Acta Mathematica Sinica, English Series

Jun., 2007, Vol. 23, No. 6, pp. 10591062

Published online: Sep. 20, 2006
DOI: 10.1007/s10114-005-0851-7
Http://www.ActaMath.com

A 3-color Theorem on Plane Graphs without 5-circuits

Bao Gang XU
School of Math. & Computer Science, Nanjing Normal University, Nanjing, 210097, P. R. China
E-mail: baogxu@pine.njnu.edu.cn

Abstract In this paper, we prove that every plane graph without 5-circuits and without triangles of
distance less than 3 is 3-colorable. This improves the main result of Borodin and Raspaud [Borodin, O.
V., Raspaud, A.: A sucient condition for planar graphs to be 3-colorable. Journal of Combinatorial
Theory, Ser. B, 88, 1727 (2003)], and provides a new upper bound to their conjecture.
Keywords plane graph, circuit, coloring
MR(2000) Subject Classification 05C15, 05C78

1 Introduction
In 1976, Steinberg (see [1, p. 229] or [2]) conjectured that every plane graph without 4- and
5-circuits is 3-colorable. In 1990, Erdos (also see [1, p. 229]) suggested the following relaxation:
Is there an integer k 5 such that every plane graph without i-circuits for 4 i k is 3-
colorable? Abbott and Zhou [3] showed that k = 11 is acceptable. Sanders and Zhao [4], and
Borodin [2] independently, improved that to k = 9. Borodin, et al. [5] again improved this
result to k = 7. Recently, we proved [6] that every plane graph without 5- and 7-circuits and
without adjacent triangles is 3-colorable.
The distance between triangles in a graph is dened as the length of the shortest path
between vertices of dierent triangles. In [7], Borodin and Raspaud proved that if G is a plane
graph without 5-circuits and without triangles of distance less than four, then G is 3-colorable,
and they conjectured that every plane graph without 5-circuits and without intersecting trian-
gles is 3-colorable. In [8], Xu proved that if a plane graph contains no intersecting triangles
and contains no 4-, 5- and 7-circuits, then it is 3-colorable.
Let G be the set of plane graphs without 5-circuits and without triangles of distance less
than 3. In this paper, we will prove that
Theorem 1 Let G be a plane graph in G , f a face of degree 3 or 7. Then, any 3-coloring of
f can be extended to G, where a 3-coloring of f is a 3-coloring of the subgraph induced by the
vertices on the boundary of f .
As a corollary of Theorem 1, every plane graph in G is 3-colorable. To see this, let G be
a plane graph in G . By Grotzschs theorem, G is 3-colorable while G contains no triangles. If
G contains a triangle T , then we may assign T a 3-coloring and then extend to both the
interior and exterior of T , that also produces a 3-coloring of G.
Let G be a plane graph. We use N (v) and d(v) to denote the neighbor set and degree of a
vertex v, respectively. Let f be a face of G. b(f ) is the boundary of f in G, and V (f ) is the set
of vertices on b(f ). The degree of f , denoted by d(f ), is the number of edges incident with it,
where every cut-edge is counted twice. A k-vertex (k-face) is a vertex (face) of degree k, and
a k -vertex (k -face) is a vertex (face) of degree at least k. Let C be a circuit of G. We use
int(C) and ext(C) to denote the sets of vertices lying inside and outside C, respectively. C is
called a separating circuit if both int(C) = and ext(C) = , and a facial circuit, otherwise.
Received November 30, 2004, Accepted July 14, 2005
Supported partially by NSFC 10001035 and 10371055
1060 Xu B. G.

Let u and v be two vertices on C. C[u, v] is the path on C clockwise from u to v, and
C(u, v) = C[u, v] \ {u, v}.

