Iteratively strip off simply connected edges in graph?
Clash Royale CLAN TAG#URR8PPP
up vote
2
down vote
favorite
Consider a set of edges composing a directed graph. For example:
edges = DirectedEdge[1, 2], DirectedEdge[2, 3], DirectedEdge[4, 3], DirectedEdge[3, 5], DirectedEdge[5, 6], DirectedEdge[6, 7];
Graph[edges]
I would like to have a function stripOff
that iteratively strips off the outer edges that are simply connected to the rest, and returns them together with the remaining graph:
incoming1, outgoing1, remains1= stripOff[edges]
Graph[remains1]
DirectedEdge[1, 2],DirectedEdge[4, 3] ,
DirectedEdge[6, 7] ,
DirectedEdge[2, 3], DirectedEdge[3, 5], DirectedEdge[5, 6]
In the next iteration step it should give
incoming2, outgoing2, remains2= stripOff[remains1]
Graph[remains2]
DirectedEdge[2, 3] ,
DirectedEdge[5, 6] ,
DirectedEdge[3, 5]
And finally in the last iteration step
incoming3, outgoing3, remains3= stripOff[remains2]
DirectedEdge[3, 5] ,
,
Is there a quick way to construct such a stripOff
function in mathematica? Thanks for any suggestion!
EDIT:
Note that I am trying to iteratively strip off external legs of the graph, which are connected to a vertex only on one side, not on both.
Even though the graph
edges = DirectedEdge[1, 2], DirectedEdge[2, 3], DirectedEdge[4, 3], DirectedEdge[5, 4];
Graph[edges]
contains a sink in the middle, the function should not cut the graph in two, but only stip off outer legs:
incoming, outgoing, remains= stripOff[edges]
DirectedEdge[1, 2] ,
DirectedEdge[5, 4] ,
DirectedEdge[2, 3], DirectedEdge[4, 3]
list-manipulation function-construction graphs-and-networks
add a comment |Â
up vote
2
down vote
favorite
Consider a set of edges composing a directed graph. For example:
edges = DirectedEdge[1, 2], DirectedEdge[2, 3], DirectedEdge[4, 3], DirectedEdge[3, 5], DirectedEdge[5, 6], DirectedEdge[6, 7];
Graph[edges]
I would like to have a function stripOff
that iteratively strips off the outer edges that are simply connected to the rest, and returns them together with the remaining graph:
incoming1, outgoing1, remains1= stripOff[edges]
Graph[remains1]
DirectedEdge[1, 2],DirectedEdge[4, 3] ,
DirectedEdge[6, 7] ,
DirectedEdge[2, 3], DirectedEdge[3, 5], DirectedEdge[5, 6]
In the next iteration step it should give
incoming2, outgoing2, remains2= stripOff[remains1]
Graph[remains2]
DirectedEdge[2, 3] ,
DirectedEdge[5, 6] ,
DirectedEdge[3, 5]
And finally in the last iteration step
incoming3, outgoing3, remains3= stripOff[remains2]
DirectedEdge[3, 5] ,
,
Is there a quick way to construct such a stripOff
function in mathematica? Thanks for any suggestion!
EDIT:
Note that I am trying to iteratively strip off external legs of the graph, which are connected to a vertex only on one side, not on both.
Even though the graph
edges = DirectedEdge[1, 2], DirectedEdge[2, 3], DirectedEdge[4, 3], DirectedEdge[5, 4];
Graph[edges]
contains a sink in the middle, the function should not cut the graph in two, but only stip off outer legs:
incoming, outgoing, remains= stripOff[edges]
DirectedEdge[1, 2] ,
DirectedEdge[5, 4] ,
DirectedEdge[2, 3], DirectedEdge[4, 3]
list-manipulation function-construction graphs-and-networks
shouldn't the last step giveDirectedEdge[3, 5] ,DirectedEdge[3, 5] ,
?
â kglr
1 hour ago
@kglr I'd like all edges to be unique, without double counting. If an edge triggers forincoming
classification, it is spent and is not available to be classified asoutgoing
any more.
