This paper was converted on www.awesomepapers.org from LaTeX by an anonymous user.
Want to know more? Visit the Converter page.

2-distance 20-coloring of planar graphs with maximum degree 6

Kengo Aoki Department of Informatics, Graduate School of Integrated Science and Technology, Shizuoka University, 3-5-1 Johoku, Chuo-ku, Hamamatsu-shi, 432-8011, Shizuoka, Japan, aoki.kengo.19@shizuoka.ac.jp
Abstract

A 2-distance kk-coloring of a graph GG is a proper kk-coloring such that any two vertices at distance two or less get different colors. The 2-distance chromatic number of GG is the minimum kk such that GG has a 2-distance kk-coloring, denoted by χ2(G)\chi_{2}(G). In this paper, we show that χ2(G)20\chi_{2}(G)\leq 20 for every planar graph GG with maximum degree at most six, which improves a former bound χ2(G)21\chi_{2}(G)\leq 21.

1 Introduction

All graphs considered in this paper are simple, finite, and planar. For a graph GG, we denote the set of vertices, the set of edges, and the set of faces by V(G)V(G), E(G)E(G), and F(G)F(G), respectively. For a graph GG and a vertex vv in GG, let GvG-v denote the graph obtained from GG by deleting the vertex vv and all edges incident with vv. The set of neighbours of a vertex vv in a graph GG is denoted by NG(v)N_{G}(v). The degree of a vertex vv in a graph GG, denoted by dG(v)d_{G}(v), is the number of edges of GG incident with vv. The maximum degree and minimum degree of a graph GG are denoted by Δ(G)\Delta(G) and δ(G)\delta(G) (Δ\Delta and δ\delta for short). A vertex of degree kk (respectively, at least kk, at most kk) is said to be a kk-vertex (respectively, k+k^{+}-vertex, kk^{-}-vertex). For XV(G)X\subseteq V(G), let G[X]G[X] denote the subgraph of GG induced by XX. A face is said to be incident with the vertices and edges in its boundary, and two faces are adjacent if their boundaries have an edge in common. The degree of a face ff in a graph GG, denoted by d(f)d(f), is the number of edges in its boundary. A face of degree kk (respectively, at least kk, at most kk) is said to be a kk-face (respectively, k+k^{+}-face, kk^{-}-face). A [v1v2vk][v_{1}v_{2}\ldots v_{k}] is a kk-face with vertices v1,v2,,vkv_{1},v_{2},\ldots,v_{k} on its boundary. For a vertex vv in a graph GG, let mk(v)m_{k}(v) denote the number of kk-faces incident with vv, and let nk(v)n_{k}(v) denote the number of kk-vertices adjacent to vv.

Let ϕ\phi be a partial coloring of a graph GG. For a vertex vv in a graph GG, let Cϕ(v)C_{\phi}(v) denote the set of colors assigned to the vertices within distance two from vv. A 2-distance kk-coloring of a graph GG is a mapping ϕ:V(G){1,2,,k}\phi:V(G)\rightarrow\{1,2,\ldots,k\} such that ϕ(v1)ϕ(v2)\phi(v_{1})\neq\phi(v_{2}) for any two vertices v1,v2V(G)v_{1},v_{2}\in V(G) with dG(v1,v2)2d_{G}(v_{1},v_{2})\leq 2, where dG(v1,v2)d_{G}(v_{1},v_{2}) is the distance between the two vertices v1v_{1} and v2v_{2}. The 2-distance chromatic number of GG is the minimum kk such that GG has a 2-distance kk-coloring, denoted by χ2(G)\chi_{2}(G). Let d2(v)d_{2}(v) denote the number of vertices within distance two from a vertex vv. Any definitions and notations not explicitly stated in this paper conform to those in [1].

The study of 2-distance coloring originated from the research on square coloring, which was first introduced by Kramer and Kramer [12, 11]. The square of a graph GG, denoted by G2G^{2}, is obtained by adding edges between all pairs of vertices that have a common neighbour in GG. In 1977, Wegner made the following conjecture.

Conjecture 1.1.

[15] If GG is a planar graph, then χ2(G)7\chi_{2}(G)\leq 7 if Δ=3\Delta=3, χ2(G)Δ+5\chi_{2}(G)\leq\Delta+5 if 4Δ74\leq\Delta\leq 7, and χ2(G)3Δ2+1\chi_{2}(G)\leq\lfloor\frac{3\Delta}{2}\rfloor+1 if Δ8\Delta\geq 8.

The case of Δ=3\Delta=3 was independently proven by Thomassen [14] and by Hartke et al. [7]. Havet et al. [8, 9] proved that the conjecture holds asymptotically. Bousquet et al. [3] proved that χ2(G)12\chi_{2}(G)\leq 12 for Δ4\Delta\leq 4 using an automatic discharging method. Deniz [5] proved that χ2(G)16\chi_{2}(G)\leq 16 for Δ5\Delta\leq 5. For a comprehensive overview of 2-distance coloring and related research, we refer the reader to [4].

The upper bound on χ2(G)\chi_{2}(G) for Δ=6\Delta=6 has been gradually improving. Zhu and Bu [16] proved that χ2(G)5Δ7\chi_{2}(G)\leq 5\Delta-7 for Δ6\Delta\geq 6, which was improved by Krzyziński et al. [13] to χ2(G)3Δ+4\chi_{2}(G)\leq 3\Delta+4 for Δ6\Delta\geq 6. In this paper, we show that χ2(G)20\chi_{2}(G)\leq 20 for every planar graph GG with Δ6\Delta\leq 6, which improves the result of χ2(G)21\chi_{2}(G)\leq 21 proved by Bousquet et al. [2]. We prove the following theorem.

Theorem 1.2.

If GG is a planar graph with maximum degree Δ6\Delta\leq 6, then χ2(G)20\chi_{2}(G)\leq 20.

Remark.

Recently, Deniz [6] posted the first version of the proof on arXiv on March 18, 2024, showing that χ2(G)2Δ+7\chi_{2}(G)\leq 2\Delta+7 for planar graphs. The proof in this version covers the cases Δ=6\Delta=6, 77, and 88. According to this inequality, when Δ=6\Delta=6, it follows that χ2(G)19\chi_{2}(G)\leq 19. However, the proof for the case Δ=6\Delta=6 in this initial version is incomplete and requires further elaboration.

2 Reducible configurations

Let GG be a minimum counterexample to Theorem 1.2 with minimum |V(G)|+|E(G)||V(G)|+|E(G)|. That is GG is a planar graph with χ2(G)>20\chi_{2}(G)>20, such that for any planar subgraph GG^{\prime} with Δ(G)Δ(G)\Delta(G^{\prime})\leq\Delta(G) and |V(G)|+|E(G)|<|V(G)|+|E(G)||V(G^{\prime})|+|E(G^{\prime})|<|V(G)|+|E(G)|, we have χ2(G)20\chi_{2}(G^{\prime})\leq 20. Obviously, GG is a connected graph.

Let C={1,2,,20}C=\{1,2,\ldots,20\} be a set of colors. We call a graph GG^{\prime} proper with respect to GG if GG^{\prime} is obtained from GG by deleting some edges or vertices and adding some edges such that for any two vertices v1v_{1}, v2V(G)V(G)v_{2}\in V(G)\cap V(G^{\prime}) with dG(v1,v2)2d_{G}(v_{1},v_{2})\leq 2, we have dG(v1,v2)2d_{G^{\prime}}(v_{1},v_{2})\leq 2. This definition of proper is the same as the one used in [5, 10]. In this section, we present some reducible configurations of GG. The proofs of the lemmas generally follow a similar pattern: We construct a graph GG^{\prime} that is proper with respect to GG by deleting a vertex vv from GG and adding some edges. By the minimality of GG, there exists a 2-distance 20-coloring ϕ\phi^{\prime} of GG^{\prime}. Let ϕ\phi be a coloring of GG such that every vertex in V(G)V(G), except for the deleted vertex vv, is colored using ϕ\phi^{\prime}. If |C||Cϕ(v)|1|C|-|C_{\phi}(v)|\geq 1, then a safe color exists for vv. By coloring vv with the safe color, ϕ\phi^{\prime} can be extended to a 2-distance 20-coloring ϕ\phi of GG. This implies that χ2(G)20\chi_{2}(G)\leq 20, which is a contradiction. The essence of the proof is to construct a proper GG^{\prime} such that |Cϕ(v)|d2(v)19|C_{\phi}(v)|\leq d_{2}(v)\leq 19.

Lemma 2.1.

We have δ(G)3\delta(G)\geq 3.

Proof.

Assume that GG contains a 1-vertex vv. It is clear that G=GvG^{\prime}=G-v is proper with respect to GG. By the minimality of GG, GG^{\prime} has a 2-distance 20-coloring ϕ\phi^{\prime}. Let ϕ\phi be a coloring of GG such that every vertex in V(G)V(G), except for vv, is colored using ϕ\phi^{\prime}. Since Δ6\Delta\leq 6, it follows that |Cϕ(v)|6|C_{\phi}(v)|\leq 6 and |C||Cϕ(v)|14|C|-|C_{\phi}(v)|\geq 14. Therefore, there exists a safe color for vv. By coloring vv with the safe color, ϕ\phi becomes a 2-distance 20-coloring of GG, a contradiction. Next, we assume that GG has a 2-vertex vv with NG(v)={x,y}N_{G}(v)=\{x,y\}. Let G=Gv+{xy}G^{\prime}=G-v+\{xy\}. The graph GG^{\prime} is proper with respect to GG. By the minimality of GG, GG^{\prime} has a 2-distance 20-coloring ϕ\phi^{\prime}. Let ϕ\phi be a coloring of GG such that every vertex in V(G)V(G), except for vv, is colored using ϕ\phi^{\prime}. Since Δ6\Delta\leq 6, it follows that |Cϕ(v)|12|C_{\phi}(v)|\leq 12 and |C||Cϕ(v)|8|C|-|C_{\phi}(v)|\geq 8. Therefore, we can color vv with a safe color, a contradiction. ∎

Lemma 2.2.

