2
$\begingroup$

Let $Z_2^n$ be group $Z_2 \times Z_2 \times \cdots \times Z_2$ with operation Exclusive-or. I'd like to know if the $Cay(Z_2^n,S)$ for $S \subset Z_2^n \setminus \{0\}$ is distance regular graph or not? Or it's for some conditions? If there is a references please let me know?

$\endgroup$
1
  • $\begingroup$ If $S$ consists of all of the vectors with a single 1 plus the all ones vector, then you get the folded cube, which is distance regular. Mostly it won't be though, as Seva said. $\endgroup$ Jul 7, 2018 at 7:46

2 Answers 2

2
$\begingroup$

A Cayley graph for $\mathbb{Z}^2_d$ with valency $m$ can always be constructed as a coset graph of a subgroup $C$ of $\mathbb{Z}^2_m$ - vertices are the cosets of $C$, cosets are adjacent if there is an element in one coset at Hamming distance one from an element in the second. The minimum Hamming distance between distinct elements of $C$ will be at least three.

In other words, $C$ is a linear binary code with minimum distance three. It is a theorem in Brouwer, Cohen and Neumaier "Distance-Regular Graphs" that the coset graph of $C$ is distance regular if and only $C$ is completely regular code, i.e., the distance partition of $C$ viewed as a subset of the $m$-cube is equitable. Perfect codes are distance regular, and there is a discussion of examples in BCN. (The $d$-cubes, the folded cubes, and the bilinear and alternating forms graphs over a field of even characteristic provide infinite families.)

$\endgroup$
1
$\begingroup$

Normally, the graph will not be distance-regular.

Pick your favorite (but not too small) set $S\subset\mathbb Z_2^n$. Unless you are very unlucky, there will be two elements $s_1,s_2\in S$ which are both representable as a sum of two (other) elements of $S$, but the number of representations differ: say, $$ s_1=t_1'+t_1'',\ s_2=t_2'+t_2'',\quad t_1',t_1'',t_2',t_2''\in S, $$ while $r_{2S}(s_1)\ne r_{2S}(s_2)$. Now, $t_1'$ and $t_1''$ are distance $1$ apart in the graph under consideration, and so are $t_2'$ and $t_2''$. However, the number of common neighbors of $t_1'$ and $t_1''$ is distinct from the number of common neighbors of $t_2'$ and $t_2''$ (the former is $r_{2S}(s_1)$, the latter is $r_{2S}(s_2)$).

$\endgroup$

Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service and acknowledge that you have read and understand our privacy policy and code of conduct.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.