1
$\begingroup$

I can see a counterexample such as this:

enter image description here

But I can also see in some cases it could be the same. I am trying to understand what property makes a MBST also a MST?

$\endgroup$

1 Answer 1

1
$\begingroup$

Let $G = (V,E)$ be the input graph. And, let $G_{M} = (V,E_{M})$ be an MST of this graph. First, note the following properties of the MST and BMST.

  1. An MST is always a BMST

  2. If all edges in the graph have distinct edge weights, there is always a unique MST.

  3. Let $e$ be any edge in $E_{M}$. Let $(S_{e},V \setminus S_{e})$ be the cut obtained after removing $e$ from the graph $G_{M}$ and $C_{e}$ denote the edges of $G$ that goes across this cut. Then, $e$ is the minimum weight edge among the edges in $C_{e}$.

Following is the property that is required for a BMST to be an MST.

Property: Every BMST is an MST if and only if for every $e \in E_M{}$, all edges in $C_{e} \setminus \{e\}$ have weight greater than $w$, where $w$ denote the weight of the bottleneck edge in a BMST or MST.

Proof: First, let us prove the 'only if' direction.

($\to$) Suppose every BMST is an MST. For the sake of contradiction assume that there is an edge $e \in E_{M}$ such that there exist an edge $e'$ in $C_{e} \setminus \{e\}$ that has weight smaller than $w$. Let us remove $e$ from $G_{M}$ and add $e'$ to $G_{M}$. Let this new graph is $G_{M}'$. It is easy to see that this graph is a BMST. However, it is not an MST since

$$\begin{align} Total\_Weight(G_{M'}) &= Total\_Weight(G_{M}) - w(e) + w(e')\\ &> Total\_Weight(G_{M}) \end{align}$$ Here, I have used the fact that $w(e) < w(e')$ by Property 3 of MST. This contradicts the fact that every BMST is an MST. This completes the proof of the 'only if' direction. Now, let us prove the 'if' direction.

($\gets$) Suppose for every $e \in E_{M}$, all edges in $C_{e} \setminus \{e\}$ have weight greater than $w$. For the sake of contradiction, assume that there is a BMST $G_{B} = (V_{B},E_{B})$ that is not an MST. Therefore, we can say that there is an edge $e$ in $E_{M}$ that is not in $E_{B}$. Now, remove this edge form the graph $G_{M}$ and let $(S_{e}, V \setminus S_{e})$ be the corresponding cut. Let $u$ be a vertex in $S_{e}$, and $v$ be a vertex in $V \setminus S_{e}$. Let $p$ be a path from $u$ to $v$ in $G_{B}$. It means, there exist an edge $e' \in p$ that goes across the cut. In other words, $e'$ belongs to $C_{e}$. Now, note that since $e' \in G_{B}$, the weight of $e'$ is $\leq$ $w$. It contradicts the fact that all edges in $C_{e} \setminus \{e\}$ have weight greater than $w$. This prove the 'if' direction. Hence the proof is complete.

$\endgroup$
4
  • $\begingroup$ The third property is basically for an edge $e$, it defines a cut set in which it is the lightest. The property for MBST being an MST this cut set $C_e$ for every edge $e$ has weights greater than the bottleneck weight $w$... I'm still going through the proof and trying to understand the pieces. $\endgroup$ Commented Jan 30, 2021 at 12:24
  • $\begingroup$ In this example, for the edge $3$, the cut set would be $\{2,3\}$, but these weights are not greater than $4$? $\endgroup$ Commented Jan 30, 2021 at 13:09
  • $\begingroup$ @sprajagopal $C_{e}$ for edge $3$ would be ${5,3}$. $\endgroup$ Commented Jan 30, 2021 at 13:42
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ @sprajagopal You have to look at the MST when you are removing an edge. Here, after you remove edge $3$. The partition $S_{e}$ contains edge $5$, and the other partition contains edges: $\{1,2\}$. $\endgroup$ Commented Jan 30, 2021 at 13:43

Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service and acknowledge you have read our privacy policy.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.