If (u, v) is an edge of lowest cost such
that uUand vV
- U, then there exists an MST that includes (u,
v)
as an edge. See Figure 8.5.
Proof of MST Property
Suppose to the contrary that there is no MST for the graph Gwhich includes the edge (u, v).
Let T be any MST of G. By
our assumption, T does not contain (u,
v).
Adding (u, v) to Twill introduce
a cycle since T is a free tree. This cycle involves (u,
v). Therefore there is a path fromv to u
that does not pass through this edge. This means thatanother
edge (u', v') in T such that
u'Uandv'V
- U. See Figure 8.6.
Deleting edge (u', v') breaks the cycle and yields a spanning
tree
T' whose cost is certainly
that of T since C(u, v) C(u',
v'). Thus we have constructed an MST that includes (u, v).
To illustrate, consider the graph in Figure 8.7 and refer to Figures 8.8 and 8.9. Consider the sets:
U | = | {1, 2, 5} | |
V - U | = | {3, 4, 6}. |
Spanning tree with cost = 26. Now, least cost edge from U to V - U is (1,3).
By including (1,3) in the above spanning tree, a cycle will form (for
example, 1-2-3-1). Let us replace the edge (2,3) by the edge (1,3).
This has yielded a ST with cost = 22
MST Lemma: Let
Proof
Since T is promising, it can be extended to obtain an MST, says S. If e S, there is nothing to prove.
If e S, then we add edge e to S, we create exactly one cycle (since S is a spanning tree). In this cycle, since e leaves U there exists at least one other edge, f say, that also leaves U (otherwise the cycle could not close). See Figure 8.10.
If we now remove f, the cycle disappears and we obtain a new tree R that spans G.
Note thatR = (S {e}) - {f}
Also note that weight of eweight of f since e is a least cost edge leaving U.
Therefore R is also an MST and it includes edge e. Furthermore T R and so can be extended to the MST R. Thus T is a promising set of edges.