
In this paper, we investigate a stochastic prey-predator model with Holling-type IV functional responses, anti-predatory behavior (referring to prey resistance to predator), gestation time delay of prey and Lévy noise. We investigate the existence and uniqueness of global positive solutions through Itô's formulation and Lyapunov's method. We also provide sufficient conditions for the persistence and extinction of prey-predator populations. Additionally, we examine the stability of the system distribution and validate our analytical findings through detailed numerical simulations. Our paper concludes with the implications of our results.
Citation: Chuanfu Chai, Yuanfu Shao, Yaping Wang. Analysis of a Holling-type IV stochastic prey-predator system with anti-predatory behavior and Lévy noise[J]. AIMS Mathematics, 2023, 8(9): 21033-21054. doi: 10.3934/math.20231071
[1] | Ali N. A. Koam, Adnan Khalil, Ali Ahmad, Muhammad Azeem . Cardinality bounds on subsets in the partition resolving set for complex convex polytope-like graph. AIMS Mathematics, 2024, 9(4): 10078-10094. doi: 10.3934/math.2024493 |
[2] | Ali N. A. Koam . Metric based resolvability of cycle related graphs. AIMS Mathematics, 2024, 9(4): 9911-9925. doi: 10.3934/math.2024485 |
[3] | Naila Mehreen, Rashid Farooq, Shehnaz Akhter . On partition dimension of fullerene graphs. AIMS Mathematics, 2018, 3(3): 343-352. doi: 10.3934/Math.2018.3.343 |
[4] | Suliman Khan, Sakander Hayat, Asad Khan, Muhammad Yasir Hayat Malik, Jinde Cao . Hamilton-connectedness and Hamilton-laceability of planar geometric graphs with applications. AIMS Mathematics, 2021, 6(4): 3947-3973. doi: 10.3934/math.2021235 |
[5] | Moussa Benoumhani . Restricted partitions and convex topologies. AIMS Mathematics, 2025, 10(4): 10187-10203. doi: 10.3934/math.2025464 |
[6] | Li Liu, Long Zhang, Huaxiang Zhang, Shuang Gao, Dongmei Liu, Tianshi Wang . A data partition strategy for dimension reduction. AIMS Mathematics, 2020, 5(5): 4702-4721. doi: 10.3934/math.2020301 |
[7] | Sakander Hayat, Bagus Imanda, Asad Khan, Mohammed J. F. Alenazi . Three infinite families of Hamilton-connected convex polytopes and their detour index. AIMS Mathematics, 2025, 10(5): 12343-12387. doi: 10.3934/math.2025559 |
[8] | Dalal Awadh Alrowaili, Uzma Ahmad, Saira Hameeed, Muhammad Javaid . Graphs with mixed metric dimension three and related algorithms. AIMS Mathematics, 2023, 8(7): 16708-16723. doi: 10.3934/math.2023854 |
[9] | Ahmed Alamer, Hassan Zafar, Muhammad Javaid . Study of modified prism networks via fractional metric dimension. AIMS Mathematics, 2023, 8(5): 10864-10886. doi: 10.3934/math.2023551 |
[10] | Jesús Gómez-Gardeñes, Ernesto Estrada . Network bipartitioning in the anti-communicability Euclidean space. AIMS Mathematics, 2021, 6(2): 1153-1174. doi: 10.3934/math.2021070 |
In this paper, we investigate a stochastic prey-predator model with Holling-type IV functional responses, anti-predatory behavior (referring to prey resistance to predator), gestation time delay of prey and Lévy noise. We investigate the existence and uniqueness of global positive solutions through Itô's formulation and Lyapunov's method. We also provide sufficient conditions for the persistence and extinction of prey-predator populations. Additionally, we examine the stability of the system distribution and validate our analytical findings through detailed numerical simulations. Our paper concludes with the implications of our results.
Let ψ be a simple, connected graph with vertex set V(ψ) and edge set E(ψ). The distance d(ρ1,ρ2), ρ1,ρ2∈V(ψ) is the length of shortest path between ρ1 and ρ2. Let Q={v1,v2,…,vj} be an ordered set of vertices of ψ. Let ρ1∈V(ψ), the representations denoted by r(ρ1|Q) is the j-tuple distances as (d(ρ1|v1),d(ρ1|v2),…,d(ρ1|vj)). If distinct vertices of ψ have distinct representation w.r.t. Q then Q is called the resolving set. The minimum number of j in the resolving set is known as the metric dimension of ψ and written as dim(ψ). Motivated by the problem of determining an intruder's location in a network in a unique way, Slater introduced the definition of metric dimension in [27] and later independently by Harary and Melter in [11]. The concept of resolving set, metric basis and metric dimension appeared in the literature [4,6,8,9,10,12,15,19,28,30,31].
A partition of a set is collection of its subsets, no pair of which overlap, such that the union of all the subsets is the whole set and partition dimension is related to the partitioning of the vertex set V(Ω) and resolvability. The partition dimension is a generalized variant of matric dimension. Another type of dimension of a graph, is called partition dimension. Let Γ={Γ1,Γ2…,Γj} and r(ρ1|Γ)={d(ρ1,Γ1),d(ρ1,Γ2),…,d(ρ1,Γj)} are named as j-ordered partition of vertices and j-tuple representations respectively. If the representations of every ρ1 in V(ψ) w.r.t. Γ is different, then Γ is the resolving partition of the vertex set and the minimum count of the resolving partition set of V(ψ) is named as the partition dimension of ψ and it is represented by pd(ψ) [7]. The problem of determining the resolving set of a graph is NP-hard [20]. As, the problem of finding the partition dimension is a generalize version of metric dimension, therefore partition dimension is also a NP-complete problem. It is natural to think that there is a relation between metric and partition dimension, [7] proved for any non-trivial connected graph ψ,
pd(ψ)≤dim(ψ)+1. | (1.1) |
In [22], fullerene graph of chemical structure is discussed and proved that the graph has constant and bounded partition dimension. For more and interesting results on constant partition dimension can see [16,21,24]. To find the exact value of partition dimension of a graph is not easy therefore, various results on the bounds of the partition dimension are discussed in literature, such as the partition dimension of Cartesian product operation on different graphs are studies and provided extensive bounds on partition dimension [29]. In [1] different bounds of partition dimension of subdivision of different graphs are discussed. In [25,26] provide bounds of partition dimension of tree and uni-cyclic graphs in the form of subgraphs.
