The issue isn’t the single special case of the star graph.
If you have a graph that is very centralized—a few “central” nodes have a lot of neighbors, and most of the edges are between “central” and “periphery” nodes—that’s not a star, but it’s “star-like.” Are such graphs nested or aren’t they?
I would imagine that certain kinds of exploitative human relationships are “star-like.”
I would imagine that certain kinds of exploitative human relationships are “star-like.”
Yes, definitely. Sorry, I don’t know the answer. The authors didn’t provide an email address, and neither of their University homepages have any contact information. They provided actual physical addresses, but I’m far too lazy for that.
The issue isn’t the single special case of the star graph. If you have a graph that is very centralized—a few “central” nodes have a lot of neighbors, and most of the edges are between “central” and “periphery” nodes—that’s not a star, but it’s “star-like.” Are such graphs nested or aren’t they?
I would imagine that certain kinds of exploitative human relationships are “star-like.”
Yes, definitely. Sorry, I don’t know the answer. The authors didn’t provide an email address, and neither of their University homepages have any contact information. They provided actual physical addresses, but I’m far too lazy for that.