ψij | name |
i+j | First Zagreb index |
1√ij | Randić index |
2√iji+j | GA index |
√i+j−2ij | ABC index |
1√i+j | Sum–connectivity index |
(ij)3(i+j−2)3 | AZI index |
2i+j | Harmonic index |
|i−j| | Albertson index |
√i2+j2 | Sombor index |
iji+j | ISI index |
The export-led growth hypothesis (ELGH) has been extensively explored; however, previous studies have predominantly relied on standard integration and cointegration techniques, and empirical evidence supporting the ELGH remains inconclusive. This research re-examined the ELGH for developed economies using advanced fractional methods. By analyzing quarterly data on GDP, real effective exchange rates, and goods exports for 27 OECD countries from 1995 to 2021, our study showed that conventional cointegration methods may overlook significant long-run relationships. In contrast, the fractional approach offers a more flexible and accurate estimation of the trade-growth nexus. These findings underscore the importance of refined econometric methods in international trade research, particularly for evaluating the long-term effects of exports on economic performance.
Citation: Jorge V. Pérez-Rodríguez, Heiko Rachinger, Maria Santana-Gallego. Revisiting the export-led growth hypothesis for OECD countries. A fractionally integrated heterogeneous panel data framework[J]. National Accounting Review, 2025, 7(2): 221-248. doi: 10.3934/NAR.2025010
[1] | Edil D. Molina, Paul Bosch, José M. Sigarreta, Eva Tourís . On the variable inverse sum deg index. Mathematical Biosciences and Engineering, 2023, 20(5): 8800-8813. doi: 10.3934/mbe.2023387 |
[2] | Mert Sinan Oz, Roberto Cruz, Juan Rada . Computation method of the Hosoya index of primitive coronoid systems. Mathematical Biosciences and Engineering, 2022, 19(10): 9842-9852. doi: 10.3934/mbe.2022458 |
[3] | William E. Fitzgibbon . The work of Glenn F. Webb. Mathematical Biosciences and Engineering, 2015, 12(4): v-xvi. doi: 10.3934/mbe.2015.12.4v |
[4] | V. R. Kulli, J. A. Méndez-Bermúdez, José M. Rodríguez, José M. Sigarreta . Revan Sombor indices: Analytical and statistical study. Mathematical Biosciences and Engineering, 2023, 20(2): 1801-1819. doi: 10.3934/mbe.2023082 |
[5] | Xinmei Liu, Xinfeng Liang, Xianya Geng . Expected Value of Multiplicative Degree-Kirchhoff Index in Random Polygonal Chains. Mathematical Biosciences and Engineering, 2023, 20(1): 707-719. doi: 10.3934/mbe.2023032 |
[6] | Saylé C. Sigarreta, Saylí M. Sigarreta, Hugo Cruz-Suárez . On degree–based topological indices of random polyomino chains. Mathematical Biosciences and Engineering, 2022, 19(9): 8760-8773. doi: 10.3934/mbe.2022406 |
[7] | Muhammad Akram, Adeel Farooq, Maria Shabir, Mohammed M. Ali Al-Shamiri, Mohammed M. Khalaf . Group decision-making analysis with complex spherical fuzzy N-soft sets. Mathematical Biosciences and Engineering, 2022, 19(5): 4991-5030. doi: 10.3934/mbe.2022234 |
[8] | Martin J. Blaser . Studying microbiology with Glenn F. Webb. Mathematical Biosciences and Engineering, 2015, 12(4): xvii-xxii. doi: 10.3934/mbe.2015.12.4xvii |
[9] | Wanlin Zhu, Minglei Fang, Xianya Geng . Enumeration of the Gutman and Schultz indices in the random polygonal chains. Mathematical Biosciences and Engineering, 2022, 19(11): 10826-10845. doi: 10.3934/mbe.2022506 |
[10] | Abdul Qadeer Khan, Azhar Zafar Kiyani, Imtiaz Ahmad . Bifurcations and hybrid control in a 3×3 discrete-time predator-prey model. Mathematical Biosciences and Engineering, 2020, 17(6): 6963-6992. doi: 10.3934/mbe.2020360 |
The export-led growth hypothesis (ELGH) has been extensively explored; however, previous studies have predominantly relied on standard integration and cointegration techniques, and empirical evidence supporting the ELGH remains inconclusive. This research re-examined the ELGH for developed economies using advanced fractional methods. By analyzing quarterly data on GDP, real effective exchange rates, and goods exports for 27 OECD countries from 1995 to 2021, our study showed that conventional cointegration methods may overlook significant long-run relationships. In contrast, the fractional approach offers a more flexible and accurate estimation of the trade-growth nexus. These findings underscore the importance of refined econometric methods in international trade research, particularly for evaluating the long-term effects of exports on economic performance.
In mathematics chemistry and biology, a chemical compound can be represented by a molecular graph by converting atoms to vertices and bonds to edges. One of the primary mission of QSAR/QSPR research is to accurately convert molecular graphs into numerical values. Graph theoretic invariants of molecular graphs are called molecular descriptors which can be utilized to simulate the structural information of molecules, in order to make worthwhile physical and chemical properties of these molecules can be acquired by single numerical values. Such kinds of molecular descriptors are also referred to as topological indices.
In the chemical literature, various topological indices relying only on vertex degrees of the molecular graphs can be utilized in QSPR/QSAR investigation on account of them can be obtained directly from the molecular architecture, and can be rapidly calculated for generous molecules (see [1,2]), and we call them VDB (vertex–degree–based) topological indices. To be more precise, for designated nonnegative real numbers {ψij} (1≤i≤j≤n−1), a VDB topological index of a an n-order (molecular) graph G is expressed as
TI(G)=∑1≤i≤j≤n−1mijψij, | (1.1) |
where mij is the amount of edges connecting an i-vertex and a j-vertex of G. A great deal of well–known VDB topological indices can be obtained by different ψij in expression (1.1). We list some VDB topological indices in Table 1.
ψij | name |
i+j | First Zagreb index |
1√ij | Randić index |
2√iji+j | GA index |
√i+j−2ij | ABC index |
1√i+j | Sum–connectivity index |
(ij)3(i+j−2)3 | AZI index |
2i+j | Harmonic index |
|i−j| | Albertson index |
√i2+j2 | Sombor index |
iji+j | ISI index |
The first Zagreb index [3] is the very first VDB topological index, as powerful molecular structure-descriptors [2], Zagreb indices can describe the peculiarities of the degree of branching in molecular carbon-atom skeleton. Thereafter, many VDB topological indices have been put forward to simulate physical, chemical, biological, and other attributes of molecules [4,5,6,7]. In 2021, Gutman [8] introduced a new VDB topological index named as the Sombor index which has a linear correlation with the entropy and the enthalpy of vaporization of octanes [9]. Das et al., give sharp bounds for Sombor index of graphs by means of some useful graph parameters and they reveal the relationships between the Sombor index and Zagreb indices of graphs [10]. Recently, Steiner Gutman index was introduced by Mao and Das [11] which incorporate Steiner distance of a connected graph G. Nordhaus-Gaddum-type results for the Steiner Gutman index of graphs were given in [12]. In 2022, Shang study the Sombor index and degree-related properties of simplicial networks [13]. For more details of VDB topological indices, one can see [3,14,15,16,17,18,19,20,21,22,23,24,25,26] and the books [27,28,29].
Fluoranthene is a eminent conjugated hydrocarbon which abound in coal tar [30]. A fluoranthene–type benzenoid system (f-benzenoid for short) is formed from two benzenoid units joined by a pentagon [31,32]. The ordinary structure modality of a f-benzenoid F is shown in Figure 1, where segments X and Y are two benzenoid systems. Each f-benzenoid possesses exactly one pentagon [32]. More and more attention is paid to f-benzenoids after the flash vacuum pyrolysis experiments of these nonalternant polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons [33].
In the whole article, the terminology and notation are chiefly derived from [34,35,36,37,38,39,40,41]. A vertex of degree k is called a k-vertex, and an edge linking a k-vertex and a j-vertex is designated as a (k,j)-edge. Let nk be the number of k-vertices and let mkj be the number of (k,j)-edges in the molecular graph G. A benzenoid system without internal vertices is said to be catacondensed. Analogously, a f-benzenoid F containing a unique internal vertex is referred to as catacatacondensed. We use h-hexagon benzenoid system (or h-hexagon f-benzenoid) to represent a benzenoid system (or f-benzenoid) containing h hexagons.