2 Structures of a Minimum Counterexample

In this section, we always assume that G is a counterexample of Theorem 1 with minimum
(G) = |V (G)| + |E(G)|, i.e., G G , G contains a face f of degree 3 or 7 with a 3-coloring that
cannot be extended to G, and (G) is as small as possible.
Without loss of generality, we may assume that f is the unbounded face fo of G. Let
C = b(fo ), and suppose is a 3-coloring of fo that cannot be extended to G. Then, d(u) 3
for u V (G) \ V (C). Since G contains neither 5-circuits nor triangles of distance less than
three, and G \ int(C  ) is still in G for any separating circuit C  of G, the following two lemmas
immediately follow from the choice of G.
Lemma 1 G contains neither separating triangles nor separating 7-circuits.
Lemma 2 No 4-face is adjacent to 3-faces.
Lemma 3 G is 2-connected.
Proof Assume to the contrary that G has a cut vertex x. Let H be a component of G x
with V (H) V (C) = , and let H be the subgraph induced by V (H) {x}. By our choice of
G, can be extended to a 3-coloring  of G \ V (H).
If H has no triangle, then by Grotzschs theorem, H admits a 3-coloring  with  (x) =

(x). If H has a triangle T , then by Lemma 1, T is a 3-face, we may assign T a 3-coloring and
then extend it to a 3-coloring  of H with  (x) =  (x). In either case  , together with  ,
yields a 3-coloring of G that extends .
From Lemma 3, we know that b(f ) is a circuit for every face f .
Lemma 4 C is chordless.
Proof Assume to the contrary that C has a chord, say uv. Without loss of generality, suppose
that |V (C(u, v))| < |V (C(v, u))|. It is certain that C(u, v) is a single vertex, say w. By
Lemma 1, uvwu is a facial circuit. Let G be the graph obtained from G \ {w} by inserting into
uv a new vertex w colored with (w). Then, G G , (G ) < (G), the unbounded face of G
is a 7-face, and hence we can extend the 3-coloring of C[v, u] {w } to G . But this provides a
3-coloring of G that extends .
Lemma 5 G contains no separating 4-circuits.
Proof Assume to the contrary that G contains a separating 4-circuit C  . Let H be the graph
obtained from the subgraph induced by V (C  ) int(C  ) by inserting three new vertices into an
edge of C  . Certainly, H G , (H) < (G) and the boundary of the unbounded face of H is
a 7-circuit.
By the choice of G, can be extended to a 3-coloring  of G \ int(C  ), and then the
restriction of  on C  can be extended to a 3-coloring  of H. But  and  provide a
3-coloring of G that extends .
Lemma 6 If x  V (C) has two neighbors, say u, v, on C, then uv E(C).
Proof Assume to the contrary that uv  E(C). Then, |V (C)| = 7. Let P be the shorter
path joining u and v on in C. It is clear that 3 |V (P )| 4. Since P {ux, xv} is a
circuit of length |V (P )| + 1, |V (P )| = 3, which implies that P {ux, xv} is a 4-circuit and
(E(C)\E(P )){ux, xv} forms a 7-circuit, by Lemma 1 and Lemma 5, E(G) = E(C){ux, xv},
which implies that d(x) = 2, a contradiction.
Lemma 7 Let f be a 4-face, and u an arbitrary vertex on b(f ). Then, u is not incident with
a 3-face, and there exists a vertex v N (u) \ V (f ) incident with a 3-face.
Proof Let b(f ) = u1 u2 u3 u4 u1 . First we show that ui is not incident with a 3-face for every i.
If it is not the case, assume that u1 is incident with a 3-face. Since G contains no triangles of
A 3-color Theorem on Plane Graphs without 5-circuits 1061

