)≤m. Hence, dim(CDmn)=m.
Theorem 3.8. The edge metric dimension of CDmn is m.
Proof. By Lemma 3.4, we have edim(CDmn)≥m. Also, let R′E={ai1}, i=1,2,…,m. Representation of edges of CDmn with respect to R′E are
r(aijaij+1|R′E)={(j+x1+1,j+x2+1,…,j−1⏟ith tuple,…,j+xm+1),if j<⌊n2⌋(n−j+x1,n−j+x2,…,n−j⏟ith tuple,…,n−j+xm),if j>⌊n2⌋(⌈n2⌉+x1,⌈n2⌉+x2,…,⌊n2⌋−1⏟ith tuple,…,⌈n2⌉+xm),if j=⌊n2⌋.r(ainai+1n|R′E)=(x1+1,x2+1,…,1,1⏟ith and (i+1)th tuple,…,xm+1). |
where xk=min{d(ain|akn),d(ai+1n|akn)},k=1,2,…m. Clearly, representation of every edge of CDmn with respect to R′E is different. Therefore, edim(CDmn)≤m. Hence edim(CDmn)=m
Let KDmn be a graph obtained by replacing the shared vertex of Dutch windmill graph with a complete graph(Km) (see, Figure 8). It has mn vertices and mn+m(m−1)2 edges. For our sake, we denote the cycle subgraphs of KDmn by Din and its vertices as ai1,ai2,…,ain−1,ain. Now, we obtain the metric dimension and edge metric dimension of this graph.
Theorem 3.9. The metric dimension of KDmn is m.
Proof. Let R0={ai1}, i=1,2,…,m. Representation of vertices of KDmn with respect to R0 are
r(aij|R0)={(j+2,…,j−1⏟ith tuple,j+2,…,j+2),if j<⌈n2⌉(n−j+2,…,j−1⏟ith tuple,n−j+2,…,n−j+2),if j=⌈n2⌉(n−j+2,…,n−j+1⏟ith tuple,n−j+2,…,n−j+2),if j>⌈n2⌉. |
which implies that R0 is a resolving set and dim(KDmn)≤m. Also, from Lemma 3.3, dim(KDmn)≥m. Therefore, dim(KDmn)=m.
Theorem 3.10. The edge metric dimension of KDmn is m.
Proof. Let R′E={ai1}, i=1,2,…,m. We claim that R′E is an edge metric generator of KDmn. Representation of edges of KDmn with respect to R′E are
r(aijaij+1|R′E)={(j+2,…,j−1⏟ith tuple,j+2,…,j+2),if j<⌈n2⌉(n−j+1,…,j−1⏟ith tuple,n−j+1,…,n−j+1),if j=⌈n2⌉(n−j+1,…,n−j⏟ith tuple,n−j+1,…,n−j+1),if j>⌈n2⌉.r(ainakn|R′E)=(2,…,1⏟ith tuple,2,…,1⏟kth tuple,2,…,2). |
which implies that edim(KDmn)≤m. Also from Lemma 3.4, edim(KDmn)≥m. Hence edim(KDmn)=m.
In this paper we have computed the metric dimension and edge metric dimension of French windmill and Dutch windmill graphs wherein the shared vertex is replaced by star graph, cyclic graph and complete graph. We have found that the metric dimension and edge metric dimension of generalizations of French windmill graph and Dutch windmill graph are same. In future, we would extend our work to Fault-tolerant metric dimension and Fractional metric dimension of French windmill and Dutch windmill graphs.
The authors declare no conflict of interest.
