São Paulo Journal of Mathematical Sciences

https://doi.org/10.1007/s40863-019-00155-2

ORIGINAL ARTICLE

On two extensions of the classical zero-divisor graph

Malik Bataineh1 · Driss Bennis2 · Jilali Mikram2 · Fouad Taraza2

© Instituto de Matemática e Estatística da Universidade de São Paulo 2019

Abstract
The extended zero-divisor graph and the annihilator graph of a ring are two extensions
of the classical zero-divisor graph. In this paper, we investigate the relation between
these graphs. Relation between these graphs on some particular ring constructions is
also given.

Keywords Zero-divisor graphs · Extended zero-divisor graphs · Annihilator graphs

Mathematics Subject Classification 13A99 · 13B99 · 05C25

1 Introduction

Throughout, R is a commutative ring with 1 = 0. We use Z (R) to denote the set

of zero-divisors of R; in particular, Z (R)∗ = Z (R)\{0}. For an element x of R, we
denote by Ann M (x) the set {m ∈ M|xm = 0}. In particular, Ann R (x), which is
denoted simply by Ann(x), is the annihilator of x. For an element
√ m of M, we denote
by Ann R (m) the set {r ∈√R|r m = 0}. For an ideal I of R, I means the radical of I .
In particular, Nil(R) := 0 is the nilradical of R. For a nonzero nilpotent element x
of R, n x denotes the index of nilpotency of x. Also, the equivalence class in a quotient

B Driss Bennis
d.bennis@fsr.ac.ma; driss_bennis@hotmail.com
Malik Bataineh
msbataineh@just.edu.jo
Jilali Mikram
mikram@fsr.ac.ma
Fouad Taraza
ftaraza@hotmail.com

1 Department of Mathematics and Statistics, Jordan University of Science and Technology, P.O.
Box 3030, Irbid 22110, Jordan
2 Centre de Recherche de Mathématiques et Applications de Rabat (CeReMAR), Faculty of Sciences,
Mohammed V University in Rabat, Rabat, Morocco

123
 São Paulo Journal of Mathematical Sciences

ring (or a quotient module) of an element x will be denoted by x. Finally, the ring
Z/nZ of the residues modulo an integer n will be noted by Zn .
For general background information and terminology on commutative rings with zero-
divisors, we refer the reader to [19].
The extended zero-divisor graph of R, denoted by (R), is the simple graph asso-
ciated to R such that its vertex set consists of all its nonzero zero-divisors and two
distinct vertices x and y are joined by an edge if and only if there exist two non-
negative integers n and m such that x n y m = 0 with x n = 0 and y m = 0. The concept
of the extended zero-divisor graph was recently introduced in [16] as an extension
of the classical zero-divisor graph. Recall the zero-divisor graph, denoted by (R),
is the simple graph associated to R such that its vertex set consists of all its nonzero
zero-divisors and two distinct vertices x and y are joined by an edge if and only if
x y = 0. The idea of associating graphs with ring-theoretic structures goes back to
Beck in [15], where he was mainly interested in colorings. In his work, all elements
of the ring are vertices of the graph (see also [8]). It was Anderson and Livingston
in [6] who introduced the zero-divisor graph of a commutative ring and started the
study of the relationship between ring-theoretic properties and graph-theoretic ones.
Since then, zero-divisor graphs of commutative rings have attracted the attention of
several researchers (see, for instance, [1–3,6,7,10,12,13,20,21]). It was proved, among
other things, that (R) is connected with diam((R)) ≤ 3 and gr((R)) ∈ {3, 4, ∞}.
For a survey and recent results concerning zero-divisor graphs, we refer the reader to
[11].
Motivated then by the success of this area of research, several authors have intro-
duced other graphs associated to some ring theoretic properties (see, for instance,
[4,5,22]). In this context, the annihilator graph of a commutative ring was introduced
in [14]. Recall that the annihilator graph of R is the simple graph AG(R) such that
its vertex set consists of all its nonzero zero-divisors and two distinct vertices x and y
are adjacent if and only if Ann R (x y) = Ann R (x) ∪ Ann R (y). It is clear that the graph
AG(R) is an extension of the zero-divisor graph (R). In this paper we investigate
the relation between the extended zero-divisor graph, the annihilator graph and the
classical zero-divisor graph of a commutative ring. Firstly, we show that defining an
extension of the extended zero-divisor graph as done for the annihilator graph leads
to nothing but the extended zero-divisor graph (see Proposition 2.1). Then, we deduce
a surprising fact that the extended graph (R) of a commutative ring R is in fact a
subgraph of the annihilator graph AG(R) (see Theorem 2.2). We then mainly focus on
when (R) = AG(R). After giving a nice necessary condition (Proposition 2.3) and
presenting some particular and simple cases of rings R over which (R) = AG(R),
we state the main result (Theorem 2.10). We end the paper with a Sect. 3 in which we
study the annihilator graphs of finite direct products of rings and trivial extensions of
rings.
For completeness, it is convenient to recall some notions on graph theory used
in this paper. Here, we use the terminology given in [11] (as a general background
reference we suggest [18]).
Let G be an undirected graph. We say that G is connected if there is a path between
any two distinct vertices. For distinct vertices x and y in G, the distance between x
and y, denoted by d(x, y), is the length of a shortest path connecting x and y, and if