â Kagaratsch
55 mins ago
add a comment |Â
up vote
2
down vote
favorite
up vote
2
down vote
favorite
Consider a set of edges composing a directed graph. For example:
edges = DirectedEdge[1, 2], DirectedEdge[2, 3], DirectedEdge[4, 3], DirectedEdge[3, 5], DirectedEdge[5, 6], DirectedEdge[6, 7];
Graph[edges]
I would like to have a function stripOff
that iteratively strips off the outer edges that are simply connected to the rest, and returns them together with the remaining graph:
incoming1, outgoing1, remains1= stripOff[edges]
Graph[remains1]
DirectedEdge[1, 2],DirectedEdge[4, 3] ,
DirectedEdge[6, 7] ,
DirectedEdge[2, 3], DirectedEdge[3, 5], DirectedEdge[5, 6]
In the next iteration step it should give
incoming2, outgoing2, remains2= stripOff[remains1]
Graph[remains2]
DirectedEdge[2, 3] ,
DirectedEdge[5, 6] ,
DirectedEdge[3, 5]
And finally in the last iteration step
incoming3, outgoing3, remains3= stripOff[remains2]
DirectedEdge[3, 5] ,
,
Is there a quick way to construct such a stripOff
function in mathematica? Thanks for any suggestion!
EDIT:
Note that I am trying to iteratively strip off external legs of the graph, which are connected to a vertex only on one side, not on both.
Even though the graph
edges = DirectedEdge[1, 2], DirectedEdge[2, 3], DirectedEdge[4, 3], DirectedEdge[5, 4];
Graph[edges]
contains a sink in the middle, the function should not cut the graph in two, but only stip off outer legs:
incoming, outgoing, remains= stripOff[edges]
DirectedEdge[1, 2] ,
DirectedEdge[5, 4] ,
DirectedEdge[2, 3], DirectedEdge[4, 3]
list-manipulation function-construction graphs-and-networks
Consider a set of edges composing a directed graph. For example:
edges = DirectedEdge[1, 2], DirectedEdge[2, 3], DirectedEdge[4, 3], DirectedEdge[3, 5], DirectedEdge[5, 6], DirectedEdge[6, 7];
Graph[edges]
I would like to have a function stripOff
that iteratively strips off the outer edges that are simply connected to the rest, and returns them together with the remaining graph:
incoming1, outgoing1, remains1= stripOff[edges]
Graph[remains1]
DirectedEdge[1, 2],DirectedEdge[4, 3] ,
DirectedEdge[6, 7] ,
DirectedEdge[2, 3], DirectedEdge[3, 5], DirectedEdge[5, 6]
In the next iteration step it should give
incoming2, outgoing2, remains2= stripOff[remains1]
Graph[remains2]
DirectedEdge[2, 3] ,
DirectedEdge[5, 6] ,
DirectedEdge[3, 5]
And finally in the last iteration step
incoming3, outgoing3, remains3= stripOff[remains2]
DirectedEdge[3, 5] ,
,
Is there a quick way to construct such a stripOff
function in mathematica? Thanks for any suggestion!
EDIT:
Note that I am trying to iteratively strip off external legs of the graph, which are connected to a vertex only on one side, not on both.
Even though the graph
edges = DirectedEdge[1, 2], DirectedEdge[2, 3], DirectedEdge[4, 3], DirectedEdge[5, 4];
Graph[edges]
contains a sink in the middle, the function should not cut the graph in two, but only stip off outer legs:
incoming, outgoing, remains= stripOff[edges]
DirectedEdge[1, 2] ,
DirectedEdge[5, 4] ,
DirectedEdge[2, 3], DirectedEdge[4, 3]
list-manipulation function-construction graphs-and-networks
list-manipulation function-construction graphs-and-networks
edited 18 mins ago
asked 2 hours ago
Kagaratsch
4,50931246
4,50931246
shouldn't the last step giveDirectedEdge[3, 5] ,DirectedEdge[3, 5] ,
?
â kglr
1 hour ago
@kglr I'd like all edges to be unique, without double counting. If an edge triggers forincoming
classification, it is spent and is not available to be classified asoutgoing
any more.
