568
Views
14
CrossRef citations to date
0
Altmetric
Research Articles

On bounds for topological descriptors of φ-sum graphs

ORCID Icon, ORCID Icon, ORCID Icon & ORCID Icon
Pages 1288-1301 | Received 08 Apr 2020, Accepted 31 Aug 2020, Published online: 11 Sep 2020

Abstract

The properties of chemical compounds are very important for the studies of the non-isomorphism phenomenon's related to the molecular graphs. Topological indices (TIs) are one of the mathematical tools which are used to study these properties. Gutman and Trinajsti [Graph theory and molecular orbitals. Total π-electron energy of alternant hydrocarbons. Chem Phys Lett. 1972;17(4):535–538] defined the Zagreb indices (descriptors) to find correlation value between a molecular graph and its total π-electron energy. Later on, Bollobás and Erdös [Graphs of extremal weights. Ars Comb; 1998;50:225–233] defined the most general form of these indices (descriptors) called by general Randić index (GRI) and first general Zagreb index (FGZI), respectively. In this paper, we computed the bounds for FGZI and GRI of φ-sum graphs, obtained by the strong product of the graph φ(G) with another graph Γ, where φ(G) is constructed using four subdivision operations on the graph G. At the end, we also include the results for some particular families of graphs as the applications of the obtained results.

MSC (2020) Subject Classifications:

1. Introduction

A number, polynomial or a matrix can uniquely identify a graph and a topological index (TI) of a molecular graph is a numeric number that can be defined as a function F:aCaaR, where C is a class of molecular graphs and R is a set of real numbers. TI's are classified into different classes but degree-based are most familiar, see [Citation1]. These are used to characterize the physicochemical properties of chemical compounds of the molecular graphs like surface tension & density, melting & freezing point, heat of evaporation & formation and solubility, see [Citation2–4]. TI's are also used in the studies of the structural properties of computer-based networks such as clustering, connectivity, modularity, robustness and vulnerability, see [Citation5].

In computational graph theory, the concept of formation of the new graphs by using some operations is studied widely. For a connected molecular graph G, Yan et al. [Citation6] defined the new graphs called as line graph L(G), subdivided graph S(G), triangle parallel graph R(G), line superposition graph Q(G) and total graph T(G) using the subdivision related operations L, S, R, Q and T on G, respectively. They also obtained the Wiener index of these new resultant graphs φ(G), where φ{L,S,R,Q,T}. Eliasi et al. [Citation7] defined the φ-sum graphs (GφΓ) using the operation of cartesian product on the graphs φ(G) and Γ. They also obtained the Wiener index of these φ-sum graphs GSΓ, GRΓ, GQΓ and GTΓ. The first, second and forgotten zagreb indices of the φ-sum graphs are computed in [Citation8,Citation9]. The first general Zagreb index and general sum-connectivity index of the aforesaid cartesian product-based φ-sum graphs are obtained in the form of exact formulas and bounds, see [Citation10–12]. For further studies of the TIs on the graphs obtained by the various operations of graphs, we refer to [Citation13–21].

Recently, Sarala et al. [Citation22] obtained the F-index of the strong product based φ-sum graphs. The theme of this note is to compute FGZI and GRI of φ-sum graphs G+φΓ constructed by the strong product of graphs φ(G) and Γ, where φ(G){(S(G),R(G),Q(G),T(G)}. The remaining paper is organized as: Section 2 contains some basic definitions and operations on graphs G and φ(G), Section 3 covers the main results of upper and lower bounds of FGZI and GRI and Section 4 is devoted to conclusion.

2. Preliminaries

Let G = (V(G), E(G)) be an undirected, simple, finite and connected molecular graph with vertex set V(G) and edge set E(G) such that each vertex presents atom and each edge shows the bonding among the atoms. Degree of u in G is ΩG(u)=|{xV(G):d(x,u)=1}|. The maximum and minimum degrees of a graph G are defined as G=max{ΩG(u):auV(G)} and δG=min{ΩG(u):auV(G)}. We note that δGΩG(u)G, where equality holds if and only if G is a regular graph. For further study of graph-theocratic terminologies, see [Citation23–25]. Now, we define some important degree-based TIs.

Definition 2.1

For a molecular graph G, the first and second Zagreb indices (descriptors) are defined as: M1(G)=vϵV(G)[ΩG(v)]2=uvϵE(G)[ΩG(v)+ΩG(u)]andM2(G)=uvϵE(G)[ΩG(v)ΩG(u)]. In 1972, Gutman and Trinajsti defined these indices (descriptors) to study the molecular graphs, see [Citation26–28].

Definition 2.2

[Citation29,Citation30]

First general Zagreb (FGZ) and general Randic´ (GR) indices of a molecular graph G are M1α=vϵV(G)ΩGα(v)=uvϵE(G)[ΩGα1(u)+ΩGα1(v)]andRβ(G)=uvϵE(G)[ΩG(u)ΩG(v)]β respectively, where α{0,1} and β are real numbers. Moreover, for α=2 and α=3, FGZI becomes first Zagreb index and forgotten topological index. Similarly, for β=1 and β=12, GRI becomes second Zagreb index and classical Randić index respectively, see [Citation26–32].

Operations of Subdivision: The following operations are defined in [Citation7].

  • S(G) is obtained by adding a new vertex in each edge of G.

  • To obtain R(G), in S(G) join end (original) vertices of the edges which are incident on each new vertex.

  • To obtain Q(G), in S(G) join those pairs of new vertices by edges which have common adjacent (original) vertices.

  • If both R(G) and Q(G) are applied at the same on S(G), we obtain T(G).

Figure  illustrates the foresaid operations of the subdivision of graphs.

Figure 1. Subdivision-related operations.

Figure 1. Subdivision-related operations.

Definition 2.3

For φ{S,R,Q,T}, φ(G) is a graph obtained by the operation φ on graph G with the vertices V(φ(G)) and the edges E(φ(G)). Then, φ-sum graph G+φΓ based on strong product of graphs φ(G) and Γ is a graph with vertex set V(G+φΓ)=V(φ(G))×V(Γ)=(V1E1)×(V2) such that two vertices (u1,v1) and (u2,v2) of V(G+φΓ) are adjacent iff, either [u1=u2 ε V(G) and v1v2 ε E(Γ)] or [v1=v2 ε V(Γ) and u1u2 ε E(φ(G))] or [u1u2 ε E(φ(G)) and v1v2 ε E(Γ)], see Figure .

Figure 2. The φ-sum graphs for G=P3 and H=P2.

Figure 2. The φ-sum graphs for G=P3 and H=P2.

