Johann Pfaff was a German mathematician of the late 18th and early 19th century. He is best known for the fact that the determinant of a skew-symmetric matrix
Today Ken and I want to talk about a kind of graph powering that may be new, and that may relate in some cases to Pfaffians.
The Pfaffian of a skew-symmetric matrix of odd dimension is always zero. For even dimension
Note that for any matrix
Hence one can do “Pfaffian elimination” where
The main use of Pfaffians in complexity theory is that the task of counting perfect matchings in a graph sometimes reduces to computing a Pfaffian. When
One of the central ideas in mathematics is taking two mathematical objects
Another central idea is taking just one mathematical object
I got into this by considering finite directed graphs
For a set Definition 1 Suppose that
A first point is that since the nodes of
A second point is that not all of
If
Thus counting is tricky in
The basic issue is that the subset power of a single cycle can be complex. For example consider the cycle
Now switch to ask, what is
vertices. Right away we see that
Then the cycles of Thus
This may be surprising to you. Things can get messier when the subset power is higher. So the analysis of the structure of subset powers can be a challenging task.
We need to understand the structure of Proposition 2 Let
Proof: The case when
where
This implies that
We claim that there is exactly one short cycle of length
So it remains to show that there is only one short cycle. Let
Let
is on the same cycle. Set
Let’s check the example from the last section. Recall we showed that
There are two main open questions. Consider
Might the concept help with matchings, or ideas of integer-valued flows in parts of a graph? What do you think? (that is, where the transpose
equals
) is the square of a polynomial
in its entries. Actually it is thought that he did not discover this result. Arthur Cayley named the polynomial after Pfaff posthumously in 1852, having published the result in 1847, while
was re-discovered and published by Thomas Muir in 1882. At least the polynomial was not named for Carl Gauss. Perhaps this was because Gauss was Pfaff’s student.
it is defined by the formula
,
is also skew symmetric, so it has a Pfaffian given by the identity
represents doing an elementary operation to the rows, so long as you do the same operation to the columns—which is represented by
. This simplifies the computation like with Gaussian elimination, though of course one can also get a polynomial time algorithm for
by doing
and taking the square root.
is the adjacency matrix of an undirected
-vertex graph, this is already hinted by the above formula: a term of the product is non-zero if and only if the entries involved define a matching. If one can negate half the entries in
so that all the terms have the same sign, then the Pfaffian computes the number of perfect matchings. Michael Fisher, Pieter Kasteleyn, and Harold Temperley proved that this was both possible and efficiently computable for planar graphs. My Tech colleague Robin Thomas has a nice survey on graphs and Pfaffians.
Products and Powers
and
and creating a new object
that is the “product” of the two. There are more types of products in math than almost any other construct. The root of all products is probably the simple Cartesian product of two sets:
. Recall this is the set of all ordered pairs
where
is in
and
is in
.
and creating a new object
that is a “power” of
. Usually this is defined in terms of a product
by making
, or
, and so on. The “so on” can include negative and even fractional powers, but always the notion of “power” seems to depend on a notion of “product.” The question is, must it always?
Cycle Graphs
that consist only of directed cycles: we will call them cycle graphs. Of course cycle graphs are essentially the graphs that correspond to permutations, and indeed this connection is essential. For now let’s think of them as just graphs. We use
to denote that there is an edge from the vertex
to vertex
, and will drop the subscript when it is clear which graph
is. Ken and I started thinking about cycle graphs a long time ago, see this.
Subset Power
let
be the sets
with each
in
and the elements
all distinct. The notation suggests the number
of such subsets, but suppresses “
” which is just the size of
.
is a directed graph and
is an integer. Define
as the graph with vertices
and with an edge from
to
if and only if for each
, there is an edge from
to
. Call it the subset power.
are sets, we are free to permute the elements
any way we wish. Consider
. There is an edge from
to
in
provided
and
or
and
.
need be distinct—in the former case we can have
or
, in the latter
or
. That is, if
is a path in
, then
in
.
is bipartite, with edges
, then for any
,
has a fairly simple description. If
and
are subsets of the same size
, then
is an edge in
if and only if
has a perfect matching as a subgraph of
. But also we can get edges
in
where
and
“cross the partition.” That is, if you take any perfect matching of
and swap the vertices on the ends of any edge between
and
, you get such a
. You can define exactly
such edges in
by making such swaps, and when the perfect matching of
is unique, these are the only edges one can make from subsets of
. However, when it is not unique this process may lead to some double-counting of edges of
.
even when
is bipartite, and tricky even in
again because of possible double-counting of pairs of edges when
are all distinct. But it may be possible in certain cases, and tell us things about counting perfect matchings of subgraphs. We consider simple cases, and find that things are already complex, however.
Why Are Things Complex?
, which has length
by our convention. What is
—the square of
by the direct product? It is easy to see that it consists of
vertices and has six cycles all of the same length six. Easy.
—the square of
by the subset product? A natural conjecture seems to be that the subset power also has all cycles of the same length. This is not true. By definition
contains
is not a multiple of
so they cannot all have length six. Let
be
are:
has two cycles of length
and one of length
.
Squaring the Cycle
when
is a single cycle and
. We prove that when
equals
the issue we saw for 6-cycles is the only one that arises, but it is already tricky.
where
is a cycle of length
. Then
is odd then
has
cycles all of length
.
is even then
has
cycles all of length
and one cycle of length
.
is odd is eay so let’s suppose that the length
is even. It is convenient to assume that
has vertices
and edges are modulo
. Then a cycle of length
will look like
. Also note that
has
vertices. It is not hard to prove that
is a multiple of
: thus,
is either
or is
. We will call former the regular case and the later case the short case.
and all the rest are length
. This will imply (2) since
be a vertex on a short cycle. Then
which implies that
and
. Thus the vertex is
and
be on short cycles. Clearly
for any
is also on the same cycle: that is
. Then
is on the same cycle: so there is only one short cycle.
had two cycles of length
and one of length
. The above Proposition~2 shows that there are
cycles of length
and one of length
: this is exactly what we showed.
Open Problems
: the subset power of a single cycle of even length
. We wish to count the number of even cycles of
. What is a formula for this number? Also even without an explicit formula can we prove that the number for fixed
is periodic in the length
? The latter if the period was explicit would allow us to calculate answers. Both these conjectures are non-trivial—I believe—because of the shortcut issue that arises.