MathOverflow is a question and answer site for professional mathematicians. Join them; it only takes a minute:

Sign up
Here's how it works:
  1. Anybody can ask a question
  2. Anybody can answer
  3. The best answers are voted up and rise to the top

Let $G=(V,E)$ be a simple, undirected graph. A clique decomposition is a set ${\cal C} \subseteq {\cal P}(V)$ such that

  1. $\emptyset \notin {\cal C}$,
  2. $C\in {\cal C}$ and $x\neq y \in C$ imply that $\{x,y\}\in E$ (that is every member of ${\cal C}$ is a clique),
  3. $\bigcup {\cal C} = V$, and
  4. $e=\{x,y\} \in E \implies$ there is $C\in{\cal C}$ such that $x,y\in C$.

Every graph has a clique decomposition (see the collection of all edges plus the isolated points). We call ${\cal C}$ minimal if $|{\cal C}|$ is minimal amongst all clique decompositions of $G$.

Question. If ${\cal C}, {\cal D}$ are minimal clique decompositions of a finite graph $G$, do we have ${\cal C}= {\cal D}$? (The same question could also be considered for infinite graphs, but I guess the answer is no for these.)

share|cite|improve this question

There can be multiple distinct decompositions of minimum size. Consider a triangular lattice tiling of a torus. The maximal cliques are triangles, so we certainly need $e(G) / 3$ cliques in any minimum-sized clique decomposition. But both the upwards pointing and downwards pointing triangles are a clique decomposition of this size.

share|cite|improve this answer

Your Answer

 
discard

By posting your answer, you agree to the privacy policy and terms of service.

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