Let vv be a 3-vertex. Then,

  1. (1)

    n5(v)=0n_{5^{-}}(v)=0,

  2. (2)

    m3(v)=0m_{3}(v)=0, and

  3. (3)

    m4(v)1m_{4}(v)\leq 1.

Proof.

Let v1v_{1}, v2v_{2}, and v3v_{3} be the neighbours of vv. (1) Assume that vv is adjacent to a 55^{-}-vertex. Without loss of generality, let v1v_{1} be a 55^{-}-vertex. Let G=Gv+{v1v2,v1v3}G^{\prime}=G-v+\{v_{1}v_{2},v_{1}v_{3}\}. The graph GG^{\prime} is proper with respect to GG. By the minimality of GG, GG^{\prime} has a 2-distance 20-coloring ϕ\phi^{\prime}. Let ϕ\phi be a coloring of GG such that every vertex in V(G)V(G), except for vv, is colored using ϕ\phi^{\prime}. Since Δ6\Delta\leq 6, it follows that |Cϕ(v)|17|C_{\phi}(v)|\leq 17 and |C||Cϕ(v)|3|C|-|C_{\phi}(v)|\geq 3. Therefore, there exists a safe color for vv. By coloring vv with the safe color, ϕ\phi becomes a 2-distance 20-coloring of GG, a contradiction.

(2) Assume that vv is incident to a 3-face [vv1v2][vv_{1}v_{2}]. Let G=Gv+{v1v3}G^{\prime}=G-v+\{v_{1}v_{3}\}. The graph GG^{\prime} is proper with respect to GG. By the minimality of GG, GG^{\prime} has a 2-distance 20-coloring ϕ\phi^{\prime}. Let ϕ\phi be a coloring of GG such that every vertex in V(G)V(G), except for vv, is colored using ϕ\phi^{\prime}. Since |Cϕ(v)|16|C_{\phi}(v)|\leq 16, we can color vv with a safe color, a contradiction.

(3) Assume that vv is incident to two 4-faces [vv1xv2][vv_{1}xv_{2}] and [vv2yv3][vv_{2}yv_{3}]. It is clear that G=Gv+{v1v3}G^{\prime}=G-v+\{v_{1}v_{3}\} is proper with respect to GG. By the minimality of GG, GG^{\prime} has a 2-distance 20-coloring ϕ\phi^{\prime}. Let ϕ\phi be a coloring of GG such that every vertex in V(G)V(G), except for vv, is colored using ϕ\phi^{\prime}. Since |Cϕ(v)|16|C_{\phi}(v)|\leq 16, we can color vv with a safe color, a contradiction. ∎

Lemma 2.3.

Let vv be a 4-vertex. Then m3(v)2m_{3}(v)\leq 2. In particular, if m3(v)=2m_{3}(v)=2, then m4(v)=0m_{4}(v)=0, n6(v)=4n_{6}(v)=4, and m3(w)4m_{3}(w)\leq 4 for any 6-vertex ww adjacent to vv.

Proof.

Let v1v_{1}, v2v_{2}, v3v_{3}, and v4v_{4} be the neighbours of vv in clockwise order. First, we show that m3(v)2m_{3}(v)\leq 2. Assume that vv is incident to three 3-faces [vv1v2][vv_{1}v_{2}], [vv2v3][vv_{2}v_{3}], and [vv3v4][vv_{3}v_{4}]. Let G=Gv+{v1v4}G^{\prime}=G-v+\{v_{1}v_{4}\}. The graph GG^{\prime} is proper with respect to GG. By the minimality of GG, GG^{\prime} has a 2-distance 20-coloring ϕ\phi^{\prime}. Let ϕ\phi be a coloring of GG such that every vertex in V(G)V(G), except for vv, is colored using ϕ\phi^{\prime}. Since Δ6\Delta\leq 6, it follows that |Cϕ(v)|18|C_{\phi}(v)|\leq 18 and |C||Cϕ(v)|2|C|-|C_{\phi}(v)|\geq 2. Therefore, there exists a safe color for vv. By coloring vv with the safe color, ϕ\phi becomes a 2-distance 20-coloring of GG, a contradiction.

Now, we consider the case m3(v)=2m_{3}(v)=2. Let f1f_{1} and f2f_{2} be two 3-faces incident to vv. First, we show that m4(v)=0m_{4}(v)=0. Assume that vv is incident to a 4-face [vv1xv2][vv_{1}xv_{2}]. If f1f_{1} and f2f_{2} are adjacent, say f1=[vv2v3]f_{1}=[vv_{2}v_{3}] and f2=[vv3v4]f_{2}=[vv_{3}v_{4}], then let G=Gv+{v1v4}G^{\prime}=G-v+\{v_{1}v_{4}\}. If f1f_{1} and f2f_{2} are not adjacent, say f1=[vv2v3]f_{1}=[vv_{2}v_{3}] and f2=[vv4v1]f_{2}=[vv_{4}v_{1}], then let G=Gv+{v3v4}G^{\prime}=G-v+\{v_{3}v_{4}\}. In both cases, GG^{\prime} is proper with respect to GG and by the minimality of GG, GG^{\prime} has a 2-distance 20-coloring ϕ\phi^{\prime}. Let ϕ\phi be a coloring of GG such that every vertex in V(G)V(G), except for vv, is colored using ϕ\phi^{\prime}. Since |Cϕ(v)|19|C_{\phi}(v)|\leq 19 in each case, we can color vv with a safe color, a contradiction.

Next, we prove that n6(v)=4n_{6}(v)=4. Assume that vv is incident to a 55^{-}-vertex. Without loss of generality, let v1v_{1} be a 55^{-}-vertex. If f1f_{1} and f2f_{2} are adjacent, say f1=[vv1v2]f_{1}=[vv_{1}v_{2}] and f2=[vv2v3]f_{2}=[vv_{2}v_{3}], then let G=Gv+{v2v4}G^{\prime}=G-v+\{v_{2}v_{4}\}. If f1f_{1} and f2f_{2} are not adjacent, say f1=[vv1v2]f_{1}=[vv_{1}v_{2}] and f2=[vv3v4]f_{2}=[vv_{3}v_{4}], then let G=Gv+{v2v3,v4v1}G^{\prime}=G-v+\{v_{2}v_{3},v_{4}v_{1}\}. In both cases, GG^{\prime} is proper with respect to GG and d2(v)19d_{2}(v)\leq 19, a contradiction.

Finally, we prove that m3(w)4m_{3}(w)\leq 4 for any 6-vertex ww adjacent to vv. To show that ww cannot be incident to more than five 3-faces, it suffices to prove that no edge in G[NG(v)]G[N_{G}(v)] is contained in two 3-faces of GG. Let f1=[vv1v2]f_{1}=[vv_{1}v_{2}]. Assume that the edge v1v2v_{1}v_{2} is contained in two 3-faces of GG. This implies that there exists a vertex xx such that xx is a common neighbour of v1v_{1} and v2v_{2}. If f1f_{1} and f2f_{2} are adjacent, say f2=[vv2v3]f_{2}=[vv_{2}v_{3}], then let G=Gv+{v2v4}G^{\prime}=G-v+\{v_{2}v_{4}\}. If f1f_{1} and f2f_{2} are not adjacent, say f2=[vv3v4]f_{2}=[vv_{3}v_{4}], then let G=Gv+{v2v3,v4v1}G^{\prime}=G-v+\{v_{2}v_{3},v_{4}v_{1}\}. In both cases, GG^{\prime} is proper with respect to GG and d2(v)19d_{2}(v)\leq 19, a contradiction. ∎

Lemma 2.4.

Let vv be a 4-vertex with m3(v)=1m_{3}(v)=1. Then m4(v)2m_{4}(v)\leq 2. In particular, if 1m4(v)21\leq m_{4}(v)\leq 2, then n4(v)=0n_{4}(v)=0, and n5(v)1n_{5}(v)\leq 1.

Proof.

Let v1v_{1}, v2v_{2}, v3v_{3}, and v4v_{4} be the neighbours of vv in clockwise order and let [vv1v2][vv_{1}v_{2}] be a 3-face incident to vv. First, we show that m4(v)2m_{4}(v)\leq 2. Assume that vv is incident to three 4-faces [vv2xv3][vv_{2}xv_{3}], [vv3yv4][vv_{3}yv_{4}], and [vv4zv1][vv_{4}zv_{1}]. Let G=Gv+{v2v3,v1v4}G^{\prime}=G-v+\{v_{2}v_{3},v_{1}v_{4}\}. The graph GG^{\prime} is proper with respect to GG. By the minimality of GG, GG^{\prime} has a 2-distance 20-coloring ϕ\phi^{\prime}. Let ϕ\phi be a coloring of GG such that every vertex in V(G)V(G), except for vv, is colored using ϕ\phi^{\prime}. Since Δ6\Delta\leq 6, it follows that |Cϕ(v)|19|C_{\phi}(v)|\leq 19 and |C||Cϕ(v)|1|C|-|C_{\phi}(v)|\geq 1. Therefore, there exists a safe color for vv. By coloring vv with the safe color, ϕ\phi becomes a 2-distance 20-coloring of GG, a contradiction.