123
São Paulo Journal of Mathematical Sciences

no such a path exists, we set d(x, y) = ∞ (by convention, d(x, x) = 0). The diameter
of the graph G is diam() := Sup{d(x, y)|x and y are vertices of G}. A cycle of
length n ∈ N\{0} in G is a path of the form x1 − x2 − · · · − xn − x1 , where xi = x j
when i = j. We define the girth of G, denoted by gr(G), as the length of a shortest
cycle in G, provided G contains a cycle; otherwise, gr(G) = ∞. A graph G is said
to be complete if any two distinct vertices are adjacent. The complete graph with n
vertices will be denoted by K n . A complete bipartite graph is a graph G which may
be partitioned into two disjoint nonempty vertex sets A and B such that two distinct
vertices are adjacent if and only if they are in distinct vertex sets. We denote the
complete bipartite graph by K m,n , where |A| = m and |B| = n. When G = K 1,n , G
is called a star graph.

2 Main results

In [14], the annihilator graph was introduced as an extension of the classical zero-
divisor graph. Thus, in the same context, one would naturally introduce an extension
AG(R) of the annihilator graph AG(R) as follows: vertices x and y are adja-
cent in AG(R) whenever there exist two non-negative integers n and m such that
Ann R (x n y m ) = Ann R (x n ) ∪ Ann R (y m ). However, because of the following result,
we deduce that AG(R) and AG(R) coincide.

Proposition 2.1 Let R be a commutative ring and consider two nonzero zero-divisors x
and y. If Ann R (x y) = Ann R (x), then Ann R (x n y m ) = Ann R (x n ) for every n, m ∈ N∗ .

Proof Assume that Ann R (x y) = Ann R (x) with x and y ∈ Z (R)∗ . Let n, m ∈ N∗ ,
show that Ann R (x n y m ) ⊂ Ann R (x n ). Let r ∈ Ann R (x n y m ), then r x n y m = 0, hence
r x n−1 y m−1 ∈ Ann R (x y) = Ann R (x). Then, r x n y m−1 = 0 and so r x n = 0 since
r x n−1 ∈ Ann R (x y) = Ann R (x), as desired. 

As a surprising fact we show that the extended graph (R) is in fact a subgraph of
the annihilator graph AG(R), and so (R) ⊂ (R) ⊂ AG(R).

Theorem 2.2 Let R be a commutative ring. Then, (R) is a subgraph of AG(R).

Proof Suppose that x − y is an edge of (R), then there are n, m ∈ N∗ such that
x n = 0, y m = 0 and x n y m = 0. Assume that x − y is not an edge of AG(R), then
Ann R (x y) = Ann R (x) ∪ Ann R (y). Hence, Ann R (x y) = Ann R (x) or Ann R (x y) =
Ann R (y) since an ideal cannot be a union of two proper ideals (see [14, Lemma 2.1
(1)]). Without lost of generality, we may assume that Ann R (x y) = Ann R (x). Since
x n y m = 0, we have x n−1 y m−1 ∈ Ann R (x y) = Ann R (x). Hence x n y m−1 = 0,
then x n−1 y m−2 ∈ Ann R (x y) = Ann R (x). Then, x n y m−2 = 0, and so x n y = 0,
x n−1 ∈ Ann R (x y) = Ann R (x). Therefore, x n = 0, a contradiction. 

