Proof of The Graph Theoretic Version
We first prove: If a bipartite graph G = (X + Y, E) = G(X, Y) has an X-saturating matching, then |NG(W)| ≥ |W| for all W ⊆ X.
Suppose M is a matching that saturates every vertex of X. Let the set of all vertices in Y matched by M to a given W be denoted as M(W). Therefore, |M(W)|=|W|, by the definition of matching. But M(W) ⊆ NG(W), since all elements of M(W) are neighbours of W. So, |NG(W)| ≥ |M(W)| and hence, |NG(W)| ≥ |W|.
Now we prove: If |NG(W)| ≥ |W| for all W ⊆ X, then G(X,Y) has a matching that saturates every vertex in X.
Assume for contradiction that G(X,Y) is a bipartite graph that has no matching that saturates all vertices of X. Let M be a maximum matching, and u a vertex not saturated by M. Consider all augmenting paths (i.e., paths in G alternately using edges outside and inside M) starting from u. Let the set of all points in Y connected to u by these augmenting paths be T, and the set of all points in X connected to u by these augmenting paths (including u itself) be W. No maximal augmenting path can end in a vertex in Y, lest we could augment M to a strictly larger matching. Thus every vertex in T is matched by M to a vertex in W. Conversely, every vertex v in W \ {u} is matched by M to a vertex in T (namely, the vertex preceding v on an augmenting path ending at v). Thus, M provides a bijection of W \ {u} and T, which implies |W| = |T| + 1. On the other hand, NG(W) ⊆ T: let v in Y be connected to a vertex w in W. If the edge (w,v) is in M, then v is in T by the previous part of the proof, otherwise we can take an augmenting path ending in w and extend it with v, showing that v is in T. Hence, |NG(W)| = |T| = |W| − 1, a contradiction.
Read more about this topic: Hall's Marriage Theorem
Famous quotes containing the words proof of the, proof of, proof, graph and/or version:
“Sculpture and painting are very justly called liberal arts; a lively and strong imagination, together with a just observation, being absolutely necessary to excel in either; which, in my opinion, is by no means the case of music, though called a liberal art, and now in Italy placed even above the other twoa proof of the decline of that country.”
—Philip Dormer Stanhope, 4th Earl Chesterfield (16941773)
“The thing with Catholicism, the same as all religions, is that it teaches what should be, which seems rather incorrect. This is what should be. Now, if youre taught to live up to a what should be that never existedonly an occult superstition, no proof of this should beMthen you can sit on a jury and indict easily, you can cast the first stone, you can burn Adolf Eichmann, like that!”
—Lenny Bruce (19251966)
“If some books are deemed most baneful and their sale forbid, how, then, with deadlier facts, not dreams of doting men? Those whom books will hurt will not be proof against events. Events, not books, should be forbid.”
—Herman Melville (18191891)
“When producers want to know what the public wants, they graph it as curves. When they want to tell the public what to get, they say it in curves.”
—Marshall McLuhan (19111980)
“Remember that you were a slave in the land of Egypt, and the LORD your God brought you out from there with a mighty hand and an outstretched arm; therefore the LORD your God commanded you to keep the sabbath day.”
—Bible: Hebrew, Deuteronomy 5:15.
See Exodus 22:8 for a different version of this fourth commandment.