[1] | US Environmental Protection Agency. Terminology Reference System. Available from: https://iaspub.epa.gov/sor_internet/registry/termreg/searchandretrieve/termsandacronyms/search.do. |
[2] | Wyoming Department of Environmental Quality, Establishing Site-Specific Background Metal Concentrations in Soil, 2000. |
[3] | US Environmental Protection Agency, Establishing Background Levels, 1995. |
[4] | US Environmental Protection Agency, Guidance for Comparing Background and Chemical Concentration Levels in Soil for CERCLA Sites. Office of Emergency and Remedial Response, Washington, DC 20460, EPA 540-R-01-003, 2002. |
[5] | Stensvold KA, Scientific Investigations Report 2011-5202, US Department of the Interior, US Geological Survey, 2012, 1-27. |
[6] | Vosnokis KAS, Perry E (2009) Background versus Risk-Based Screening Levels: An Examination of Arsenic Background Soil Concentrations in Seven States. Int J Soil Sediment Water 2: 2. |
[7] | Mortefolio MJ, Derivation of Site-Specific Arsenic Background in Soil: A Case Study. Proceedings of the Annual International Conference on Soils, Sedements, Water and Energy. 2010, 12: 6. |
[8] | Love D, Loock D, Kuzyk ZZ, et al. (2005) Development of Site-Specific Environmental Criteria from Background Data. In: Assessment and Remediation of Contaminated Sites in Arctic and Cold Climates (ARCSACC), Edmunton, Alberta. |
[9] | New York Department of Envirionmental Conservation, Determination of Soil Cleanup Objectives and Cleanup Levels, 1994. |
[10] | New Jersey Department of Envirionmental Protection, Soil Cleanup Criteria (Site Remediation Program), 2015. |
[11] | New Hampshire Department of Envirionmental Services, NHDES Contaminated Sites Risk Characterization and Managment Policy, 1998. |
[12] | California Regional Water Quality Control Board, Applicaiton of Risk-Based Screening Levels and Decision Making to Sites with Impacted Soil and Groundwater, 2001. |
[13] | State of Colorado Department of Public Health and Environment, Hazardous Materials and Waste Management Division (2014) Arsenic Concentrations in Soil Risk Mangement Guidance for Evaluating. |
[14] | U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (2014) Regional Screening Level (RSL) Summary Table. |
[15] | State of Connecticut, Department of Energy and Environmental Protection (2013) Regulation of Department of Energy and Environmental Protection Concerning Remediation Standard. |
[16] | Michigan Department of Envirionmental Quality (2013) Cleanup Criteria Requirements for Response Activity (Formerly the Part 201 Generic Cleanup Criteria and Screening Levels). |
[17] | Minnesota Pollution Control Agency (1999) Site Remediation Section: Risk-Based Guidance for Soil-Human Health Pathway. |
[18] |
Milillo TM, Sinha G, Gardella JA (2012) Use of Geostatistics for Remediation Planning to Transcend Urban Political Boundaries. Environ Pollut 170: 52-62. doi: 10.1016/j.envpol.2012.06.006
![]() |
[19] | Goovaerts P, Kriging versus Stochastic Simulation for Risk Analysis in Soil Contamination. In: geoENV I-Geostatistics for Environmental Applications. Springer Netherlands, 1997: 247-258. |
[20] | Webster R, Oliver MA, Geostatistics for Environmental Scientists. John Wiley & Sons, 2007, 330. |
[21] | Fairbanks P, 'Legitimate questions' on toxics and illness. Buffalo News, p. B1, 25 March 2001. |