In [14] Badawi investigated when (R) = AG(R). In our context, we investigate

when (R) = AG(R) under the condition (R) = (R).
We start by giving a necessary condition.

123
 São Paulo Journal of Mathematical Sciences

Proposition 2.3 Let R be a commutative ring. If AG(R) = (R), then, for all x ∈
Z (R)\Nil(R) and for every integer n > 1, we have Ann R (x n ) = Ann R (x n+1 ).

Proof Suppose there is an element x ∈ Z (R)\Nil(R) such that Ann R (x n ) =

Ann R (x n+1 ) for some integer n > 1. Then, x − x n is an edge of AG(R) (since
Ann(x) ⊆ Ann(x n )). Hence, x − x n is an edge of (R) (since AG(R) = (R)).
Therefore, x ∈ Nil(R), a contradiction. 

Corollary 2.4 Let R be a commutative ring. If there is an element x ∈ Z (R)\Nil(R)

such that Ann R (x n ) = Ann R (x n+1 ) for some integer n > 1, then AG(R) = (R) =
(R).

Example 2.5 1. If R = Z12 , then 2 − 10 is an edge of AG(R) but it is not an edge of

(R).
We have (R)  (R)  AG(R), gr((R)) = gr((R)) = 4, gr(AG(R)) = 3,
diam((R)) = 3 and diam((R)) = diam(AG(R)) = 2.
2 3 2 3 2 3

4 4 4
6 6 6
8 8 8

10 9 10 9 10 9
Γ(Z12 ) Γ(Z12 ) AG(Z12 )
2. If R = Z24 , then 2 − 4 is an edge of AG(R) but it is not an edge of (R).
We have (R)  (R)  AG(R), gr((R)) = gr((R)) = gr(AG(R)) = 3,
diam((R)) = 3 and diam((R)) = diam(AG(R)) = 2.

Before giving a characterization of when AG(R) = (R), we give some particular

simple cases of rings over which AG(R) = (R). For instance, AG(R) = (R) when
(R) is a complete graph, because (R) is a subgraph of AG(R) (Theorem 2.2). In
[16, Theorem 3.3], it is shown that (R) is a complete graph if R is a non reduced
quasi-local commutative ring with maximal ideal Nil(R) such that |Nil(R)∗ | ≥ 2 and
x n x −1 y n y −1 = 0 for each x, y ∈ Nil(R)∗ . Thus, we have the following result.

Proposition 2.6 Let R be a non reduced quasi-local commutative ring with maximal
ideal Nil(R) such that |Nil(R)∗ | ≥ 2 and x n x −1 y n y −1 = 0 for each x, y ∈ Nil(R)∗ .
Then, AG(R) = (R).

Proof The result follows since, under the given conditions, (R) is a complete graph
by [16, Theorem 3.3]. 

Proposition 2.7 Let R be a commutative ring with (R) = (R). Then, the following
statements are equivalent:

123
São Paulo Journal of Mathematical Sciences

1. gr(AG(R)) = 4.
2. AG(R) = (R) = K 2,3 is a complete bipartite graph of R.

Proof (1)⇒(2) Since gr(AG(R)) = 4 and (R) = (R), R is ring-isomorphic to

either Z2 × Z4 or Z2 × Z2 [X ]/(X 2 ) (by [14, Theorem 2.9]). Then AG(R) =
(R) = K 2,3 .
(2)⇒(1) It is clear. 

Proposition 2.8 Let R be a commutative ring such that (R) = (R). Then, (R) is
a star graph if and only if AG(R) = (R) = K 3 .

Proof (⇒) Suppose that (R) is a star graph and (R) = (R). Then, AG(R) =
(R) = K 3 by [14, Theorem 3.17].
(⇐) By [14, Theorem 3.17], (R) = K 1,2 . Therefore (R) is a star graph. 

Corollary 2.9 Let R be a non reduced commutative ring with |Z (R)∗ | ≥ 2. Then,
AG(R) is a star graph if and only if AG(R) = (R) = (R) = K 1,1 or K 1,∞ .

Now we give the main result of this paper which characterizes the case when
AG(R) = (R) of a commutative ring R.