The applications of partition resolving sets can be found in different fields such as robot navigation [19], Djokovic-Winkler relation [9], strategies for the mastermind game [10], network discovery and verification [5], in chemistry for representing chemical compounds [17,18] and in problems of pattern recognition and image processing, some of which involve the use of hierarchical data structures [23] for more applications see [6,11]. Following theorems are very helpful in finding the partition dimension of a graph.
Theorem 1.1. [7] Let Γ be a resolving partition of V(ψ) and ρ1,ρ2∈V(ψ). If d(ρ1,z)=d(ρ2,z) for all vertices z∈V(ψ)∖(ρ1,ρ2), then ρ1,ρ2 belong to different classes of Γ.
Theorem 1.2. [7] Let ψ be a simple and connected graph, then
● pd(ψ) is 2 iff ψ is a path graph
● pd(ψ) is n iff ψ is a complete graph,
Let R be a family of connected graphs Gn:R=(Gn)n≥1, where |V(ψ)|=λ(n) and limn→∞λ(n)=∞. If there exists a constant α≥1 such that pd(ψ)≤α,n≥1, then R has bounded partition dimension otherwise unbounded. Imran et al. [14] studied the metric dimension of Rpn, Dpn, and Qpn, convex polytopes which motivates us to find the partition dimension of same families of convex polytopes. In this paper, the partition dimension of same families of convex polytopes are studied. We determine the partition dimension of Rpn, in second section. In the third section, the partition dimension of the graph Dpn of a convex polytope with pendent edges is presented. The fourth section remains for the partition dimension of the graph Qpn.
The convex polytope Rpn (p for pendant edges) is a planar graph and obtained from the convex polytope Rn defined in [13]. If we attach a pendant edge at each vertex of outer layer of Rn then we obtained a new planer graph Rpn as shown in Figure 1. The vertex set of Rpn, V(RPn)={V(Rn)}∪{xα:1≤α≤n} and edge set of Rpn, E(RPn)={E(Rn)}∪{wαxα:1≤α≤n}.
For calculation, {uα:1≤α≤n} represents the inner cycle, the cycle induced by {vα:1≤α≤n} is interior cycle, exterior cycle containing {wα:1≤α≤n} set of vertices and pendant vertices named {xα:1≤α≤n}.
Theorem 2.1. Let Rpn be a polytopes with n≥6. Then pd(Rpn)≤4.
Proof. We splits the proof into following two cases.
Case 1: When n=2β,β≥3,β∈N. We partition the vertices of Rpn into four partition resolving sets Θ={Γ1,Γ2,Γ3,Γ4} where Γ1={u1}, Γ2={u2}, Γ3={uβ+1} and Γ4={∀V(Rpn)|∉{Γ1,Γ2,Γ3}}. It suffice to show that if every vertex of Rpn have different representation w.r.t. resolving set Γ, then pd(Rpn)≤4. We give the representations of all vertices w.r.t. resolving partition set Γ are following.
The vertices on inner cycle having the representations w.r.t. Γ which are:
If 3≤α≤β, then r(uβ|Γ)=(α−1,α−2,β−α+1,0). If β+2≤α≤2β, then r(uβ|Γ)=(2β−α+1,2β−α+2,α−β−1,0). There are no two vertices have same representation in inner cycle of Rpn.
The vertices on interior cycle having the representations w.r.t. Γ which are:
If α=1, then r(vβ|Γ)=(1,1,β,0). If 2≤α≤β, then r(vβ|Γ)=(α,α−1,β−α+1,0). If α=β+1, then r(vβ|Γ)=(β,β,1,0). If β+2≤α≤2β, then r(vβ|Γ)=(2β−α+1,2β−α+2,α−β,0). There are also no two vertices have same representation in interior cycle of Rpn.
The vertices on exterior cycle having the representations w.r.t. Γ which are:
If α=1, then r(wβ|Γ)=(2,2,β+1,0). If 2≤α≤β+1, then r(wβ|Γ)=(α+1,α,β−α+2,0). If α=β+2, then r(wβ|Γ)=(β+1,β+1,2,0). If β+3≤α≤2β, then r(wβ|Γ)=(2β−α+2,2β−α+3,α−β+1,0). Again there are no two vertices have same representation also in exterior cycle of Rpn. The representations of pendant vertices w.r.t. Γ are shown in Table 1. Again we can see that there are no two vertices have same representation of pendant vertices of Rpn.
Representation | Γ1 | Γ2 | Γ3 | Γ4 |
xα: α=1 | 3 | 3 | β+2 | 0 |
xα: 2≤α≤β | α+2 | α+1 | β−α+3 | 0 |
xα: α=β+1 | β+2 | β+2 | 3 | 0 |
xα: β+2≤α≤2β | 2β−α+3 | 2β−α+4 | α−β+2 | 0 |
It is easy to verify that all the vertices of Rpn have unique representation w.r.t. resolving partition Γ. Its means we can resolve the vertices of Rpn into four partition resolving sets, when n is even.
Case 2: When n=2β+1,β≥3,β∈N. Again we resolve the vertices of Rpn into four partition resolving sets Γ={Γ1,Γ2,Γ3,Γ4} where Γ1={u1}, Γ2={u2}, Γ3={uβ+1} and Γ4={∀V(Rpn)|∉{Γ1,Γ2,Γ3}}. It suffice to show that if every vertices of Rpn have different representation w.r.t. resolving set Γ, then pd(Rpn)≤4. {We give the representations of all vertices Γ4 w.r.t. resolving set Γ are following.
The vertices on inner cycle having the representations w.r.t. Γ which are:
If 3≤α≤β, then r(uβ|Γ)=(α−1,α−2,β−α+1,0). If α=β+2, then r(uβ|Γ)=(β,β,1,0). If β+3≤α≤2β+1, then r(uβ|Γ)=(2β−α+2,2β−α+3,α−β−1,0). There are no two vertices have same representation in inner cycle of Rpn.