Now, we suppose that m4(v)=2m_{4}(v)=2. Let f1f_{1} and f2f_{2} be two 4-faces incident to vv. First, we prove that n4(v)=0n_{4}(v)=0. Assume that vv is adjacent to a 4-vertex. Let v1v_{1} be a 4-vertex. Regardless of whether f1f_{1} and f2f_{2} are adjacent, let G=Gv+{v1v3,v1v4}G^{\prime}=G-v+\{v_{1}v_{3},v_{1}v_{4}\}. (If a vertex viNG(v)v_{i}\in N_{G}(v) other than v1v_{1} is a 4-vertex, then we construct GG^{\prime} by deleting vv and adding edges from viv_{i} to each neighbour vjv_{j} of vv with vivjE(G)v_{i}v_{j}\notin E(G).) The graph GG^{\prime} is proper with respect to GG. By the minimality of GG, GG^{\prime} has a 2-distance 20 coloring ϕ\phi^{\prime}. Let ϕ\phi be a coloring of GG such that every vertex in V(G)V(G), except for vv, is colored using ϕ\phi^{\prime}. Since |Cϕ(v)|18|C_{\phi}(v)|\leq 18, there exists a safe color for vv, a contradiction. Second, we show that n5(v)1n_{5}(v)\leq 1. Assume that vv is adjacent to two 5-vertices. There are six possible arrangements of two 5-vertices among the four neighbors of vv. Regardless of whether f1f_{1} and f2f_{2} are adjacent, the construction of GG^{\prime} depends on which neighbours of vv are the two 5-vertices. If v1v_{1} is one of the two 5-vertices, then we construct G=Gv+{v1v3,v1v4}G^{\prime}=G-v+\{v_{1}v_{3},v_{1}v_{4}\}. Similarly, if v2v_{2} is one of the two 5-vertices, then we construct G=Gv+{v2v3,v2v4}G^{\prime}=G-v+\{v_{2}v_{3},v_{2}v_{4}\}. Otherwise, if v3v_{3} and v4v_{4} are two 5-vertices, then we construct G=Gv+{v2v3,v3v4,v4v1}G^{\prime}=G-v+\{v_{2}v_{3},v_{3}v_{4},v_{4}v_{1}\}. In all cases, GG^{\prime} is proper with respect to GG. By the minimality of GG, GG^{\prime} has a 2-distance 20-coloring ϕ\phi^{\prime}. Let ϕ\phi be a coloring of GG such that every vertex in V(G)V(G), except for vv, is colored using ϕ\phi^{\prime}. Since |Cϕ(v)|18|C_{\phi}(v)|\leq 18, we can color vv with a safe color, a contradiction.

Next, we suppose that m4(v)=1m_{4}(v)=1. Let f1f_{1} be a 4-face incident to vv. The proof of n4(v)=0n_{4}(v)=0 is similar to the proof when we supposed that m4(v)=2m_{4}(v)=2. Assume that vv is adjacent to a 4-vertex and let v1v_{1} be a 4-vertex. We construct GG^{\prime} in the same way as before, regardless of the position of f1f_{1}: G=Gv+{v1v3,v1v4}G^{\prime}=G-v+\{v_{1}v_{3},v_{1}v_{4}\}. The graph GG^{\prime} is proper with respect to GG. By the minimality of GG, GG^{\prime} has a 2-distance 20-coloring ϕ\phi^{\prime}. Let ϕ\phi be a coloring of GG such that every vertex in V(G)V(G), except for vv, is colored using ϕ\phi^{\prime}. The only difference is that, in this case, |Cϕ(v)|19|C_{\phi}(v)|\leq 19. We can color vv with a safe color, a contradiction. Finally, we prove that n5(v)1n_{5}(v)\leq 1. Assume that vv is adjacent to two 5-vertices. There are six possible arrangements of two 5-vertices among the four neighbors of vv. We consider two cases based on the position of f1f_{1}. Case 1: f1=[vv2xv3]f_{1}=[vv_{2}xv_{3}]. If v1v_{1} is one of the two 5-vertices, then we construct G=Gv+{v1v3,v1v4}G^{\prime}=G-v+\{v_{1}v_{3},v_{1}v_{4}\}. Similarly, if v2v_{2} is one of the two 5-vertices, then we construct G=Gv+{v2v3,v2v4}G^{\prime}=G-v+\{v_{2}v_{3},v_{2}v_{4}\}. Otherwise, if v3v_{3} and v4v_{4} are the two 5-vertices, then we construct G=Gv+{v2v3,v3v4,v4v1}G^{\prime}=G-v+\{v_{2}v_{3},v_{3}v_{4},v_{4}v_{1}\}. Case 2: f1=[vv3xv4]f_{1}=[vv_{3}xv_{4}]. In this case, we construct G=Gv+{v2v3,v4v1}G^{\prime}=G-v+\{v_{2}v_{3},v_{4}v_{1}\}, regardless of which neighbours of vv are the two 5-vertices. In all cases, GG^{\prime} is proper with respect to GG. Since d2(v)19d_{2}(v)\leq 19, there exists a safe color for vv, a contradiction. ∎

Now, we discuss the properties of a 5-vertex in GG. Let vv be a 5-vertex and let v1,v2,,v5v_{1},v_{2},\ldots,v_{5} be the neighbours of vv in clockwise order.

Lemma 2.5.

Let vv be a 5-vertex. If m3(v)=5m_{3}(v)=5, then n6(v)=5n_{6}(v)=5 and m3(w)4m_{3}(w)\leq 4 for any 6-vertex ww adjacent to vv.

Proof.

Suppose that vv is incident to five 3-faces. First, we show that n6(v)=5n_{6}(v)=5. Assume that vv is adjacent to a 55^{-}-vertex. Without loss of generality, let v1v_{1} be a 55^{-}-vertex. It is clear that G=GvG^{\prime}=G-v is proper with respect to GG. By the minimality of GG, GG^{\prime} has a 2-distance 20-coloring ϕ\phi^{\prime}. Let ϕ\phi be a coloring of GG such that every vertex in V(G)V(G), except for vv, is colored using ϕ\phi^{\prime}. Since Δ6\Delta\leq 6, it follows that |Cϕ(v)|19|C_{\phi}(v)|\leq 19 and |C||Cϕ(v)|1|C|-|C_{\phi}(v)|\geq 1. Therefore, there exists a safe color for vv. By coloring vv with the safe color, ϕ\phi becomes a 2-distance 20-coloring of GG, a contradiction.

Next, we prove that m3(w)4m_{3}(w)\leq 4 for any 6-vertex ww adjacent to vv. To show that ww cannot be incident to more than five 3-faces, it suffices to prove that no edge in G[NG(v)]G[N_{G}(v)] is contained in two 3-faces of GG. Without loss of generality, we assume that the edge v1v2v_{1}v_{2} is contained in two 3-faces. This implies that there exists a vertex xx such that xx is a common neighbour of v1v_{1} and v2v_{2}. It is clear that G=GvG^{\prime}=G-v is proper with respect to GG. Since d2(v)19d_{2}(v)\leq 19, there exists a safe color for vv, a contradiction. ∎

Lemma 2.6.

Let vv be a 5-vertex with m3(v)=4m_{3}(v)=4 and m4(v)m_{4}(v) = 1. Then n4(v)=0n_{4^{-}}(v)=0, n5(v)1n_{5}(v)\leq 1, and m3(w)5m_{3}(w)\leq 5 for any 6-vertex ww adjacent to vv.

Proof.

Suppose that vv is incident to four 3-faces [vv1v2][vv_{1}v_{2}], [vv2v3][vv_{2}v_{3}], [vv3v4][vv_{3}v_{4}], [vv4v5][vv_{4}v_{5}], and one 4-face [vv5xv1][vv_{5}xv_{1}]. First, we show that n4(v)=0n_{4^{-}}(v)=0. By Lemma 2.2(1), vv is not adjacent to any 3-vertex. Thus it suffices to show that vv is not adjacent to any 4-vertex. Assume that vv is adjacent to a 4-vertex. Let G=Gv+{v5v1}G^{\prime}=G-v+\{v_{5}v_{1}\}. The graph GG^{\prime} is proper with respect to GG. By the minimality of GG, GG^{\prime} has a 2-distance 20-coloring ϕ\phi^{\prime}. Let ϕ\phi be a coloring of GG such that every vertex in V(G)V(G), except for vv, is colored using ϕ\phi^{\prime}. Since Δ6\Delta\leq 6, it follows that |Cϕ(v)|19|C_{\phi}(v)|\leq 19 and |C||Cϕ(v)|1|C|-|C_{\phi}(v)|\geq 1. Therefore, there exists a safe color for vv. By coloring vv with the safe color, ϕ\phi becomes a 2-distance 20-coloring of GG, a contradiction.

Next, we assume that vv is incident to two 5-vertices. It is clear that G=Gv+{v5v1}G^{\prime}=G-v+\{v_{5}v_{1}\} is proper with respect to GG. By the minimality of GG, GG^{\prime} has a 2-distance 20-coloring ϕ\phi^{\prime}. Let ϕ\phi be a coloring of GG such that every vertex in V(G)V(G), except for vv, is colored using ϕ\phi^{\prime}. Since |Cϕ(v)|19|C_{\phi}(v)|\leq 19, we can color vv with a safe color, a contradiction. Thus n5(v)1n_{5}(v)\leq 1 holds. This implies that n6(v)4n_{6}(v)\geq 4.

Finally, we prove that m3(w)5m_{3}(w)\leq 5 for any 6-vertex ww adjacent to vv. Assume that v1v_{1} is a 6-vertex. Since v1v_{1} is incident to a 4-face, v1v_{1} can be incident to at most five 3-faces. By symmetry, the same holds if we assume that v5v_{5} is a 6-vertex. Next, we prove that if v2v_{2}, v3v_{3}, or v4v_{4} is a 6-vertex, then it can be incident to at most five 3-faces. Without loss of generality, we assume that v2v_{2} is a 6-vertex and is incident to six 3-faces. In this case, each of the edges v1v2v_{1}v_{2} and v2v3v_{2}v_{3} is contained in two 3-faces. Let G=Gv+{v1v5}G^{\prime}=G-v+\{v_{1}v_{5}\}. The graph GG^{\prime} is proper with respect to GG. Since d2(v)19d_{2}(v)\leq 19, there exists a safe color for vv, a contradiction. ∎

Lemma 2.7.

Let vv be a 5-vertex with m3(v)=4m_{3}(v)=4 and m5+(v)m_{5^{+}}(v) = 1. Then n3(v)=0n_{3}(v)=0, n4(v)1n_{4}(v)\leq 1, and n5(v)2n_{5}(v)\leq 2. In particular, if n4(v)=1n_{4}(v)=1, then n5(v)=0n_{5}(v)=0.

Proof.