Theorem 2.10 Let R be a commutative ring with (R) = (R). Then, AG(R) =
(R) if and only if one of the following assertions hold:
1. gr(AG(R)) = 4.
2. If Z (R) = Nil(R), then x n x −1 y n y −1 = 0 for each x, y ∈ Nil(R)∗ .
3. If Z (R) = Nil(R), then the following conditions hold.
• For each distinct x, y ∈ Nil(R)∗ , we have x n x −1 y n y −1 = 0, and
• If there are z ∈ Z (R)\Nil(R) and t ∈ Z (R)∗ with z = t and z n t m = 0 for all
n, m ∈ N∗ , then Ann R (zt) = Ann R (z) or Ann R (zt) = Ann R (t).

Proof (⇐) If gr(AG(R)) = 4, then AG(R) = (R) (by Proposition 2.7).

If Z (R) = Nil(R) and x n x −1 y n y −1 = 0 for each x, y ∈ Nil(R)∗ , then (R) is a
complete graph (by [16, Theorem 3.3]). Then, AG(R) = (R).
Now, assume that Z (R) = Nil(R). Let x − y be an edge of AG(R). Then, if x,
y ∈ Nil(R)∗ , we have x n x −1 y n y −1 = 0, hence x − y is an edge of (R) by [16,
Theorem 3.3]. Now, let x ∈ Z (R)\Nil(R) and y ∈ Z (R)∗ . Suppose that x − y is not
an edge of (R). Then, x n y m = 0 for all n, m ∈ N∗ , hence Ann R (x y) = Ann R (x) or
Ann R (x y) = Ann R (y), a contradiction.
(⇒) Assume that AG(R) = (R) with (R) = (R). Then gr(AG(R)) ∈ {3, 4}
by [14, Corollary 2.11]. If gr(AG(R)) = 4, there is nothing to prove. Suppose that
gr(AG(R)) = 3. Then, there are two cases: diam(AG(R)) = 1 or diam(AG(R)) = 2
(by [14, Theorem 2.2]). If diam(AG(R)) = 1, then (R) is a complete graph, and
hence Z (R) = Nil(R) and for every x, y ∈ Nil(R)∗ , x n x −1 y n y −1 = 0 by [16, Theorem
3.3], as desired. If diam(AG(R)) = 2, then Z (R) = Nil(R); otherwise AG(R)
is complete by [14, Theorem 3.10], a contradiction. Using the (induced) subgraph,
AG N (R), of AG(R) with the set of vertices Nil(R)∗ , AG N (R) =  N (R) is complete
(by [14, Theorem 3.10]). Hence, for every x, y ∈ Nil(R)∗ , we have x n x −1 y n y −1 = 0.

123
 São Paulo Journal of Mathematical Sciences

Since diam(AG(R)) = 2, there are z ∈ Z (R)\Nil(R) and t ∈ Z (R)∗ such that

z − t is not an edge of (R) = AG(R), hence z n t m = 0 for all n, m ∈ N∗ and
Ann R (zt) = Ann R (z) or Ann R (zt) = Ann R (t). We are done. 

3 Annihilator graph of some ring constructions

We study the annihilator graph of the finite direct products of rings and trivial exten-
sions of rings.
The following result studies the annihilator graph of finite direct products of rings.