The vertices on interior cycle having the representations w.r.t. Γ which are:
If α=1, then r(vβ|Γ)=(1,1,β,0). If 2≤α≤β, then r(vβ|Γ)=(α,α−1,β−α+1,0). If α=β+1, then r(vβ|Γ)=(β+1,β,1,0). If β+2≤α≤2β+1, then r(vβ|Γ)=(2β−α+2,2β−α+3,α−β,0). There are also no two vertices have same representation in interior cycle of Rpn.
The vertices on exterior cycle having the representations w.r.t. Γ which are: If α=1, then r(wβ|Γ)=(2,2,β+1,0). If 2≤α≤β, then r(wβ|Γ)=(α+1,α,β−α+2,0). If α=β+1, then r(wβ|Γ)=(β+2,β+1,2,0). If β+2≤α≤2β+1, then r(wβ|Γ)=(2β−α+3,2β−α+4,α−β+1,0). Again there are no two vertices have same representation also in exterior cycle of Rpn.
The pendant vertices having the representations w.r.t. Γ shown in Table 2. Again we can see that there are no two vertices have same representation of pendant vertices of Rpn.
Representation | Γ1 | Γ2 | Γ3 | Γ4 |
xα: α=1 | 3 | 3 | β+2 | 0 |
xα: 2≤α≤β | α+2 | α+1 | β−α+3 | 0 |
xα: α=β+1 | β+3 | β+2 | 3 | 0 |
xα: β+2≤α≤2β+1 | 2β−α+4 | 2β−α+5 | α−β+2 | 0 |
It is easy to verify that all the vertices of Rpn have unique representation w.r.t. resolving partition Γ. Its means we can also resolve the vertices of Rpn into four partition resolving sets, when n is odd.
We note that from Case 1 and 2, there are no two vertices having the same representations implying that pd(Rpn)≤4.
The convex polytope DPn is a planar graph and if we attach a pendant edge at each vertex of outer cycle of Dn [2] then we obtained a new plane graph DPn as shown in Figure 2. The vertex and edge set V(DPn)={V(Dn)}∪{yα:1≤α≤n}, E(DPn)={E(Dn)}∪{xαyα:1≤α≤n} are respectively. For calculation, {uα:1≤α≤n} represents the inner cycle, the cycle induced by {vα:1≤α≤n} is interior cycle, exterior cycle containing {wα:1≤α≤n} set of vertices, {xα:1≤α≤n} labeled as outer cycle and pendant vertices named for {yα:1≤α≤n}.
Theorem 3.1. Let DPn be a polytopes with n≥6. Then pd(DPn)≤4.
Proof. We split the proof of above theorem into following two cases.
Case 1: When n=2β,β≥3,β∈N. We partition the vertices of Dpn into four partition sets Γ={Γ1,Γ2,Γ3,Γ4} where Γ1={u1}, Γ2={u2}, Γ3={uβ+1} and Γ4={∀V(Dpn)|∉{Γ1,Γ2,Γ3}}. It suffice to show that if every vertices of Dpn have different representation w.r.t. resolving set Γ, then pd(Dpn)≤4. We give the representations of all vertices Γ4 w.r.t. resolving set Γ are following.
The vertices on inner cycle having the representations w.r.t. Γ which are:
If 3≤α≤β, then r(uβ|Γ)=(α−1,α−2,β−α+1,0). If β+2≤α≤2β, then r(uβ|Γ)=(2β−α+1,2β−α+2,α−β−1,0). There are no two vertices have same representation in inner cycle of Dpn.
The vertices on interior cycle having the representations w.r.t. Γ which are:
If α=1, then r(vβ|Γ)=(1,2,β+1,0). If 2≤α≤β, then r(vβ|Γ)=(α,α−1,β−α+2,0). If α=β+1, then r(vβ|Γ)=(β,β,1,0). If β+2≤α≤2β, then r(vβ|Γ)=(2β−α+2,2β−α+3,α−β,0). There are also no two vertices have same representation in interior cycle of Dpn.
The vertices on exterior cycle having the representations w.r.t. Γ which are:
If α=1, then r(wβ|Γ)=(2,2,β+1,0). If 2≤α≤β, then r(wβ|Γ)=(α+1,α,β−α+2,0). If α=β+1, then r(wβ|Γ)=(β+1,β+1,2,0). If β+2≤α≤2β, then r(wβ|Γ)=(2β−α+2,2β−α+3,α−β+1,0). Again there are no two vertices have same representation also in exterior cycle of Dpn.
The vertices on outer cycle and pendant vertices having the representations w.r.t. Γ as shown in Tables 3 and 4. Again we can see that there are no two vertices have same representation in outer cycle and pendant vertices of Dpn.
Representation | Γ1 | Γ2 | Γ3 | Γ4 |
xα: α=1 | 3 | 3 | β+2 | 0 |
xα: 2≤α≤β | α+2 | α+1 | β−α+3 | 0 |
xα: α=β+1 | β+2 | β+2 | 3 | 0 |
xα: β+2≤α≤2β | 2β−α+3 | 2β−α+4 | α−β+2 | 0 |
Representation | Γ1 | Γ2 | Γ3 | Γ4 |
yα: α=1 | 4 | 4 | β+3 | 0 |
yα: 2≤α≤β | α+3 | α+2 | β−α+4 | 0 |
yα: α=β+1 | β+3 | β+3 | 4 | 0 |
yα: β+2≤α≤2β−1 | 2β−α+4 | 2β−α+5 | α−β+3 | 0 |
It is easy to verify that all the vertices of Dpn have unique representation w.r.t. resolving partition Γ. Its means we can resolve the vertices of Dpn into four partition resolving sets, when n is even.
Case 2: When n=2β+1,β≥3,β∈N. Again we resolve the vertices of Dpn into four partition resolving sets Γ={Γ1,Γ2,Γ3,Γ4} where Γ1={u1}, Γ2={u2}, Γ3={uβ+1} and Γ4={∀V(Dpn)|∉{Γ1,Γ2,Γ3}}. It suffice to show that if every vertices of Dpn have different representation w.r.t. resolving set Γ, then pd(Dpn)≤4. We give the representations of all vertices Γ4 w.r.t. resolving set Γ are following.
The vertices on inner cycle having the representations w.r.t. Γ which are:
If 3≤α≤β, then r(uβ|Γ)=(α−1,α−2,β−α+1,0). If α=β+2, then r(uβ|Γ)=(β,β,1,0). If β+3≤α≤2β+1, then r(uβ|Γ)=(2β−α+1,2β−α+2,α−β−1,0). There are no two vertices have same representation in inner cycle of Dpn.
