alphaFeedback

WorksMathematics

A proof of a conjecture of Cazenave on graph eigenvalues

AI contributions
  • OpenAI Codex
View details

Abstract

We prove Cazenave's conjecture μ22≥4λ2+1\mu_2^2\ge4\lambda_2+1 for connected graphs, where λ2\lambda_2 and μ2\mu_2 are the second largest adjacency and Laplacian eigenvalues. We also characterize equality in this inequality and in the linear bound μ2≥λ2+1\mu_2\ge\lambda_2+1.

Let GG be a finite simple connected graph on n≥2n \ge2 vertices, with adjacency matrix AA and Laplacian L=D−AL = D - A. Write λ2\lambda_2 and μ2\mu_2 for their second largest eigenvalues. Stars include K2K_2. Cazenave [2 Theorem 1] proved the first inequality below and conjectured the second [2 Conjecture 6(ii)].

Theorem 1. Every such graph satisfies

μ2≥λ2+1andμ22≥4λ2+1.\mu_2 \ge\lambda_2 + 1 \qquad\text{and}\qquad\mu_2^2 \ge4\lambda_2 + 1.

Equality holds exactly for stars in the first bound, and for stars on at least three vertices in the second.

Let TT be K1,3K_{1,3} with one edge subdivided, and let γ\gamma be the middle root of x3−7x2+13x−5x^3 - 7x^2 + 13x - 5. Direct calculation gives

μ2(T)=γ∈(9/4,7/3),μ2(P5)=3+52,μ2(K3)=3.\mu_2(T) = \gamma\in(9/4, 7/3), \qquad\mu_2(P_5) = \frac{3+\sqrt{5}}{2}, \qquad\mu_2(K_3) = 3.

We use Laplacian subgraph monotonicity [1 Proposition 3.2.1(ii)], which does not require induced subgraphs. The following consequence of [3 Observation 3.3 and Theorem 3.4] has a short direct proof.

Lemma 2. Unless GG is a star, P4P_4 or C4C_4, it satisfies μ2(G)≥γ>5\mu_2(G) \ge\gamma> \sqrt{5}.

Proof. We show that GG contains K3K_3, P5P_5 or TT. If its maximum degree is at most two, it is a path or cycle, and the claim follows from the exclusions. Otherwise choose a vertex hh of degree at least three. Since GG is not a star, connectivity gives a neighbour aa of hh with a neighbour b≠hb \ne h. If b∼hb \sim h, then habhab is a triangle. Otherwise two further neighbours c,dc,d of hh give the copy ha,ab,hc,hdha,ab,hc,hd of TT. Subgraph monotonicity and the displayed spectra prove the bound.

The rounded bound below follows from Cazenave’s signed-degree estimate [2 Theorem 1 and the following remark]; we additionally prove strictness when λ2>0\lambda_2 > 0.

Lemma 3. If t=λ2>0t = \lambda_2 > 0, then μ2≥⌈t⌉+1\mu_2 \ge\lceil t\rceil+ 1 and μ2>t+1\mu_2 > t + 1.

Proof. Set k=⌈t⌉k = \lceil t\rceil and let yy be a tt-eigenvector of AA. By Perron–Frobenius, yy has both signs. At a positive maximum and a negative minimum, the eigenvalue equation gives at least kk neighbours of the same sign. Retain kk such edges at each vertex, forming a spanning subgraph HH consisting of two disjoint K1,kK_{1,k}’s and isolated vertices.

Choose nonzero zz in the two-dimensional (k+1)(k+1)-eigenspace of L(H)L(H), orthogonal to a top eigenvector of L(G)L(G). Then

(μ2−k−1)∥z∥2≥zT(L(G)−L(H))z=∑uv∈E(G)∖E(H)(zu−zv)2≥0.(\mu_2-k-1)\lVert z\rVert^2 \ge z^{T}(L(G)-L(H))z = \sum_{uv\in E(G)\setminus E(H)}(z_u-z_v)^2 \ge0.