n
Theorem 3.1 Let R = Ri , where (Ri )1≤i≤n is a finite family of rings with n ∈
i=1
N∗ \{1}.
1. If n = 2, then the following assertions hold:
(a) If R1 ∼ = R2 =∼ Z2 , then (R) = (R) = AG(R), gr((R)) = ∞ and
diam((R)) = 1.
(b) If R1 and R2 are integral domains and one of them is isomorphic to Z2 ,
then gr((R)) = gr((R)) = gr(AG(R)) = ∞ and diam((R)) =
diam((R)) = diam(AG(R)) = 2. In this case (R) = (R) = AG(R)
is a star graph.
(c) If R1 and R2 are integral domains with |R1 | ≥ 3 and |R2 | ≥ 3, then (R) =
(R) = AG(R), diam((R)) = 2 and gr((R)) = 4. In this case (R) is a
complete bipartite graph.
(d) If R1 or R2 is not an integral domain, then gr((R)) = gr((R)) =
gr(AG(R)) = 3, diam((R)) = diam((R)) = 3 and diam(AG(R)) = 2.
(e) If R1 or R2 is not an integral domain such that all zero divisors are nilpo-
tent in each ring with nonzero zero divisors, then gr((R)) = gr((R)) =
gr(AG(R)) = 3, diam((R)) = 3 and diam((R)) = diam(AG(R)) = 2.
2. If n ≥ 3, then gr((R)) = gr((R)) = gr(AG(R)) = 3, diam(((R)) =
diam((R)) = 3 and diam(AG(R)) = 2.
Proof 1. Case n = 2. The proof of both (a) and (b) is trivial.
We prove the assertion (c). Suppose that R1 and R2 are integral domains, then
Z (R1 × R2 )∗ = T1 ∪ T2 where T1 = {(0, a); a ∈ R2∗ } and T2 = {(b, 0); b ∈ R1∗ }.
So we have Ann(0, a) = T2 for all a ∈ R2∗ and Ann(b, 0) = T1 for all b ∈ R1∗ .
Then, (R) is a complete bipartite graph, therefore (R) = (R) = AG(R).
(d). We have gr((R)) = gr((R)) = gr(AG(R)) = 3 and diam((R)) =
diam((R)) = 3 from [16, Propositions 4.9 and 3.6]. Since diam((R)) = 3 and
by [14, Theorem 2.2], diam(AG(R)) ≤ 2. It remains to show that diam(AG(R)) =
1. We may assume that R2 is not an integral domain, then 1 and −1 are two reg-
ular elements of R2 . Then Ann((0, 1)(0, −1)) = Ann(0, 1) ∪ Ann(0, −1), hence
(0, 1) − (0, −1) is not an edge of AG(R), therefore diam(AG(R)) = 2.
(e) Follows b y [16, Propositions 3.6 and 4.9] and the previous proof.

123
São Paulo Journal of Mathematical Sciences

2. Case n ≥ 3. Since (0, 0, 0, ..., 1) − (0, 1, 1, 1, ...., 1) is not an edge of AG(R),

diam(AG(R)) = 2. The other assertions follow from [16, Propositions 3.6 and
4.9]. 

As a consequence, we determine the girth and the diameter of AG(Zn ).


k
Corollary 3.2 Let R = Zn , where n = piαi is the prime factorization of n with
i=1
k ∈ N∗ . The following assertions hold:
1. If n = 22 , then diam((R)) = diam(AG(R)) = 0.
2. If n = 2m with m > 2 or n = p m with p an odd prime integer and m ≥ 2, then
diam((R)) = 1. In this case (R) = AG(R) is a complete graph.
3. If n = p α q β with p and q distinct primes, then diam((R)) = 2.
Namely,
• If p = 2 with α = β = 1, then (R) = AG(R) is a star graph.
• If p = 2 with α = 2 and β = 1 or if n = pq, then (R) = AG(R) is a
complete bipartite graph.

k
4. If n = piαi with pi = p j for i = j and k ≥ 3, then (R) = AG(R),
i=1
diam(AG(R)) = 2 and gr(AG(R)) = 3.

Recall that the idealization of an R-module M called also the trivial extension of R
by M, denoted by R M, is the commutative ring R× M with the following operations:
(r1 , m 1 ) + (r2 , m 2 ) = (r1 +r2 , m 1 + m 2 ) and (r1 , m 1 )(r2 , m 2 ) = (r1r2 , r1 m 2 +r2 m 1 )
for all (r1 , m 1 ), (r2 , m 2 ) ∈ R  M.
Recall also that Nil(R  M) = Nil(R) M and Z (R  M) = (Z (R)∪ Z (M)) M,
where Z (M) := {r ∈ R|∃m ∈ M\{0}, r m = 0} (see, for instance, [9] for more details
about this ring construction).
We end with a result that characterizes when (R  M) and AG(R  M) coincide
in the case where R is an integral domain.
We need the following lemmas.

Lemma 3.3 Let R be an integral domain and M an R-module. Then, (a, n) − (b, m)
is not an edge of AG(R  M) if and only if Ann M (a) ∪ Ann M (b) = Ann M (ab).