Let Lh represent the h-hexagon linear chain (as shown in Figure 2(a)). An f-benzenoid FLh (h≥3) obtaining from pieces X=L2 and Y=Lh−2 is named as f-linear chain (as shown in Figure 2(b)).
A fissure (resp. bay, cove, fjord and lagoon) of a f-benzenoid F is a path of degree sequences (2,3,2) (resp. (2,3,3,2), (2,3,3,3,2), (2,3,3,3,3,2) and (2,3,3,3,3,3,2)) on the perimeter of F (see Figure 3). Fissures, bays, coves, fjords and lagoons are said to be different kinds of inlets and their number are signified by f, B, C, Fj and L, respectively [32,37]. Inlets determine many electronic and topological properties of f-benzenoids. Then, it can be found that f+2B+3C+4FJ+5L is the number of 3-vertices on the perimeter of F. It is noted that lagoons cannot occur in the theory of benzenoid systems. For convenience, let r=f+B+C+Fj+L to represent the total number of inlets and b=B+2C+3Fj+4L is referred to as the quantity of bay regions, In addition, b is exactly the quantity of (3,3)-edges on the perimeter of F. It is obvious that b≥2 for any f-benzenoid F.
It is noted that any f-benzenoid F contains merely either 2-vertex or 3-vertex. The vertices not on the perimeter are said to be internal, and we use ni to represent their number.
Lemma 1.1. [32] Let F be an n-order, h-hexagon f-benzenoid with m edges and ni internal vertices. Then
(i) n=4h+5−ni;
(ii) m=5h+5−ni.
Lemma 1.2. [32] Let F be an n-order and h-hexagon f-benzenoid with r inlets, Then
(i) m22=n−2h−r;
(ii) m23=2r;
(iii) m33=3h−r.
From the perspective of mathematics and chemistry, finding the extremal values of some useful TI for significant classes of graphs is very interesting [14,19,23,40,41,42,43,44,45,46,47,48,49,50,51,52,53,54,55,56].
As a matter of convenience, we use Γm to represent the collection of f-benzenoids containing exactly m edges. In [45], we derived extremal values for TI among all f-benzenoids with given order. It is noted that structure of f-benzenoids with given order is different from that of f-benzenoids with given number of edges. And we found that the technique for studying TI among all f-benzenoids with given order can not be used directly to investigate TI for all f-benzenoids with fixed number of edges. For this reason, we concentrate on the research of extremal values for TI among all f-benzenoids with given size.
The main idea of this work is to construct f-benzenoids owning maximal r and minimal h at the same time in Γm depending on the number m is congruent to 0,1,2,3 or 4 modulo 5. By making use of this technique, we obtain the extremum of TI over Γm and characterize their corresponding graphs on the basis of m is congruent to 0,1,2,3 or 4 modulo 5. Afterwards the extremums of some well-known TI over Γm can be got by use of the previous results.
The structure of this paper is as below. We first determine the maximal r in the set Γm in Section 2. By utilizing these results, we find the extremum of several famed TI over Γm in Section 3.
We will find the f-benzenoids with maximal r in Γm in this section. Figure 4 illustrates three f-benzenoids pertaining to Γ42.
At first, we try to obtain the maximum and minimum number of hexagons in any F∈Γm.
The spiral benzenoid system [57] Th is a benzenoid system whose structure is in a "spiral" manner as illustrated in Figure 5. Th has maximal ni in all h-hexagon benzenoid systems.
As a matter of convenience, let SHh (h≥3) represent the collection of f-benzenoids formed by two spiral benzenoids X and Y. Particularly, a f-spiral benzenoid is a f-benzenoid F∗∈SHh in which X=Th−1 and Y=T1 (as shown in Figure 6). It is easy to see that that
ni(F∗)=2h−⌈√12(h−1)−3⌉. |
In [40], we proved that for every F′∈SHh (h≥3), the inequality
ni(F′)≤ni(F∗) | (2.1) |
holds, and the following graph operations were introduced.
Operation 1. For any h-hexagon f-benzenoid F having two segments X and Y, let h1=h(X) and h2=h(Y). By substituting spiral benzenoid systems Th1 and Th2 for X and Y, severally, another f-benzenoid F′∈SHh can be obtained (as shown in Figure 7).
For any h-hexagon f-benzenoid F, when h=3, it is easily checked that
ni(F)=1=2×3−⌈√12(3−1)−3⌉. | (2.2) |
When h≥4, let h1=h(X) and h2=h(Y). Another F′∈SHh (as shown in Figure 7) in which X=Th1 and Y=Th2 can be acquired by applying Operation 1 to F. It is apparently that ni(X)≤ni(Th1), ni(Y)≤ni(Th2), therefore
ni(F)=ni(X)+ni(Y)+1≤ni(Th1)+ni(Th2)+1=ni(F′). | (2.3) |
So, the following Lemma can be deduced by Eqs (2.1) and (2.3).
Lemma 2.1. [41] Let F be an h(h≥3)-hexagon f-benzenoid. Then
ni(F)≤2h−⌈√12(h−1)−3⌉, | (2.4) |
and the equality is established when F is F∗.
For any F∈Γm, h(F) over Γm is variable. Sharp bounds for h(F) in Γm is given below.
Theorem 2.1. For any f-benzenoid F∈Γm,
⌈15(m−4)⌉≤h(F)≤m−1−⌈13(2m+√4m−31)⌉, | (2.5) |
where ⌈x⌉ is the smallest integer larger or equal to x.
Proof. On one hand, from Lemma 1.1 (ii) we know that m=5h(F)+5−ni(F). Combining the fact that ni(F)≥1 for any F∈Γm, we get
h(F)≥⌈15(m−4)⌉. |
On the other hand, by Lemma 2.1 we know that ni(F)≤ni(F∗). Consequently, from m=5h(F)+5−ni(F) we have
m−3h(F)−5≥⌈√12(h(F)−1)−3⌉≥√12(h(F)−1)−3. |
Hence,
(3h(F)+(3−m))2≥4m−31. |
Due to the fact that 3h(F)+(3−m)<0, we deduce
3h(F)+(3−m)≤−√4m−31, |
i.e., h(F)≤m−1−⌈13(2m+√4m−31)⌉.
Remark 1. Theorem 2.1 implies that f-spiral benzenoid F∗ has the maximal number of hexagons over Γm.
For the sake of obtaining the extremum TI among all f-benzenoids in Γm, we need to find the f-benzenoids F∈Γm possessing maximal r.
Recall that convex benzenoid systems (CBS for brevity) are a particular sort of benzenoid systems lack of bay regions [14]. Let HSh be the collection of benzenoid systems containing h hexagons.
Lemma 2.2. [42] Let H∈HSh. Under the below cases, H is definitely not a CBS:
(i) If h≥4 and ni=1;
(ii) If h≥5 and ni=2;
(iii) If h≥6 and ni=3.
Lemma 2.3. [52] Let H∈HSh such that ni(H)=4. Then H is bound to embody a subbenzenoid system given in Figure 8, there does not exist hexagons which are adjacent to fissures.
Lemma 2.4. Let S∈HSh. If h≥7 and ni(S)=4, then S is not a CBS.
Proof. Let S be an h (h≥7)-hexagon benzenoid system, ni(S)=4, then by Lemma 2.3 S must contain one of the benzenoid systems of the form given in Figure 7. The proof is carried out in two cases.
Case 1. If these four internal vertices form a path P4 or a K1,3, then S contains one of benzenoid systems (d)–(f) in Figure 7 as its subbenzenoid systems. It is noted that h≥7, by Lemma 2.2, it must not exist hexagons contiguous to the fissures, so, S has at least one hexagon contiguous to a (2,2)-edge, by means of such hexagons, it is succeeded in converting one of the fissures into a cove, bay or fjord. Hence, b(S)≥1.
Case 2. If these four internal vertices are not adjacent then S has possibility subbenzenoid systems as follows.
1) There exist one type (a) and one type (c) benzenoid systems in S;
2) There exist two type (b) benzenoid systems in S;
3) There exist two type (a) and one type (b) benzenoid systems in S.
