gotchaModerate
Why does DFS only yield tree and back edges on undirected, connected graphs?
Viewed 0 times
whyedgesdfsgraphsbackundirectedconnectedyielddoesand
Problem
Prove that if G is an undirected connected graph, then each of its edges is either in the depth-first search tree or is a back edge.
Now, from intuition and in class lectures by Steven Skiena, I know that the above holds true, since it dives all the way down, and then throw a rope back to a previous vertex. I also know that DFS is great in finding cycles.
However, my problem here is that I don't know how to prove that the edge is either a tree edge or a back edge.
Now, from intuition and in class lectures by Steven Skiena, I know that the above holds true, since it dives all the way down, and then throw a rope back to a previous vertex. I also know that DFS is great in finding cycles.
However, my problem here is that I don't know how to prove that the edge is either a tree edge or a back edge.
Solution
A depth first search on a directed graph can yield 4 types of edges; tree, forward, back and cross edges. As we are looking at undirected graphs, it should be obvious that forward and back edges are the same thing, so the only things left to deal with are cross edges.
A cross edge in a graph is an edge that goes from a vertex $v$ to another vertex $u$ such that $u$ is neither an ancestor nor descendant of $v$. So what you need to argue is that in an undirected graph, there's no way you can get a cross edge. It might help to think of why the can occur in directed graphs, and why you can't have this case in undirected graphs.
A cross edge in a graph is an edge that goes from a vertex $v$ to another vertex $u$ such that $u$ is neither an ancestor nor descendant of $v$. So what you need to argue is that in an undirected graph, there's no way you can get a cross edge. It might help to think of why the can occur in directed graphs, and why you can't have this case in undirected graphs.
Context
StackExchange Computer Science Q#11438, answer score: 14
Revisions (0)
No revisions yet.