Proof We have Ann RM (a, n) = {(0, k)|k ∈ Ann M (a)}, Ann RM (b, m) =
{(0, t)|t ∈ Ann M (b)} and Ann RM ((a, n)(b, m)) = Ann RM (ab, am + bn) =
{(0, h)|h ∈ Ann M (ab)}. Then (a, n) − (b, m) is an edge of AG(R  M) if and only
if Ann M (a) ∪ Ann M (b) = Ann M (ab). 

Lemma 3.4 Let R be an integral domain and M an R-module. Then, the following
assertions hold:
1. For a ∈ R, Ann M (a) = Ann M (a 2 ) if and only if (a, n) − (a, m) is not an edge of
AG(R  M) for all n, m ∈ M ∗ .

123
 São Paulo Journal of Mathematical Sciences

2. If there is an element a ∈ R such that Ann M (a) = Ann M (a 2 ), then (R  M) =

AG(R  M).

Proof (1) This is a particular case of the previous lemma where a = b.

(2) If there is an element a ∈ R such that Ann M (a) = Ann M (a 2 ), then, by (1),
(a, n) − (a, m) is an edge of AG(R  M) but it is not an edge of (R  M) since
R is an integral domain, therefore (R  M) = AG(R  M). 

When investigating the question “When is (R  M) = AG(R  M)?”, we get at

first two necessary conditions, however we realise that one of them is resulted from
the other. Namely we have the following reult which will be used in the proof of the
next theorem.

Lemma 3.5 Let R be an integral domain and M an R-module. Consider the following
conditions:
1. For all a, b ∈ R, Ann M (a) ∪ Ann M (b) = Ann M (ab). √
2. For all m ∈ M and a ∈ R ∗ , Ann R (m) = Ann R (am) if a ∈
/ Ann R (m).
The implication 1 ⇒ 2 holds true.

As a ring that satisfies the condition (2) but not (1) of Lemma 3.5, it suffices to
consider the ring Z  Z4 (in fact one can consider Z  Z p2 for any prime positive
integer p). Indeed, for a = b ∈ Z\{0}, AnnZ4 (a) = AnnZ4 (a 2 ). But, it is easy to
show that the condition (2) holds true.

Theorem 3.6 Let R be an integral domain and M an R-module. Then, (R  M) =

AG(R  M) if and only if the following conditions hold:
√
1. For all m ∈ M and a ∈ R ∗ , Ann R (m) = Ann R (am) if a ∈
/ Ann R (m).
2. For all a, b ∈ R, Ann M (a) ∪ Ann M (b) = Ann M (ab).

Proof First, notice that, since R is an integral domain, Z (R  M) = Z (M)  M =

T1 ∪ T2 such that T1 = {(0, m)|m ∈ M} and T2 = {(a, n)|a ∈ R ∗ , n ∈ M and for
some m ∈ M ∗ , am = 0}.
(⇒) Now assume that (R  M) = AG(R  M) and consider a, b ∈ R. We prove
that Ann M (ab) ⊂ Ann M (a) ∪ Ann M (b). Let m ∈ M such that abm = 0.
We may assume that m = 0. Suppose that am = 0 and bm = 0. Then,
(a, 0) and (b, 0) are in T2 . Now, since ab = 0, (a, 0) − (b, 0) is not an edge
of (R  M), hence (a, 0) − (b, 0) is not an edge of AG(R  M) since
(R  M) = AG(R  M). Then, by Lemma 3.3, Ann M (a) ∪ Ann M (b) =
Ann M (ab).
(⇐) Suppose that (R  M) = AG(R  M), then there is an edge (a, n) −
(b, m) of AG(R  M) that is not an edge of (R  M). Two cases
occur:
Case 1 : Without loss of generality, we may assume that (b, m) = (0, m) ∈
∗ α
√ (a, n) ∈ T2 . Then, for all α ∈ N , (a, n) (0, m) = (0, 0), then
T1 and
/ Ann R (m). Now by hypothesis and Lemma 3.5, Ann R (m) = Ann R (am).
a ∈

123
São Paulo Journal of Mathematical Sciences

This implies that (a, n) − (0, m) is not an edge of AG(R  M), a contradic-
tion.
Case 2 : (a, n), (b, m) ∈ T2 , then Ann M (a) ∪ Ann M (b) = Ann M (ab) hence
(a, n) − (b, m) is not an edge of AG(R  M) by Lemma 3.3, a contradiction.