4) There exist four type (a) benzenoid systems in S
By Lemma 2.2, neither hexagons may be adjacent to the fissures in any of the cases indicated above. Since h≥7, S has at least one hexagon contiguous to a (2,2)-edge, by means of such hexagons, it is succeeded in making one of the fissures become a cove, bay or fjord. Therefore, b(S)≥1.
The proof is completed.
Lemma 2.5. [45] Let F be an h-hexagon f-benzenoid. Then
1) If ni=1, then r(F)≤r(FLh)=2h−3 (h≥3);
2) If ni=2, then r(F)≤r(Gh)=2h−4 (h≥4);
3) If ni=3, then r(F)≤r(Rh)=2h−5 (h≥5);
4) If ni=4, then r(F)≤r(Zh)=2h−6 (h≥6).
Next we find the f-benzenoids with maximal r in Γm with a fixed ni. Recall that Mh, Nh and Qh (see Figure 9) are benzenoid systems, and Gh (see Figure 10), Rh (see Figure 11), Zh (see Figure 12) are f-benzenoids.
Lemma 2.6. [41] Let F be an h-hexagon f-benzenoid. Then
r(F)≤r(FLh)=2h−3. |
Lemma 2.7. [32] For any h-hexagon f-benzenoid including ni internal vertices and b bay regions, the number of (2,2)-edge and (2,3)-edge are m22=b+5,m23=4h−2ni−2b, respectively.
From Lemmas 1.2 (ii) and 8, we get
r=2h−ni−b | (2.6) |
Furthermore, by Lemma 1.1 (ii) and Eq (2.6), we deduce
r=m−3h−5−b | (2.7) |
Theorem 2.2. Let F be an h-hexagon f-benzenoid. If ni=5, then r(F)≤r(Uh)=2h−7 (h≥7).
Proof. Let h1=h(X) and h2=h(Y), X and Y are two segments of F. If ni=5, by the structure of f-benzenoid, equality ni(X)+ni(Y)=4 holds, so, we have the following five cases.
Case 1. ni(X)=1, ni(Y)=3, i.e., there exist one internal vertex and three internal vertices in X and Y, respectively.
Subcase 1.1. If h1=3, then X=M3.
Subcase 1.1.1. If h2=5, i.e., Y=Q5, then F is the f-benzenoid D1, D2 or D3 (see Figure 14). It is clear that r(F)=r(D1)=8≤2h−7, r(F)=r(D2)=7≤2h−7 or r(F)=r(D3)=8≤2h−7.
Subcase 1.1.2. If h2≥6, by Lemma 2.2 and the hypothesis that ni(Y)=3, Y is not a CBS, so b(Y)≥1. Furthermore, b(F)≥3, combining Eq (2.6) we obtain r=2h−ni−b≤2h−8<2h−7.
Subcase 1.2. If h1≥4, according to Lemma 2.2, X is definitely not a CBS, i.e., b(X)≥1.
Subcase 1.2.1. If h2=5, i.e., Y=Q5. It is clear that b(F)≥4, then Eq (2.6) deduces r≤2h−9<2h−7.
Subcase 1.2.2. If h2≥6, Y is definitely not not a CBS according to Lemma 2.2, so, b(Y)≥1. It is clear that b(F)≥5, consequently from Eq (2.6) we obtain r≤2h−10<2h−7.
Case 2. ni(X)=3 and ni(Y)=1.
Subcase 2.1. If h1=5, then X=Q5.
Subcase 2.1.1. If h2=3, i.e., Y=M3, then F is the f-benzenoid D4, D5, D6 (see Figure 14), or D7 (as shown in Figure 15). r(F)=r(D4)=8≤2h−7, r(F)=r(D5)=7≤2h−7, r(F)=r(D6)=8≤2h−7, r(F)=r(D7)=7≤2h−7.
Subcase 2.1.2. If h2≥4, Y is surely not a CBS in light of Lemma 2.2, i.e., b(X)≥1. Hence, we have b(F)≥4, it follows from Eq (2.6) that r≤2h−9<2h−7.
Subcase 2.2. If h1≥6, by Lemma 2.2, X is definitely not a CBS, hence b(X)≥1.
Subcase 2.2.1. If h2=3, i.e., Y=M3. We have b(F)≥4, and Eq (2.6) infers that r≤2h−9<2h−7.
Subcase 2.2.2. f h2≥4, by Lemma 2.2, Y is certainly not a CBS, i.e., b(X)≥1. Hence we have b(F)≥5, by Eq (2.6), r≤2h−10<2h−7.
Case 3. ni(X)=2, ni(Y)=2, i.e., X and Y both have two internal vertices.
Subcase 3.1. If h1=4, we note that ni(X)=2, so X must be the benzenoid system (b) in Figure 9.
Subcase 3.1.1. If h2=4, Y is surely the benzenoid system (b) in Figure 9 according to the hypothesis ni(Y)=2, therefore, F is D8 or D9 (as shown in Figure 15). We get r(F)=r(D8)=8<2h−7 or r(F)=r(D9)=7<2h−7.
Subcase 3.1.2. If h2≥5, by Lemma 2.2 and that ni(Y)=2, Y is not a CBS, so we know that b(X)≥1. Then b(F)≥4, by Eq (2.6) and the fact that ni=5, r≤2h−9<2h−7.
Subcase 3.2. If h2=4, we note that ni(Y)=2, so Y must be the benzenoid system (b) in Figure 8.
Subcase 3.2.1. If h1=4, X must also be the benzenoid system (b) in Figure 9. Hence, F is D8 or D9 (as shown in Figure 15). r(F)=r(D8)=8≤2h−7 or r(F)=r(D9)=7≤2h−7.
Subcase 3.2.2. If h1≥5, by Lemma 2.2 and ni(X)=2, X is definitely not a CBS, i.e., b(X)≥1. Hence, b(F)≥4, by Eq (2.6) and the fact that ni=5, we have r≤2h−9<2h−7.
Subcase 3.3. If h1≥5, h2≥5, it is noted that ni(X)=ni(Y)=2, neither X nor Y are definitely CBS according to Lemma 2.2. So, both b(X) and b(Y) are greater than 1. Hence, b(F)≥5, on the basis of Eq (2.6) we get r≤2h−10<2h−7.
Case 4. ni(X)=4 and ni(Y)=0, i.e., X contains four internal vertices, Y is a catacondensed benzenoid system.
Subcase 4.1. If h1=6, then X is the benzenoid system (d), (e) or (f) in Figure 9.
Subcase 4.1.1. If h2=1, F is the f-benzenoid D10, D11, D12 (see Figure 16), D13 (see Figure 17) or U7 (see Figure 12). r(F)=r(D10)=6≤2h−7, r(F)=r(D11)=6≤2h−7, r(F)=r(D12)=6≤2h−7, r(F)=r(D13)=6≤2h−7 or r(F)=r(U7)=7=2h−7.
Subcase 4.1.2. If h2≥2, we have b(F)≥2, by Eq (2.6), r≤2h−7.
Subcase 4.2. If h1≥7, in the light of Lemma 2.4, X is definitely not a CBS, hence b(Y)≥1. In this situation b(F)≥3, we get the inequality r≤2h−8<2h−7 according to Eq (2.6).
Case 5. ni(X)=0 and ni(Y)=4, i.e., X is a catacondensed benzenoid system, Y has four internal vertices.
Subcase 5.1. If h2=6, then Y is the benzenoid system (d), (e) or (f) in Figure 8.
Subcase 5.1.1. If h1=2, X must be the linear chain L2. In this event, F is D14, D15, D16, D17, D18, D19, D20 or D21 (see Figure 17). By further checking, we gain that r(F)=r(D14)=7≤2h−7, r(F)=r(D15)=8≤2h−7, r(F)=r(D16)=8≤2h−7, r(F)=r(D17)=7≤2h−7, r(F)=r(D18)=7≤2h−7, r(F)=r(D19)=8≤2h−7, r(F)=r(D20)=6≤2h−7 or r(F)=r(D21)=6≤2h−7.