Remark 2.4

For any vertex (u,v)V(G+φΓ), the degree of (u,v) (denoted by d(u,v)) can be defined as d(u,v)=Ωφ(G)(u)+ΩΓ(v)+Ωφ(G)(u)ΩΓ(v)if uϵV(G)Ωφ(G)(u)+Ωφ(G)(u)ΩΓ(v)if uϵV(φ(G))V(G).

3. Main results

This section contains the main results of φ-sum graphs based on strong product. Assume that the connected graphs G and Γ have number of vertices nG and nΓ, and number of edges mG and mΓ, respectively.

Theorem 3.1

Let G and Γ be two connected graph.

  1. We have α2Mα(G+sΓ)α1, where α1, α2 0 and α1=2[G+Γ+GΓ]α1×[nGmΓ+mG(nΓ+mΓ)]+2mG[G+GΓ]α1[mΓ+nΓ]α2=2[δG+δΓ+δGδΓ]α1×[nGmΓ+mG(nΓ+mΓ)]+2mG[δG+δGδΓ]α1[mΓ+nΓ].

  2. We have β2Rβ(G+sΓ)β1, where β1, β2 0 and β1=nGmΓ[G+Γ+GΓ]2β+2mG[G+Γ+GΓ]β[G+GΓ]β×[nΓ+mΓ]β2=nGmΓ[δG+δΓ+δGδΓ]2β+2mG[δG+δΓ+δGδΓ]β[δG+δGδΓ]β×[nΓ+mΓ].

Proof.

By definition (a)Mα(G+sΓ)=(u,v)ϵV(G+sΓ)dG+sΓα(u,v) In terms of edges, where n=α1 Mα(G+sΓ)=(s1,t1)(s2,t2)ϵE(G+sΓ)[dG+sΓn(s1,t1)+dG+sΓn(s2,t2)]=s1=s2ϵV(G)(t1t2)ϵE(Γ)[dG+sΓn(s1,t1)+dG+sΓn(s2,t2)]+t1=t2ϵV(Γ)(s1s2)ϵE(S(G))[dG+sΓn(s1,t1)+dG+sΓn(s2,t2)]+s1s2ϵE(S(G))(t1t2)ϵE(Γ)[dG+sΓn(s1,t1)+dG+sΓn(s2,t2)]=1+2+3. Consider, 1=s1=s2ϵV(G)(t1t2)ϵE(Γ)[dG+sΓn(s1,t1)+dG+sΓn(s2,t2)]=s1=s2ϵV(G)(t1t2)ϵE(Γ)[{Ω(G)s1+Ω(Γ)t1+Ω(G)s1Ω(Γ)t1}n+{Ω(G)s2+Ω(Γ)t2+Ω(G)s2Ω(Γ)t2}n]s1=s2ϵV(G)(t1t2)ϵE(Γ)[{G+Γ+GΓ}n+{G+Γ+GΓ}n]=2nGmΓ{G+Γ+GΓ}n. It is clear that S(G) = G and E(S(G)) = 2E(G). Therefore ∀{t1=t2}ε V(Γ) & {s1s2} ε E(S(G)) with s1 ε V(G), s2 ε (V(S(G))V(G)) we have 2=t1=t2ϵV(Γ)(s1s2)ϵE(S(G))[dG+sΓn(s1,t1)+dG+sΓn(s2,t2)]=t1=t2ϵV(Γ)(s1s2)ϵE(S(G))[{Ω(G)s1+Ω(Γ)t1+Ω(G)s1Ω(Γ)t1}n+{Ω(G)s2+Ω(G)s2Ω(Γ)t2}n]t1=t2ϵV(Γ)(s1s2)ϵE(S(G))[{G(1+Γ)+Γ}n+{G(1+Γ)}n]=2nΓmG[{G(1+Γ)+Γ}n+{G(1+Γ)}n]. Now ∀s1s2ε E(S(G)) such that s1ϵE(G) & s2 ε (V(S(G))V(G)) and (t1t2) ε E(Γ), we have 3=s1s2ϵE(S(G))(t1t2)ϵE(Γ)[dG+sΓn(s1,t1)+dG+sΓn(s2,t2)]=s1s2ϵE(S(G))(t1t2)ϵE(Γ)[{Ω(G)s1+Ω(Γ)t1+Ω(G)s1Ω(Γ)t1}n+{Ω(G)s2+Ω(G)s2Ω(Γ)t2}n]s1ϵV(G),s2ϵV(S(G))V(G)(t1t2)ϵE(Γ)[{G+Γ+GΓ}n+{G+GΓ}n]=mΓ|E(S(G))|[{G+Γ+GΓ}n+{G+GΓ}n]=2mGmΓ[{G+Γ+GΓ}n+{G+GΓ}n]. Consequently, Mα(G+sΓ)2[G+Γ+GΓ]α1×[nGmΓ+mG(nΓ+mΓ)]+2mG[G+GΓ]α1[mΓ+nΓ]. Similarly, we can compute Mα(G+sΓ)2[δG+δΓ+δGδΓ]α1×[nGmΓ+mG(nΓ+mΓ)]+2mG[δG+δGδΓ]α1[mΓ+nΓ]. equality holds iff G and Γ are regular graphs. (b)Rβ(G+sΓ)=(s1,t1)(s2,t2)ϵE(G+sΓ)[ΩG+sΓ(s1,t1)×ΩG+sΓ(s2,t2)]β=s1=s2ϵV(G)(t1t2)ϵE(Γ)[ΩG+sΓ(s1,t1)×ΩG+sΓ(s2,t2)]β+t1=t2ϵV(Γ)(s1s2)ϵE(S(G))[ΩG+sΓ(s1,t1)×ΩG+sΓ(s2,t2)]β+s1s2ϵE(S(G))(t1t2)ϵE(Γ))[ΩG+sΓ(s1,t1)×ΩG+sΓ(s2,t2)]β=1+2+3. Consider, 1=s1=s2ϵV(G)(t1t2)ϵE(Γ)[ΩG+sΓ(s1,t1)×ΩG+sΓ(s2,t2)]β=s1=s2ϵV(G)(t1t2)ϵE(Γ)[(ΩS(G)s1+Ω(Γ)t1+ΩS(G)s1Ω(Γ)t1)×(ΩS(G)s2+Ω(Γ)t2+ΩS(Gs2Ω(Γ)t2)]βs1=s2ϵV(G)(t1t2)ϵE(Γ)[G+Γ+GΓ]2β=nGmΓ[G+Γ+GΓ]2β.2=t1=t2ϵV(Γ)(s1s2)ϵE(S(G))[ΩG+sΓ(s1,t1)×ΩG+sΓ(s2,t2)]β=t1=t2ϵV(Γ)(s1s2)ϵE(S(G))[(ΩS(G)s1+Ω(Γ)t1+ΩS(G)s1Ω(Γ)t1)×(ΩS(G)s2+ΩS(G)s2Ω(Γ)t2)]β2nΓmG[(G+Γ+GΓ)(G+GΓ)]β.3=s1s2ϵE(S(G))(t1t2)ϵE(Γ)[ΩG+sΓ(s1,t1)×ΩG+sΓ(s2,t2)]β=s1ϵV(G),s2ϵV(S(G))V(G)(t1t2)ϵE(Γ)[(ΩS(G)s1+Ω(Γ)t1+ΩS(G)s1Ω(Γ)t1)×(ΩS(G)s2+ΩS(G)s2Ω(Γ)t2)]βmΓ|E(S(G))|[(G+Γ+GΓ)×(G+GΓ)]β=2mGmΓ[(G+Γ+GΓ)(G+GΓ)]β. Therefore, Rβ(G+sΓ)nGmΓ[G+Γ+GΓ]2β+2mG[G+Γ+GΓ]β×[G+GΓ]β[nΓ+mΓ]. Similarly, we can compute Rβ(G+sΓ)nGmΓ[δG+δΓ+δGδΓ]2β+2mG[δG+δΓ+δGδΓ]β×[δG+δGδΓ]β[nΓ+mΓ]. equality holds iff G and Γ are regular graphs.