Suppose that vv is incident to four 3-faces [vv1v2][vv_{1}v_{2}], [vv2v3][vv_{2}v_{3}], [vv3v4][vv_{3}v_{4}], [vv4v5][vv_{4}v_{5}], and one 5+5^{+}-face that contains v1v_{1} and v5v_{5}. Obviously, we have n3(v)=0n_{3}(v)=0 by Lemma 2.2(1). Now, we show that n4(v)1n_{4}(v)\leq 1. Assume that vv is adjacent to two 4-vertices. Let G=Gv+{v1v5}G^{\prime}=G-v+\{v_{1}v_{5}\}. The graph GG^{\prime} is proper with respect to GG. By the minimality of GG, GG^{\prime} has a 2-distance 20-coloring ϕ\phi^{\prime}. Let ϕ\phi be a coloring of GG such that every vertex in V(G)V(G), except for vv, is colored using ϕ\phi^{\prime}. Since Δ6\Delta\leq 6, it follows that |Cϕ(v)|18|C_{\phi}(v)|\leq 18 and |C||Cϕ(v)|2|C|-|C_{\phi}(v)|\geq 2. Therefore, there exists a safe color for vv. By coloring vv with the safe color, ϕ\phi becomes a 2-distance 20-coloring of GG, a contradiction.

Next, we prove that n5(v)2n_{5}(v)\leq 2. Assume that vv is adjacent to three 5-vertices. It is clear that G=Gv+{v1v5}G^{\prime}=G-v+\{v_{1}v_{5}\} is proper with respect to GG. By the minimality of GG, GG^{\prime} has a 2-distance 20-coloring ϕ\phi^{\prime}. Let ϕ\phi be a coloring of GG such that every vertex in V(G)V(G), except for vv, is colored using ϕ\phi^{\prime}. Since |Cϕ(v)|19|C_{\phi}(v)|\leq 19, we can color vv with a safe color, a contradiction.

Finally, we consider the case n4(v)=1n_{4}(v)=1. Assume that vv is adjacent to a 5-vertex. Obviously, G=Gv+{v1v5}G^{\prime}=G-v+\{v_{1}v_{5}\} is proper with respect to GG. Since d2(v)19d_{2}(v)\leq 19, there exists a safe color for vv, a contradiction. ∎

Lemma 2.8.

Let vv be a 5-vertex with m3(v)=4m_{3}(v)=4 and m5+(v)m_{5^{+}}(v) = 1. Then the number of 4-vertices, 5-vertices, and 6-vertices adjacent to vv must be one of the following:

  1. (a)

    (n4(v)n_{4}(v), n5(v)n_{5}(v), n6(v)n_{6}(v)) = (1, 0, 4),

  2. (b)

    (n4(v)n_{4}(v), n5(v)n_{5}(v), n6(v)n_{6}(v)) = (0, 2, 3),

  3. (c)

    (n4(v)n_{4}(v), n5(v)n_{5}(v), n6(v)n_{6}(v)) = (0, 1, 4), or

  4. (d)

    (n4(v)n_{4}(v), n5(v)n_{5}(v), n6(v)n_{6}(v)) = (0, 0, 5).

Moreover, let ww be any 6-vertex adjacent to vv. Then the following hold:

  1. (1)

    If vv is in case (a), then m3(w)4m_{3}(w)\leq 4.

  2. (2)

    If vv is in case (b), then m3(w)4m_{3}(w)\leq 4.

  3. (3)

    If vv is in case (c), then there exists at least one 6-vertex ww with m3(w)5m_{3}(w)\leq 5.

  4. (4)

    If vv is in case (d), then there exist at least two 6-vertices w1w_{1}, w2w_{2} with m3(w1)5m_{3}(w_{1})\leq 5 and m3(w2)5m_{3}(w_{2})\leq 5.

Proof.

The first statement of the lemma follows directly from Lemma 2.7. We now prove the remaining statements, from (1) to (4). Suppose that vv is incident to four 3-faces [vv1v2][vv_{1}v_{2}], [vv2v3][vv_{2}v_{3}], [vv3v4][vv_{3}v_{4}], [vv4v5][vv_{4}v_{5}], and one 5+5^{+}-face that contains v1v_{1} and v5v_{5}.

(1) To show that ww cannot be incident to more than five 3-faces, it suffices to prove that no edge in G[NG(v)]G[N_{G}(v)] is contained in two 3-faces of GG. Assume that the edge v1v2v_{1}v_{2} is contained in two 3-faces. It is clear that G=Gv+{v5v1}G^{\prime}=G-v+\{v_{5}v_{1}\} is proper with respect to GG. By the minimality of GG, GG^{\prime} has a 2-distance 20-coloring ϕ\phi^{\prime}. Let ϕ\phi be a coloring of GG such that every vertex in V(G)V(G), except for vv, is colored using ϕ\phi^{\prime}. Since n4(v)=1n_{4}(v)=1 and n6(v)=4n_{6}(v)=4, it follows that |Cϕ(v)|19|C_{\phi}(v)|\leq 19 and |C||Cϕ(v)|1|C|-|C_{\phi}(v)|\geq 1. Therefore, there exists a safe color for vv. By coloring vv with the safe color, ϕ\phi becomes a 2-distance 20-coloring of GG, a contradiction.

(2) The proof is similar to that of (1). To show that ww cannot be incident to more than five 3-faces, it suffices to prove that no edge in G[NG(v)]G[N_{G}(v)] is contained in two 3-faces of GG. Assume that the edge v1v2v_{1}v_{2} is contained in two 3-faces. As in (1), let G=Gv+{v5v1}G^{\prime}=G-v+\{v_{5}v_{1}\}, which is proper with respect to GG. By the minimality of GG, GG^{\prime} has a 2-distance 20-coloring ϕ\phi^{\prime}. Let ϕ\phi be a coloring of GG such that every vertex in V(G)V(G), except for vv, is colored using ϕ\phi^{\prime}. In case (b), we have n5(v)=2n_{5}(v)=2 and n6(v)=3n_{6}(v)=3, which leads to |Cϕ(v)|19|C_{\phi}(v)|\leq 19. Therefore, there exists a safe color for vv. By coloring vv with the safe color, ϕ\phi becomes a 2-distance 20-coloring of GG, a contradiction.

(3) In case (c), we have n5(v)=1n_{5}(v)=1 and n6(v)=4n_{6}(v)=4. It follows that at least one of v1v_{1} and v5v_{5} must be a 6-vertex. Let ww be such a 6-vertex. Since ww is incident to one 5+5^{+}-face, it can be incident to at most five 3-faces. Therefore, (3) holds.

(4) In case (d), all neighbours of vv are 6-vertices. It follows that both v1v_{1} and v5v_{5} are 6-vertices. Let w1=v1w_{1}=v_{1} and w2=v5w_{2}=v_{5}. Since each of w1w_{1} and w2w_{2} is incident to one 5+5^{+}-face, it can be incident to at most five 3-faces. Therefore, (4) holds. ∎

Next, we examine the properties of a 6-vertex in GG. Let vv be a 6-vertex and let v1,v2,,v6v_{1},v_{2},\ldots,v_{6} be the neighbours of vv in clockwise order.

Refer to caption
Refer to caption
Figure 1: Illustrations of Lemma 2.9(4.3).
Lemma 2.9.

Let vv be a 6-vertex with m3(v)=5m_{3}(v)=5 and m4(v)=1m_{4}(v)=1 and let uu be any 5-vertex adjacent to vv. Then the following hold:

  1. (1)

    n4(v)2n_{4}(v)\leq 2.

  2. (2)

    If n4(v)=2n_{4}(v)=2, then n5(v)1n_{5}(v)\leq 1.

  3. (3)

    If n4(v)=1n_{4}(v)=1, then n5(v)3n_{5}(v)\leq 3. Moreover, if n5(v)=3n_{5}(v)=3, then m3(u)3m_{3}(u)\leq 3.

  4. (4)

    If n4(v)=0n_{4}(v)=0, then n5(v)5n_{5}(v)\leq 5. Moreover, the following hold:

    1. (4.1)

      If n5(v)=5n_{5}(v)=5, then m3(u)3m_{3}(u)\leq 3.

    2. (4.2)

      If n5(v)=4n_{5}(v)=4, then there exist at most two 5-vertices uu with m3(u)4m_{3}(u)\geq 4.

    3. (4.3)

      If n5(v)=3n_{5}(v)=3, then there exist at most two 5-vertices uu with m3(u)4m_{3}(u)\geq 4.

Proof.

Suppose that vv is incident to five 3-faces [vv1v2][vv_{1}v_{2}], [vv2v3][vv_{2}v_{3}], [vv3v4][vv_{3}v_{4}], [vv4v5][vv_{4}v_{5}], [vv5v6][vv_{5}v_{6}], and one 4-face [vv6xx1][vv_{6}xx_{1}]. By Lemma 2.2(2), vv is not adjacent to any 3-vertex.

(1) In the proof of Lemma 2.3, we showed that if vv is a 4-vertex with m3(v)=2m_{3}(v)=2, then no edge in G[NG(v)]G[N_{G}(v)] is contained in two 3-faces. Thus v2v_{2}, v3v_{3}, v4v_{4}, and v5v_{5} cannot be 4-vertices. Among the neighbours of vv, at most two vertices, namely, v1v_{1} and v6v_{6}, can be 4-vertices.

(2) We suppose that v1v_{1} and v6v_{6} are 4-vertices. Assume that vv is adjacent to two 5-vertices. Let G=Gv+{v1v3,v1v5,v1v6}G^{\prime}=G-v+\{v_{1}v_{3},v_{1}v_{5},v_{1}v_{6}\}. The graph GG^{\prime} is proper with respect to GG. By the minimality of GG, GG^{\prime} has a 2-distance 20-coloring ϕ\phi^{\prime}. Let ϕ\phi be a coloring of GG such that every vertex in V(G)V(G), except for vv, is colored using ϕ\phi^{\prime}. Since Δ6\Delta\leq 6, it follows that |Cϕ(v)|19|C_{\phi}(v)|\leq 19 and |C||Cϕ(v)|1|C|-|C_{\phi}(v)|\geq 1. Therefore, there exists a safe color for vv. By coloring vv with the safe color, ϕ\phi becomes a 2-distance 20-coloring of GG, a contradiction.