Subcase 5.1.2. If h1≥3, bearing in mind that X is a catacondensed benzenoid system and Y is the benzenoid system (d), (e) or (f) in Figure 8, then F must have f-benzenoid D14, D15, D16, D17, D18, D19, D20 or D21 (see Figure 17) as its subgraph.
Subcase 5.1.2.1. If D14 is a subgraph in F, it is obvious that D14 has two coves. Since X is a catacondensed benzenoid system and h1≥3, F has at least one hexagon contiguous to a (2,2)-edge of X, and such hexagons can convert one fissure into a bay, or convert one cove into a fjord, or convert one fjord into a lagoon. In this instance b(F)≥4. Consequently, r≤2h−9<2h−7 can be got according to Eq (2.6).
Subcase 5.1.2.2. If D15, D16 or D19 is a subpart f-benzenoid in F, it is obvious each one of D15, D16 and D19 has a bay and a cove. Since X is a catacondensed benzenoid system and h1≥3, F contains at least one hexagon adjoining a (2,2)-edge of X, and such hexagons will make one fissure become a bay, or make one cove become a fjord, or make one fjord become a lagoon. Consequently, b(F)≥4, by Eq (2.6) it follows that r≤2h−9<2h−7.
Subcase 5.1.2.3. If D17 is a subpart f-benzenoid in F, it is obvious that D17 has a fjord and a bay. Since X is a catacondensed benzenoid system and h1≥3, F has at least one hexagon adjoining a (2,2)-edge of X, and such hexagons will convert one fissure into a bay, or convert one cove into a fjord, or convert one fjord into a lagoon. Consequently, b(F)≥4, by Eq (2.6) it follows that r≤2h−9<2h−7.
Subcase 5.1.2.4. If D18 is a subpart f-benzenoid in F, it is obvious that D18 has a fjord and two bays. Since X is a catacondensed benzenoid system and h1≥3, there exists has at least one hexagon adjoining a (2,2)-edge of X in F, and these hexagons will convert one of the fissures into a bay, or convert one cove into a fjord, or convert one fjord into a lagoon. Consequently, b(F)≥4, in light of Eq (2.6), r≤2h−9<2h−7.
Subcase 5.1.2.5. If D20 or D21 is a subpart f-benzenoid in F, it is obvious that both D20 and D21 have a bay and two fjords. Since X is a catacondensed benzenoid system and h1≥3, F contains at least one hexagon adjoining a (2,2)-edge of X, and such hexagons will make one fissure become a bay, or make one cove become a fjord, or make one fjord become a lagoon. Consequently, b(F)≥4, according to Eq (2.6), r≤2h−9<2h−7.
Subcase 5.2. If h2≥7, by Lemma 2.4 and the fact that ni(Y)=4, Y is certainly not a CBS, i.e., b(Y)≥1.
Subcase 5.2.1. If h1=2, i.e., X=L2. From the structure of f-benzenoid, F is formed from X and Y joined by a pentagon, it is easily seen that there are at least one bay or one cove arisen in the process of construction of F. It is clear that b(F)≥2, by Eq (2.6) we have r≤2h−7.
Subcase 5.2.2. If h1≥3, we know that F is formed by joining from X and Y through a pentagon, in this construction process of F, it is easily seen that there are at least one bay or one cove arisen. Then b(F)≥2, by Eq (2.6), r≤2h−7.
The proof is completed.
We recall that FLh is the f-linear chain with h hexagons [40]. Extremal f-benzenoids with maximal r in Γm were determined in the following theorem.
Theorem 2.3. Let F∈Γm. Then
1) If m≡0(mod5), then r(F)≤2m−355=r(Um5);
2) If m≡1(mod5), then r(F)≤2m−325=r(Zm−15);
3) If m≡2(mod5), then r(F)≤2m−295=r(Rm−25);
4) If m≡3(mod5), then r(F)≤2m−265=r(Gm−35);
5) If m≡4(mod5), then r(F)≤2m−235=r(FLm−45).
Proof. We know by Eq (2.5) that
⌈15(m−4)⌉≤h(F)≤m−1−⌈13(2m+√4m−31)⌉. |
1) If m≡0(mod5), then ⌈15(m−4)⌉=m5. If h=m5, then by Lemma 1.1 (ii)
m=5h(F)+5−ni(F)=m+5−ni(F), |
it means that ni(F)=5. Furthermore, Theorem 2.2 infers that r(F)≤r(Um5) and we are done. So assume now that h(F)≥m5+1, then by equality (2.7) and the fact that b(F)≥2
r(F)=m−5−3h(F)−b(F)≤m−5−3(m5+1)−b(F) |
≤2m5−10=2m−505≤2m−355=r(Um5). |
2) If m≡1(mod5), then ⌈15(m−4)⌉=m−15. If h(F)=m−15, then by Lemma 1.1 (ii)
m=5h(F)+5−ni(F)=m+4−ni(F), |
thus ni(F)=4. Then r(F)≤r(Zm−15) by part 4 of Lemma 2.5. Otherwise h(F)≥m−15+1, then by equality (2.7) and the obvious fact that b(F)≥2
r(F)=m−5−3h(F)−b(F)≤m−5−3(m−15+1)−b(F) |
≤2m+35−10=2m−475≤2m−325=r(Zm−15). |
3) If m≡2(mod5), then ⌈15(m−4)⌉=m−25. If h(F)=m−25, then by Lemma 1.1 (ii)
m=5h(F)+5−ni(F)=m+3−ni(F), |
and so ni(F)=3. Then r(F)≤r(Rm−25) by part 3 of Lemma 2.5. So assume now that h(F)≥m−25+1, then by Eq (2.7) and the fact that b(F)≥2
r(F)=m−5−3h(F)−b(F)≤m−5−3(m−25+1)−b(F) |
≤2m+65−10=2m−445≤2m−295=r(Rm−25). |
4) If m≡3(mod5), then ⌈15(m−4)⌉=m−35. If h(F)=m−35, then by Lemma 1.1 (ii)
m=5h(F)+5−ni(F)=m+2−ni(F), |
thus ni(F)=2. By Lemma 2.5, r(F)≤r(Gm−35) and we are done. If h(F)≥m−35+1, then by equality (2.7) and the fact that b(F)≥2
r(F)=m−5−3h(F)−b(F)≤m−5−3(m−35+1)−b(F) |
≤2m+95−10=2m−415≤2m−265=r(Gm−35). |
5) If m≡4(mod5), then ⌈15(m−4)⌉=m−45. Since h≥m−45 and b(F)≥2, then by Eq (2.7), we have
r(F)=m−5−3h(F)−b(F)≤m−5−3m−125−b(F) |
≤2m+125−7=2m−235=r(FLm−45). |
In this part, we attempt to find the extremal values of TI over Γm.
It is noted that a f-benzenoid F contains only 2-vertex and 3-vertex. Hence, equation (1.1) reduces to
TI(F)=m22ψ22+m23ψ23+m33ψ33, | (3.1) |
In the light of Lemmas 1.1 and 1.2,
TI(F)=ψ22m+3(ψ33−ψ22)h+(2ψ23−ψ22−ψ33)r, | (3.2) |
If U,V∈Γm then clearly
TI(U)−TI(V)=3(ψ33−ψ22)(h(U)−h(V)) +(2ψ23−ψ22−ψ33)(r(U)−r(V)). | (3.3) |
For convenience, we set s=ψ33−ψ22, q=2ψ23−ψ22−ψ33.