â Kagaratsch
55 mins ago
add a comment |Â
shouldn't the last step giveDirectedEdge[3, 5] ,DirectedEdge[3, 5] ,
?
â kglr
1 hour ago
@kglr I'd like all edges to be unique, without double counting. If an edge triggers forincoming
classification, it is spent and is not available to be classified asoutgoing
any more.
â Kagaratsch
55 mins ago
shouldn't the last step give
DirectedEdge[3, 5] ,DirectedEdge[3, 5] ,
?â kglr
1 hour ago
shouldn't the last step give
DirectedEdge[3, 5] ,DirectedEdge[3, 5] ,
?â kglr
1 hour ago
@kglr I'd like all edges to be unique, without double counting. If an edge triggers for
incoming
classification, it is spent and is not available to be classified as outgoing
any more.â Kagaratsch
55 mins ago
@kglr I'd like all edges to be unique, without double counting. If an edge triggers for
incoming
classification, it is spent and is not available to be classified as outgoing
any more.â Kagaratsch
55 mins ago
add a comment |Â
2 Answers
2
active
oldest
votes
up vote
2
down vote
g = Graph[edges, VertexLabels -> Automatic]
source[g_?GraphQ] := Pick[VertexList[g], VertexInDegree[g], 0]
sink[g_?GraphQ] := Pick[VertexList[g], VertexOutDegree[g], 0]
strip[g_] :=
With[so = source[g], si = sink[g],
Flatten[IncidenceList[g, #] & /@ so],
Flatten[IncidenceList[g, #] & /@ si],
VertexDelete[g, Join[so, si]]
]
There are minor issues, such as returning an edge twice at the last step, but that should be easy (if tedious) to fix.
add a comment |Â
up vote
2
down vote
sourceEdges = IncidenceList[#, GeneralUtilities`GraphSources @ # ]&;
sinkEdges = Complement[IncidenceList[#, GeneralUtilities`GraphSinks @ #],
sourceEdges @ #]&;
rest = Complement[#, sourceEdges@#, sinkEdges@#] &;
f = Rest @ NestWhileList[sourceEdges @ #[[3]], sinkEdges @ #[[3]], rest @ #[[3]]&,
, , #, #[[3]] =!= &]&;
f @ edges
1 -> 2, 4 -> 3, 6 -> 7, 2 -> 3, 3 -> 5, 5 -> 6,
2 -> 3, 5 -> 6, 3 -> 5,
3 -> 5, ,
You can also use GraphComputation`SourceVertexList
and GraphComputation`SinkVertexList
for GeneralUtilities`GraphSources
and GeneralUtilities`GraphSinks
, respectively.
I wonder ifGeneralUtilities'GraphSinks
would trigger on2->3
and4->3
in a situation like1->2 , 2->3 , 4->3 , 5->4
, where2->3
and4->3
do point to a sink but are not simply connected to the rest of the graph? Asking, since I'd actually like to avoid this in my case.
â Kagaratsch
1 hour ago
@Kagaratsch, not sure I understandel = 1->2 , 2->3 , 4->3 , 5->4
, butGeneralUtilities`GraphSinks @Flatten[el]
gives3
.
â kglr
54 mins ago
I see, that is what I was afraid of. In my application case I am only looking for sources and sinks which are simply connected to the rest of the graph.
â Kagaratsch
52 mins ago
@Kagaratsch, sounds like the example in your question does not reflect your requirements accurately. Adding the example in your comment to your post with some explanation would be useful.
â kglr
39 mins ago
Added an edit to the question.