Theorem 3.2

Let G and Γ be two connected graph.

  1. We have α2Mα(G+RΓ)α1, where α1, α2 0 and α1=2nGmΓ{G(1+Γ)+Γ}α1+2αmG[1+Γ]α1[nΓ+mΓ]+2mG[2G(1+Γ)+Γ]α1[3nΓ+3mΓ]α2=2nGmΓ{δG(1+δΓ)+δΓ}α1+2αmG[1+δΓ]α1[nΓ+mΓ]+2mG[2δG(1+δΓ)+δΓ]α1[3nΓ+3mΓ].

  2. We have β2Rβ(G+RΓ)β1, where β1, β2 0 and β1=nGmΓ[G(1+Γ)+Γ]2β+2mG[2G(1+Γ)+Γ]2β[nΓ+mΓ]+2β+1mG[2G(1+Γ)+Γ]β[1+Γ]β×[nΓ+mΓ]β2=nGmΓ[δG(1+δΓ)+δΓ]2β+2mG[2δG(1+δΓ)+δΓ]2β[nΓ+mΓ]+2β+1mG[2δG(1+δΓ)+δΓ]β[1+δΓ]β×[nΓ+mΓ].

Proof.

By definition Mα(G+RΓ)=(u,v)ϵ(V(G+RΓ))dG+RΓα(u,v)=(s1,t1)(s2,t2)ϵE(G+RΓ)[dG+RΓn(s1,t1)+dG+RΓn(s2,t2)]=s1=s2ϵV(G)t1t2ϵE(Γ)[dG+RΓn(s1,t1)+dG+RΓn(s2,t2)]+t1=t2ϵV(Γ)s1s2ϵE(R(G))[dG+RΓn(s1,t1)+dG+RΓn(s2,t2)]+s1s2ϵE(R(G))(t1t2)ϵE(Γ)[dG+RΓn(s1,t1)+dG+RΓn(s2,t2)=1+2+3.1=s1=s2ϵV(G)(t1t2)ϵE(Γ)[dG+RΓn(s1,t1)+dG+RΓn(s2,t2)]=2nGmΓ{G+Γ+GΓ}n. Since E(R(G)) = 2E(G) also for {t1=t2} ε V(Γ) and {s1s2} ε E(R(G)). If s2 ε V(G) then ΩR(G)(s2) = 2ΩG(s2). If s2 ε V(R(G))V(G) then ΩR(G)(s2) = 2. 2=t1=t2ϵV(Γ)s1s2ϵE(R(G))[dG+RΓn(s1,t1)+dG+RΓn(s2,t2)]=t1=t2ϵV(Γ)s1s2ϵE(R(G))s1,s2ϵV(G)[dG+RΓn(s1,t1)+dG+RΓn(s2,t2)]+t1=t2ϵV(Γ)s1s2ϵE(R(G))s1ϵV(G),s2ϵV(R(G))V(G)[dG+RΓn(s1,t1)+dG+RΓn(s2,t2)]=2+2.2=t1=t2ϵV(Γ)(s1s2)ϵE(R(G))[dG+RΓn(s1,t1)+dG+RΓn(s2,t2)]=t1=t2ϵV(Γ)(s1s2)ϵE(R(G))[{ΩR(G)s1+Ω(Γ)t1+ΩR(G)s1Ω(Γ)t1}n+{ΩR(G)s2+Ω(Γ)t2+ΩR(G)s2Ω(Γ)t2}n]t1=t2ϵV(Γ)(s1s2)ϵE(R(G))[{2G+Γ+2GΓ}n+{2G+Γ+2GΓ}n]=2nΓ|E(R(G))|[{2G+Γ+2GΓ}n=4nΓmG[{2G+Γ+2GΓ}n.2=t1=t2ϵV(Γ)(s1s2)ϵE(R(G))[dG+RΓn(s1,t1)+dG+RΓn(s2,t2)]=t1=t2ϵV(Γ)(s1s2)ϵE(R(G))[{ΩR(G)s1+Ω(Γ)t1+ΩR(G)s1Ω(Γ)t1}n+{ΩR(G)s2+ΩR(G)s2Ω(Γ)t2}n]2nΓmG[{2G+Γ+2GΓ}n+{2+2Γ}n].3=s1s2ϵE(R(G))(t1t2)ϵE(Γ)[dG+RΓn(s1,t1)+dG+RΓn(s2,t2)]=s1s2ϵE(R(G))s1,s2ϵV(G)(t1t2)ϵE(Γ)[dG+RΓn(s1,t1)+dG+RΓn(s2,t2)]+s1s2ϵE(R(G)),s1ϵV(G)s2ϵV(R(G))V(G)(t1t2)ϵE(Γ)[dG+RΓn(s1,t1)+dG+RΓn(s2,t2)]=3+3.3=t1t2ϵE(Γ)(s1s2)ϵE(R(G))[dG+RΓn(s1,t1)+dG+RΓn(s2,t2)]=t1t2ϵE(Γ)(s1s2)ϵE(R(G))[{ΩR(G)s1+Ω(Γ)t1+ΩR(G)s1Ω(Γ)t1}n+{ΩR(G)s2+Ω(Γ)t2+ΩR(G)s2Ω(Γ)t2}n]4mGmΓ[2G+Γ+2GΓ]n.3=t1t2ϵE(Γ)(s1s2)ϵE(R(G))[dG+RΓn(s1,t1)+dG+RΓn(s2,t2)]=t1t2ϵE(Γ)(s1s2)ϵE(R(G))[{ΩR(G)s1+Ω(Γ)t1+ΩR(G)s1Ω(Γ)t1}n+{ΩR(G)s2+ΩR(G)s2Ω(Γ)t2}n]2mGmΓ[{2G+Γ+2GΓ}n+(2+2Γ)n]. Hence Mα(G+RΓ)2nGmΓ{G+Γ+GΓ}α1+2αmG[1+Γ]α1[nΓ+mΓ]+2mG[2G+Γ+2GΓ]α1×[3nΓ+3mΓ]. Similarly