Theorem 3.1. For any F∈Γm, we have the following results.
a. If s≤0 and q≥0,
TI(F)≤{TI(Um5),if m≡0(mod 5)TI(Zm−15),if m≡1(mod 5)TI(Rm−25),if m≡2(mod 5)TI(Gm−35),if m≡3(mod 5)TI(FLm−45),if m≡4(mod 5) |
b. If s≥0 and q≤0,
TI(F)≥{TI(Um5),if m≡0(mod 5)TI(Zm−15),if m≡1(mod 5)TI(Rm−25),if m≡2(mod 5)TI(Gm−35),if m≡3(mod 5)TI(FLm−45),if m≡4(mod 5) |
Proof. Let F∈Γm. By Eq (2.5)
h(F)≥⌈15(m−4)⌉={h(Um5),if m≡0(mod 5)h(Zm−15),if m≡1(mod 5)h(Rm−25),if m≡2(mod 5)h(Gm−35),if m≡3(mod 5)h(FLm−45),if m≡4(mod 5) |
i.e., f-benzenoids Um5, Zm−15, Rm−25, Gm−35 and FLm−45 have minimal h over the set Γm. Meanwhile, by Theorem 2.3, we have
r(F)≤{r(Um5),if m≡0(mod 5)r(Zm−15),if m≡1(mod 5)r(Rm−25),if m≡2(mod 5)r(Gm−35),if m≡3(mod 5)r(FLm−45),if m≡4(mod 5) |
i.e., these five f-benzenoids have maximal number of inlets over Γm. Hence, for any f-benzenoids F∈Γm and V∈{Um5,Zm−15,Rm−25,Gm−35,FLm−45}, h(F)−h(V)≥0 and r(F)−r(V)≤0 hold simultaneously, from Eq (2.7), we have
TI(F)−TI(V)=3s(h(F)−h(V))+q(r(F)−r(V)). |
If s≤0 and q≥0, then TI(F)−TI(V)≤0, i.e., V reaches the maximum value of TI over Γm. If s≥0 and q≤0, then TI(F)−TI(V)≥0, i.e., V reaches the minimum value of TI over Γm. Furthermore, which V∈{Um5,Zm−15,Rm−25,Gm−35,FLm−45} is the extremal graph depending on m is congruent to 0,1,2,3 or 4 modulo 5.
Example 1. Values of s and q for several famous TI are listed in Table 2:
ij | 1√ij | 2√iji+j | 1√i+j | (ij)3(i+j−2)3 | √i+j−2ij | |
q | -1 | -0.0168 | -0.0404 | -0.0138 | -3.390 | 0.040 |
s | 5 | -0.1667 | 0 | -0.091 | 3.390 | -0.040 |
Therefore, the minimum extreme value of TI for the second Zagreb index, GA index and the AZI index can be determined in the light of Theorems 2.3 and 3.1, and we can obtain the maximum extreme value of TI for the ABC index.
If f-benzenoid F∈Γm, then from the Eqs (2.3) and (2.6) and Lemma 1.1(ii) we have
TI(F)=(2ψ23−ψ33)m+6(ψ33−ψ23)h−(2ψ23−ψ22−ψ33)b −5(2ψ23−ψ22−ψ33). | (3.4) |
Consequently, for f-benzenoids U,V∈Γm
TI(U)−TI(V)=6(ψ33−ψ23)(h(U)−h(V)) +(−2ψ23+ψ22+ψ33)(b(U)−b(V)). | (3.5) |
Set u=6(ψ33−ψ23) and keep in mind that q=2ψ23−ψ22−ψ33. Then
TI(U)−TI(V)=u(h(U)−h(V))−q(b(U)−b(V)). | (3.6) |
It is noted that Eq (3.6) can be decided only by h, b and the signs of u and q. For any F∈Γm, We know that
h(F)≤m−1−⌈13(2m+√4m−31)⌉, |
and the equality can be achieved precisely when F is the f-spiral benzenoid F∗ [41].
In [41], we proved that ni(F∗)=2h−⌈√12(h−1)−3⌉. But, b(F∗)≠2 may occur. It is noticeable if X in F∗ is a CBS, F∗ is a f-benzenoid satisfying that b(F∗)=2 or 3. For the sake of simplicity, Let N be the set of positive integers.
The CBS, W=H(l1,l2,l3,l4,l5,l6) (as shown in Figure 18), can be completely determined by the positive integers l1,l2,l3,l4 [14].
The following lemma gave requirements that there exists CBS with maximal ni [53].
Lemma 3.1. [53] Let h∈N. The conditions below are isovalent:
(a) There is a CBS W containing h hexagons and 2h+1−⌈√12h−3 ⌉ number of internal vertices.
(b) There exist l1,l2,l3,l4∈N satisfying the following equation
h=l1l3+l1l4+l2l3+l2l4−l2−l3−12l1(l1+1)−12l4(l4+1)+1⌈√12h−3 ⌉=l1+2l2+2l3+l4−3} | (3.7) |
If for h∈N, Eq (3.7) has a solution l1,l2,l3,l4∈N, then there is a CBS W meeting the conditions that ni(W)=ni(Th).
Now, we concentrate on the research for TI of f-benzenoids. For a h−1∈N, supposing that the system below
h−1=l1l3+l1l4+l2l3+l2l4−l2−l3−12l1(l1+1)−12l4(l4+1)+1⌈√12(h−1)−3 ⌉=l1+2l2+2l3+l4−3∃ li∈{l1,l2,l3,l4,l5,l6}, li=2} | (3.8) |
has a solution {l1,l2,l3,l4}, then a CBS Wh−1 containing ni(Wh−1)=2(h−1)+1−⌈√12(h−1)−3⌉ number of internal vertices exists. Note that li=2 in system (3.8), i.e., there exists one fissure on the side of li of Wh−1, let u,w,v in Figure 1 represent the three vertices of this fissure. Now, we obtain an f-spiral benzenoid F∗1 in which X=Wh−1 and Y=L1. It is obvious that
ni(F∗1)=2h−⌈√12(h−1)−3⌉ | (3.9) |
and b(F∗1)=2. (as shown in Figure 19)
Theorem 3.2. Let h−1∈N such that the Eq (3.8) has a solution, and m=3h+5+⌈√12(h−1)−3⌉. Then for any F∈Γm
1) TI(F∗1)≥TI(F), when u≥0 and q≥0;
2) TI(F∗1)≤TI(F), when u≤0 and q≤0.
Proof. From Lemma 1.1 (ii) and Eq (3.9), we have
m(F∗1)=5h+5−(2h−⌈√12(h−1)−3⌉)=3h+5+⌈√12(h−1)−3⌉ |
and so
h=m−1−⌈13(2m+√4m−31)⌉. |
It is obvious that b(F∗1)=2 and b(F)≥2 for any F∈Γm. Hence by Eq (3.6), we have
TI(F)−TI(F∗1)=u(h(F)−h(F∗1))−q(b(F)−b(F∗1)) |
=u[h(F)−(m−1−⌈13(2m+√4m−31)⌉)]−q[b(F)−2]. |
And by Eq (2.5)
h(F)≤m−1−⌈13(2m+√4m−31)⌉. |
If u≥0 and q≥0 then TI(F)−TI(F∗1)≤0, i.e., F∗1 achieves maximal TI in Γm. Similarly, if u≤0 and q≤0 then TI(F)−TI(F∗1)≥0, i.e., F∗1 obtains minimal TI in Γm.
Example 2. The values of u and q for some famous TI are listed in the following Table 3:
ij | 1√ij | 2√iji+j | 1√i+j | (ij)3(i+j−2)3 | √i+j−2ij | |
q | -1 | -0.0168 | -0.0404 | -0.0138 | -3.390 | 0.040 |
u | 18 | -0.449 | 0.121 | -0.233 | 20.344 | -0.242 |
Hence, by Theorem 3.1 we can deduce the minimal values of the Randć index and the the sum–connectivity index in f-spiral benzenoid F∗1 for those h such that Eq (3.8) holds.
Example 3. Take consideration of the generalized Randć index
Rα(G)=∑1≤i≤j≤n−1mij(ij)α, |
where α∈R. Note that
q=2(6α)−4α−9α=−4α((32)α−1)2≤0 |
for all α∈R. Moreover, s=9α−4α≥0 if and only if α≥0 if and only if u=6(9α−6α)≥0. Hence, by Theorem 3.1, the minimal value of Rα(G) is obtained for all α≥0, and for any α≤0, the minimal value of Rα(G) can be attained by the f-spiral benzenoid F∗1 for those h such that Eq (3.8) holds.
This work investigates extremum TI over the collection of f-benzenoids having same number of edges. In practical terms, there are many other types of very useful topological indices for instance graph energy [58,59,60,61,62], Wiener index [63], Randić energy [64], Wiener polarity index [65], incidence energy [66], Harary index [67], entropy measures [68,69] and HOMO-LUMO index [70]. So, determining these topological indices for f-benzenoids is going to be extraordinary fascinating.
It is noted that the current framework is for studying topological indices of deterministic networks. But random networks would be a very promising direction. In [71,72], the distance Estrada index of random graphs was discussed, and the author went deeply into (Laplacian) Estrada index for random interdependent graphs. So, studying VDB topological indices of random and random interdependent graphs is another interesting problem.
