On Feb 27, 6:37 am, David Joyner <wdjoy...@gmail.com> wrote: > There are several places where bipartite graphs > differ (at least in the literature) from regular graphs. > For example, usually the bipartite graph's adjacency matrix > is not square.
I think an "adjacency matrix" should always be square. But for a bipartite graph if you order the vertices consecutively within the two parts of the bipartition, then you get a block matrix with zero matrices in the northwest and southeast corners. And the other two corners are transposes of each other (but not square when the bipartite sets are different sizes). This is in the BipartiteGraph class as "reduced_adjacency_matrix()." I can't recall ever seeing this matrix given a name, so I don't know if this is how one would expect to find it. In the research for your graph theory book have you learned what others call it? Rob -- To post to this group, send an email to sage-devel@googlegroups.com To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to sage-devel+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/sage-devel URL: http://www.sagemath.org