Mα(G+RΓ)2nGmΓ{δG+δΓ+δGδΓ}α1+2αmG[1+δΓ]α1[nΓ+mΓ]+2mG[2δG+δΓ+2δGδΓ]α1×[3nΓ+3mΓ]. equality holds iff G and Γ are regular graphs. (b)Rβ(G+RΓ)=(s1,t1)(s2,t2)ϵ(E(G+RΓ))[ΩG+RΓ(s1,t1)×ΩG+RΓ(s2,t2)]β=s1=s2ϵV(G)t1t2ϵE(Γ)[ΩG+RΓ(s1,t1)×ΩG+RΓ(s2,t2)]β+t1=t2ϵV(Γ)s1s2ϵE(R(G))[ΩG+RΓ(s1,t1)×ΩG+RΓ(s2,t2)]β+s1s2ϵE(R(G))(t1t2)ϵE(Γ)[ΩG+RΓ(s1,t1)×ΩG+RΓ(s2,t2)]β=1+2+3. Consider, 1=s1=s2ϵV(G)(t1t2)ϵE(Γ)[ΩG+RΓ(s1,t1)×ΩG+RΓ(s2,t2)]β=s1=s2ϵV(G)(t1t2)ϵE(Γ)[{ΩR(G)s1+Ω(Γ)t1+ΩR(G)s1Ω(Γ)t1}×{ΩR(G)s2+Ω(Γ)t2+ΩR(G)s2Ω(Γ)t2}]βs1=s2ϵV(G)(t1t2)ϵE(Γ)[G+Γ+GΓ]2β=nGmΓ[G+Γ+GΓ]2β.2=t1=t2ϵV(Γ)s1s2ϵE(R(G))s1,s2ϵV(G)[ΩG+RΓ(s1,t1)×ΩG+RΓ(s2,t2)]β+t1=t2ϵV(Γ)s1s2ϵE(R(G))s1ϵV(G),s2ϵV(R(G))V(G)[ΩG+RΓ(s1,t1)×ΩG+RΓ(s2,t2)]β=2+2.2=t1=t2ϵV(Γ)(s1s2)ϵE(R(G))[ΩG+RΓ(s1,t1)×ΩG+RΓ(s2,t2)]β=t1=t2ϵV(Γ)(s1s2)ϵE(R(G))[{ΩR(G)s1+Ω(Γ)t1+ΩR(G)s1Ω(Γ)t1}×{ΩR(G)s2+Ω(Γ)t2+ΩR(G)s2Ω(Γ)t2}]βnΓ|E(R(G))|[2G+Γ+2GΓ]2β=2nΓmG[2G+Γ+2GΓ]2β.2=t1=t2ϵV(Γ)(s1s2)ϵE(R(G))[ΩG+RΓ(s1,t1)×ΩG+RΓ(s2,t2)]β=t1=t2ϵV(Γ)(s1s2)ϵE(R(G))[{ΩR(G)s1+Ω(Γ)t1+ΩR(G)s1Ω(Γ)t1}×{ΩR(G)s2+ΩR(G)s2Ω(Γ)t2}]βnΓ|E(R(G))|[{2G+Γ+2GΓ}×{2+2Γ}]β=2β+1nΓmG[{2G+Γ+2GΓ}{1+Γ}]β.3=s1s2ϵE(R(G))(t1t2)ϵE(Γ)[ΩG+RΓ(s1,t1)×ΩG+RΓ(s2,t2)]β=s1s2ϵE(R(G))s1,s2ϵV(G)(t1t2)ϵE(Γ)[ΩG+RΓ(s1,t1)×ΩG+RΓ(s2,t2)]β+s1s2ϵE(R(G),s1ϵV(G),s2ϵV(R(G))V(G)(t1t2)ϵE(Γ))[ΩG+RΓ(s1,t1)×ΩG+RΓ(s2,t2)]β=3+3.3=t1t2ϵE(Γ)(s1s2)ϵE(R(G))[ΩG+RΓ(s1,t1)×ΩG+RΓ(s2,t2)]β=t1t2ϵE(Γ)(s1s2)ϵE(R(G))[{ΩR(G)s1+Ω(Γ)t1+ΩR(G)s1Ω(Γ)t1}×{ΩR(G)s2+Ω(Γ)t2+ΩR(G)s2Ω(Γ)t2}]βmΓ|E(R(G))|[{2G+Γ+2GΓ}]2β=2mGmΓ[2G+Γ+2GΓ]2β.3=t1t2ϵE(Γ)(s1s2)ϵE(R(G))[ΩG+RΓ(s1,t1)×ΩG+RΓ(s2,t2)]β=t1t2ϵE(Γ)(s1ϵV(G),s2ϵV(R(G))V(G))[{ΩR(G)s1+Ω(Γ)t1+ΩR(G)s1Ω(Γ)t1}×{ΩR(G)s2+ΩR(G)s2Ω(Γ)t2}]βmΓ|E(R(G))|[{2G+Γ+2GΓ}×{2+2Γ}]β=2β+1mGmΓ[(2G+Γ+2GΓ)×(1+Γ)]β. Consequently, Rβ(G+RΓ)nGmΓ[G(1+Γ)+Γ]2β+2mG[2G(1+Γ)+Γ]2β×[nΓ+mΓ]+2β+1mG[2G(1+Γ)+Γ]β×[1+Γ]β[nΓ+mΓ]. Similarly, we can compute Rβ(G+RΓ)nGmΓ[δG(1+δΓ)+δΓ]2β+2mG[2δG(1+δΓ)+δΓ]2β[nΓ+mΓ]+2β+1mG[2δG(1+δΓ)+δΓ]β[1+δΓ]β×[nΓ+mΓ]. equality holds iff G and Γ are regular graphs.

Theorem 3.3

Let G and Γ be two connected graph.

  1. We have α2Mα(G+QΓ)α1, where α1, α2 0 and α1=2αGα1(12MG+2mG)×(1+Γ)α1(nΓ+mΓ)+2[G+Γ+GΓ]α1×[nGmΓ+nΓmG+mGmΓ]α2=2αδGα112MG+2mG×(1+δΓ)α1(nΓ+mΓ)+2[δG+δΓ+δGδΓ]α1×[nGmΓ+nΓmG+mGmΓ].

