3

How many labeled graphs there are of order $n$ without any isolated vertices?

By the inclusion-exclusion principle, we have:

$$\sum_{i=0}^n (-1)^i{n\choose i}2^{n-i \choose 2} $$

But is there any closed form for it? Or is there any better solution?

MR_BD
  • 5,942

1 Answers1

3

The numbers are given in OEIS A006219. They start $$1, 0, 1, 4, 41, 768, 27449, 1887284, 252522481, 66376424160, 34509011894545, 35645504882731588, 73356937912127722841, 301275024444053951967648, 2471655539737552842139838345, 40527712706903544101000417059892, 1328579255614092968399503598175745633$$ No clean formula is given. I found it by computing the value for $n=8$ and searching for $252522481$. They grow approximately as $2^{n \choose 2}$

Ross Millikan
  • 374,822
  • can you prove this formula please? I can't understand one moment, let n = 4, then total number of possible graphs is 64, now we should exclude all graphs with property that at least 1 vertex isolated. But, using this formula we can select 4 vertices to be isolated, for each one we can build 8 graphs on 3 others vertices. So some cases we count multiple times, for example when all vertices isolated it is 4 cases of 32. So, what is the correct rule in inclusion-exclusion formula we should apply? – Evgeny Mar 08 '21 at 05:48
  • No, I can't prove it. I don't remember how I did the $n=8$ case. For $n=4$ you can isolate a vertex by cutting all $3$ edges incident, so each vertex can be isolated in $2^3$ ways because there are $3$ other edges which might or might not be there. If you isolate two vertices this way you have eliminate $5$ edges so there are only $2$ choices. You can't isolate three vertices without isolating all four. This would give $64-4\cdot 8 +{4 \choose 2}2=38$ But you can also have graphs with two pairs of connected vertices, there are $3$, which gives $41$. – Ross Millikan Mar 08 '21 at 06:09
  • Then how they give this formula?) If there is no proof for that. Do you mean that I should do any case separately??? – Evgeny Mar 08 '21 at 06:15
  • It depends whether you want an approximate or exact answer. Often we can approximate the growth of a function more easily than we can find the exact values. I was just reporting what I found in OEIS. You can follow the links to see where it comes from. – Ross Millikan Mar 08 '21 at 14:38