The vertices on interior cycle having the representations w.r.t. Γ which are:
If α=1, then r(vβ|Γ)=(1,2,β+1,0). If 2≤α≤β+1, then r(vβ|Γ)=(α,α−1,β−α+2,0). If α=β+2, then r(vβ|Γ)=(β+1,β+1,2,0). If β+3≤α≤2β+1, then r(vβ|Γ)=(2β−α+2,2β−α+3,α−β,0). There are also no two vertices have same representation in interior cycle of Dpn.
The vertices on exterior cycle having the representations w.r.t. Γ which are:
If α=1, then r(wβ|Γ)=(2,2,β+1,0). If 2≤α≤β, then r(wβ|Γ)=(α+1,α,β−α+2,0). If α=β+1, then r(wβ|Γ)=(β+2,β+1,2,0). If β+2≤α≤2β+1, then r(wβ|Γ)=(2β−α+3,2β−α+4,α−β+1,0). Again there are no two vertices have same representation also in exterior cycle of Dpn.
The vertices on outer cycle and pendant vertices having the representations w.r.t. Γ as shown in Tables 5 and 6. Again we can see that there are no two vertices have same representation in outer cycle and pendant vertices of Dpn.
Representation | Γ1 | Γ2 | Γ3 | Γ4 |
xα: α=1 | 3 | 3 | β+2 | 0 |
xα: 2≤α≤β | α+2 | α+1 | β−α+3 | 0 |
xα: α=β+1 | β+2 | β+2 | 3 | 0 |
xα: β+2≤α≤2β+1 | 2β−α+4 | 2β−α+5 | α−β+2 | 0 |
Representation | Γ1 | Γ2 | Γ3 | Γ4 |
xα: α=1 | 4 | 4 | β+3 | 0 |
xα: 2≤α≤β | α+3 | α+2 | β−α+4 | 0 |
xα: α=β+1 | β+3 | β+3 | 4 | 0 |
xα: β+2≤α≤2β+1 | 2β−α+5 | 2β−α+6 | α−β+3 | 0 |
It is easy to verify that all the vertices of Dpn have unique representation w.r.t. resolving partition Γ. Its means we can also resolve the vertices of Dpn into four partition resolving sets, when n is odd.
We note that from Case 1 and 2, there are no two vertices having the same representations implying that pd(Tpn)≤4.
The convex polytope QPn is a planar graph and If we attach a pendant edge at each vertex of outer cycle of Qn [3] then we obtained a new plane graph QPn as shown in Figure 3. The vertex and edge set V(QPn)={V(αn)}∪{yα:1≤α≤n}, E(QPn)={E(Qn)}∪{xαyα:1≤α≤n} are respectively.
For convenience, {uα:1≤α≤n} represents the inner cycle, the cycle induced by {vα:1≤α≤n} is interior cycle, exterior cycle containing {wα:1≤α≤n} set of vertices, {xα:1≤α≤n} are exterior vertices, and pendant vertices named for {yα:1≤α≤n}.
Theorem 4.1. Let QPn be a polytopes with n≥6. Then pd(QPn)≤4.
Proof. Case 1: When n=2β,β≥3,β∈N. We partition the vertices of Qpn into four partition resolving sets Γ={Γ1,Γ2,Γ3,Γ4} where Γ1={u1}, Γ2={u2}, Γ3={uβ+1} and Γ4={∀V(Qpn)|∉{Γ1,Γ2,Γ3}}. It suffice to show that if every vertices of Qpn have different representation w.r.t. resolving set Γ, then pd(Qpn)≤4. We give the representations of all vertices Γ4 w.r.t. resolving set Γ are following.
The vertices on inner cycle having the representations w.r.t. Γ which are:
If 3≤α≤β, then r(uβ|Γ)=(α−1,α−2,β−α+1,0). If β+2≤α≤2β, then r(uβ|Γ)=(2β−α+1,2β−α+2,α−β−1,0). There are no two vertices have same representation in inner cycle of Qpn.
The vertices on interior cycle having the representations w.r.t. Γ which are:
If β=1, then r(vβ|Γ)=(1,2,α+1,0). If 2≤α≤β, then r(vβ|Γ)=(α,α−1,β−α+2,0). If β+2≤α≤2β, then r(vβ|Γ)=(2β−α+2,2β−α+3,α−β,0). There are also no two vertices have same representation in interior cycle of Qpn.
The vertices on exterior cycle having the representations w.r.t. Γ which are:
If β=1, then r(vβ|Γ)=(2,2,α+1,0). If 2≤α≤β, then r(wβ|Γ)=(α+1,α,β−α+2,0). If α=β+1, then r(vβ|Γ)=(α+1,α+1,2,0). If β+2≤α≤2β, then r(wβ|Γ)=(2β−α+2,2β−α+3,α−β+1,0). Again there are no two vertices have same representation also in exterior cycle of Qpn.
The vertices on exterior cycle having the representations w.r.t. Γ which are:
If β=1, then r(vβ|Γ)=(3,3,α+2,0). If 2≤α≤β, then r(wβ|Γ)=(α+2,α+1,β−α+3,0). If α=β+1, then r(vβ|Γ)=(α+2,α+2,3,0). If β+2≤α≤2β, then r(wβ|Γ)=(2β−α+3,2β−α+4,α−β+2,0). Again there are no two vertices have same representation also in exterior cycle of Qpn.
The pendant vertices having the representations w.r.t. Γ as shown in Table 7. Again we can see that there are no two vertices have same representation in pendant vertices of Qpn.
Representation | Γ1 | Γ2 | Γ3 | Γ4 |
yα: α=1 | 4 | 4 | β+3 | 0 |
yα: 2≤α≤β | α+3 | α+2 | β−α+4 | 0 |
yα: α=β+1 | β+3 | β+3 | 4 | 0 |
yα: β+2≤α≤2β | 2β−α+4 | 2β−α+5 | α−β+3 | 0 |
It is easy to verify that all the vertices of Qpn have unique representation w.r.t. resolving partition Γ. Its means we can resolve the vertices of Qpn into four partition resolving sets, when n is even.