This work was supported by Ningbo Natural Science Foundation (No. 2021J234). The authors are very grateful to anonymous referees and editor for their constructive suggestions and insightful comments, which have considerably improved the presentation of this paper.
The authors declare there is no conflict of interest.
[1] |
Abual-Foul B (2004) Testing the export-led growth hypothesis: Evidence from Jordan. Appl Econ Lett 11: 393–396. https://doi.org/10.1080/1350485042000228268 doi: 10.1080/1350485042000228268
![]() |
[2] |
Aslan A, Topcu E (2018) The relationship between export and growth: Panel data evidence from Turkish sectors. Economies 6. https://doi.org/10.3390/economies6020022 doi: 10.3390/economies6020022
![]() |
[3] |
Bahmani-Oskooee M, Economidou C (2009) Export-led growth vs. growth-led exports: LDCs experience. J Dev Areas 42: 179–212. https://doi.org/10.1353/jda.0.0030 doi: 10.1353/jda.0.0030
![]() |
[4] | Bahmani-Oskooee M, Economidou C, Goswami GG (2005) Export Led Growth Hypothesis Revisited: A Panel Cointegration Approach. Sci J Admin Dev 3: 40–55. |
[5] |
Balassa B (1978) Exports and economic growth: Further evidence. J Dev Econ 5: 181–189. https://doi.org/10.1016/0304-3878(78)90006-8 doi: 10.1016/0304-3878(78)90006-8
![]() |
[6] |
Blomquist J, Westerlund J (2013) Testing slope homogeneity in large panels with serial correlation. Econ Lett 121: 374–378. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.econlet.2013.09.012 doi: 10.1016/j.econlet.2013.09.012
![]() |
[7] |
Bodman MP (1996) On export-led growth in Australia and Canada: Cointegration, causality and structural stability. Aust Econ Pap 35: 282–299. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-8454.1996.tb00051.x doi: 10.1111/j.1467-8454.1996.tb00051.x
![]() |
[8] | Breitung J (2000) The local power of some unit root tests for panel data, In: Baltagi, B. (Ed.), Nonstationary panels, panel cointegration, and dynamic panels, Advances in Econometrics, Emerald Group Publishing, 15: 61–178. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0731-9053(00)15006-6 |
[9] |
Buchinskaya ON, Dyatel EP (2019) Influence of high-technology exports and foreign charges for the use of intellectual property on economic growth. J New Econ 20: 114–126. https://doi.org/10.29141/2073-1019-2019-20-2-7 doi: 10.29141/2073-1019-2019-20-2-7
![]() |
[10] |
Buffie E (1992) On the condition for export-led growth. Can J Econ 25: 211–225. https://doi.org/10.2307/135720 doi: 10.2307/135720
![]() |
[11] |
Choi I (2001) Unit root tests for panel data. J Int Money Finan 20: 249–272. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0261-5606(00)00048-6 doi: 10.1016/S0261-5606(00)00048-6
![]() |
[12] |
Chudik A, Pesaran MH (2015) Common correlated effects estimation of heterogeneous dynamic panel data models with weakly exogenous regressors. J Econom 188: 393–420. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jeconom.2015.03.007 doi: 10.1016/j.jeconom.2015.03.007
![]() |
[13] |
Chudik A, Pesaran MH, Tosetti E (2011) Weak and strong cross-section dependence and estimation of large panels. Econom J 14: C45–C90. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1368-423X.2010.00330.x doi: 10.1111/j.1368-423X.2010.00330.x
![]() |
[14] | Chudik A, Mohaddes K, Pesaran MH, et al. (2016) Long-run effects in large heterogeneous panel data models with cross-sectionally correlated errors, In: Essays in Honor of Aman Ullah (Advances in Econometrics), 36: 85–135. https://doi.org/10.1108/S0731-905320160000036013 |
[15] |
Dawson PJ (2005) Agricultural exports and economic growth in less developed countries. Agric Econ 33: 145–152. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1574-0862.2005.00358.x doi: 10.1111/j.1574-0862.2005.00358.x
![]() |
[16] |
Demir O (2018). Does high tech exports really matter for economic growth? A panel approach for upper middle-income economies. AJIT-e: Online Academic J Inf Technol 9: 43–54. https://doi.org/10.5824/1309-1581.2018.1.003.x doi: 10.5824/1309-1581.2018.1.003.x
![]() |
[17] |
Dittman I (2000) Residual-based tests for fractional cointegration: A Monte Carlo study. J Time Ser Anal 21: 615–647. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.econlet.2014.11.009 doi: 10.1016/j.econlet.2014.11.009
![]() |
[18] | Ditzen J (2019) Estimating long run effects in models with cross-sectional dependence using xtdcce2. CEERP Working Paper Series 7. |
[19] |
Ditzen J (2021) Estimating long run effects and the exponent of cross-sectional dependence: An update to xtdcce2. Stata J 21. https://doi.org/10.1177/1536867X211045560 doi: 10.1177/1536867X211045560
![]() |
[20] |
Dreger C, Herzer D (2013) A further examination of the export-led growth hypothesis. Empir Econ 45: 39–60. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00181-012-0602-4 doi: 10.1007/s00181-012-0602-4
![]() |
[21] |
Dumitrescu EI, Hurlin C (2012) Testing for Granger non-causality in heterogeneous panels. Econ Model 29: 1450–1460. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.econmod.2012.02.014 doi: 10.1016/j.econmod.2012.02.014
![]() |
[22] | Dutt D, Ghosh D (1996) The export growth-economic growth nexus: A causality analysis. J Dev Areas 30: 167–182. https://www.jstor.org/stable/4192538 |
[23] |
Engle RF, Granger CWJ (1987) Co-integration and error correction: Representation, estimation, and testing. Econometrica 55: 251–276. https://doi.org/10.2307/1913236 doi: 10.2307/1913236
![]() |
[24] |
Ergemen YE, Velasco C (2017) Estimation of fractionally integrated panels with fixed-effects and cross-section dependence. J Econom 196: 248–258. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jeconom.2016.05.020 doi: 10.1016/j.jeconom.2016.05.020
![]() |
[25] |
Emirmahmutoglu F, Kose N (2011) Testing for Granger causality in heterogeneous mixed panels. Econ Model 28: 870–876. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.econmod.2010.10.018 doi: 10.1016/j.econmod.2010.10.018
![]() |
[26] |
Falk M (2009) High-tech exports and economic growth in industrialized countries. Appl Econ Lett 16: 1025–1028. https://doi.org/10.1080/13504850701222228 doi: 10.1080/13504850701222228
![]() |
[27] |
Fischer C, Gil-Alana LA (2009) The nature of the relationship between international tourism and international trade: The case of German imports of Spanish wine. Appl Econ 41: 1345–1359. https://doi.org/10.1080/00036840601019349 doi: 10.1080/00036840601019349
![]() |
[28] | Gil-Alana LA, Hualde J (2009) Fractional integration and cointegration: An overview and an empirical application, In: Mills, T.C., Patterson, K. (Eds.), Palgrave Handbook of Econometrics, Palgrave Macmillan. https://doi.org/10.1057/9780230244405_10 |
[29] |
Gil-Alana LA, Mudida R, de Gracia FP (2014) Persistence, long memory and seasonality in Kenyan tourism series. Ann Touris Res 46: 89–101. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.annals.2014.02.008 doi: 10.1016/j.annals.2014.02.008
![]() |
[30] |
Giles JA, Williams CL (2000) Export-led growth: A survey of the empirical literature and some non-causality results. Part 1. J Int Trade Econ Dev 9: 261–337. https://doi.org/10.1080/09638190050086177 doi: 10.1080/09638190050086177
![]() |