[22] | Fairbanks P, Taking Action. Buffalo News, p. B1, 8 September 2001. |
[23] | Fairbanks P, Herbeck D (2002) LTV Steel to Help Pay for $16 Million Cleanup. Buffalo News, 16 July 2002. |
[24] | Groll M (2002) Toxic Neglect: City Had Early Warnings of Contamination. Buffalo News, p. A1, 11 Feburary 2002. |
[25] | Gardella JA, Milillo TM, Sinha G, et al. (2007) Linking Community-Service Learning and Envirionmental Analytical Chemistry. Analytical Chemistry 79: 811-818. |
[26] | Gardella JA, Milillo TM, Sinha G, et al. (2009) Linking Advanced Public Service Learning And Community Participation With Environmental Analytical Chemistry: Lessons From Case Studies In Western New York. In: Redlawsk D, Rice T (Eds.), Service Learning with Government Partners. San Francisco, CA: John Wiley & Sons, 98-112. |
[27] |
Verstraete S, Van Meirvenne M (2008) A Multi-Stage Sampling Strategy for the Delineation of Soil Pollution in a Contaminated Brownfield. Environ Pollut 154: 184-191. doi: 10.1016/j.envpol.2007.10.014
![]() |
[28] | Environmental Science Research Institute (ESRI). Available from: http://www.esri.com. |
[29] | United States Census Bureau (2000) 108th Congressional District Census TIGER Line File. Available from: ftp://ftp2.census.gov/geo/tiger/tgrcd10. |
[30] | Brewer C, Harrower M. ColorBrewer 2.0. Available from: http://colorbrewer2.org. |
[31] |
Goovaerts P (2009) AUTO-IK: A 2D Indicator Kriging Program for the Automated Non-Parametric Modeling of Local Uncertainty in Earth Sciences. Comput Geosci-UK 35: 1255-1270. doi: 10.1016/j.cageo.2008.08.014
![]() |
[32] | Lin YP, Chu HJ, Wu CF, et al. (2011) Hotspot Analysis of Spatial Environmental Pollutants Using Kernel Density Estimation and Geostatistical Techniques. J Environ Res Public Health 8: 75-88. |
[33] | Antunes I, Albuquerque MTD (2013) Using Indicator Kriging for the Evaluation of Arsenic Potential Contamination in an Abandoned Mining Area (Portugal). Sci Total Environ 442: 545-552. |
[34] |
Goovaerts P (1994) Comparative Performance of Indicator Algorithms for Modeling Conditional Probability Distribution Functions. Mathamatical Geology 26: 389-411. doi: 10.1007/BF02089230
![]() |
[35] | Johnston K, Ver Hoef JM, Krivoruchko K, et al. Using ArcGIS Geostatistical Analyst. Redlands: ESRI, 2001. |
[36] | Isaaks EH, Srivastava RM, An Introduction to Applied Geostatistics, New York: Oxford University Press, 1989, 592 p. |
1. | Sahil Sharma, Vijay Kumar Bhat, Fault-tolerant metric dimension of zero-divisor graphs of commutative rings, 2022, 19, 0972-8600, 24, 10.1080/09728600.2021.2009746 | |
2. | Kamran Azhar, Sohail Zafar, Agha Kashif, Michael Onyango Ojiema, Gohar Ali, Fault-Tolerant Partition Resolvability of Cyclic Networks, 2021, 2021, 2314-4785, 1, 10.1155/2021/7237168 | |
3. | Sunny Kumar Sharma, Vijay Kumar Bhat, 2023, Chapter 8, 978-981-19-7013-9, 111, 10.1007/978-981-19-7014-6_8 | |
4. | Sahil Sharma, Vijay Kumar Bhat, Vertex resolvability of convex polytopes with n-paths of length p, 2022, 7, 2379-9927, 129, 10.1080/23799927.2022.2059012 | |
5. | Enqiang Zhu, Shaoxiang Peng, Chanjuan Liu, Identifying the Exact Value of the Metric Dimension and Edge Dimension of Unicyclic Graphs, 2022, 10, 2227-7390, 3539, 10.3390/math10193539 | |
6. | Basma Mohamed, Linda Mohaisen, Mohamed Amin, Computing Connected Resolvability of Graphs Using Binary Enhanced Harris Hawks Optimization, 2023, 36, 1079-8587, 2349, 10.32604/iasc.2023.032930 | |