(3) Without loss of generality, we suppose that v1v_{1} is a 4-vertex. Assume that vv is adjacent to four 5-vertices. The graph G=Gv+{v1v3,v1v5,v1v6}G^{\prime}=G-v+\{v_{1}v_{3},v_{1}v_{5},v_{1}v_{6}\} is proper with respect to GG. By the minimality of GG, GG^{\prime} has a 2-distance 20-coloring ϕ\phi^{\prime}. Let ϕ\phi be a coloring of GG such that every vertex in V(G)V(G), except for vv, is colored using ϕ\phi^{\prime}. Since |Cϕ(v)|19|C_{\phi}(v)|\leq 19, we can color vv with a safe color, a contradiction.

Now, we consider the case n5(v)n_{5}(v) = 3. To show that any 5-vertex uu adjacent to vv cannot be incident to more than four 3-faces, it suffices to prove that no edge in G[NG(v)]G[N_{G}(v)] is contained in two 3-faces of GG. Assume that the edge v1v2v_{1}v_{2} is contained in two 3-faces. Let G=Gv+{v1v3,v1v5,v1v6}G^{\prime}=G-v+\{v_{1}v_{3},v_{1}v_{5},v_{1}v_{6}\}. The graph GG^{\prime} is proper with respect to GG. Since d2(v)19d_{2}(v)\leq 19, there exists a safe color for vv, a contradiction.

(4) We suppose that vv is not adjacent to any 4-vertex. Assume that all neighbours of vv are 5-vertices. Let G=Gv+{v6v1,v3v1,v3v5}G^{\prime}=G-v+\{v_{6}v_{1},v_{3}v_{1},v_{3}v_{5}\}. The graph GG^{\prime} is proper with respect to GG. By the minimality of GG, GG^{\prime} has a 2-distance 20-coloring ϕ\phi^{\prime}. Since d2(v)19d_{2}(v)\leq 19, there exists a safe color for vv, a contradiction.

(4.1) Suppose that vv is adjacent to five 5-vertices. To show that any 5-vertex uu adjacent to vv cannot be incident to more than four 3-faces, it suffices to prove that no edge in G[NG(v)]G[N_{G}(v)] is contained in two 3-faces of GG. Assume that the edge v1v2v_{1}v_{2} is contained in two 3-faces. There are six possibilities for which neighbours of vv is a 6-vertex. Due to symmetry, it suffices to consider the cases where v1v_{1}, v2v_{2}, or v3v_{3} is a 6-vertex. In each of these cases, let G=Gv+{v6v1,v4v2,v4v6}G^{\prime}=G-v+\{v_{6}v_{1},v_{4}v_{2},v_{4}v_{6}\}. Then GG^{\prime} is proper with respect to GG. Since d2(v)19d_{2}(v)\leq 19, there exists a safe color for vv, a contradiction.

(4.2) Suppose that vv is adjacent to four 5-vertices. We consider two cases based on whether both v1v_{1} and v6v_{6} are 6-vertices or not. First, we show that if v1v_{1} and v6v_{6} are both 6-vertices, then m3(v3)3m_{3}(v_{3})\leq 3 and m3(v4)3m_{3}(v_{4})\leq 3. By symmetry, we only need to consider v3v_{3}. Let v7v_{7} and v8v_{8} be the neighbours of v3v_{3} other than vv, v2v_{2}, and v4v_{4}. Assume that v3v_{3} is incident to four 3-faces. We have two cases: Case 1: The four 3-faces are [vv2v3][vv_{2}v_{3}], [vv3v4][vv_{3}v_{4}], [v2v7v3][v_{2}v_{7}v_{3}], and [v3v8v4][v_{3}v_{8}v_{4}]. Case 2: The four 3-faces are [vv2v3][vv_{2}v_{3}], [vv3v4][vv_{3}v_{4}], [v2v7v3][v_{2}v_{7}v_{3}], and [v3v7v8][v_{3}v_{7}v_{8}]. In Case 1, let G=Gv3+{v7v8}G^{\prime}=G-v_{3}+\{v_{7}v_{8}\}. In Case 2, let G=Gv3+{v8v4}G^{\prime}=G-v_{3}+\{v_{8}v_{4}\}. In each case, GG^{\prime} is proper with respect to GG. By the minimality of GG, GG^{\prime} has a 2-distance 20-coloring ϕ\phi^{\prime}. Let ϕ\phi be a coloring of GG such that every vertex in V(G)V(G), except for v3v_{3}, is colored using ϕ\phi^{\prime}. Since |Cϕ(v3)|18|C_{\phi}(v_{3})|\leq 18, we can color v3v_{3} with a safe color, a contradiction. Therefore, if v1v_{1} and v6v_{6} are 6-vertices, then there are at most two 5-vertices uu adjacent to vv with m3(u)4m_{3}(u)\geq 4, namely v2v_{2} and v5v_{5}.

Next, we discuss the case where v1v_{1} is not a 6-vertex or v6v_{6} is not a 6-vertex. To show that there exist at most two 5-vertices uu adjacent to vv with m3(u)4m_{3}(u)\geq 4, it suffices to prove that at most one edge in G[NG(v)]G[N_{G}(v)] is contained in two 3-faces of GG. Assume that two edges vivi+1v_{i}v_{i+1} and vjvj+1v_{j}v_{j+1} for i,j{1,2,3,4,5}i,j\in\{1,2,3,4,5\} with iji\neq j are contained in two 3-faces. If v1v_{1} and v2v_{2} are 6-vertices, then we construct G=Gv+{v2v4,v4v6,v6v1}G^{\prime}=G-v+\{v_{2}v_{4},v_{4}v_{6},v_{6}v_{1}\}. (Otherwise, we construct GG^{\prime} as follows: remove vv, add the edge v6v1v_{6}v_{1}, and choose one 5-vertex viv_{i} in the neighbourhood of vv other than v1v_{1} and v6v_{6}, and connect viv_{i} to the two vertices in the neighbourhood of vv that are at distance two from viv_{i}.) The graph GG^{\prime} is proper with respect to GG. Since d2(v)19d_{2}(v)\leq 19, there exists a safe color for vv, a contradiction.

(4.3) Suppose that vv is adjacent to three 5-vertices. There are twenty possible combinations of three 5-vertices. However, by symmetry, we only discuss ten cases: (see Figure 1.) Case 1: The three 5-vertices are v4v_{4}, v5v_{5}, and v6v_{6}. Case 2: The three 5-vertices are v3v_{3}, v5v_{5}, and v6v_{6}. Case 3: The three 5-vertices are v3v_{3}, v4v_{4}, and v6v_{6}. Case 4: The three 5-vertices are v3v_{3}, v4v_{4}, and v5v_{5}. Case 5: The three 5-vertices are v2v_{2}, v5v_{5}, and v6v_{6}. Case 6: The three 5-vertices are v2v_{2}, v4v_{4}, and v6v_{6}. Case 7: The three 5-vertices are v2v_{2}, v4v_{4}, and v5v_{5}. Case 8: The three 5-vertices are v2v_{2}, v3v_{3}, and v6v_{6}. Case 9: The three 5-vertices are v1v_{1}, v5v_{5}, and v6v_{6}. Case 10: The three 5-vertices are v1v_{1}, v4v_{4}, and v6v_{6}.

First, we consider Cases 3, 4, and 7. We show that m3(v4)3m_{3}(v_{4})\leq 3 in these cases. Assume that v4v_{4} is incident to four 3-faces. Let v7v_{7} and v8v_{8} be the neighbours of v4v_{4} other than vv, v3v_{3}, and v5v_{5}. Since v4v_{4} is already incident to two 3-faces, namely [vv3v4][vv_{3}v_{4}] and [vv4v5][vv_{4}v_{5}], the remaining two 3-faces must be one of the following: (i) [v3v7v4][v_{3}v_{7}v_{4}] and [v4v8v5][v_{4}v_{8}v_{5}], or (ii) [v4v7v8][v_{4}v_{7}v_{8}] and [v4v8v5][v_{4}v_{8}v_{5}]. In case (i), we construct G=Gv4+{v7v8}G^{\prime}=G-v_{4}+\{v_{7}v_{8}\}. In case (ii), we construct G=Gv4+{v3v7}G^{\prime}=G-v_{4}+\{v_{3}v_{7}\}. The graph GG^{\prime} is proper with respect to GG. By the minimality of GG, GG^{\prime} has a 2-distance 20-coloring ϕ\phi^{\prime}. Let ϕ\phi be a coloring of GG such that every vertex in V(G)V(G), except for v4v_{4}, is colored using ϕ\phi^{\prime}. Since |Cϕ(v4)|19|C_{\phi}(v_{4})|\leq 19 in each case, we can color v4v_{4} with a safe color, a contradiction.

Next, we consider Cases 1, 2, 5, and 9. We prove that m3(v6)3m_{3}(v_{6})\leq 3 in these cases. Assume that v6v_{6} is incident to four 3-faces. It is clear that G=Gv6+{vx}G^{\prime}=G-v_{6}+\{vx\} is proper with respect to GG. Since d2(v6)19d_{2}(v_{6})\leq 19 in each case, there exists a safe color for v6v_{6}, a contradiction.

We can similarly show that m3(v3)3m_{3}(v_{3})\leq 3 in Case 8. Assume that v3v_{3} is incident to four 3-faces. Let v7v_{7} and v8v_{8} be the neighbours of v3v_{3} other than vv, v2v_{2}, and v4v_{4}. Since v3v_{3} is already incident to two 3-faces, namely [vv2v3][vv_{2}v_{3}] and [vv3v4][vv_{3}v_{4}], the remaining two 3-faces must be one of the following: (i) [v2v7v3][v_{2}v_{7}v_{3}] and [v3v8v4][v_{3}v_{8}v_{4}], or (ii) [v3v7v8][v_{3}v_{7}v_{8}] and [v3v8v4][v_{3}v_{8}v_{4}]. In case (i), we construct G=Gv3+{v7v8}G^{\prime}=G-v_{3}+\{v_{7}v_{8}\}. In case (ii), we construct G=Gv3+{v2v7}G^{\prime}=G-v_{3}+\{v_{2}v_{7}\}. The graph GG^{\prime} is proper with respect to GG. Since d2(v3)19d_{2}(v_{3})\leq 19 in each case, there exists a safe color for v3v_{3}, a contradiction.