  2. We have β2Rβ(G+QΓ)β1, where β1, β2 0 and β1=(2G(1+Γ))2β(nΓ+mΓ)12MG+mG+2mG(G(1+Γ)+Γ)β(2G(1+Γ))β+mΓnG[G(1+Γ)+Γ]2ββ2=(2δG(1+δΓ))2β(nΓ+mΓ)12MG+mG+2mG(δG(1+δΓ)+δΓ)β(2δG(1+δΓ))β+mΓnG[δG(1+δΓ)+δΓ]2β.

Proof.

By definition (a)Mα(G+QΓ)=(u,v)ϵ(V(G+QΓ))dG+QΓα(u,v)=(s1,t1)(s2,t2)ϵ(E(G+QΓ))[dG+QΓn(s1,t1)+dG+QΓn(s2,t2)]=s1=s2ϵV(G)t1t2ϵ(E(Γ))[dG+QΓn(s1,t1)+dG+QΓn(s2,t2)]+t1=t2ϵV(Γ)s1s2ϵ(E(Q(G))[dG+QΓn(s1,t1)+dG+QΓn(s2,t2)]+s1s2ϵE(Q(G)(t1t2)ϵE(Γ))[dG+QΓn(s1,t1)+dG+QΓn(s2,t2)=1+2+3. Consider, 1=s1=s2ϵV(G)(t1t2)ϵE(Γ)[dG+QΓn(s1,t1)+dG+QΓn(s2,t2)]=2nGmΓ{G+Γ+GΓ}n. Note that ΩQ(G)s2 = ΩGwi+ΩGwj for s2ϵ[V(Q(G))V(G)], s2 is the vertex inserted into the edge wiwj of G for all wi, wj ε V(G), we have 2=t1=t2ϵV(Γ)s1s2ϵE(Q(G))[dG+QΓn(s1,t1)+dG+QΓn(s2,t2)]=t1=t2ϵV(Γ)s1s2ϵE(Q(G)),s1ϵV(G)ands2ϵV(R(G))V(G)[dG+QΓn(s1,t1)+dG+QΓn(s2,t2)]+t1=t2ϵV(Γ)s1s2ϵE(Q(G)),s1,s2ϵV(R(G))V(G)[dG+QΓn(s1,t1)+dG+QΓn(s2,t2)]=2+2.2=t1=t2ϵV(Γ)(s1s2)ϵE(Q(G))[dG+QΓn(s1,t1)+dG+QΓn(s2,t2)]=t1=t2ϵV(G)(s1s2)ϵE(Q(G))[{ΩQ(G)s1+Ω(Γ)t1+ΩQ(G)s1Ω(Γ)t1}n+{ΩQ(G)s2+ΩQ(G)s2Ω(Γ)t2}n]=t1=t2ϵV(Γ)(s1s2)ϵE(Q(G))[{ΩQ(G)s1+Ω(Γ)t1+ΩQ(G)s1Ω(Γ)t1}n+{(ΩGwi+ΩAwj)+(ΩGwi+ΩGwj)Ω(Γ)t2}n]2nΓmG[{G+Γ+GΓ}n+{2G+2GΓ}n]. Since s1 is vertex inserted in the edge wiwj of G and s2 is vertex inserted in the edge wjwk of G for all wi, wj wk ε V(G), we have 2=t1=t2ϵV(Γ)(s1s2)ϵE(Q(G))[dG+QΓn(s1,t1)+dG+QΓn(s2,t2)]=t1=t2ϵV(Γ)(s1s2)ϵE(Q(G))[{ΩQ(G)s1+ΩQ(G)s1Ω(Γ)t1}n+{ΩQ(G)s2+ΩQ(G)s2Ω(Γ)t2}n]=t1=t2ϵV(Γ)(s1s2)ϵE(Q(G))[(ΩQ(G)ns1+ΩQ(G)ns2)×(1+Ω(Γ)t1)n]=t1=t2ϵV(Γ)(s1s2)ϵE(Q(G))[(1+Γ)n{(ΩG(wi)+ΩG(wj))n+(ΩG(wj)+ΩG(wk))n}]t1=t2ϵV(Γ)(s1s2)ϵE(Q(G))[(1+Γ)n{2n+1Gn}=2n+1nΓ12M(G)+mGGn(1+Γ)n.3=s1s2ϵE(Q(G))(t1t2)ϵE(Γ)[dG+QΓn(s1,t1)+dG+QΓn(s2,t2)]=s1s2ϵE(Q(G)),s1ϵV(G),s2ϵV(Q(G))V(G)(t1t2)ϵE(Γ)[dG+QΓn(s1,t1)+dG+QΓn(s2,t2)]+s1s2ϵE(Q(G)),s1,s2ϵV(Q(G))V(G)(t1t2)ϵE(Γ)[dG+QΓn(s1,t1)+dG+QΓn(s2,t2)]=3+3.3=t1t2ϵE(Γ)(s1s2)ϵE(Q(G))[dG+QΓn(s1,t1)+dG+QΓn(s2,t2)]=t1t2ϵE(Γ)s1ϵV(G),s2ϵV(R(G))V(G)[{ΩQ(G)s1+Ω(Γ)t1+ΩQ(G)s1Ω(Γ)t1}n+{ΩQ(G)s2+ΩQ(G)s2Ω(Γ)t2}n]t1t2ϵE(Γ)s1ϵV(G),s2ϵV(R(G))V(G)[{G+Γ+GΓ}n+{(ΩGwi+ΩGwj)+(ΩGwj+ΩGwk)Ω(Γ)t2}n]=2mGmΓ[{G+Γ+GΓ}n+{2G+2GΓ}n].3=t1t2ϵE(Γ)(s1s2)ϵE(Q(G))[dG+QΓn(s1,t1)+dA+QΓn(s2,t2)]=t1t2ϵE(Γ)s1,s2ϵV(Q(G))V(G)[{ΩQ(G)s1+ΩQ(G)s1Ω(Γ)t1}n+{ΩQ(G)s2+ΩQ(G)s2Ω(Γ)t2}n]=t1t2ϵE(Γ)(s1,s2)ϵV(Q(G))V(G)[{dQ(G)ns1(1+ΩΓt1)n}+{dQ(G)ns2(1+Ω(Γ)t2)n}]=t1t2ϵE(Γ)(s1,s2)ϵ{V(Q(G))V(G)}[{(ΩGwi+ΩGwj)n×(1+ΩΓt1)n}+{(ΩGwj+ΩGwk)n(1+ΩΓt2)n]t1t2ϵE(Γ)s1ϵV(G),s2ϵ{V(Q(G))V(G)}[2n+1Gn×(1+Γ)n]=2n+1mΓGn(1+Γ)n12MG+mG. Hence