Skip to main content

graphs and networks - Combinatorica: Girth[] and FindCycle[] disagreement



Warning: run the following code in a fresh Mma session, as some symbols could be shadowed (depending on your Mma version)


While trying to answer this question, I fell into the following:


 (* Let's load a large Directed Graph and convert it to Combinatorica *)
g = Graph@Union@Flatten[
Thread[DirectedEdge @@ ##] & /@ Select[{#, IsotopeData[#, "DaughterNuclides"]} & /@
IsotopeData[], #[[2]] != {} &]];
Needs["GraphUtilities`"]
<< Combinatorica`
cg = ToCombinatoricaGraph[g];



Girth[cg] gives the length of a shortest cycle in a simple graph g.



So, let's check if cg is Simple and calculate its Girth:


{SimpleQ@cg, Girth@cg}
(*
-> {True, 3}
*)

So there is at least one Cycle in cg of length 3.



But look what happens when we try to find it by the two available methods in Combinatorica:


{ExtractCycles@cg, FindCycle@cg}
(*
-> {{},{}}
*)

So, two questions:



  1. Is this a bug?

  2. What is the easiest way to find all cycles in g without using Combinatorica?



Edit


BTW, the (now) standard Graph functionality also detects cycles:


AcyclicGraphQ[g]
(* -> False *)

Answer



I don't think it's a bug. Directed radioactive decay graphs shouldn't have cycles by definition and AcyclicGraphQ doesn't see them either:


AcyclicGraphQ@g



True



You don't seem to have heeded your own warning to start with a fresh kernel, as playing around with the code for a while gave me False too.


The output of ExtractCycles and FindCycle is therefore correct.


Girth doesn't seem to take directionality into account when determining cycles:


Cyclic directed graph:


Girth@ ToCombinatoricaGraph@
System`Graph[{1 \[DirectedEdge] 2, 2 \[DirectedEdge] 3, 3 \[DirectedEdge] 1}]



3



Acyclic directed graph (note the reversed direction of the last edge):


Girth@ToCombinatoricaGraph@
System`Graph[{1 \[DirectedEdge] 2, 2 \[DirectedEdge] 3, 1 \[DirectedEdge] 3}]


3



Comments

Popular posts from this blog

plotting - Filling between two spheres in SphericalPlot3D

Manipulate[ SphericalPlot3D[{1, 2 - n}, {θ, 0, Pi}, {ϕ, 0, 1.5 Pi}, Mesh -> None, PlotPoints -> 15, PlotRange -> {-2.2, 2.2}], {n, 0, 1}] I cant' seem to be able to make a filling between two spheres. I've already tried the obvious Filling -> {1 -> {2}} but Mathematica doesn't seem to like that option. Is there any easy way around this or ... Answer There is no built-in filling in SphericalPlot3D . One option is to use ParametricPlot3D to draw the surfaces between the two shells: Manipulate[ Show[SphericalPlot3D[{1, 2 - n}, {θ, 0, Pi}, {ϕ, 0, 1.5 Pi}, PlotPoints -> 15, PlotRange -> {-2.2, 2.2}], ParametricPlot3D[{ r {Sin[t] Cos[1.5 Pi], Sin[t] Sin[1.5 Pi], Cos[t]}, r {Sin[t] Cos[0 Pi], Sin[t] Sin[0 Pi], Cos[t]}}, {r, 1, 2 - n}, {t, 0, Pi}, PlotStyle -> Yellow, Mesh -> {2, 15}]], {n, 0, 1}]

plotting - Plot 4D data with color as 4th dimension

I have a list of 4D data (x position, y position, amplitude, wavelength). I want to plot x, y, and amplitude on a 3D plot and have the color of the points correspond to the wavelength. I have seen many examples using functions to define color but my wavelength cannot be expressed by an analytic function. Is there a simple way to do this? Answer Here a another possible way to visualize 4D data: data = Flatten[Table[{x, y, x^2 + y^2, Sin[x - y]}, {x, -Pi, Pi,Pi/10}, {y,-Pi,Pi, Pi/10}], 1]; You can use the function Point along with VertexColors . Now the points are places using the first three elements and the color is determined by the fourth. In this case I used Hue, but you can use whatever you prefer. Graphics3D[ Point[data[[All, 1 ;; 3]], VertexColors -> Hue /@ data[[All, 4]]], Axes -> True, BoxRatios -> {1, 1, 1/GoldenRatio}]

plotting - Mathematica: 3D plot based on combined 2D graphs

I have several sigmoidal fits to 3 different datasets, with mean fit predictions plus the 95% confidence limits (not symmetrical around the mean) and the actual data. I would now like to show these different 2D plots projected in 3D as in but then using proper perspective. In the link here they give some solutions to combine the plots using isometric perspective, but I would like to use proper 3 point perspective. Any thoughts? Also any way to show the mean points per time point for each series plus or minus the standard error on the mean would be cool too, either using points+vertical bars, or using spheres plus tubes. Below are some test data and the fit function I am using. Note that I am working on a logit(proportion) scale and that the final vertical scale is Log10(percentage). (* some test data *) data = Table[Null, {i, 4}]; data[[1]] = {{1, -5.8}, {2, -5.4}, {3, -0.8}, {4, -0.2}, {5, 4.6}, {1, -6.4}, {2, -5.6}, {3, -0.7}, {4, 0.04}, {5, 1.0}, {1, -6.8}, {2, -4.7}, {3, -1.