Processing math: 0%

Wednesday, 18 September 2013

Kings in a Tournament


In a tournament, each pair of teams plays one game, which one of the teams wins and the other loses. The number of teams in a tournament can be any integer greater than one. In a particular tournament, team X is said to be a 'king' if, for every other team Y, X beats Y or a team that beats Y. The aim of this article will be to establish that every tournament contains at least one king, yet no tournament can have exactly 2 kings. In order to prove these facts, I will introduce some definitions from graph theory first, which are as follows:

An orientation \vec{G} of a graph G is an assignment of an orientation (direction) to each edge.

We call the directed edges arcs. So if the edge vu is oriented from v to u, we refer to the resulting directed edge as the arc (v, u). We denote the arcs of \vec{G} by A(\vec{G}). Sometimes, we may refer to v as the tail of the arc and u as the head of the arc.

The indegree d^{-}(v) of a vertex v in an oriented graph \vec{G} is the number of arcs that are oriented towards v, i.e. the number of arcs of the form (u, v). Similarly, the outdegree d^{+}(v) of a vertex v in an oriented graph \vec{G} is the number of arcs that are oriented from v, i.e., the number of arcs of the form (v, u).

The in-neighbourhood S_I(v) of a vertex v in an oriented graph \vec{G} is the set of all vertices u such that (u,v) is an arc in \vec{G}. Similarly, the out-neighbourhood S_O(v) of a vertex v in an oriented graph \vec{G} is the set of all vertices w such that (v,w) is an arc in \vec{G}.

In an oriented graph \vec{G}, a directed path is a path in which all the edges have the same orientation.

Any orientation of a complete graph is referred to as a tournament.
So, thinking of this to be a representation of an actual tournament where the arc (v, u) indicates that v beat u in the competition, a vertex v should be called a king if, for every other vertex u in the graph, there is a directed path of length 1 or 2 from v to u, since this implies that either v beat u or v beat someone who beat u. Having thus restated our original problem in terms of graph theory, we are now ready to proceed with the proofs.


Tournament Graph with 5 Vertices having 4 Kings

Claim 1. Every tournament T contains at least one king.

Proof. Suppose that v is a vertex having maximum outdegree in the tournament graph T. Then, we claim that v is a king in T. In order to verify this claim, it is enough to show that there is a directed path of length 2 from v to each vertex in its in-neighborhood, denoted by S_I(v).

So, let u be any vertex belonging to S_I(v). If there is a vertex w in the out-neighbourhood of v, denoted by S_O(v), such that (w, u) is an arc of T, then the arcs (v, w) and (w, u) form a directed path of length 2 from v to u.

On the other hand, if there is no such vertex in S_O(v), then it must be the case that, for all vertices y \in S_O(v)(u, y) is an arc of T, which implies that \forall y \in S_O(v), we have y \in S_O(u). Now, since all the vertices in S_O(v) also belong to S_O(u), and additionally v \in S_O(u), hence the outdegree of u is greater than that of v. But this contradicts the choice of v itself. Thus, there has to exist a vertex w \in S_O(v) such that (w, u) is an arc of T, and hence the claim is verified.


Claim 2. Let q be a team that loses at least once in a tournament T. Then, the teams that beat q include at least one king.

Proof. First, let us consider the case where q is beaten by only one team p. In that case, p is clearly a king in T since it has a direct arc (p, q) to q and a directed path of length 2 to each of the remaining vertices of T, which all belong to the out-neighbourhood of q.

Now, if q is beaten by more than one team, we simply consider the smaller tournament consisting only of the teams that beat q and the games they play with each other. In other words, we will be looking at the tournament graph T' induced on only the vertices belonging to the in-neighbourhood of q. From the previous claim, we know that the tournament T' contains at least one king. Now, if p is a king in the tournament T', then p must also be a king in T. This is true because, p has a direct arc (p, q) to q and a directed path of length 2 to all the vertices in the out-neighbourhood of q, and being a king in T', it is also guaranteed to have a directed path of length either 1 or 2 to each of the vertices (except itself) in the in-neighbourhood of q. Hence proved.


Claim 3. No tournament can have exactly 2 kings.

Proof. Let us assume, for the sake of argument, that a tournament has exactly 2 kings, say q and r. As the two kings play each other, without loss of generality we can assume that q beats r. However, since r is a king in the tournament, r must have beaten someone who beat q. In order for this to be possible, there must be at least one team who beat q in the tournament. Now, from the previous claim, we know that there must be at least one king, say p, amongst the teams who beat q, and obviously, p is different from both q and r. Thus, our initial assumption is shown to be incorrect. Hence proved.

No comments:

Post a Comment