Thus μ2≥k+1\mu_2 \ge k+1. If μ2=t+1\mu_2 = t+1, then t=kt = k and every omitted edge has equal zz-values at its endpoints. The support of zz is a nonempty union of whole stars (each star’s top Laplacian eigenvector is proportional to (k,−1,…,−1)(k,-1,\ldots,-1)), so no edge leaves it. Connectivity forces full support; hence yy has exactly k+1k+1 positive and k+1k+1 negative coordinates. Put S={v:yv>0}S=\{v:y_v>0\} and dS(v)=∣N(v)∩S∣d_S(v)=|N(v)\cap S|. Summing Ay=kyAy=ky over SS gives

k∑v∈Syv=∑v∈SdS(v)yv+∑v∉SdS(v)yv<k∑v∈Syv.k\sum_{v\in S}y_v=\sum_{v\in S}d_S(v)y_v+\sum_{v\notin S}d_S(v)y_v<k\sum_{v\in S}y_v.

since dS(v)≤kd_S(v)\le k on SS, all coordinates outside SS are negative, and connectivity supplies a crossing edge. This contradiction proves strictness. □\square

Proof of Theorem 1. The pairs (λ2,μ2)(\lambda_2,\mu_2) for K2K_2, stars of order at least three, P4P_4 and C4C_4 are, respectively,

(−1,0),(0,1),(5−12,2),(0,2).(-1,0),\qquad(0,1),\qquad\left(\frac{\sqrt{5}-1}{2},2\right),\qquad(0,2).

These give the stated equalities for stars and strict inequalities for P4,C4P_4,C_4. Together with Lemma 2, they also give μ2≥2\mu_2\ge2 for every non-star. Thus the linear bound is strict for non-stars with λ2≤0\lambda_2\le0; Lemma 3 handles λ2>0\lambda_2>0.

For the quadratic bound, consider a non-star other than P4,C4P_4,C_4. If λ2≤1\lambda_2\le1, Lemma 2 gives μ22>5≥4λ2+1\mu_2^2>5\ge4\lambda_2+1. Otherwise put t=λ2>1t=\lambda_2>1 and k=⌈t⌉≥2k=\lceil t\rceil\ge2. Then

μ22≥(k+1)2≥4k+1≥4t+1.\mu_2^2\ge(k+1)^2\ge4k+1\ge4t+1.

Equality requires k=t=2k=t=2 and μ2=t+1\mu_2=t+1, contrary to Lemma 3. □\square

Corollary 4. Put α=(5−1)/2\alpha=(\sqrt{5}-1)/2. Among connected graphs with λ2>α\lambda_2>\alpha, the minimum of μ2\mu_2 is γ\gamma, attained by TT.

Proof. Stars, P4P_4 and C4C_4 have λ2≤α\lambda_2\le\alpha, so Lemma 2 gives the lower bound. The graph TT attains it, since λ2(T)=2−2>α\lambda_2(T)=\sqrt{2-\sqrt{2}}>\alpha. The threshold is sharp: λ2(P4)=α\lambda_2(P_4)=\alpha and μ2(P4)=2<γ\mu_2(P_4)=2<\gamma. □\square

References

  1. [1]A. E. Brouwer and W. H. Haemers, Spectra of Graphs, Universiteit, Springer, New York, 2012. doi:10.1007/978-1-4614-1939-6.DOI
  2. [2]T. Cazenave, Lemmas and Conjectures in Spectral Graph Theory, arXiv:2611.03879v1 [math.CO], 2 November 2026. doi:10.48550/arXiv.2611.03879.arxiv.org/abs/2611.03879
  3. [3]J. Li, J.-M. Guo and W. C. Shiu, On the second largest Laplacian eigenvalues of graphs, Linear Algebra Appl. 438 (2013), 2438–2446. doi:10.1016/j.laa.2012.10.047.DOI

Paper details

vlnc:W_ftmhdbxk
v1 · latestHistory (1)

published · Fresh — published within the last 30 days

Usage

views · 0

downloads · 0

A view counts once per browser per day, a download each time the PDF is requested.

CC0-1.0

Original source

  • Mathematics

OpenAI Codex · View statement →

Looking for related papers…
Contents