distance less than three, each vertex in (N (u2 ) N (u4 )) \ {u1 } is not incident with a 3-face.
Let H be the graph obtained by identifying u2 and u4 . Then, H G and (H) < (G). If
we can prove that this identication does not damage the pre-coloring , then we can extend
to H and then to G, a contradiction.
We claim that, at most one of u2 and u4 is on C. If it is not the case, assume that
{u2 , u4 } V (C). Since d(fo ) = 4 and G is chordless by Lemma 4, at least one of u1 and u3 ,
say u1 , is not on C. By Lemma 6, u2 u4 E(C) so that G contains two adjacent triangles
u1 u2 u4 u1 and u3 u2 u4 u3 , which contradicts the choice of G.
If {u2 , u4 } V (C) = , or just one of u2 and u4 is on C and another has no neighbor on
C, we are done. So, we assume that u2 V (C), u4  V (C) and u4 has a neighbor w on C.
Since u4  V (C), if {u1 , u3 } V (C) = , say u1 V (C), then by Lemma 6, wu1 E(C) that
produces a 3-face wu1 u4 w adjacent to f , which contradicts Lemma 2. So, {u1 , u3 } V (C) = .
Since (G) 3 and G contains no 5-circuits, C b(f ) {wu4 } contains either a separating
4-circuit or a separating 7-circuit, which contradicts Lemma 1 or Lemma 5. Therefore, the
identication of u2 and u4 does not damage the pre-coloring .
In the following, we need to show only that there is a 3-face that
s s has distance 1 from ui for every i. If it is not so, by symmetry we
s s s@s
@s s may assume that every 3-face has distance at least 2 from u2 . The
same arguments as above ensure that we can extend to the graph
s s obtained by identifying u2 and u4 , and then to G.
s s @s Lemma 7 tells us that a 4-face and the 3-faces around it must be
@s s as shown in Figure 1.
Let f be a k-face of G, k 6, and u1 uvv1 a segment on b(f ). If
Figure 1 k = 7, then G \ {u, v} + u1 v1 contains no 5-circuits.
Lemma 8 For k = 7, if a k-face f is adjacent to a 3-face at an edge uv with {u, v}V (C) = ,
then either u or v is a 4 -vertex.
Proof Assume to the contrary that d(u) = d(v) = 3. Let u1 uvv1 be the segment on b(f ), and
w the vertex adjacent to both u and v. It is certain that k = 6 or k 8. Since G contains
no 5-circuits, if {u1 , v1 } V (C), then C (u1 uvv1 ) (uwv) contains separating 7-circuits that
contradicts Lemma 1. Therefore, at most one of u1 and v1 is on C. Let G = G \ {u, v} + u1 v1 .
Then, G G and (G ) < (G). can be extended to a 3-coloring  of G . Since  (u1 ) =
 (v1 ), {1, 2, 3}\{ (u1 ),  (w)} = {1, 2, 3}\{ (v1 ),  (w)}, and hence  can be extended to G.
Lemma 9 If a 6-face f is adjacent to a 3-face at an edge uv with u V (C), then v is a
4 -vertex.
Proof By Lemma 4, v  V (C). Assume to the contrary that d(v) = 3. Let v1 = u be another
neighbor of v on b(f ). By Lemma 6, v1 is not on C and v1 has no neighbor on C. Let G be
the graph obtained from G \ {v} by identifying u and v1 . Then, G G and (G ) < (G).
is not damaged by the identication, and can be extended to G and then to G sequentially.
If we assign every vertex of an even circuit a list of two colors, then we can color this circuit
no matter what the lists are. Therefore:
Lemma 10 If f is an even face not adjacent to fo , then b(f ) has a 4 -vertex.

3 Proof of Theorem 1
This is done by contradiction. If the conclusion is not valid, then we choose a counterexample
G and its unbounded face fo is as dened at the beginning of Section 2. Let r(v) = d(v) 3 1
d(f ) 
for v V (G), and r(f ) = 6 1 for f F (G). By Eulers formula, xV (G)F (G) r(x) =
 d(v)  d(f )
vV (G) ( 3 1) + f F (G) ( 6 1) = 2.
A face f adjacent to fo is called a light-face if the vertices in V (f ) V (fo ) are all 3-vertices.
We will modify r to a new weight r according to the following discharging rules:
1062 Xu B. G.

R-1 Let f be a 3- or 4-face, v a 4 -vertex on b(f ). v transfers to f :

(a) 13 if f is a 3-face, or a 4-face incident with a unique 4 -vertex.
(b) 16 if f is a 4-face incident with at least two 4 -vertices.
R-2 Every bounded 7 -face transfers 16 to every adjacent 3-face.
R-3 fo transfers 13 toevery incident 2-vertex, or light-3-face, or light-4-face.
If we can show that xV (G)  F (G) r (x) > 2, then this contradiction to


xV (G) F (G) r(x) = 2 will complete our proof.
 