[31] | Grossman GM, Helpman E (1991) Innovation and Growth in the Global Economy, MIT Press. |
[32] |
Hadri K (2000) Testing for stationarity in heterogeneous panel data. Econom J 3: 148–161. https://doi.org/10.1111/1368-423X.00043 doi: 10.1111/1368-423X.00043
![]() |
[33] |
Hagemejer J, Mućk J (2019) Export-led growth and its determinants: Evidence from CEEC countries. World Econ 42: 1994–2025. https://doi.org/10.1111/twec.12790 doi: 10.1111/twec.12790
![]() |
[34] | Helpman E, Krugman P (1985) Market Structure and Foreign Trade, MIT Press. |
[35] |
Herzer D, Nowak-Lehmann F, Siliverstovs B (2006) Export-led growth in Chile: Assessing the role of export composition in productivity growth. Dev Econ 43: 306–328. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1746-1049.2006.00019.x doi: 10.1111/j.1746-1049.2006.00019.x
![]() |
[36] | Hualde J, Nielsen MØ (2023) Fractional integration and cointegration. Fractional Integration and Cointegration, In: Oxford Research Encyclopedia of Economics and Finance. https://doi.org/10.1093/acrefore/9780190625979.013.639 |
[37] |
Im KS, Pesaran MH, Shin Y (2003) Testing for unit roots in heterogeneous panels. J Econom 115: 53–74. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0304-4076(03)00092-7 doi: 10.1016/S0304-4076(03)00092-7
![]() |
[38] |
Islam MS (2022) Does the trade‐led growth hypothesis exist for South Asia? A pooled mean group estimation. Reg Sci Policy Pract 14: 244–258. https://doi.org/10.1111/rsp3.12481 doi: 10.1111/rsp3.12481
![]() |
[39] |
Islam MS, Alsaif SS, Alsaif T (2022) Trade openness, government consumption, and economic growth nexus in Saudi Arabia: ARDL cointegration approach. Sage Open 12. https://doi.org/10.1177/21582440221096661 doi: 10.1177/21582440221096661
![]() |
[40] |
Islam MS (2023) Does an export‐led growth proposition exist for Bangladesh's ready‐made garments sector? A nonlinear ARDL approach. Reg Sci Policy Pract 15: 939–956. https://doi.org/10.1111/rsp3.12557 doi: 10.1111/rsp3.12557
![]() |
[41] |
Jin JC (1995) Export-led growth and the four little dragons. J Int Trade Econ Dev 4: 203–215. https://doi.org/10.1080/09638199500000017 doi: 10.1080/09638199500000017
![]() |
[42] |
Jun S (2007) Bi-directional relationships between exports and growth: A panel cointegration analysis. J Econ Res 12: 133–171. https://doi.org/10.17256/jer.2007.12.2.002 doi: 10.17256/jer.2007.12.2.002
![]() |
[43] |
Hausmann R, Hwang J, Rodrik D (2007) What you export matters. J Econ Growth 12: 1–25. https://doi.org/10.3386/w11905 doi: 10.3386/w11905
![]() |
[44] | Hausmann R (2024) Export-led growth. Growth Lab Working Papers 231 Harvard's Growth Lab. |
[45] |
Konya L (2008). Export-Led Growth or Growth-Driven Export? New Evidence from Granger Causality Analysis on OECD Countries. Appl Econom Int Dev 4. https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.254090 doi: 10.2139/ssrn.254090
![]() |
[46] |
Kónya L (2006) Exports and growth: Granger causality analysis on OECD countries with panel data approach. Econ Model 23: 978–992. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.econmod.2006.04.008 doi: 10.1016/j.econmod.2006.04.008
![]() |
[47] |
Krugman PR (1979) Increasing returns, monopolistic competition, and international trade. J Int Econ 9: 469–479. https://doi.org/10.1016/0022-1996(79)90017-5 doi: 10.1016/0022-1996(79)90017-5
![]() |
[48] |
Lall S (2020) The technological structure and performance of developing country manufactured exports, 1985–98. Oxf Dev Stud 28: 337–369. https://doi.org/10.1080/713688318 doi: 10.1080/713688318
![]() |
[49] |
Levin A, Lin CF, Chu CSJ (2002) Unit root tests in panel data: Asymptotic and finite-sample proper. J Econom 108: 1–24. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0304-4076(01)00098-7 doi: 10.1016/S0304-4076(01)00098-7
![]() |
[50] |
Lim SY, Ho CM (2013) Nonlinearity in ASEAN-5 export-led growth model: Empirical evidence from nonparametric approach. Econ Model 32: 136–145. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.econmod.2013.01.044 doi: 10.1016/j.econmod.2013.01.044
![]() |
[51] | McCombie JSL, Roberts M (2002) The role of the balance of payments in economic growth: Another look at the Harrod trade multiplier. Rev Polit Econ 14: 429–449. |
[52] | McCombie JSL, Thirlwall AP (2004) Essays on Balance of Payments Constrained Growth: Theory and Evidence, Routledge. |
[53] |
Maddala GS, Wu S (1999) A comparative study of unit root tests with panel data and a new simple test. Oxf Bull Econ Stat 61: 631–652. https://doi.org/10.1111/1468-0084.0610s1631 doi: 10.1111/1468-0084.0610s1631
![]() |
[54] |
Marin D (1992) Is the export-led growth hypothesis valid for industrialized countries? Rev Econ Stat 74: 678–688. https://doi.org/10.2307/2109382 doi: 10.2307/2109382
![]() |
[55] | Medina-Smith EJ (2000) Is the export-led growth hypothesis valid for developing countries? A case study of Costa Rica. Policy Issues in International Trade and Commodities Study Series, 7, United Nations Conference on Trade and Development. |
[56] |
Melitz MJ (2003) The Impact of Trade on Intra-Industry Reallocations and Aggregate Industry Productivity. Econometrica 71: 1695–1725. https://doi.org/10.1111/1468-0262.00467 doi: 10.1111/1468-0262.00467
![]() |
[57] | Mishra PK (2011) The dynamics of relationship between exports and economic growth in India. Int J Econ Sci Appl Res 4: 53–57. https://hdl.handle.net/10419/66632 |
[58] |
Nguyen HT, Örsal DDK (2020) A new and benign hegemon on the horizon? The Chinese century and growth in the Global South. Economics 14. http://dx.doi.org/10.5018/economics-ejournal.ja.2020-12 doi: 10.5018/economics-ejournal.ja.2020-12
![]() |
[59] |
Odhiambo NM (2022) Is export-led growth hypothesis still valid for sub-Saharan African countries? New evidence from panel data analysis. Eur J Manag Bus Econ 31: 77–93. https://doi.org/10.1108/ejmbe-06-2020-0156 doi: 10.1108/ejmbe-06-2020-0156
![]() |
[60] | OECD (2022) Quarterly National Accounts. OECD Stats. Available from: https://stats.oecd.org/Index.aspx?DataSetCode = QNA%20. |
[61] | Palley TI (2012) The rise and fall of export-led growth. Investigación Económica 71: 141–161. |
[62] |
Parida PC, Sahoo P (2007) Export-led growth in South Asia: A panel cointegration analysis. Int Econ J 21: 155–175. https://doi.org/10.1080/10168730701345414 doi: 10.1080/10168730701345414
![]() |
[63] |
Parteka A (2020) What drives cross-country differences in export variety? A bilateral panel approach. Econ Model 92: 48–56. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.econmod.2020.07.001 doi: 10.1016/j.econmod.2020.07.001
![]() |
[64] |
Pedroni P (1999) Critical values for cointegration tests in heterogeneous panels with multiple regressors. Oxf Bull Econ Stat 61: 653–670. https://doi.org/10.1111/1468-0084.0610s1653 doi: 10.1111/1468-0084.0610s1653
![]() |
[65] |
Pedroni P (2004) Panel cointegration: Asymptotic and finite sample properties of pooled time series tests with an application to the PPP hypothesis. Economet Theory 20: 597–625. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0266466604203073 doi: 10.1017/S0266466604203073
![]() |
[66] |
