Abstract
There are essentially four points that Dr. Chebotarev's raises in [1]. Point 1. Chebotarev claims that Lemma 2 is not correct as stated and gives a counter example consisting of a simple directed tree. This counterexample points out two issues with the lemma as stated. The second portion of Lemma 2, referring to the case in which there are c components, only applies to graphs in which there are disjoint components of the graph (no edges between the components). This is clear from the proof of this fact (which simply consists of separating the nodes so that the Laplacian is block diagonal, implying a disjoint set of nodes), but is ambiguous in the statement of the lemma.
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