7. | Sahil Sharma, Vijay Kumar Bhat, Sohan Lal, Edge resolvability of crystal cubic carbon structure, 2023, 142, 1432-881X, 10.1007/s00214-023-02964-3 | |
8. | Sunny Kumar Sharma, Vijay Kumar Bhat, On Some Plane Graphs and Their Metric Dimension, 2021, 7, 2349-5103, 10.1007/s40819-021-01141-z | |
9. | Bao-Hua Xing, Sunny Kumar Sharma, Vijay Kumar Bhat, Hassan Raza, Jia-Bao Liu, Ali Ahmad, The Vertex-Edge Resolvability of Some Wheel-Related Graphs, 2021, 2021, 2314-4785, 1, 10.1155/2021/1859714 | |
10. | Basma Mohamed, Linda Mohaisen, Mohamed Amin, Guokai Zhang, Binary Equilibrium Optimization Algorithm for Computing Connected Domination Metric Dimension Problem, 2022, 2022, 1875-919X, 1, 10.1155/2022/6076369 | |
11. | Xiujun Zhang, Muhammad Tanzeel Ali Kanwal, Muhammad Azeem, Muhammad Kamran Jamil, Muzammil Mukhtar, Finite vertex-based resolvability of supramolecular chain in dialkyltin, 2022, 45, 2191-0219, 255, 10.1515/mgmc-2022-0027 | |
12. | Qingqun Huang, Adnan Khalil, Didar Abdulkhaleq Ali, Ali Ahmad, Ricai Luo, Muhammad Azeem, Breast cancer chemical structures and their partition resolvability, 2022, 20, 1551-0018, 3838, 10.3934/mbe.2023180 | |
13. | Iqbal M. Batiha, Basma Mohamed, Binary rat swarm optimizer algorithm for computing independent domination metric dimension problem, 2024, 10, 2351-5279, 119, 10.21595/mme.2024.24037 | |
14. | Desi Rahmadani, Makbul Muksar, Toto Nusantara, Sapti Wahyuningsih, 2024, 3235, 0094-243X, 020001, 10.1063/5.0234959 | |
15. | Lianglin Li, Shu Bao, Hassan Raza, On Some families of Path-related graphs with their edge metric dimension, 2024, 6, 2666657X, 100152, 10.1016/j.exco.2024.100152 | |
16. | Sahil Sharma, Vijay Kumar Bhat, Sohan Lal, The metric resolvability and topological characterisation of some molecules in H1N1 antiviral drugs, 2023, 49, 0892-7022, 1165, 10.1080/08927022.2023.2223718 | |
17. | Pengcheng Guo, Pengchao Lv, Junjie Huang, Bo Liu, 2024, Chapter 16, 978-981-97-2274-7, 197, 10.1007/978-981-97-2275-4_16 | |
18. | Aqsa Shah, Imran Javaid, Shahid Ur Rehman, Symmetries and symmetry-breaking in arithmetic graphs, 2023, 9, 24058440, e19820, 10.1016/j.heliyon.2023.e19820 | |
19. | Sidra Bukhari, Muhammad Kamran Jamil, Muhammad Azeem, Vertex-edge based resolvability parameters of vanadium carbide network with an application, 2024, 122, 0026-8976, 10.1080/00268976.2023.2260899 | |
20. | Iqbal M. Batiha, Nidal Anakira, Amal Hashim, Basma Mohamed, A special graph for the connected metric dimension of graphs, 2024, 10, 2351-5279, 193, 10.21595/mme.2024.24176 | |
21. | Pannawat Eakawinrujee, Nantapath Trakultraipruk, Total and paired domination numbers of windmill graphs, 2023, 16, 1793-5571, 10.1142/S1793557123501231 | |
22. | Sidra Bukhari, Muhammad Kamran Jamil, Muhammad Azeem, Senesie Swaray, Honeycomb Rhombic Torus Vertex-Edge Based Resolvability Parameters and Its Application in Robot Navigation, 2024, 12, 2169-3536, 23751, 10.1109/ACCESS.2024.3359916 | |
23. | Yingying Zhang, Fanfan Wang, Chenxu Yang, Monitoring Edge-Geodetic Numbers of Some Networks, 2025, 25, 0219-2659, 10.1142/S0219265924500014 | |
24. | Rehab Alharbi, Hibba Arshad, Imran Javaid, Ali. N. A. Koam, Azeem Haider, Distance-based granular computing in networks modeled by intersection graphs, 2025, 10, 2473-6988, 10528, 10.3934/math.2025479 |