Finally, we discuss Case 6 and Case 10. To show that there exist at most two 5-vertices uu adjacent to vv with m3(v)4m_{3}(v)\geq 4, it suffices to prove that at most two edges in G[NG(v)]G[N_{G}(v)] are contained in two 3-faces of GG. Assume that three edges in G[NG(v)]G[N_{G}(v)] are contained in two 3-faces. In each case, we construct G=Gv+{v2v4,v4v6,v6v1}G^{\prime}=G-v+\{v_{2}v_{4},v_{4}v_{6},v_{6}v_{1}\}. The graph GG^{\prime} is proper with respect to GG. Since d2(v)19d_{2}(v)\leq 19, there exists a safe color for vv, a contradiction. From the above, there are at most two 5-vertices uu adjacent to vv with m3(u)4m_{3}(u)\geq 4 in Case 1 through Case 10. ∎

Lemma 2.10.

Let vv be a 6-vertex with m3(v)=5m_{3}(v)=5 and m5+(v)=1m_{5^{+}}(v)=1 and let uu be any 5-vertex adjacent to vv. Then the following hold:

  1. (1)

    n4(v)2n_{4}(v)\leq 2.

  2. (2)

    If n4(v)=2n_{4}(v)=2, then n5(v)2n_{5}(v)\leq 2.

  3. (3)

    If n4(v)=1n_{4}(v)=1, then n5(v)4n_{5}(v)\leq 4. Moreover, if n5(v)=4n_{5}(v)=4, then m3(u)3m_{3}(u)\leq 3.

  4. (4)

    If n4(v)=0n_{4}(v)=0 and n5(v)=6n_{5}(v)=6, then m3(u)3m_{3}(u)\leq 3.

  5. (5)

    If n4(v)=0n_{4}(v)=0 and n5(v)=5n_{5}(v)=5, then there exist at most two 5-vertices uu with m3(u)4m_{3}(u)\geq 4.

Proof.

Suppose that vv is incident to five 3-faces [vv1v2][vv_{1}v_{2}], [vv2v3][vv_{2}v_{3}], [vv3v4][vv_{3}v_{4}], [vv4v5][vv_{4}v_{5}], [vv5v6][vv_{5}v_{6}], and one 5+5^{+}-face that contains v1v_{1} and v6v_{6}. By Lemma 2.2(2), vv is not adjacent to any 3-vertex.

(1) The proof is the same as that of Lemma 2.9(1). The vertices v1v_{1} and v6v_{6} can be 4-vertices.

(2) We suppose that v1v_{1} and v6v_{6} are 4-vertices. Assume that vv is adjacent to three 5-vertices. Regardless of which neighbours of vv other than v1v_{1} and v6v_{6} are the three 5-vertices, we construct G=Gv+{v1v3,v1v5,v1v6}G^{\prime}=G-v+\{v_{1}v_{3},v_{1}v_{5},v_{1}v_{6}\}. The graph GG^{\prime} is proper with respect to GG. By the minimality of GG, GG^{\prime} has a 2-distance 20-coloring ϕ\phi^{\prime}. Let ϕ\phi be a coloring of GG such that every vertex in V(G)V(G), except for vv, is colored using ϕ\phi^{\prime}. Since Δ6\Delta\leq 6, it follows that |Cϕ(v)|19|C_{\phi}(v)|\leq 19 and |C||Cϕ(v)|1|C|-|C_{\phi}(v)|\geq 1. Therefore, there exists a safe color for vv. By coloring vv with the safe color, ϕ\phi becomes a 2-distance 20-coloring of GG, a contradiction.

(3) Without loss of generality, we suppose that v1v_{1} is a 4-vertex. Assume that vv is adjacent to five 5-vertices. It is clear that G=Gv+{v1v3,v1v5,v1v6}G^{\prime}=G-v+\{v_{1}v_{3},v_{1}v_{5},v_{1}v_{6}\} is proper with respect to GG. By the minimality of GG, GG^{\prime} has a 2-distance 20-coloring ϕ\phi^{\prime}. Let ϕ\phi be a coloring of GG such that every vertex in V(G)V(G), except for vv, is colored using ϕ\phi^{\prime}. Since |Cϕ(v)|19|C_{\phi}(v)|\leq 19, we can color vv with a safe color, a contradiction. Now, we suppose that vv is adjacent to four 5-vertices. To show that any 5-vertex uu adjacent to vv cannot be incident to more than four 3-faces, it suffices to prove that no edge in G[NG(v)]G[N_{G}(v)] is contained in two 3-faces of GG. Assume that the edge v1v2v_{1}v_{2} is contained in two 3-faces. Let G=Gv+{v1v3,v1v5,v1v6}G^{\prime}=G-v+\{v_{1}v_{3},v_{1}v_{5},v_{1}v_{6}\}. Then GG^{\prime} is proper with respect to GG. Since d2(v)19d_{2}(v)\leq 19, there exists a safe color for vv, a contradiction.

(4) Suppose that all neighbours of vv are 5-vertices. To show that any 5-vertex uu adjacent to vv is incident to at most three 3-faces, it suffices to prove that no edge in G[NG(v)]G[N_{G}(v)] is contained in two 3-faces of GG. Assume that the edge v1v2v_{1}v_{2} is contained in two 3-faces. Let G=Gv+{v4v2,v4v6,v1v6}G^{\prime}=G-v+\{v_{4}v_{2},v_{4}v_{6},v_{1}v_{6}\}. Then GG^{\prime} is proper with respect to GG. Since d2(v)19d_{2}(v)\leq 19, there exists a safe color for vv, a contradiction.

(5) Suppose that vv is adjacent to five 5-vertices and one 6-vertex. To show that there exist at most two 5-vertices uu adjacent to vv with m3(u)4m_{3}(u)\geq 4, it suffices to prove that at most one edge in G[NG(v)]G[N_{G}(v)] is contained in two 3-faces of GG. Assume that two edges vivi+1v_{i}v_{i+1} and vjvj+1v_{j}v_{j+1} for i,j{1,2,3,4,5}i,j\in\{1,2,3,4,5\} with iji\neq j are contained in two 3-faces. Due to symmetry, it suffices to consider the cases where v1v_{1}, v2v_{2}, or v3v_{3} is a 6-vertex. In each of these cases, let G=Gv+{v4v2,v4v6,v1v6}G^{\prime}=G-v+\{v_{4}v_{2},v_{4}v_{6},v_{1}v_{6}\}. Then GG^{\prime} is proper with respect to GG. Since d2(v)19d_{2}(v)\leq 19, there exists a safe color for vv, a contradiction. ∎

From Lemma 2.11 to Lemma 2.13, let fi=[vvivi+1]f_{i}=[vv_{i}v_{i+1}] for i{1,2,,5}i\in\{1,2,\ldots,5\} and f6=[vv6v1]f_{6}=[vv_{6}v_{1}] be the 3-faces incident to vv.

Lemma 2.11.

Let vv be a 6-vertex with m3(v)=4m_{3}(v)=4 and m4(v)=2m_{4}(v)=2. Then the following hold:

  1. (1)

    n3(v)=0n_{3}(v)=0.

  2. (2)

    If n4(v)=1n_{4}(v)=1, then n5(v)4n_{5}(v)\leq 4.

  3. (3)

    If n5(v)=6n_{5}(v)=6, then m3(u)3m_{3}(u)\leq 3 for any 5-vertex uu adjacent to vv.

Proof.

We have three cases where vv is incident to four 3-faces and two 4-faces: Case 1: The 4-faces are [vv1xv2][vv_{1}xv_{2}] and [vv2yv3][vv_{2}yv_{3}], and the 3-faces are f3f_{3}, f4f_{4}, f5f_{5}, and f6f_{6}. Case 2: The 4-faces are [vv1xv2][vv_{1}xv_{2}] and [vv3yv4][vv_{3}yv_{4}], and the 3-faces are f2f_{2}, f4f_{4}, f5f_{5}, and f6f_{6}. Case 3: The 4-faces are [vv1xv2][vv_{1}xv_{2}] and [vv4yv5][vv_{4}yv_{5}], and the 3-faces are f2f_{2}, f3f_{3}, f5f_{5}, and f6f_{6}.

(1) By Lemma 2.2(2), a 3-vertex is not incident to any 3-face, and by Lemma 2.2(3), a 3-vertex is incident to at most one 4-face. Thus vv is not adjacent to any 3-vertex in each case.

(2) Suppose that vv is adjacent to one 4-vertex. Assume that all other neighbours of vv are 5-vertices. First, we consider Case 1. In the proof of Lemma 2.3, we showed that if vv is a 4-vertex with m3(v)=2m_{3}(v)=2, then no edge in G[NG(v)]G[N_{G}(v)] is contained in two 3-faces. Thus only v1v_{1}, v2v_{2}, or v3v_{3} can be a 4-vertex. In each case, let G=Gv+{v1v2,v2v3,v3v5,v5v1}G^{\prime}=G-v+\{v_{1}v_{2},v_{2}v_{3},v_{3}v_{5},v_{5}v_{1}\}. Then GG^{\prime} is proper with respect to GG. By the minimality of GG, GG^{\prime} has a 2-distance 20-coloring ϕ\phi^{\prime}. Let ϕ\phi be a coloring of GG such that every vertex in V(G)V(G), except for vv, is colored using ϕ\phi^{\prime}. Since |Cϕ(v)|19|C_{\phi}(v)|\leq 19 and |C||Cϕ(v)|1|C|-|C_{\phi}(v)|\geq 1, there exists a safe color for vv. By coloring vv with the safe color, ϕ\phi becomes a 2-distance 20-coloring of GG, a contradiction.