xV (G) F (G) r (x) =
Claim 1 r (f ) 0 for every f = fo .
Proof Let f be a 3-face. If f is incident with at least two 4 -vertices, then by (R-1) (a),
r (f ) r(f ) + 2 13 > 0. If the number of 4 -vertices on b(f ) is at most one, then by Lemmas 8
and 9, and by (R-2) and (R-3), either f is incident with a 4 -vertex and adjacent to at least
one 7-face from which f receives at least 16 so that r (f ) r(f ) + 13 + 16 = 0, or f is adjacent
to three 7 -faces so that r (f ) r(f ) + 3 16 = 0.
Let f be a 4-face. If f is incident with a 4 -vertex, then r (f ) r(f ) + 2 16 = r(f ) + 13 = 0
by (R-1). If f is not incident with a 4 -vertex, then f is adjacent to fo by Lemma 10, so
r (f ) r(f ) + 13 = 0 by (R-3).
If f is a 6-face, then r (f ) = r(f ) 0. If f is a 7 -face, then f is adjacent to at most
d(f ) ) 1

4  3-faces, and r (f ) r(f )

d(f 4  6 0.
Claim 2 r (v) 0 for every vertex v.
Proof If v is a 2-vertex then v V (C) and r (v) = r(v) + 13 = 0. If v is a 3-vertex then
r (v) = r(v) = 0.
Let v be a 4 -vertex. If v is incident with neither a 3-face nor a 4-face, then r (v) = r(v) > 0.
If v is incident with a 3-face, then, by Lemma 7, v is not incident with 4-faces, and hence
r (v) = r(v) 13 0. In the following, we assume that v is incident with some 4-faces, and
hence is not incident with a 3-face.
By Lemma 7, at least one edge incident with v is not incident with any 4-faces. Let the faces
incident with v be f0 , f1 , . . . , fd(v)1 clockwise around v. Without loss of generality, assume
that both f0 and fd(v)1 are 6 -faces, and f1 is a 4-face. By (R1 ), f2i1 and f2i totally receive
at most 13 from v, 1 i
d(v)2 2 . Therefore, v transfers out at most 13
d(v)2
2 , and
1 d(v)2 d(v)4
r (v) r(v) 3
2   6 0.
By Claim 1 and Claim 2, xV (G)  F (G) r (x) r (fo ). Let s be the number of 2-vertices
on C, t the number of light-3-faces and light-4-faces. Since each light-face shares at least two
common 3-vertices with fo , s + 2t d(fo ), by Lemmas 3 and 5, s d(fo ) 2 if t = 0, and
s d(fo ) 3 if t 1. Therefore, s + t d(fo ) 2, and r (fo ) r(fo ) (s + t) 13
d(fo )
5 1 d(fo3)2 = 2d(f 15
o )5
> 2. This completes the proof of Theorem 1.
References
[1] Steinberg, R.: The state of the three color problem, Quo Vadis. Graph Theory? J. Gimbel, J. W. Kennedy
& L. V. Quintas (eds). Ann Discrete Math., 55, 211248 (1993)
[2] Borodin, O. V.: Structural properties of plane graphs without adjacent triangles and an application to
3-colorings. Journal of Graph Theory, 21(2), 183186 (1996)
[3] Abbott, H. L., Zhou, B.: On small faces in 4-critical graphs. Ars Combin., 32, 203207 (1991)
[4] Sanders, D. P., Zhao, Y.: A note on the three color problem. Graphs and Combinatorics, 11, 9194 (1995)
[5] Borodin, O. V., et al.: Planar graphs without cycles of length from 4 to 7 are 3-colorable. Journal of
Combinatorial Theory, Ser. B, 93, 303311 (2005)
[6] Xu, B.: On 3-colorable plane graphs without 5- and 7-circuits. Journal of Combinatorial Theory, Ser. B,
in press
[7] Borodin, O. V., Raspaud, A.: A sucient condition for planar graphs to be 3-colorable. Journal of Com-
binatorial Theory, Ser. B, 88, 1727 (2003)
[8] Xu, B.: On 3-colorings of plane graphs. Acta Math. Appl. Sinica, 20, 597604 (2004)