arXiv++ Combinatorics

Cops and Robbers is a well-studied pursuit-evasion game in which a set of cops seeks to catch a robber in a graph G, where cops and robber move along edges of G. The cop number of G is the minimum number of cops that is sufficient to catch the robber. Every planar graph has cop number at most three, and there are planar graphs for which three cops are necessary [Aigner and Fromme, DAM 1984]. We study the problem for beyond-planar graphs, that is, graphs that can be drawn in the plane with few crossings. In particular, we focus on 1-planar graphs, that is, graphs that can be drawn in the plane with at most one crossing per edge. In contrast to planar graphs, we show that some 1-planar graphs have unbounded cop number. Meanwhile, for maximal 1-planar graphs, we prove that three cops are always sufficient and sometimes necessary. In addition, we characterize outer 1-planar graphs with respect to their cop number.

We conjecture that the balanced complete bipartite graph $K_{\lfloor n/2 \rfloor,\lceil n/2 \rceil}$ contains more cycles than any other $n$-vertex triangle-free graph, and we make some progress toward proving this. We give equivalent conditions for cycle-maximal triangle-free graphs; show bounds on the numbers of cycles in graphs depending on numbers of vertices and edges, girth, and homomorphisms to small fixed graphs; and use the bounds to show that among regular graphs, the conjecture holds. We also consider graphs that are close to being regular, with the minimum and maximum degrees differing by at most a positive integer $k$. For $k=1$, we show that any such counterexamples have $n\le 91$ and are not homomorphic to $C_5$; and for any fixed $k$ there exists a finite upper bound on the number of vertices in a counterexample. Finally, we describe an algorithm for efficiently computing the matrix permanent (a #P-complete problem in general) in a special case used by our bounds.

Scheinerman and Wilf (1994) assert that `an important open problem in the study of graph embeddings is to determine the rectilinear crossing number of the complete graph K_n.' A rectilinear drawing of K_n is an arrangement of n vertices in the plane, every pair of which is connected by an edge that is a line segment. We assume that no three vertices are collinear, and that no three edges intersect in a point unless that point is an endpoint of all three. The rectilinear crossing number of K_n is the fewest number of edge crossings attainable over all rectilinear drawings of K_n. For each n we construct a rectilinear drawing of K_n that has the fewest number of edge crossings and the best asymptotics known to date. Moreover, we give some alternative infinite families of drawings of K_n with good asymptotics. Finally, we mention some old and new open problems.

A drawing of a graph G in the plane is said to be a rectilinear drawing of G if the edges are required to be line segments (as opposed to Jordan curves). We assume no three vertices are collinear. The rectilinear crossing number of G is the fewest number of edge crossings attainable over all rectilinear drawings of G. Thanks to Richard Guy, exact values of the rectilinear crossing number of K_n, the complete graph on n vertices, for n = 3,...,9, are known (Guy 1972, White and Beinke 1978, Finch 2000, Sloanes A014540). Since 1971, thanks to the work of David Singer (1971, Gardiner 1986), the rectilinear crossing number of K_10 has been known to be either 61 or 62, a deceptively innocent and tantalizing statement. The difficulty of determining the correct value is evidenced by the fact that Singer's result has withstood the test of time. In this paper we use a purely combinatorial argument to show that the rectilinear crossing number of K_10 is 62. Moreover, using this result, we improve an asymptotic lower bound for a related problem. Finally, we close with some new and old open questions that were provoked, in part, by the results of this paper, and by the tangled history of the problem itself.