Next, we consider Case 2. For the same reason, only v1v_{1}, v2v_{2}, v3v_{3}, or v4v_{4} can be a 4-vertex. In each case, let G=Gv+{v1v2,v3v4,v3v5,v5v1}G^{\prime}=G-v+\{v_{1}v_{2},v_{3}v_{4},v_{3}v_{5},v_{5}v_{1}\}. Then GG^{\prime} is proper with respect to GG. Since d2(v)19d_{2}(v)\leq 19, there exists a safe color for vv, a contradiction.

Finally, we consider Case 3. Each neighbour of vv can be a 4-vertex. By symmetry, it suffices to consider the cases where v1v_{1} or v3v_{3} is a 4-vertex. In each case, let G=Gv+{v1v2,v4v5,v1v3,v3v5}G^{\prime}=G-v+\{v_{1}v_{2},v_{4}v_{5},v_{1}v_{3},v_{3}v_{5}\}. Then GG^{\prime} is proper with respect to GG. Since d2(v)19d_{2}(v)\leq 19, there exists a safe color for vv, a contradiction.

(3) Suppose that all neighbours of vv are 5-vertices. To show that any 5-vertex uu adjacent to vv cannot be incident to more than four 3-faces, it suffices to prove that no edge in G[NG(v)]G[N_{G}(v)] is contained in two 3-faces of GG. Assume that the edge v6v1v_{6}v_{1} is contained in two 3-faces. In Case 1, let G=Gv+{v1v2,v2v3,v3v5,v5v1}G^{\prime}=G-v+\{v_{1}v_{2},v_{2}v_{3},v_{3}v_{5},v_{5}v_{1}\}. In Case 2, let G=Gv+{v1v2,v3v4,v3v5,v5v1}G^{\prime}=G-v+\{v_{1}v_{2},v_{3}v_{4},v_{3}v_{5},v_{5}v_{1}\}. In Case 3, let G=Gv+{v1v2,v4v5,v1v3,v3v5}G^{\prime}=G-v+\{v_{1}v_{2},v_{4}v_{5},v_{1}v_{3},v_{3}v_{5}\}. In each case, GG^{\prime} is proper with respect to GG. Since d2(v)19d_{2}(v)\leq 19, there exists a safe color for vv, a contradiction. ∎

Lemma 2.12.

Let vv be a 6-vertex with m3(v)=4m_{3}(v)=4, m4(v)=1m_{4}(v)=1, and m5+(v)=1m_{5^{+}}(v)=1. Then n3(v)1n_{3}(v)\leq 1. In particular, if n3(v)=1n_{3}(v)=1, then n4(v)=0n_{4}(v)=0.

Proof.

We have three cases where vv is incident to four 3-faces, one 4-face, and one 5+5^{+}-face: Case 1: The 4-face is [vv1xv2][vv_{1}xv_{2}] and the 5+5^{+}-face is [vv2yzv3][vv_{2}y\ldots zv_{3}], and the 3-faces are f3f_{3}, f4f_{4}, f5f_{5}, and f6f_{6}. Case 2: The 4-face is [vv1xv2][vv_{1}xv_{2}] and the 5+5^{+}-face is [vv3yzv4][vv_{3}y\ldots zv_{4}], and the 3-faces are f2f_{2}, f4f_{4}, f5f_{5}, and f6f_{6}. Case 3: The 4-face is [vv1xv2][vv_{1}xv_{2}] and the 5+5^{+}-face is [vv4yzv5][vv_{4}y\ldots zv_{5}], and the 3-faces are f2f_{2}, f3f_{3}, f5f_{5}, and f6f_{6}.

First, we show that vv is adjacent to at most one 3-vertex. By Lemma 2.2(2), a 3-vertex is not incident to any 3-face. Thus vv is not adjacent to any 3-vertex in Case 2 and Case 3. In Case 1, only v2v_{2} can be a 3-vertex. Thus n3(v)1n_{3}(v)\leq 1 holds.

Now we consider Case 1 and suppose that v2v_{2} is a 3-vertex. Assume that vv is adjacent to a 4-vertex. In the proof of Lemma 2.3, we showed that if vv is a 4-vertex with m3(v)=2m_{3}(v)=2, then no edge in G[NG(v)]G[N_{G}(v)] is contained in two 3-faces. Hence only v1v_{1} or v3v_{3} can be a 4-vertex. If v1v_{1} is a 4-vertex, then we construct G=Gv2+{v1y}G^{\prime}=G-v_{2}+\{v_{1}y\}. Otherwise, we construct G=Gv2+{v3x,v3y}G^{\prime}=G-v_{2}+\{v_{3}x,v_{3}y\}. In both cases, GG^{\prime} is proper with respect to GG. By the minimality of GG, GG^{\prime} has a 2-distance 20-coloring ϕ\phi^{\prime}. Let ϕ\phi be a coloring of GG such that every vertex in V(G)V(G), except for v2v_{2}, is colored using ϕ\phi^{\prime}. Since Δ6\Delta\leq 6, it follows that |Cϕ(v2)|17|C_{\phi}(v_{2})|\leq 17 and |C||Cϕ(v2)|3|C|-|C_{\phi}(v_{2})|\geq 3. Therefore, there exists a safe color for v2v_{2}. By coloring v2v_{2} with the safe color, ϕ\phi becomes a 2-distance 20-coloring of GG, a contradiction. ∎

Lemma 2.13.

Let vv be a 6-vertex with m3(v)=4m_{3}(v)=4 and m5+(v)=2m_{5^{+}}(v)=2. Then n3(v)1n_{3}(v)\leq 1. In particular, if n3(v)=1n_{3}(v)=1, then n4(v)=0n_{4}(v)=0.

Proof.

We have three cases where vv is incident to four 3-faces and two 5+5^{+}-faces: Case 1: The 5+5^{+}-faces are [vv1xyv2][vv_{1}x\ldots yv_{2}], [vv2zwv3][vv_{2}z\ldots wv_{3}], and the 3-faces are f3f_{3}, f4f_{4}, f5f_{5}, and f6f_{6}. Case 2: The 5+5^{+}-faces are [vv1xyv2][vv_{1}x\ldots yv_{2}], [vv3zwv4][vv_{3}z\ldots wv_{4}], and the 3-faces are f2f_{2}, f4f_{4}, f5f_{5}, and f6f_{6}. Case 3: The 5+5^{+}-faces are [vv1xyv2][vv_{1}x\ldots yv_{2}], [vv4zwv5][vv_{4}z\ldots wv_{5}], and the 3-faces are f2f_{2}, f3f_{3}, f5f_{5}, and f6f_{6}.

The proof is similar to that of Lemma 2.12. Only v2v_{2} can be a 3-vertex in Case 1. Thus n3(v)1n_{3}(v)\leq 1 holds. We suppose that v2v_{2} is a 3-vertex and assume that vv is adjacent to a 4-vertex. Only v1v_{1} or v3v_{3} can be a 4-vertex. If v1v_{1} is a 4-vertex, then we construct G=Gv2+{v1y,v1z}G^{\prime}=G-v_{2}+\{v_{1}y,v_{1}z\}. Otherwise, we construct G=Gv2+{v3y,v3z}G^{\prime}=G-v_{2}+\{v_{3}y,v_{3}z\}. In both cases, GG^{\prime} is proper with respect to GG. By the minimality of GG, GG^{\prime} has a 2-distance 20-coloring ϕ\phi^{\prime}. Let ϕ\phi be a coloring of GG such that every vertex in V(G)V(G), except for v2v_{2}, is colored using ϕ\phi^{\prime}. Since |Cϕ(v2)|18|C_{\phi}(v_{2})|\leq 18, we can color v2v_{2} with a safe color, a contradiction. ∎

Lemma 2.14.

Let ff be a 5-face of GG. Then there is at most one 3-vertex incident to ff. In particular, if ff is incident to one 3-vertex, then ff is not incident to any 4-vertex.

Proof.

Let [v1v2v3v4v5][v_{1}v_{2}v_{3}v_{4}v_{5}] be a 5-face. By Lemma 2.2(1), a 3-vertex is not adjacent to any 55^{-}-vertex. Assume that v1v_{1} and v4v_{4} are 3-vertices with NG(v1)={v2,v5,v6}N_{G}(v_{1})=\{v_{2},v_{5},v_{6}\} and NG(v4)={v3,v5,v7}N_{G}(v_{4})=\{v_{3},v_{5},v_{7}\}. Let G=Gv1+{v2v4,v4v6}G^{\prime}=G-v_{1}+\{v_{2}v_{4},v_{4}v_{6}\}. The graph GG^{\prime} is proper with respect to GG. By the minimality of GG, GG^{\prime} has a 2-distance 20-coloring ϕ\phi^{\prime}. Let ϕ\phi be a coloring of GG such that every vertex in V(G)V(G), except for v1v_{1}, is colored using ϕ\phi^{\prime}. Since Δ6\Delta\leq 6, it follows that |Cϕ(v1)|18|C_{\phi}(v_{1})|\leq 18 and |C||Cϕ(v1)|2|C|-|C_{\phi}(v_{1})|\geq 2. Therefore, there exists a safe color for v1v_{1}. By coloring v1v_{1} with the safe color, ϕ\phi becomes a 2-distance 20-coloring of GG, a contradiction.

Now, suppose that v1v_{1} is a 3-vertex with NG(v1)={v2,v5,v6}N_{G}(v_{1})=\{v_{2},v_{5},v_{6}\}. Assume that v4v_{4} is a 4-vertex. It is clear that G=Gv1+{v2v4,v4v6}G^{\prime}=G-v_{1}+\{v_{2}v_{4},v_{4}v_{6}\} is proper with respect to GG. Let ϕ\phi be a coloring of GG such that every vertex in V(G)V(G), except for v1v_{1}, is colored using ϕ\phi^{\prime}. Since |Cϕ(v1)|18|C_{\phi}(v_{1})|\leq 18, we can color v1v_{1} with a safe color, a contradiction. ∎

We obtain the following corollary from Lemma 2.2.

Corollary 2.15.

A 6+6^{+}-face ff is incident to at most d(f)2\lfloor\frac{d(f)}{2}\rfloor 3-vertices.