Case 2: When n=2β+1,β≥3,β∈N. Again we resolve the vertices of Qpn into four partition resolving sets Γ={Γ1,Γ2,Γ3,Γ4} where Γ1={u1}, Γ2={u2}, Γ3={uβ+1} and Γ4={∀V(Qpn)|∉{Γ1,Γ2,Γ3}}. It suffice to show that if every vertices of Qpn have different representation w.r.t. resolving set Γ, then pd(Qpn)≤4. We give the representations of all vertices Γ4 w.r.t. resolving set Γ are following.
The vertices on inner cycle having the representations w.r.t. Γ which are:
If 3≤α≤β, then r(uβ|Γ)=(α−1,α−2,β−α+1,0). If α=β+2, then r(uβ|Γ)=(β,β,1,0). If β+3≤α≤2β+1, then r(uβ|Γ)=(2β−α+1,2β−α+2,α−β−1,0). There are no two vertices have same representation in inner cycle of Qpn.
The vertices on interior cycle having the representations w.r.t. Γ which are:
If β=1, then r(vβ|Γ)=(1,2,α+1,0). If 2≤α≤β, then r(vβ|Γ)=(α,α−1,β−α+2,0). If α=β+2, then r(vβ|Γ)=(β+1,β+1,2,0). If β+3≤α≤2β+1, then r(vβ|Γ)=(2β−α+2,2β−α+3,α−β,0). There are also no two vertices have same representation in interior cycle of Qpn.
The vertices on exterior cycle having the representations w.r.t. Γ which are:
If β=1, then r(vβ|Γ)=(2,2,α+1,0). If 2≤α≤β, then r(wβ|Γ)=(α+1,α,β−α+2,0). If α=β+1, then r(wβ|Γ)=(β+2,β+1,2,0). If β+2≤α≤2β+1, then r(wβ|Γ)=(2β−α+3,2β−α+4,α−β+1,0). Again there are no two vertices have same representation also in exterior cycle of Qpn.
The vertices on exterior cycle having the representations w.r.t. Γ which are:
If β=1, then r(vβ|Γ)=(3,3,α+2,0). If 2≤α≤β, then r(wβ|Γ)=(α+2,α+1,β−α+3,0). If α=β+1, then r(wβ|Γ)=(β+2,β+2,3,0). If β+2≤α≤2β+1, then r(wβ|Γ)=(2β−α+4,2β−α+5,α−β+2,0). Again there are no two vertices have same representation also in exterior cycle of Qpn.
The pendant vertices having the representations w.r.t. Γ as shown in Table 8. Again we can see that there are no two vertices have same representation in pendant vertices of Qpn.
Representation | Γ1 | Γ2 | Γ3 | Γ4 |
yα: α=1 | 4 | 4 | β+3 | 0 |
yα: 2≤α≤β | α+3 | α+2 | β−α+4 | 0 |
yα: α=β+1 | β+4 | β+3 | 4 | 0 |
yα: β+2≤α≤2β+1 | 2β−α+5 | 2β−α+6 | α−β+3 | 0 |
It is easy to verify that all the vertices of Qpn have unique representation w.r.t. resolving partition Γ. Its means we can also resolve the vertices of Qpn into four partition resolving sets, when n is odd.
We note that from Case 1 and 2, there are no two vertices having the same representations implying that pd(Upn)≤4.
The core of the problem of the partition dimension is deciding the resolving partition set for a graph. In this paper, we have studies the partition dimension of some families of convex polytopes graph such as Rpn, Dpn and Qpn, which are obtained from the convex polytopes by adding a pendant edge at each vertex of outer cycle. In this research work, we have proved that partition dimension of these convex polytopes are bounded. Consequently, we propose the following open problems.
Conjecture 5.1. The following equalities hold:
pd(Rpn)=pd(Dpn)=pd(Qpn)=4 |
The authors declare there is no conflict of interest.
[1] | W. Thomas, Stability and complexity in model ecosystems, Princeton University Press, 1973. https://doi.org/10.1515/9780691206912 |
[2] |
C. S. Holling, The functional response of predator to prey density and its role in mimicry and population regulation, Mem. Entomol. Soc. Can., 45 (1965), 1–60. https://doi.org/10.4039/entm9745fv doi: 10.4039/entm9745fv
![]() |
[3] |
W. W. Murdoch, A. Oaten, Predation and population stability, Adv. Ecol. Res., 9 (1975), 1–131. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0065-2504(08)60288-3 doi: 10.1016/S0065-2504(08)60288-3
![]() |
[4] |
L. A. Real, The kinetics of functional response, Am. Nat., 111 (1977), 289–300. https://doi.org/10.1086/283161 doi: 10.1086/283161
![]() |
[5] | N. V. Kampen, A. Heertjes, Statistical aspects of the predator-prey problem, J. Theor. Biol., 7 (1959), 1–36. |
[6] |
Y. F. Shao, Fear and delay effects on a food chain system with two kinds of different functional responses, Int. J. Biomath., 34 (2023), 2350025. https://doi.org/10.1142/S1793524523500250 doi: 10.1142/S1793524523500250
![]() |
[7] |
S. Baba, A comprehensive cost-effectiveness analysis of control of maize streak virusdisease with Holling's Type II predation form and standard incidence, Results Phys., 40 (2022), 105862. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rinp.2022.105862 doi: 10.1016/j.rinp.2022.105862
![]() |
[8] |
A. Singh, V. S. Sharma, Bifurcations and chaos control in a discrete-time prey-predator model with Holling type-II functional response and prey refuge, J. Comput. Appl. Math., 418 (2023), 114666. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cam.2022.114666 doi: 10.1016/j.cam.2022.114666
![]() |
[9] |
