Revolutionaries and spies: Spy-good and spy-bad graphs

Abstract

We study a game on a graph G played by r revolutionaries and s spies. Initially, revolutionaries and then spies occupy vertices. In each subsequent round, each revolutionary may move to a neighboring vertex or not move, and then each spy has the same option. The revolutionaries win if m of them meet at some vertex having no spy (at the end of a round); the spies win if they can avoid this forever. Let σ(G,m,r) denote the minimum number of spies needed to win. To avoid degenerate cases, assume |V(G)| r-m+1r/m 1. The easy bounds are then r/m σ(G,m,r) r-m+1. We prove that the lower bound is sharp when G has a rooted spanning tree T such that every edge of G not in T joins two vertices having the same parent in T. As a consequence, σ(G,m,r)γ(G)r/m, where γ(G) is the domination number; this bound is nearly sharp when γ(G) m. For the random graph with constant edge-probability p, we obtain constants c and c' (depending on m and p) such that σ(G,m,r) is near the trivial upper bound when r<c n and at most c' times the trivial lower bound when r>c' n. For the hypercube Qd with d r, we have σ(G,m,r)=r-m+1 when m=2, and for m 3 at least r-39m spies are needed. For complete k-partite graphs with partite sets of size at least 2r, the leading term in σ(G,m,r) is approximately kk-1rm when k m. For k=2, we have σ(G,2,r)=7r/2-35 and σ(G,3,r)=r/2, and in general 3r2m-3 σ(G,m,r)(1+1/3)rm.

0

Turn this paper into a lesson

ArcXiv compiles a structured reading guide from this paper's metadata: plain-English importance, contributions, prerequisite concepts, which sections to read first, flashcards, and a quiz. Grounded in the abstract, never invented.

Discussion (0)

Sign in to join the discussion.

Loading comments…