â Kagaratsch
17 mins ago
add a comment |Â
2 Answers
2
active
oldest
votes
2 Answers
2
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
up vote
2
down vote
g = Graph[edges, VertexLabels -> Automatic]
source[g_?GraphQ] := Pick[VertexList[g], VertexInDegree[g], 0]
sink[g_?GraphQ] := Pick[VertexList[g], VertexOutDegree[g], 0]
strip[g_] :=
With[so = source[g], si = sink[g],
Flatten[IncidenceList[g, #] & /@ so],
Flatten[IncidenceList[g, #] & /@ si],
VertexDelete[g, Join[so, si]]
]
There are minor issues, such as returning an edge twice at the last step, but that should be easy (if tedious) to fix.
add a comment |Â
up vote
2
down vote
g = Graph[edges, VertexLabels -> Automatic]
source[g_?GraphQ] := Pick[VertexList[g], VertexInDegree[g], 0]
sink[g_?GraphQ] := Pick[VertexList[g], VertexOutDegree[g], 0]
strip[g_] :=
With[so = source[g], si = sink[g],
Flatten[IncidenceList[g, #] & /@ so],
Flatten[IncidenceList[g, #] & /@ si],
VertexDelete[g, Join[so, si]]
]
There are minor issues, such as returning an edge twice at the last step, but that should be easy (if tedious) to fix.
add a comment |Â
up vote
2
down vote
up vote
2
down vote
g = Graph[edges, VertexLabels -> Automatic]
source[g_?GraphQ] := Pick[VertexList[g], VertexInDegree[g], 0]
sink[g_?GraphQ] := Pick[VertexList[g], VertexOutDegree[g], 0]
strip[g_] :=
With[so = source[g], si = sink[g],
Flatten[IncidenceList[g, #] & /@ so],
Flatten[IncidenceList[g, #] & /@ si],
VertexDelete[g, Join[so, si]]
]
There are minor issues, such as returning an edge twice at the last step, but that should be easy (if tedious) to fix.
g = Graph[edges, VertexLabels -> Automatic]
source[g_?GraphQ] := Pick[VertexList[g], VertexInDegree[g], 0]
sink[g_?GraphQ] := Pick[VertexList[g], VertexOutDegree[g], 0]
strip[g_] :=
With[so = source[g], si = sink[g],
Flatten[IncidenceList[g, #] & /@ so],
Flatten[IncidenceList[g, #] & /@ si],
VertexDelete[g, Join[so, si]]
]
There are minor issues, such as returning an edge twice at the last step, but that should be easy (if tedious) to fix.
answered 1 hour ago
Szabolcs
156k13423912
156k13423912
add a comment |Â
add a comment |Â
up vote
2
down vote
sourceEdges = IncidenceList[#, GeneralUtilities`GraphSources @ # ]&;
sinkEdges = Complement[IncidenceList[#, GeneralUtilities`GraphSinks @ #],
sourceEdges @ #]&;
rest = Complement[#, sourceEdges@#, sinkEdges@#] &;
f = Rest @ NestWhileList[sourceEdges @ #[[3]], sinkEdges @ #[[3]], rest @ #[[3]]&,
, , #, #[[3]] =!= &]&;
f @ edges
1 -> 2, 4 -> 3, 6 -> 7, 2 -> 3, 3 -> 5, 5 -> 6,
2 -> 3, 5 -> 6, 3 -> 5,
3 -> 5, ,
You can also use GraphComputation`SourceVertexList
and GraphComputation`SinkVertexList
for GeneralUtilities`GraphSources
and GeneralUtilities`GraphSinks
, respectively.
I wonder ifGeneralUtilities'GraphSinks
would trigger on2->3
and4->3
in a situation like1->2 , 2->3 , 4->3 , 5->4
, where2->3
and4->3
do point to a sink but are not simply connected to the rest of the graph? Asking, since I'd actually like to avoid this in my case.
â Kagaratsch
1 hour ago
@Kagaratsch, not sure I understandel = 1->2 , 2->3 , 4->3 , 5->4
, butGeneralUtilities`GraphSinks @Flatten[el]
gives3
.
â kglr
54 mins ago
I see, that is what I was afraid of. In my application case I am only looking for sources and sinks which are simply connected to the rest of the graph.
â Kagaratsch
52 mins ago
@Kagaratsch, sounds like the example in your question does not reflect your requirements accurately. Adding the example in your comment to your post with some explanation would be useful.
â kglr
39 mins ago
Added an edit to the question.
