1) The document is a student's tutorial submission for a discrete mathematics class discussing proof by contradiction.
2) It analyzes a node a with the maximum out-degree in a graph and assumes a is not the "king" node.
3) It reaches a contradiction by showing that if a is not the king, then there must exist another node v with more than a's maximum out-degree, contradicting the initial assumption.
1) The document is a student's tutorial submission for a discrete mathematics class discussing proof by contradiction.
2) It analyzes a node a with the maximum out-degree in a graph and assumes a is not the "king" node.
3) It reaches a contradiction by showing that if a is not the king, then there must exist another node v with more than a's maximum out-degree, contradicting the initial assumption.
1) The document is a student's tutorial submission for a discrete mathematics class discussing proof by contradiction.
2) It analyzes a node a with the maximum out-degree in a graph and assumes a is not the "king" node.
3) It reaches a contradiction by showing that if a is not the king, then there must exist another node v with more than a's maximum out-degree, contradicting the initial assumption.
Tutorial submission for COL202(Discrete Mathematics)
Tutorial-9
Proof by contradiction: Say the node with the maximum out-degree is a.
If a is not the king, then ∃ a node v, such that a cannot beat v =⇒ ∀ out- neighbours of a (say ti ) there is an out-edge from v to ti (else v would have been beaten by a), also there is an out-edge from v to a (again the same argument). If the number of out-edges of a are k, then from the above analysis v has atleast k(∀ ti )+1 > k out-neighbours, which contradicts the assumption that a was the node with the maximum out-degree.■