Example 3.7 1. As examples of rings that satisfy the condition of Theorem 3.6, one
can take an extension R → S of integral domains. Then, (R  S) = (R  S) =
AG(R  S) and moreover it is a complete graph. Also one can consider the ring
Z  Z p for any prime positive integer p (see [17]).
2. As an example of a ring that does not satisfy the condition of Theorem 3.6, one
can consider the ring Z  Z6 and so (Z  Z6 ) = AG(R  Z6 ).

Acknowledgements The authors would like to thank the referees for careful reading of the manuscript and
helpful comments.

Compliance with ethical standards

Conflict of interest On behalf of all authors, the corresponding author states that there is no conflict of
interest.

References
1. Anderson, D.F.: On the diameter and girth of a zero-divisor graph, II. Houst. J. Math. 34, 361–371
(2008)
2. Anderson, D.F., Badawi, A.: Divisibility conditions in commutative rings with zero-divisors. Commun.
Algebra 30, 4031–4047 (2002)
3. Anderson, D.F., Badawi, A.: On the zero-divisor graph of a ring. Commun. Algebra 36, 3073–3092
(2008)
4. Anderson, D.F., Badawi, A.: The total graph of a commutative ring. J. Algebra 320, 2706–2719 (2008)
5. Anderson, D.F., Badawi, A.: The generalized total graph of a commutative ring. J. Algebra Appl. 12,
1250212–1250230 (2013)
6. Anderson, D.F., Livingston, P.S.: The zero-divisor graph of a commutative ring. J. Algebra 217, 434–
447 (1999)
7. Anderson, D.F., Mulay, S.B.: On the diameter and girth of a zero-divisor graph. J. Pure Appl. Algebra
210, 543–550 (2007)
8. Anderson, D.D., Naseer, M.: Beck’s coloring of a commutative ring. J. Algebra 159, 500–514 (1993)
9. Anderson, D.D., Winders, M.: Idealization of a module. J. Commut. Algebra 1, 3–56 (2009)
10. Anderson, D.F., Levy, R., Shapiro, J.: Zero-divisor graphs, von Neumann regular rings, and Boolean
algebras. J. Pure Appl. Algebra 180, 221–241 (2003)
11. Anderson, D.F., Axtell, M., Stickles, J.: Zero-divisor graphs in commutative rings. In: Fontana, M.,
Kabbaj, S.-E., Olberding, B., Swanson, I. (eds.) Commutative Algebra, Noetherian and Non-Noetherian
Perspectives, pp. 23–45. Springer, New York (2010)
12. Axtell, M., Stickles, J.: Zero-divisor graphs of idealizations. J. Pure Appl. Algebra 204, 235–243 (2006)
13. Axtell, M., Coykendall, J., Stickles, J.: Zero-divisor graphs of polynomial and power series over
commutative rings. Commun. Algebra 33, 2043–2050 (2005)
14. Badawi, A.: On the annihilator graph of a commutative ring. Commun. Algebra 42, 108–121 (2014)
15. Beck, I.: Coloring of commutative rings. J. Algebra 116, 208–226 (1988)
16. Bennis, D., Mikram, J., Taraza, F.: On the extended zero-divisor graph of commutative rings. Turk. J.
Math. 40, 376–388 (2016)
17. Bennis, D., Mikram, J., Taraza, F.: Extended zero-divisor graph of idealizations. Commun. Korean
Math. Soc. 32, 7–17 (2017)
18. Bollabos, B.: Modern Graph Theory. Springer, New York (1998)

123
 São Paulo Journal of Mathematical Sciences

19. Huckaba, J.A.: Commutative Rings with Zero Divisors. Marcel Dekker, New York (1988)
20. Levy, R., Shapiro, J.: The zero-divisor graph of von Neumann regular rings. Commun. Algebra 30,
745–750 (2002)
21. Lucas, T.G.: The diameter of a zero divisor graph. J. Algebra 301, 3533–3558 (2006)
22. Maimani, H.R., Salimi, M., Sattari, A., Yassemi, S.: Comaximal graph of commutative rings. J. Algebra
319, 1801–1808 (2008)

Publisher’s Note Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps
and institutional affiliations.

123