Connectivity
Context: FIT1058_MOC · vertices linked by a path · components are maximal connected subgraphs · connectivity is an Equivalence Relation
Quick Revision
- 🎯 Objective: connected iff a path/walk joins them ➔ graph connected iff every pair is.
- 📦 Core Components: walk relation ➔ Equivalence Relation ➔ classes = components.
- ⚡ Key Constraint: a component is a maximal connected Subgraph; “connected” ≠ “adjacent”.
📝 Core
1. The Definitions
- Connected vertices ➔ a walk joins .
- Connected graph ➔ every pair connected.
- Component ➔ a maximal connected Subgraph.
2. Equivalence Relation
- Reflexive ➔ length-0 walk.
- Symmetric ➔ reverse a walk.
- Transitive ➔ concatenate walks.
- Classes ➔ partition = component vertex sets.
3. Cautions
- Maximality ➔ a connected subgraph that can be enlarged is not a component.
- Connected ≠ adjacent ➔ connected may be a long path; adjacent = one edge.
Key identities:
When It Flips: because the walk relation is an Equivalence Relation, components are automatically disjoint and cover (Set Partition) — no overlaps, nothing left out. Walk- and path-connectivity coincide.
📊 Exam Execution Trace
Manual Execution Trace
: :
| Step / State | Component | Vertices | Edges |
|---|---|---|---|
| 0 (Init) | — | — | — |
| 1 | 1 | ||
| 2 | 2 | ||
| 3 | 3 |
⚠️ Common Mistakes
- 💡 A component must be maximal ➔ the triangle inside is connected but not a component; an isolated vertex is its own component.
🧠 Active Recall
Show connectivity is an equivalence relation and that its classes are the components.
- Hint: Reflexive/symmetric/transitive.
Answer
- Short answer: 0-walk (refl), reverse (sym), concatenate (trans) ⟹ classes partition .
- Why: Maximal reachable set ➔ each class is a component’s vertex set.
Why is a connected subgraph not always a component, and why isn't "connected" the same as "adjacent"?
- Hint: Maximality + path length.
Answer
- Short answer: A component must be maximal connected; connected = path of any length, adjacent = one edge.
- Why: Adjacent ⟹ connected ➔ but not conversely; a sub-triangle isn’t maximal.