Mα(G+QΓ)2αGα112MG+2mG(1+Γ)α1×(nΓ+mΓ)+2[G+Γ+GΓ]α1×[nGmΓ+nΓmG+mGmΓ]. Similarly, we can compute Mα(A+QB)2αδGα112MG+2mG(1+δΓ)α1×(nΓ+mΓ)+2[δG+δΓ+δGδΓ]α1×[nGmΓ+nΓmG+mGmΓ]. equality holds iff G and Γ are regular graphs. (b)Rβ(G+QΓ)=(s1,t1)(s2,t2)ϵ(E(G+QΓ))[ΩG+QΓ(s1,t1)×ΩG+QΓ(s2,t2)]β=s1=s2ϵV(G)t1t2ϵ(E(Γ))[ΩG+QΓ(s1,t1)×ΩG+QΓ(s2,t2)]β+t1=t2ϵV(Γ)s1s2ϵ(E(Q(G)))[ΩG+QΓ(s1,t1)×ΩG+QΓ(s2,t2)]β+s1s2ϵE(Q(G))(t1t2)ϵE(Γ))[ΩG+QΓ(s1,t1)×ΩG+QΓ(s2,t2)]β=1+2+3. Consider, 1=s1=s2ϵV(G)(t1t2)ϵE(Γ)[ΩG+QΓ(s1,t1)×ΩG+QΓ(s2,t2)]β=nGmΓ[G+Γ+GΓ]2β.2=t1=t2ϵV(Γ)s1s2ϵ(E(Q(G))),s1ϵV(G),s2ϵV(Q(G))V(G)[ΩG+QΓ(s1,t1)×ΩG+QΓ(s2,t2)]β+t1=t2ϵV(Γ)s1s2ϵE(Q(G))s1,s2ϵV(Q(G))V(G)[ΩG+QΓ(s1,t1)×ΩG+QΓ(s2,t2)]β=2+2.2=t1=t2ϵV(Γ)(s1s2)ϵE(Q(G))[ΩG+QΓ(s1,t1)×ΩG+QΓ(s2,t2)]β=t1=t2ϵV(Γ)(s1s2)ϵE(Q(G))[{ΩQ(G)s1+Ω(Γ)t1+ΩQ(G)s1Ω(Γ)t1}×{ΩQ(G)s2+ΩQ(G)s2Ω(Γ)t2}]β=t1=t2ϵV(Γ)(s1s2)ϵE(Q(G))[{ΩQ(G)s1+Ω(Γ)t1+ΩQ(G)s1Ω(Γ)t1}×{(ΩGwi+ΩGwj)+(ΩGwi+ΩGwj)Ω(Γ)t2}]β2nΓmG[{G+Γ+GΓ}×{2G+2GΓ}]β.2=t1=t2ϵV(Γ)(s1s2)ϵE(Q(G))[ΩG+QΓ(s1,t1)×ΩG+QΓ(s2,t2)]β=t1=t2ϵV(Γ)(s1s2)ϵE(Q(G))[{ΩQ(G)s1+ΩQ(G)s1Ω(Γ)t1}×{ΩQ(G)s2+ΩQ(G)s2Ω(Γ)t2}]β=t1=t2ϵV(Γ)(s1s2)ϵE(Q(G))[(ΩQ(G)s1×ΩQ(G)s2)×(1+Ω(Γ)t1)2]βt1=t2ϵV(Γ)(s1s2)ϵE(Q(G))[(1+Γ)2{(ΩG(wi)+ΩG(wj))×(ΩG(wj)+ΩG(wk))}]β=nΓ12MG+mG[2G]2β[1+Γ]2β. Now s1s2ϵE(Q(G)&(t1t2)ϵ E(Γ), we can write 3=s1s2ϵE(Q(G))(t1t2)ϵE(Γ)[ΩG+QΓ(s1,t1)×ΩG+QΓ(s2,t2)]β=s1s2ϵE(Q(G)),s1ϵV(G),s2ϵV(R(G))V(G)(t1t2)ϵE(Γ)[ΩG+QΓ(s1,t1)×ΩG+QΓ(s2,t2)]β+s1s2ϵE(Q(G)),s1,s2ϵV(R(G))V(G)(t1t2)ϵE(Γ)[ΩG+QΓ(s1,t1)×ΩG+QΓ(s2,t2)]β=3+3.3=t1t2ϵE(Γ)(s1s2)ϵE(Q(G))[ΩG+QΓ(s1,t1)×ΩG+QΓ(s2,t2)]β=t1t2ϵE(Γ)s1ϵV(G),s2ϵV(Q(G))V(G)[{ΩQ(G)s1+Ω(Γ)t1+ΩQ(G)s1Ω(Γ)t1}β×{ΩQ(G)s2+ΩQ(G)s2Ω(Γ)t2}β]t1t2ϵE(Γ)s1ϵV(G),s2ϵV(Q(G))V(G)[{G+Γ+GΓ}β{(ΩGwi+ΩGwj)+(ΩGwj+ΩGwk)Ω(Γ)t2}β]=2mGmΓ[G+Γ+GΓ]β[2G+2GΓ]β.3=t1t2ϵE(Γ)(s1s2)ϵE(Q(G))[ΩG+QΓ(s1,t1)×ΩG+QΓ(s2,t2)]β=t1t2ϵE(Γ)s1,s2ϵ{V(Q(G))V(G)}[{ΩQ(G)s1+ΩQ(G)s1Ω(Γ)t1}×{ΩQ(G)s2+ΩQ(G)s2Ω(Γ)t2}]β=t1t2ϵE(Γ)s1,s2ϵ{V(Q(G))V(G)}[{ΩQ(G)s1(1+Ω(Γ)t1)}×{ΩQ(G)s2(1+Ω(Γ)t2)}]β=t1t2ϵE(Γ)s1,s2ϵ{V(Q(G))V(G)}[{(ΩGwi+ΩGwj)×(1+Ω(Γ)t1)}×{(ΩGwj+ΩGwk)(1+Ω(Γ)t2)}]βt1t2ϵE(Γ)s1,s2ϵ{V(Q(G))V(G)}[2G(1+Γ)]2β=mΓ{2G(1+Γ)}2β12MG+mG. Consequently, Rβ(G+QΓ)(2G(1+Γ))2β(nΓ+mΓ)×12MG+mG +2mG(G(1+Γ)+Γ)β(2G(1+Γ))β+mΓnG[G(1+Γ)+Γ]2β. Similarly, we can compute Rβ(A+QB)(2δG(1+δΓ))2β(nΓ+mΓ)12MG+mG+2mG(δG(1+δΓ)+δΓ)β(2δG(1+δΓ))β+mΓnG[δG(1+δΓ)+δΓ]2β. equality holds iff G and Γ are regular graphs.