Pérez-Rodríguez JV, Rachinger H, Santana-Gallego M (2021) Testing the validity of the tourism-led growth hypothesis under long-range dependence. Curr Issues Tour 24: 768–793. https://doi.org/10.1080/13683500.2020.1744537 doi: 10.1080/13683500.2020.1744537
![]() |
[67] |
Pérez-Rodríguez JV, Rachinger H, Santana-Gallego M (2022) Does tourism promote economic growth? A fractionally integrated heterogeneous panel data analysis. Tour Econ 28: 1355–1376. https://doi.org/10.1177/13548166209806 doi: 10.1177/13548166209806
![]() |
[68] |
Pesaran MH (2006) Estimation and inference in large heterogeneous panels with multifactor error structure. Econometrica 74: 967–1012. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-0262.2006.00692.x doi: 10.1111/j.1468-0262.2006.00692.x
![]() |
[69] |
Pesaran MH (2007) A simple panel unit root test in the presence of cross-section dependence. J Appl Econom 22: 265–312. https://doi.org/10.1002/jae.951 doi: 10.1002/jae.951
![]() |
[70] |
Pesaran MH (2015) Testing weak cross-sectional dependence in large panels. Econom Rev 34: 1089–1117. https://doi.org/10.1080/07474938.2014.956623 doi: 10.1080/07474938.2014.956623
![]() |
[71] |
Ribeiro Ramos FF (2001) Exports, imports, and economic growth in Portugal: Evidence from causality and cointegration analysis. Econ Model 18: 613–623. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0264-9993(00)00055-9 doi: 10.1016/S0264-9993(00)00055-9
![]() |
[72] |
Ribeiro AP, Carvalho V, Santos P (2016) Export-led growth in the EU: Where and what to export? Int Trade J 30: 319–344. https://doi.org/10.1080/08853908.2016.1197806 doi: 10.1080/08853908.2016.1197806
![]() |
[73] |
Robinson PM (1995) Gaussian semiparametric estimation of long range dependence. Ann Stat 23: 1630–1661. https://doi.org/10.1214/aos/1176324317 doi: 10.1214/aos/1176324317
![]() |
[74] |
Romer P (1990) Endogenous technological change. J Polit Econ 98: S71–S102. https://doi.org/10.1086/261725 doi: 10.1086/261725
![]() |
[75] |
Romero JP, McCombie JSL (2016) The Multi-Sectoral Thirlwall's Law: evidence from 14 developed European countries using product-level data. Int Rev Appl Econ 30: 301–325. https://doi.org/10.1080/02692171.2015.1102207 doi: 10.1080/02692171.2015.1102207
![]() |
[76] |
Sahoo AK, Sahoo D, Sahu NC (2014) Mining export, industrial production and economic growth: A cointegration and causality analysis for India. Resour Policy 42: 27–34. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.resourpol.2014.09.001 doi: 10.1016/j.resourpol.2014.09.001
![]() |
[77] |
Sannassee RV, Seetanah B, Jugessur J (2014) Export-led growth hypothesis: A meta-analysis. J Dev Areas 48: 361–385. https://doi.org/10.1353/jda.2014.0018 doi: 10.1353/jda.2014.0018
![]() |
[78] |
Seok JH, Moon H (2021) Agricultural exports and agricultural economic growth in developed countries: Evidence from OECD countries. J Int Trade Econ Dev 30: 1004–1019. https://doi.org/10.1080/09638199.2021.1923780 doi: 10.1080/09638199.2021.1923780
![]() |
[79] |
Seok JH, Kim SE (2023) The impact of population aging on economic growth in Korea: Revisiting the export-led growth hypothesis framework. J Int Trade Econ Dev 33: 1091–1107. https://doi.org/10.1080/09638199.2023.2235434 doi: 10.1080/09638199.2023.2235434
![]() |
[80] |
Shafiullah M, Selvanathan S, Naranpanawa A (2017) The role of export composition in export-led growth in Australia and its regions. Econ Anal Policy 53: 62–76. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eap.2016.11.002 doi: 10.1016/j.eap.2016.11.002
![]() |
[81] |
Shan J, Sun F (1998) On the export-led growth hypothesis: The econometric evidence from China. Appl Econ 30: 1055–1065. https://doi.org/10.1080/000368498325228 doi: 10.1080/000368498325228
![]() |
[82] |
Shan J, Sun F (1999) Export-led growth and the US economy: Some further testing. Appl Econ Lett 6: 169–172. https://doi.org/10.1080/135048599353564 doi: 10.1080/135048599353564
![]() |
[83] |
Sojoodi S, Baghbanpour J (2023) The relationship between high-tech industries exports and GDP growth in the selected developing and developed countries. J Knowl Econ 15: 2073–2095. https://doi.org/10.1007/s13132-023-01174-3 doi: 10.1007/s13132-023-01174-3
![]() |
[84] |
Tang CF, Lai YW, Ozturk I (2015) How stable is the export-led growth hypothesis? Evidence from Asia's Four Little Dragons. Econ Model 44: 229–235. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.econmod.2014.09.022 doi: 10.1016/j.econmod.2014.09.022
![]() |
[85] |
Thirlwall AP (1979) The balance of payments constraint as an explanation of international growth rate differences. Banca Nazionale del Lavoro Quarterly Review 32: 45–53. https://doi.org/10.13133/2037-3643/12804 doi: 10.13133/2037-3643/12804
![]() |
[86] |
Toda HY, Yamamoto T (1995) Statistical inference in vector autoregressions with possibly integrated process. J Econom 66: 225–250. https://doi.org/10.1016/0304-4076(94)01616-8 doi: 10.1016/0304-4076(94)01616-8
![]() |
[87] | Torres R (2019) Export-led growth in the euro area: Benefits and costs. Funcas SEFO 8: 5–14. |
[88] | WDI (2023) World Development Indicators. The World Bank. Available from: https://datacatalog.worldbank.org/search/dataset/0037712/World-Development-Indicators. |
[89] |
Westerlund J (2005) New simple tests for panel cointegration. Econom Rev 24: 297–316. https://doi.org/10.1080/07474930500243019 doi: 10.1080/07474930500243019
![]() |
[90] |
Xu Z (1996) On the causality between export growth and GDP growth: An empirical reinvestigation. Rev Int Econ 4: 172–184. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9396.1996.tb00094.x doi: 10.1111/j.1467-9396.1996.tb00094.x
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
1. | Fengwei Li, Qingfang Ye, Extremal graphs with given parameters in respect of general ABS index, 2024, 482, 00963003, 128974, 10.1016/j.amc.2024.128974 | |
2. | Shabana Anwar, Muhammad Kamran Jamil, Amal S. Alali, Mehwish Zegham, Aisha Javed, Extremal values of the first reformulated Zagreb index for molecular trees with application to octane isomers, 2023, 9, 2473-6988, 289, 10.3934/math.2024017 |
ψij | name |
i+j | First Zagreb index |
1√ij | Randić index |
2√iji+j | GA index |
√i+j−2ij | ABC index |
1√i+j | Sum–connectivity index |
(ij)3(i+j−2)3 | AZI index |
2i+j | Harmonic index |
|i−j| | Albertson index |
√i2+j2 | Sombor index |
iji+j | ISI index |
ij | 1√ij | 2√iji+j | 1√i+j | (ij)3(i+j−2)3 | √i+j−2ij | |
q | -1 | -0.0168 | -0.0404 | -0.0138 | -3.390 | 0.040 |
s | 5 | -0.1667 | 0 | -0.091 | 3.390 | -0.040 |
ij | 1√ij | 2√iji+j | 1√i+j | (ij)3(i+j−2)3 | √i+j−2ij | |
q | -1 | -0.0168 | -0.0404 | -0.0138 | -3.390 | 0.040 |
u | 18 | -0.449 | 0.121 | -0.233 | 20.344 | -0.242 |
ψij | name |
i+j | First Zagreb index |
1√ij | Randić index |
2√iji+j | GA index |
√i+j−2ij | ABC index |
1√i+j | Sum–connectivity index |
(ij)3(i+j−2)3 | AZI index |
2i+j | Harmonic index |
|i−j| | Albertson index |
√i2+j2 | Sombor index |
iji+j | ISI index |
ij | 1√ij | 2√iji+j | 1√i+j | (ij)3(i+j−2)3 | √i+j−2ij | |
q | -1 | -0.0168 | -0.0404 | -0.0138 | -3.390 | 0.040 |
s | 5 | -0.1667 | 0 | -0.091 | 3.390 | -0.040 |
ij | 1√ij | 2√iji+j | 1√i+j | (ij)3(i+j−2)3 | √i+j−2ij | |
q | -1 | -0.0168 | -0.0404 | -0.0138 | -3.390 | 0.040 |
u | 18 | -0.449 | 0.121 | -0.233 | 20.344 | -0.242 |