A note on the eternal dominating set problem
We consider the “all guards move” model for the eternal dominating set problem. A set of guards form a dominating set on a graph and at the beginning of each round, a vertex not in the dominating set is attacked. To defend against the attack, the guards move (each guard either passes or moves to a neighboring vertex) to form a dominating set that includes the attacked vertex. The minimum number of guards required to defend against any sequence of attacks is the “eternal domination number” of the graph. In 2005, it was conjectured [Goddard et al. (J. Combin. Math. Combin. Comput. 52:169–180, 2005)] there would be no advantage to allow multiple guards to occupy the same vertex during a round. We show this is, in fact, false. We also describe algorithms to determine the eternal domination number for both models for eternal domination and examine the related combinatorial game, which makes use of the reduced canonical form of games.
KeywordsGraph protection Graph domination Eternal domination Combinatorial game theory
Mathematics Subject Classification05C69 05C57 68R15 91A46
S. Finbow acknowledges research support from the Natural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada (Grant Application 2014-06571). Serge Gaspers is the recipient of an Australian Research Council (ARC) Future Fellowship (Project Number FT140100048) and he also acknowledges support under the ARC’s Discovery Projects Funding Scheme (DP150101134). M.E. Messinger acknowledges research support from the Natural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada (Grant Application 356119-2011). The authors acknowledge support from the Games and Graphs Collaborative Research Group of the Atlantic Association for Research in Mathematical Sciences.
- Albert MH, Nowakowski RJ, Wolfe D (2007) Lessons in play. A K Peters Ltd, MassachusettsGoogle Scholar
- Beaton I, Finbow S, MacDonald JA (2013) Eternal domination numbers of \(4 \times n\) grid graphs. J Combin Math Combin Comput 85:33–48Google Scholar
- Berlekamp ER, Conway JH, Guy RK (2001) Winning ways for your mathematical plays, vol 1, 2nd edn. A K Peters Ltd, MassachusettsGoogle Scholar
- Burger AP, Cockayne EJ, Gründlingh WR, Mynhardt CM, van Vuuren JH, Winterbach W (2004) Infinite order domination in graphs. J Combin Math Combin Comput 50:179–194Google Scholar
- Finbow S, Messinger ME, van Bommel M (2015) Eternal domination of \(3 \times n\) grid graphs. Aust J Combin 61(2):156–174Google Scholar
- Goddard W, Hedetniemi SM, Hedetniemi ST (2005) Eternal security in graphs. J Combin Math Combin Comput 52:169–180Google Scholar
- Klostermeyer WF, MacGillivray G (2009) Eternal dominating sets in graphs. J Combin Math Combin Comput 68:97–111Google Scholar
- ReVelle CS (1997) Can you protect the Roman empire? John Hopkins Mag 50(2):40Google Scholar
- Woeginger GJ (2001) Exact algorithms for NP-hard problems: a survey. In: Proc. of the 5th international workshop on combinatorial optimization, Springer LNCS 2570, Berlin, pp 185–208Google Scholar