Theorem 3.4

Let G and Γ be two connected graph.

  1. We have α2Mα(G+TΓ)α1, where α1, α2 0 and α1=2mG[3nΓ+3mΓ][2G+Γ+2GΓ]α1+2αmΓmG(1+Γ)α1+2αGα1(1+Γ)α112MG+mG[nΓ+mΓ]+2nGmΓ[G+Γ+GΓ]α1α2=2mG[3nΓ+3mΓ][2δG+δΓ+2δGδΓ]α1+2αmΓmG(1+δΓ)α1+2αδGα1(1+δΓ)α112MG+mG×[nΓ+mΓ]+2nGmΓ[δG+δΓ+δGδΓ]α1.

  2. We have β2Rβ(G+TΓ)β1, where β1, β20 and β1=2mG[2G+Γ+2GΓ]2β[mΓ+mΓ]+nGmΓ[G(1+Γ)+Γ]2β+(2G(1+Γ))2β12MG+mG×[nΓ+mΓ]+2β+1mG[(2G+Γ+2GΓ)(1+)]β[nΓ+GβmΓ]β2=2mG[2δG+δΓ+2δGδΓ]2β[mΓ+mΓ]+nGmΓ[δG(1+δΓ)+δΓ]2β+(2δG(1+δΓ))2β12MG+mG[nΓ+mΓ]+2β+1mG[(2δG+δΓ+2δGδΓ)(1+δ)]β×nΓ+δGβmΓ. equality holds iff G and Γ are regular graphs.

4. Applications and discussion

The upper and lower bounds on the FGZI and GRI of Pn+φPm for α, β > 0 are given as follows:

For S-sum graph Pn+SPm: (a)α1=2[8]α1[3nm2n2m+1]+2[n1][2m1][6]α1α2=2[3]α1[3nm2n2m+1]+2[n1][2m1][2]α1.(b)β1=n[m1][64]β+2[n1][2m1][48]ββ2=n[m1][9]β+2[n1][2m1][6]β.

For R-sum graph Pn+RPm: (a)α1=4n[m1][8]α1+[n1](2m1)×[6(14)α1+2(6)α1(2m1)]α2=2n[m1][3]α1+6[n1][5]α1[2m1]+2[n1][4]α1(2m1)(b)β1=[8]2β[n(m1)]+2(n1)[14]2β(2m1)+2β+1(n1)(42)β(2m1)β2=[3]2β[n(m1)]+2(n1)(5)2β(2m1)+2β+1(n1)(15)β(2m1)

For Q-sum graph Pn+QPm: (a)α1=[2]2α1[3]α1[4n5][2m1]+[2]2α1[3mn2n2m+1]α2=[2]2α1[4n5][2m1]+2[3]α1[3mn2n2m+1](b)β1=[144]β[2m1][4n5]+[[2]β+1[3]β[n1]+[64]βn[m1]β2=[16]β[2m1][4n5]+[3]β[2]β[n1]+[9]βn[m1]

For T-sum graph Pn+TPm: (a)α1=6(12)α1(n1)(2m1)+6(14)α1(n1)(2m1)+2(8)α1n(m1)+2(12)α1(n1)(m1)α2=6(4)α1(n1)(2m1)+6(5)α1(n1)(2m1)+2(3)α1n(m1)+(2)2α1(n1)(m1)(b)β1=(3n3)(12)2β(2m1)+2(n1)(14)2β(2m1)+2(84)β(n1)[(1+2β)m2β]+n(m1)(8)2ββ2=(3n3)(4)2β(2m1)+2(n1)(5)2β(2m1)+2(20)β(n1)[(2m1]+n(m1)(3)2β Now, we present the numerical values of FGZI and GRI for Pn+φPm with the help of the above bounds under the assumption that n=m=α=β and α,β>0 in Tables . Moreover, Tables  and  present the exact values of FGZI and GRI for the same graphs (Figures ).

Figure 3. Comparison between bounds and exact values of FGZI & GRI index: In first graph α1 by blue colour, exact value of FGZI by green colour and α2 by red colour are presented. Similarly, in second graph β1 by blue colour, exact value of GRI by green colour and β2 by red colour are presented.

Figure 3. Comparison between bounds and exact values of FGZI & GRI index: In first graph α1 by blue colour, exact value of FGZI by green colour and α2 by red colour are presented. Similarly, in second graph β1 by blue colour, exact value of GRI by green colour and β2 by red colour are presented.

Figure 4. Comparison between bounds and exact values of FGZI & GRI: In first graph α1 by green colour, exact value of FGZI by pink colour and α2 by purple colour are presented. Similarly, in second graph β1 by purple colour, exact value of GRI by green colour and β2 by red colour are presented.

Figure 4. Comparison between bounds and exact values of FGZI & GRI: In first graph α1 by green colour, exact value of FGZI by pink colour and α2 by purple colour are presented. Similarly, in second graph β1 by purple colour, exact value of GRI by green colour and β2 by red colour are presented.

Figure 5. Comparison of bounds and exact values of FGZI & GRI: In first graph α1 by blue colour, exact value of FGZI by purple colour and α2 by red colour are presented. In second graph, β1 by purple colour, exact value of GRI by green colour and β2 by red colour are presented.

Figure 5. Comparison of bounds and exact values of FGZI & GRI: In first graph α1 by blue colour, exact value of FGZI by purple colour and α2 by red colour are presented. In second graph, β1 by purple colour, exact value of GRI by green colour and β2 by red colour are presented.

Figure 6. Comparison of bounds and exact values of FGZI & GRI: In first graph α1 by green colour, exact value of FGZI by purple colour and α2 by red colour are presented. Similarly, in second graph, β1 by purple colour, exact value of GRI by blue colour and β2 by red colour are presented.

Figure 6. Comparison of bounds and exact values of FGZI & GRI: In first graph α1 by green colour, exact value of FGZI by purple colour and α2 by red colour are presented. Similarly, in second graph, β1 by purple colour, exact value of GRI by blue colour and β2 by red colour are presented.

Table 1. Pn+SPm.

Table 2. Pn+RPm.

Table 3. Pn+QPm.

Table 4. Pn+TPm.

Table 5. Exact values for FGZI.

Table 6. Exact values for GRI.