â Kagaratsch
17 mins ago
add a comment |Â
up vote
2
down vote
sourceEdges = IncidenceList[#, GeneralUtilities`GraphSources @ # ]&;
sinkEdges = Complement[IncidenceList[#, GeneralUtilities`GraphSinks @ #],
sourceEdges @ #]&;
rest = Complement[#, sourceEdges@#, sinkEdges@#] &;
f = Rest @ NestWhileList[sourceEdges @ #[[3]], sinkEdges @ #[[3]], rest @ #[[3]]&,
, , #, #[[3]] =!= &]&;
f @ edges
1 -> 2, 4 -> 3, 6 -> 7, 2 -> 3, 3 -> 5, 5 -> 6,
2 -> 3, 5 -> 6, 3 -> 5,
3 -> 5, ,
You can also use GraphComputation`SourceVertexList
and GraphComputation`SinkVertexList
for GeneralUtilities`GraphSources
and GeneralUtilities`GraphSinks
, respectively.
I wonder ifGeneralUtilities'GraphSinks
would trigger on2->3
and4->3
in a situation like1->2 , 2->3 , 4->3 , 5->4
, where2->3
and4->3
do point to a sink but are not simply connected to the rest of the graph? Asking, since I'd actually like to avoid this in my case.
â Kagaratsch
1 hour ago
@Kagaratsch, not sure I understandel = 1->2 , 2->3 , 4->3 , 5->4
, butGeneralUtilities`GraphSinks @Flatten[el]
gives3
.
â kglr
54 mins ago
I see, that is what I was afraid of. In my application case I am only looking for sources and sinks which are simply connected to the rest of the graph.
â Kagaratsch
52 mins ago
@Kagaratsch, sounds like the example in your question does not reflect your requirements accurately. Adding the example in your comment to your post with some explanation would be useful.
â kglr
39 mins ago
Added an edit to the question.
â Kagaratsch
17 mins ago
add a comment |Â
up vote
2
down vote
up vote
2
down vote
sourceEdges = IncidenceList[#, GeneralUtilities`GraphSources @ # ]&;
sinkEdges = Complement[IncidenceList[#, GeneralUtilities`GraphSinks @ #],
sourceEdges @ #]&;
rest = Complement[#, sourceEdges@#, sinkEdges@#] &;
f = Rest @ NestWhileList[sourceEdges @ #[[3]], sinkEdges @ #[[3]], rest @ #[[3]]&,
, , #, #[[3]] =!= &]&;
f @ edges
1 -> 2, 4 -> 3, 6 -> 7, 2 -> 3, 3 -> 5, 5 -> 6,
2 -> 3, 5 -> 6, 3 -> 5,
3 -> 5, ,
You can also use GraphComputation`SourceVertexList
and GraphComputation`SinkVertexList
for GeneralUtilities`GraphSources
and GeneralUtilities`GraphSinks
, respectively.
sourceEdges = IncidenceList[#, GeneralUtilities`GraphSources @ # ]&;
sinkEdges = Complement[IncidenceList[#, GeneralUtilities`GraphSinks @ #],
sourceEdges @ #]&;
rest = Complement[#, sourceEdges@#, sinkEdges@#] &;
f = Rest @ NestWhileList[sourceEdges @ #[[3]], sinkEdges @ #[[3]], rest @ #[[3]]&,
, , #, #[[3]] =!= &]&;
f @ edges
1 -> 2, 4 -> 3, 6 -> 7, 2 -> 3, 3 -> 5, 5 -> 6,
2 -> 3, 5 -> 6, 3 -> 5,
3 -> 5, ,
You can also use GraphComputation`SourceVertexList
and GraphComputation`SinkVertexList
for GeneralUtilities`GraphSources
and GeneralUtilities`GraphSinks
, respectively.
edited 45 mins ago
answered 1 hour ago
kglr
170k8193396
170k8193396
I wonder ifGeneralUtilities'GraphSinks
would trigger on2->3
and4->3
in a situation like1->2 , 2->3 , 4->3 , 5->4
, where2->3
and4->3
do point to a sink but are not simply connected to the rest of the graph? Asking, since I'd actually like to avoid this in my case.