C. S. Holling, Some characteristics of simple types of predation and parasitism, Can. Entomol., 91 (1959), 385–398. https://doi.org/10.4039/Ent91385-7 doi: 10.4039/Ent91385-7
![]() |
[10] |
F. Y. Wei, Uniform persistence of asymptotically periodic multispecies competition predator-prey systems with Holling III type functional response, Appl. Math. Comput., 170 (2005), 994–998. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.amc.2004.12.040 doi: 10.1016/j.amc.2004.12.040
![]() |
[11] |
Y. J. Huang, Stability analysis of a prey-predator model with holling type III response function incorporating a prey refuge, Appl. Math. Comput., 182 (2006), 672–683. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.amc.2006.04.030 doi: 10.1016/j.amc.2006.04.030
![]() |
[12] |
V. Madhusudanana, HOPF-bifurcation analysis of delayed computer virus modelwith holling type iii incidence function and treatment, Sci. Afr., 15 (2022), e01125. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sciaf.2022.e01125 doi: 10.1016/j.sciaf.2022.e01125
![]() |
[13] |
W. Sokol, J. A. Howell, Kinetics of phenol exidation by washed cells, Biotechnol. Bioeng., 23 (1981), 2039–2049. https://doi.org/10.1002/bit.260230909 doi: 10.1002/bit.260230909
![]() |
[14] |
V. H. Edwards, The influence of high substrate concentrations on microbial kinetics, Biotechnol. Bioeng., 12 (1970), 679–712. https://doi.org/10.1002/bit.260120504 doi: 10.1002/bit.260120504
![]() |
[15] |
H. H. C. Alvino, M. Marvá, Group defense promotes coexistence in interference competition: The Holling type IV competitive response, Math. Comput. Simulat., 198 (2022), 426–445. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.matcom.2022.02.031 doi: 10.1016/j.matcom.2022.02.031
![]() |
[16] |
S. W. Zhang, A food chain model with impulsive perturbations and Holling IV functional response, Chaos Soliton. Fract., 26 (2005), 855–866. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chaos.2005.01.053 doi: 10.1016/j.chaos.2005.01.053
![]() |
[17] |
S. W. Zhang, Chaos in periodically forced Holling type IV predator-prey system with impulsive perturbations, Chaos Soliton. Fract., 27 (2006), 980–990. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chaos.2005.04.065 doi: 10.1016/j.chaos.2005.04.065
![]() |
[18] |
C. X. Shen, Permanence and global attractivity of the food-chain system with Holling IV type functional response, Appl. Math. Comput., 194 (2007), 179–185. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.amc.2007.04.019 doi: 10.1016/j.amc.2007.04.019
![]() |
[19] |
X. X. Liu, Q. D. Huang, The dynamics of a harvested predator-prey system with Holling type IV functional response, BioSystems, 169–170 (2018), 26–39. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biosystems.2018.05.005 doi: 10.1016/j.biosystems.2018.05.005
![]() |
[20] |
K. Gopalsamy, Time lags and global stability in two species competition, Bull. Math. Biol., 42 (1980), 729–737. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0092-8240(80)80069-3 doi: 10.1016/S0092-8240(80)80069-3
![]() |
[21] |
Y. Zhao, S. L. Yuan, Q. M. Zhang, The effect of Lévy noise on the survival of a stochastic competitive model in an impulsive polluted environment, Appl. Math. Model., 40 (2016), 7583–7600. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.apm.2016.01.056 doi: 10.1016/j.apm.2016.01.056
![]() |
[22] |
Y. Zhao, S. L. Yuan, Stability in distribution of a stochastic hybrid competitive Lotka-Volterra model with Lévy jumps, Chaos Soliton. Fract., 85 (2016), 98–109. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chaos.2016.01.015 doi: 10.1016/j.chaos.2016.01.015
![]() |
[23] |
C. Lu, Dynamical behavior of stochastic delay Lotka-Volterra competitive model with general Lévy jumps, Physica A, 531 (2019), 121730. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.physa.2019.121730 doi: 10.1016/j.physa.2019.121730
![]() |
[24] |
B. Tang, Y. Xiao, Bifurcation analysis of a predator-prey model with anti-predator behaviour, Chaos Soliton. Fract., 70 (2015), 58–68. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chaos.2014.11.008 doi: 10.1016/j.chaos.2014.11.008
![]() |
[25] |
K. M. Comb, G. Shannon, S. M. Durant, Leadership in elephants: The adaptive value of age, P. Roy. Soc. B-Biol. Sci., 278 (2011), 3270–3276. https://doi.org/10.1098/rspb.2011.0168 doi: 10.1098/rspb.2011.0168
![]() |
[26] |
S. Creel, N. M. Creel, Limitation of African wild dogs by competition with larger carnivores, Conserv. Biol., 10 (1996), 526–538. https://doi.org/10.1046/j.1523-1739.1996.10020526.x doi: 10.1046/j.1523-1739.1996.10020526.x
![]() |
[27] | J. V. Craig, Effects of predation risk on reproductive behavior of northern fur seals, J. Mammal., 86 (2005), 1059–1067. |
