
doi: 10.1002/net.20390
Summary: In this note, we give a counter example to show that the proof of a main result obtained by \textit{T. W. Haynes} and \textit{P. J. Slater} [Networks 32, No.3, 199--206 (1998; Zbl 0997.05074), Theorem 12] is inaccurate. Here, we give a complete proof of the result.
Extremal problems in graph theory, Vertex subsets with special properties (dominating sets, independent sets, cliques, etc.), upper bound, paired-domination number, minimum degree
Extremal problems in graph theory, Vertex subsets with special properties (dominating sets, independent sets, cliques, etc.), upper bound, paired-domination number, minimum degree
| selected citations These citations are derived from selected sources. This is an alternative to the "Influence" indicator, which also reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically). | 0 | |
| popularity This indicator reflects the "current" impact/attention (the "hype") of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network. | Average | |
| influence This indicator reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically). | Average | |
| impulse This indicator reflects the initial momentum of an article directly after its publication, based on the underlying citation network. | Average |