â Kagaratsch
1 hour ago
@Kagaratsch, not sure I understandel = 1->2 , 2->3 , 4->3 , 5->4
, butGeneralUtilities`GraphSinks @Flatten[el]
gives3
.
â kglr
54 mins ago
I see, that is what I was afraid of. In my application case I am only looking for sources and sinks which are simply connected to the rest of the graph.
â Kagaratsch
52 mins ago
@Kagaratsch, sounds like the example in your question does not reflect your requirements accurately. Adding the example in your comment to your post with some explanation would be useful.
â kglr
39 mins ago
Added an edit to the question.
â Kagaratsch
17 mins ago
add a comment |Â
I wonder ifGeneralUtilities'GraphSinks
would trigger on2->3
and4->3
in a situation like1->2 , 2->3 , 4->3 , 5->4
, where2->3
and4->3
do point to a sink but are not simply connected to the rest of the graph? Asking, since I'd actually like to avoid this in my case.
â Kagaratsch
1 hour ago
@Kagaratsch, not sure I understandel = 1->2 , 2->3 , 4->3 , 5->4
, butGeneralUtilities`GraphSinks @Flatten[el]
gives3
.
â kglr
54 mins ago
I see, that is what I was afraid of. In my application case I am only looking for sources and sinks which are simply connected to the rest of the graph.
â Kagaratsch
52 mins ago
@Kagaratsch, sounds like the example in your question does not reflect your requirements accurately. Adding the example in your comment to your post with some explanation would be useful.
â kglr
39 mins ago
Added an edit to the question.
â Kagaratsch
17 mins ago
I wonder if
GeneralUtilities'GraphSinks
would trigger on 2->3
and 4->3
in a situation like 1->2 , 2->3 , 4->3 , 5->4
, where 2->3
and 4->3
do point to a sink but are not simply connected to the rest of the graph? Asking, since I'd actually like to avoid this in my case.â Kagaratsch
1 hour ago
I wonder if
GeneralUtilities'GraphSinks
would trigger on 2->3
and 4->3
in a situation like 1->2 , 2->3 , 4->3 , 5->4
, where 2->3
and 4->3
do point to a sink but are not simply connected to the rest of the graph? Asking, since I'd actually like to avoid this in my case.â Kagaratsch
1 hour ago
@Kagaratsch, not sure I understand
el = 1->2 , 2->3 , 4->3 , 5->4
, but GeneralUtilities`GraphSinks @Flatten[el]
gives 3
.â kglr
54 mins ago
@Kagaratsch, not sure I understand
el = 1->2 , 2->3 , 4->3 , 5->4
, but GeneralUtilities`GraphSinks @Flatten[el]
gives 3
.â kglr
54 mins ago
I see, that is what I was afraid of. In my application case I am only looking for sources and sinks which are simply connected to the rest of the graph.
â Kagaratsch
52 mins ago
I see, that is what I was afraid of. In my application case I am only looking for sources and sinks which are simply connected to the rest of the graph.
â Kagaratsch
52 mins ago
@Kagaratsch, sounds like the example in your question does not reflect your requirements accurately. Adding the example in your comment to your post with some explanation would be useful.
â kglr
39 mins ago
@Kagaratsch, sounds like the example in your question does not reflect your requirements accurately. Adding the example in your comment to your post with some explanation would be useful.
â kglr
39 mins ago
Added an edit to the question.
â Kagaratsch
17 mins ago
Added an edit to the question.
â Kagaratsch
17 mins ago
add a comment |Â
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
StackExchange.ready(
function ()
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fmathematica.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f185556%2fiteratively-strip-off-simply-connected-edges-in-graph%23new-answer', 'question_page');
);
Post as a guest
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
shouldn't the last step give
DirectedEdge[3, 5] ,DirectedEdge[3, 5] ,
?â kglr
1 hour ago
@kglr I'd like all edges to be unique, without double counting. If an edge triggers for
incoming
classification, it is spent and is not available to be classified asoutgoing
any more.â Kagaratsch
55 mins ago