[28] | K. Gopalsamy, Stability and oscillations in delay differential equations of population dynamics, Springer Science+Business Media Dordrecht, 1992. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-015-7920-9 |
[29] |
J. P. Tripathi, S. Abbas, M. Thakur, A density dependent delayed predator-prey model with Beddington-DeAngelis type function response incorporating a prey refuge, Commun. Nonlinear Sci. Numer. Simul., 22 (2015), 427–450. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cnsns.2014.08.018 doi: 10.1016/j.cnsns.2014.08.018
![]() |
[30] |
A. Martin, S. Ruan, Predator-prey models with delay and prey harvesting, J. Math. Biol., 43 (2001), 247–267. https://doi.org/10.1007/s002850100095 doi: 10.1007/s002850100095
![]() |
[31] |
C. J. Xu, W. Zhang, C. Aouiti, Z. X. Liu, L. Y. Yao, Comparative exploration on bifurcation behavior for integer-order and fractional-order delayed BAM neural networks, Nonlinear Anal. Model. Control, 27 (2022), 1030–1053. https://doi.org/10.15388/namc.2022.27.28491 doi: 10.15388/namc.2022.27.28491
![]() |
[32] |
S. Ruan, Delay differential equations in single species dynamics, Delay Differ. Equat. Appl., 205 (2006), 477–517. https://dx.doi.org/10.1007/1-4020-3647-7_11 doi: 10.1007/1-4020-3647-7_11
![]() |
[33] | J. Barbalat, Systems d'equations differentielles d'osci d'oscillations nonlinéaires, Romanian J. Pure Appl. Math., 4 (1959), 267–270. |
[34] |
M. Liu, C. Z. Bai, Optimal harvesting of a stochastic logistic model with time delay, J. Nonlinear Sci., 25 (2015), 277–289. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00332-014-9229-2 doi: 10.1007/s00332-014-9229-2
![]() |
[35] |
M. Liu, P. S. Mandal, Dynamical behavior of a one-prey two-predator model with random perturbations, Commun. Nonlinear Sci. Numer. Simulat., 28 (2015), 123–137. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cnsns.2015.04.010 doi: 10.1016/j.cnsns.2015.04.010
![]() |
[36] |
Y. Guo, Stochastic regime switching SIR model driven by Lévy noise, Physica A, 497 (2017), 1–11. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.physa.2017.02.053 doi: 10.1016/j.physa.2017.02.053
![]() |
[37] |
H. Qiu, Optimal harvesting of a stochastic delay tri-trophic food-chain model with Lévy jumps, Physica A, 492 (2018), 1715–1728. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.physa.2017.11.092 doi: 10.1016/j.physa.2017.11.092
![]() |
[38] |
J. H. Bao, X. R. Mao, G. Yin, C. G. Yuan, Competitive Lotka-Volterra population dynamics with jumps, Nonlinear Anal., 74 (2011), 6601–6616. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.na.2011.06.043 doi: 10.1016/j.na.2011.06.043
![]() |
[39] |
J. Yu, Stationary distribution and ergodicity of a stochastic food-chain model with Lévy jumps, Physica A, 482 (2017), 14–28. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.physa.2017.04.067 doi: 10.1016/j.physa.2017.04.067
![]() |
[40] |
M. Deng, Stability of a stochastic delay commensalism model with Lévy jumps, Physica A, 527 (2019), 121061. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.physa.2019.121061 doi: 10.1016/j.physa.2019.121061
![]() |
[41] |
C. Liu, Q. L. Zhang, Y. K. Li, Dynamical behavior in a hybrid stochastic triple delayed prey predator bioeconomic system with Lévy jumps, J. Franklin I., 356 (2019), 592–628. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jfranklin.2018.11.015 doi: 10.1016/j.jfranklin.2018.11.015
![]() |
[42] |
Y. L. Zhou, S. L. Yuan, D. L. Zhao, Threshold behavior of a stochastic SIS model with Lévy jumps, Appl. Math. Comput., 275 (2016), 255–267. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.amc.2015.11.077 doi: 10.1016/j.amc.2015.11.077
![]() |
[43] |
H. Kunita, Itô's stochastic calculus: Its surprising power for applications, Stoch. Process. Appl., 120 (2010), 622–652. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.spa.2010.01.013 doi: 10.1016/j.spa.2010.01.013
![]() |
[44] | R. X. Xue, Y. F. Shao, Analysis of a stochastic predator-prey system with fear effect and Lévy noise, Adv. Cont. Discr. Mod., 72 (2022). https://doi.org/10.1186/s13662-022-03749-x |
[45] |
C. Liu, X. Y. Xun, Q. L. Zhang, Y. K. Li, Dynamical analysis and optimal control in a hybrid stochastic double delayed bioeconomic system with impulsive contaminants emission and Lévy jumps, Appl. Math. Comput., 352 (2019), 99–118. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.amc.2019.01.045 doi: 10.1016/j.amc.2019.01.045
![]() |
[46] |
Z. Ma, G. Cui, W. Wang, Persistence and extinction of a population in a polluted environment, Math. Biosci., 101 (1990), 75–97. https://doi.org/10.1016/0025-5564(90)90103-6 doi: 10.1016/0025-5564(90)90103-6
![]() |
[47] |