5. Conclusion

In this paper, we have computed the bounds (upper and lower) for FGZI and GRI of φ-sum graphs which are obtained by the strong product of φ(G) graph with another graph Γ, where φ(G) is constructed using four subdivision operations on the graph G. At the end, we also included the results for some particular families of graphs as the applications of the obtained results and concluded that the exact values satisfy the obtained bounds. More preciously, upper and lower bounds for FGZI and GRI of φ-sum graphs based on strong product are computed, where α,β>0. In addition, if we assume that α,β<0 then these bounds become α1Mα(G+φΓ)α2 and β1Rβ(G+φΓ)β2.

Acknowledgments

The author is deeply thankful to the editor and the reviewers for their valuable suggestions to improve the quality of this manuscript.

Disclosure statement

No potential conflict of interest was reported by the author(s).

Additional information

Funding

The research was supported by the National Natural Science Foundation of China [grant numbers 11971142, 11871202, 61673169, 11701176, 11626101, 11601485].

References

  • Gutman I. Degree-based topological indices. Croat Chem Acta. 2013;86(4):351–361. doi: 10.5562/cca2294
  • Javaid M, Cao J. Computing topological indices of probabilistic neural network. Neural Comput Appl. 2018;30(12):3869–3876. doi: 10.1007/s00521-017-2972-1
  • Devillers J, Balaban AT. Topological indices and related descriptors in QSAR and QSPR. Amsterdam: Gordon and Breach Science Publishers; 1999.
  • Randic M. Characterization of molecular branching. J Am Chem Soc. 1975;97(23):6609–6615. doi: 10.1021/ja00856a001
  • Van Steen M. Graph theory and complex networks: an introduction. Maarten van Steen; 2010. 144p.
  • Yan W, Yang BY, Yeh YN. The behavior of Wiener indices and polynomials of graphs under five graph decorations. Appl Math Lett. 2007;20(3):290–295. doi: 10.1016/j.aml.2006.04.010
  • Eliasi M, Taeri B. Four new sums of graphs and their Wiener indices. Discrete Appl Math. 2009;157(4):794–803. doi: 10.1016/j.dam.2008.07.001
  • Deng H, Sarala D, Ayyaswamy SK, et al. The Zagreb indices of four operations on graphs. Appl Math Comput. 2016;275:422–431.
  • Liu JB, Javed S, Javaid M, et al. Computing first general Zagreb index of operations on graphs. IEEE Access. 2019;7:47494–47502. doi: 10.1109/ACCESS.2019.2909822
  • Akhter S, Imran M. The sharp bounds on general sum-connectivity index of four operations on graphs. J Inequalities Appl. 2016;2016(1):102. doi: 10.1186/s13660-016-1048-6
  • Ahmad M, Saeed M, Javaid M, et al. Exact formula and improved bounds for general sum-connectivity index of graph-operations. IEEE Access. 2019;7:167290–167299.
  • Akhter S, Imran M. Computing the forgotten topological index of four operations on graphs. AKCE Int J Graphs Comb. 2017;14(1):70–79. doi: 10.1016/j.akcej.2016.11.012
  • Lokesha V, Shetty BS, Ranjini PS, et al. New bounds for randic and GA indices. J Inequalities Appl. 2013;2013(1):180. doi: 10.1186/1029-242X-2013-180
  • Das KC, Akgunes N, Togan M, et al. On the first Zagreb index and multiplicative Zagreb coindices of graphs. Anal Univ “Ovidius” Constanta-Seria Mat. 2016;24(1):153–176. doi: 10.1515/auom-2016-0008
  • Lokesha V, Shruti R, Ranjini P, et al. On certain topological indices of nanostructures using Q (G) and R (G) operators. Commun Fac Sci Univ Ank Ser A1 Math Stat. 2018;67(2):178–187.
  • Togan M, Yurttas A, Cevik AS, et al. Zagreb indices and multiplicative Zagreb indices of double graphs of subdivision graphs. TWMS J Appl Eng Math. 2019;9(2):404.
  • Lokesha V, Shruti R, Cevik AS. M-polynomial of subdivision and complementary graphs of banana tree graph. J Int Math Virtual Inst. 2020;10(1):157–182.
  • Cevik AS, Lokesha V, Jain S, et al. New results on the F-index of graphs based on corona-type products of graphs. Proc Jangjeon Math Soc. 2020;23(2):141–147.
  • Das KC, Yurttas A, Togan M, et al. The multiplicative Zagreb indices of graph operations. J Inequalities Appl. 2013;2013(1):90. doi: 10.1186/1029-242X-2013-90
  • Liu JB, Javaid M, Awais HM. Computing Zagreb indices of the subdivision-related generalized operations of graphs. IEEE Access. 2019;7:105479–105488.
  • Awais H, Javaid M, Jamal M. Forgotten index of generalized F-sum graphs. J Prime Res Math. 2019;15:115–128.
  • Sarala D, Deng H, Natarajan C, et al. F index of graphs based on four new operations related to the strong product. AKCE Int J Gr Comb. 2018. doi: 10.1016/j.akcej.2018.07.003
  • West DB. Introduction to graph theory. Upper Saddle River (NJ): Prentice Hall; 1996.
  • Zhang X, Awais HM, Javaid M, et al. Multiplicative Zagreb indices of molecular graphs. J Chem. 2019;5294198. doi: 10.1155/2019/5294198
  • Awais HM, Javaid M, Raheem A. Hyper-Zagreb index of graphs based on generalized subdivision related operations. Punjab Univ J Math. 2020;52(5):89–103.
  • Gutman I, Trinajstić N. Graph theory and molecular orbitals. Total π-electron energy of alternant hydrocarbons. Chem Phys Lett. 1972;17(4):535–538. doi: 10.1016/0009-2614(72)85099-1
  • Randić M. Characterization of molecular branching. J Am Chem Soc. 1975;97(23):6609–6615. doi: 10.1021/ja00856a001
  • Bollobàs B, Erdös P. Graphs of extremal weights. Ars Comb. 1998;50:225–233.
  • Li X, Zheng J. A unified approach to the extremal trees for different indices. MATCH Commun Math Comput Chem. 2005;54(1):195–208.
  • Ahmad H, Seadawy AR, Khan TA, et al. Analytic approximate solutions for some nonlinear parabolic dynamical wave equations. J Taibah Univ Sci. 2020;14(1):346–358. doi: 10.1080/16583655.2020.1741943
  • Özkan YS, Yaar E, Seadawy AR. A third-order nonlinear Schrödinger equation: the exact solutions, group-invariant solutions and conservation laws. J Taibah Univ Sci. 2020;14(1):585–597. doi: 10.1080/16583655.2020.1760513
  • Marin M, Othman MI, Seadawy AR, et al. A domain of influence in the Moore–Gibson–Thompson theory of dipolar bodies. J Taibah Univ Sci. 2020;14(1):653–660. doi: 10.1080/16583655.2020.1763664