X. Y. Li, X. R. Mao, Population dynamical behavior of non-autonomous Lotka-Volterra competitive system with random perturbation, Discrete Cont. Dyn-S., 24 (2009), 523–545. https://doi.org/10.3934/dcds.2009.24.523 doi: 10.3934/dcds.2009.24.523
![]() |
[48] | M. Kot, Elements of mathematical biology, Cambridge University Press, 2001. https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511608520 |
[49] |
C. J. Xu, D. Mu, Y. L. Pan, C. Aouiti, L. Y. Yao, Exploring bifurcation in a fractional-order predator-prey system with mixed delays, J. Appl. Anal. Comput., 13 (2023), 1119–1136. https://doi.org/10.11948/20210313 doi: 10.11948/20210313
![]() |
[50] |
C. J. Xu, W. Zhang, C. Aouiti, Z. X. Liu, L. Y. Yao, Bifurcation insight for a fractional-order stage-structured predator-prey system incorporating mixed time delays, Math. Method. Appl. Sci., 46 (2023), 7489–7513. https://doi.org/10.1002/mma.9041 doi: 10.1002/mma.9041
![]() |
1. | Xiujun Zhang, Muhammad Salman, Anam Rani, Rashna Tanveer, Usman Ali, Zehui Shao, Metric Identification of Vertices in Polygonal Cacti, 2023, 136, 1526-1506, 883, 10.32604/cmes.2023.025162 | |
2. | Kamran Azhar, Sohail Zafar, Agha Kashif, Amer Aljaedi, Umar Albalawi, The Application of Fault-Tolerant Partition Resolvability in Cycle-Related Graphs, 2022, 12, 2076-3417, 9558, 10.3390/app12199558 | |
3. | Wajdi Alghamdi, Muhammad Ahsan Asim, Akbar Ali, On the Bounded Partition Dimension of Some Generalised Graph Structures, 2022, 2022, 2314-4785, 1, 10.1155/2022/9531182 | |
4. | Ali Al Khabyah, Ali N. A. Koam, Ali Ahmad, Niansheng Tang, Partition Resolvability of Nanosheet and Nanotube Derived from Octagonal Grid, 2024, 2024, 2314-4785, 1, 10.1155/2024/6222086 | |
5. | Syed Waqas Shah, Muhammad Yasin Khan, Gohar Ali, Irfan Nurhidayat, Soubhagya Kumar Sahoo, Homan Emadifar, Ram Jiwari, On Partition Dimension of Generalized Convex Polytopes, 2023, 2023, 2314-4785, 1, 10.1155/2023/4412591 |
Representation | Γ1 | Γ2 | Γ3 | Γ4 |
xα: α=1 | 3 | 3 | β+2 | 0 |
xα: 2≤α≤β | α+2 | α+1 | β−α+3 | 0 |
xα: α=β+1 | β+2 | β+2 | 3 | 0 |
xα: β+2≤α≤2β | 2β−α+3 | 2β−α+4 | α−β+2 | 0 |
Representation | Γ1 | Γ2 | Γ3 | Γ4 |
xα: α=1 | 3 | 3 | β+2 | 0 |
xα: 2≤α≤β | α+2 | α+1 | β−α+3 | 0 |
xα: α=β+1 | β+3 | β+2 | 3 | 0 |
xα: β+2≤α≤2β+1 | 2β−α+4 | 2β−α+5 | α−β+2 | 0 |
Representation | Γ1 | Γ2 | Γ3 | Γ4 |
xα: α=1 | 3 | 3 | β+2 | 0 |
xα: 2≤α≤β | α+2 | α+1 | β−α+3 | 0 |
xα: α=β+1 | β+2 | β+2 | 3 | 0 |
xα: β+2≤α≤2β | 2β−α+3 | 2β−α+4 | α−β+2 | 0 |
Representation | Γ1 | Γ2 | Γ3 | Γ4 |
yα: α=1 | 4 | 4 | β+3 | 0 |
yα: 2≤α≤β | α+3 | α+2 | β−α+4 | 0 |
yα: α=β+1 | β+3 | β+3 | 4 | 0 |
yα: β+2≤α≤2β−1 | 2β−α+4 | 2β−α+5 | α−β+3 | 0 |
Representation | Γ1 | Γ2 | Γ3 | Γ4 |
xα: α=1 | 3 | 3 | β+2 | 0 |
xα: 2≤α≤β | α+2 | α+1 | β−α+3 | 0 |
xα: α=β+1 | β+2 | β+2 | 3 | 0 |
xα: β+2≤α≤2β+1 | 2β−α+4 | 2β−α+5 | α−β+2 | 0 |
Representation | Γ1 | Γ2 | Γ3 | Γ4 |
xα: α=1 | 4 | 4 | β+3 | 0 |
xα: 2≤α≤β | α+3 | α+2 | β−α+4 | 0 |
xα: α=β+1 | β+3 | β+3 | 4 | 0 |
xα: β+2≤α≤2β+1 | 2β−α+5 | 2β−α+6 | α−β+3 | 0 |
Representation | Γ1 | Γ2 | Γ3 | Γ4 |
yα: α=1 | 4 | 4 | β+3 | 0 |
yα: 2≤α≤β | α+3 | α+2 | β−α+4 | 0 |
yα: α=β+1 | β+3 | β+3 | 4 | 0 |
yα: β+2≤α≤2β | 2β−α+4 | 2β−α+5 | α−β+3 | 0 |
Representation | Γ1 | Γ2 | Γ3 | Γ4 |
yα: α=1 | 4 | 4 | β+3 | 0 |
yα: 2≤α≤β | α+3 | α+2 | β−α+4 | 0 |
yα: α=β+1 | β+4 | β+3 | 4 | 0 |
yα: β+2≤α≤2β+1 | 2β−α+5 | 2β−α+6 | α−β+3 | 0 |
Representation | Γ1 | Γ2 | Γ3 | Γ4 |
xα: α=1 | 3 | 3 | β+2 | 0 |
xα: 2≤α≤β | α+2 | α+1 | β−α+3 | 0 |
xα: α=β+1 | β+2 | β+2 | 3 | 0 |
xα: β+2≤α≤2β | 2β−α+3 | 2β−α+4 | α−β+2 | 0 |
Representation | Γ1 | Γ2 | Γ3 | Γ4 |
xα: α=1 | 3 | 3 | β+2 | 0 |
xα: 2≤α≤β | α+2 | α+1 | β−α+3 | 0 |
xα: α=β+1 | β+3 | β+2 | 3 | 0 |
xα: β+2≤α≤2β+1 | 2β−α+4 | 2β−α+5 | α−β+2 | 0 |
Representation | Γ1 | Γ2 | Γ3 | Γ4 |
xα: α=1 | 3 | 3 | β+2 | 0 |
xα: 2≤α≤β | α+2 | α+1 | β−α+3 | 0 |
xα: α=β+1 | β+2 | β+2 | 3 | 0 |
xα: β+2≤α≤2β | 2β−α+3 | 2β−α+4 | α−β+2 | 0 |
Representation | Γ1 | Γ2 | Γ3 | Γ4 |
yα: α=1 | 4 | 4 | β+3 | 0 |
yα: 2≤α≤β | α+3 | α+2 | β−α+4 | 0 |
yα: α=β+1 | β+3 | β+3 | 4 | 0 |
yα: β+2≤α≤2β−1 | 2β−α+4 | 2β−α+5 | α−β+3 | 0 |
Representation | Γ1 | Γ2 | Γ3 | Γ4 |
xα: α=1 | 3 | 3 | β+2 | 0 |
xα: 2≤α≤β | α+2 | α+1 | β−α+3 | 0 |
xα: α=β+1 | β+2 | β+2 | 3 | 0 |
xα: β+2≤α≤2β+1 | 2β−α+4 | 2β−α+5 | α−β+2 | 0 |
Representation | Γ1 | Γ2 | Γ3 | Γ4 |
xα: α=1 | 4 | 4 | β+3 | 0 |
xα: 2≤α≤β | α+3 | α+2 | β−α+4 | 0 |
xα: α=β+1 | β+3 | β+3 | 4 | 0 |
xα: β+2≤α≤2β+1 | 2β−α+5 | 2β−α+6 | α−β+3 | 0 |
Representation | Γ1 | Γ2 | Γ3 | Γ4 |
yα: α=1 | 4 | 4 | β+3 | 0 |
yα: 2≤α≤β | α+3 | α+2 | β−α+4 | 0 |
yα: α=β+1 | β+3 | β+3 | 4 | 0 |
yα: β+2≤α≤2β | 2β−α+4 | 2β−α+5 | α−β+3 | 0 |
Representation | Γ1 | Γ2 | Γ3 | Γ4 |
yα: α=1 | 4 | 4 | β+3 | 0 |
yα: 2≤α≤β | α+3 | α+2 | β−α+4 | 0 |
yα: α=β+1 | β+4 | β+3 | 4 | 0 |
yα: β+2≤α≤2β+1 | 2β−α+5 | 2β−α+6 | α−β+3 | 0 |