3 Discharging

In this section, we design discharging rules and complete the proof of Theorem 1.2. We can derive the following equation by Euler’s formula |V(G)||E(G)|+|F(G)|=2|V(G)|-|E(G)|+|F(G)|=2.

vV(G)(dG(v)4)+fF(G)(d(f)4)=8.\sum_{v\in V(G)}(d_{G}(v)-4)+\sum_{f\in F(G)}(d(f)-4)=-8.

We assign an initial charge μ(v)=dG(v)4\mu(v)=d_{G}(v)-4 to each vertex and μ(f)=d(f)4\mu(f)=d(f)-4 to each face. We design appropriate discharging rules and redistribute the charges of the vertices and faces according to those rules. Let μ(v)\mu^{\prime}(v) and μ(f)\mu^{\prime}(f) denote the final charges of the vertices and faces, respectively, after the discharging process. During the process, the sum of charges remains constant. If μ(v)0\mu^{\prime}(v)\geq 0 and μ(f)0\mu^{\prime}(f)\geq 0, the following contradiction arises.

0xV(G)F(G)μ(x)=xV(G)F(G)μ(x)=8<0.0\leq\sum_{x\in V(G)\cup F(G)}\mu^{\prime}(x)=\sum_{x\in V(G)\cup F(G)}\mu(x)=-8<0.

We design the following discharging rules, which are based on the rules in [5].

  1. R1

    Every 3-face receives 13\frac{1}{3} from each of its incident vertices.

  2. R2

    Every 3-vertex receives 19\frac{1}{9} from each of its adjacent 6-vertices ww with m3(w)5m_{3}(w)\leq 5.

  3. R3

    Every 3-vertex receives 13\frac{1}{3} from each of its incident 5+5^{+}-faces.

  4. R4

    Every 4-vertex receives 15\frac{1}{5} from each of its incident 5+5^{+}-faces.

  5. R5

    Every 4-vertex receives 115\frac{1}{15} from each of its adjacent 6-vertices ww with m3(w)5m_{3}(w)\leq 5.

  6. R6

    Every 5-vertex receives 15\frac{1}{5} from each of its incident 5+5^{+}-faces.

  7. R7

    Every 5-vertex uu with m3(u)4m_{3}(u)\geq 4 receives 215\frac{2}{15} from each of its adjacent 6-vertices ww with m3(w)5m_{3}(w)\leq 5.

  8. R8

    Every 6-vertex vv receives 15\frac{1}{5} from each of its incident 5+5^{+}-faces ff, if ff does not contain any 3-vertex adjacent to vv.

  9. R9

    Every 6-vertex vv receives 19\frac{1}{9} from each of its incident 5+5^{+}-faces ff, if ff contains a 3-vertex adjacent to vv.

First, we prove that μ(f)0\mu^{\prime}(f)\geq 0 for each fF(G)f\in F(G).

Case 1. d(f)=3.d(f)=3.


The initial charge is μ(f)=d(f)4=1\mu(f)=d(f)-4=-1. By Lemma 2.2(2), ff is not incident to any 3-vertex. By R1, ff receives 13\frac{1}{3} from each 4+4^{+}-vertex incident to ff. Thus μ(f)=1+3×13=0\mu^{\prime}(f)=-1+3\times\frac{1}{3}=0.

Case 2. d(f)=4.d(f)=4.


By the discharging rules, there is no transfer of charge. Thus μ(f)=μ(f)=0\mu(f)=\mu^{\prime}(f)=0.

Case 3. d(f)=5.d(f)=5.


The initial charge is μ(f)=d(f)4=1\mu(f)=d(f)-4=1. By Lemma 2.14, ff is incident to at most one 3-vertex, and if ff is incident to one 3-vertex, then ff is not incident to any 4-vertex. By Lemma 2.2(1), all neighbours of a 3-vertex are 6-vertices. If ff is incident to a 3-vertex, then μ(f)=1132×152×19=245\mu^{\prime}(f)=1-\frac{1}{3}-2\times\frac{1}{5}-2\times\frac{1}{9}=\frac{2}{45} by R3, R6, R8, and R9. Otherwise, μ(f)=15×15=0\mu^{\prime}(f)=1-5\times\frac{1}{5}=0 by R4, R6, and R8.

Case 4. d(f)=6+.d(f)=6^{+}.


The initial charge is μ(f)=d(f)42\mu(f)=d(f)-4\geq 2. We have μ(f)0\mu^{\prime}(f)\geq 0 by By Corollary 2.15.

Next, we prove that μ(v)0\mu^{\prime}(v)\geq 0 for each vV(G)v\in V(G). By Lemma 2.1 and Δ6\Delta\leq 6, we only consider the cases where 3dG(v)63\leq d_{G}(v)\leq 6.

Case 1. dG(v)=3.d_{G}(v)=3.


The initial charge is μ(v)=dG(v)4=1\mu(v)=d_{G}(v)-4=-1. By Lemma 2.2(1), all neighbours of vv are 6-vertices. By Lemma 2.2(2) and Lemma 2.2(3), vv is incident to either one 4-face and two 5+5^{+}-faces or three 5+5^{+}-faces. In each case, m3(w)5m_{3}(w)\leq 5 holds for any 6-vertex ww adjacent to vv. If vv is incident to one 4-face and two 5+5^{+}-faces, then μ(v)=1+3×19+2×13=0\mu^{\prime}(v)=-1+3\times\frac{1}{9}+2\times\frac{1}{3}=0 by R2 and R3. Otherwise, μ(v)=1+3×19+3×13=13\mu^{\prime}(v)=-1+3\times\frac{1}{9}+3\times\frac{1}{3}=\frac{1}{3} by R2 and R3.

Case 2. dG(v)=4.d_{G}(v)=4.


The initial charge is μ(v)=dG(v)4=0\mu(v)=d_{G}(v)-4=0. By Lemma 2.2(1), vv is not adjacent to any 3-vertex. By Lemma 2.3, we have m3(v)2m_{3}(v)\leq 2. Thus we divide the case based on the value of m3(v)m_{3}(v).

Case 2.1. m3(v)=2.m_{3}(v)=2.


By Lemma 2.3, we have m4(v)=0m_{4}(v)=0, n6(v)=4n_{6}(v)=4, and m3(w)4m_{3}(w)\leq 4 for any 6-vertex ww adjacent to vv. This implies that vv is incident to two 3-faces and two 5+5^{+}-faces, all neighbours of vv are 6-vertices, and R5 can be applied to vv. By R1, R4, and R5, μ(v)=02×13+2×15+4×115=0\mu^{\prime}(v)=0-2\times\frac{1}{3}+2\times\frac{1}{5}+4\times\frac{1}{15}=0.

Case 2.2. m3(v)=1.m_{3}(v)=1.


By Lemma 2.4, we have m4(v)2m_{4}(v)\leq 2. In particular, if 1m4(v)21\leq m_{4}(v)\leq 2, then n4(v)=0n_{4}(v)=0 and n5(v)1n_{5}(v)\leq 1. If m4(v)=2m_{4}(v)=2, then the remaining face incident to vv is a 5+5^{+}-face, and vv is adjacent to at least three 6-vertices. By R1, R4, and R5, μ(v)01×13+1×15+3×115=115\mu^{\prime}(v)\geq 0-1\times\frac{1}{3}+1\times\frac{1}{5}+3\times\frac{1}{15}=\frac{1}{15}. If m4(v)=1m_{4}(v)=1, then the remaining two faces incident to vv are 5+5^{+}-faces, and vv is adjacent to at least three 6-vertices. By R1, R4, and R5, μ(v)01×13+2×15+3×115=415\mu^{\prime}(v)\geq 0-1\times\frac{1}{3}+2\times\frac{1}{5}+3\times\frac{1}{15}=\frac{4}{15}. If m4(v)=0m_{4}(v)=0, then the remaining three faces incident to vv are 5+5^{+}-faces. Regardless of the number of 6-vertices adjacent to vv, we have μ(v)01×13+3×15=415\mu^{\prime}(v)\geq 0-1\times\frac{1}{3}+3\times\frac{1}{5}=\frac{4}{15} by R1 and R4.

Case 2.3. m3(v)=0.m_{3}(v)=0.


In this case, vv is not incident to any 3-face, which implies that R1 cannot be applied. Thus μ(v)μ(v)=0\mu^{\prime}(v)\geq\mu(v)=0.

Case 3. dG(v)=5.d_{G}(v)=5.


The initial charge is μ(v)=dG(v)4=1\mu(v)=d_{G}(v)-4=1. By Lemma 2.2(1), vv is not adjacent to any 3-vertex. We divide the case based on the value of m3(v)m_{3}(v).

Case 3.1. m3(v)=5.m_{3}(v)=5.


By Lemma 2.5, we have n6(v)=5n_{6}(v)=5 and m3(w)4m_{3}(w)\leq 4 for any 6-vertex ww adjacent to vv. Thus R7 can be applied to vv. By R1 and R7, μ(v)=15×13+5×215=0\mu^{\prime}(v)=1-5\times\frac{1}{3}+5\times\frac{2}{15}=0.

Case 3.2. m3(v)=4.m_{3}(v)=4.


The remaining face incident to vv is either one 4-face or one 5+5^{+}-face. First, we consider the case where the remaining face is a 4-face. By Lemma 2.6, we have n4(v)=0n_{4^{-}}(v)=0, n5(v)1n_{5}(v)\leq 1, and m3(w)5m_{3}(w)\leq 5 for any 6-vertex ww adjacent to vv. Thus R7 can be applied to vv. If vv is adjacent to one 5-vertex and four 6-vertices, then μ(v)14×13+4×215=15\mu^{\prime}(v)\geq 1-4\times\frac{1}{3}+4\times\frac{2}{15}=\frac{1}{5} by R1 and R7. If vv is adjacent to five 6-vertices, then μ(v)14×13+5×215=13\mu^{\prime}(v)\geq 1-4\times\frac{1}{3}+5\times\frac{2}{15}=\frac{1}{3} by R1 and R7. Next, we consider the case where the remaining face is a 5+5^{+}-face. By Lemma 2.8, the pattern of the degrees of the vertices adjacent to vv must be one of the cases (a) through (d). In each case, we show that μ(v)0\mu^{\prime}(v)\geq 0.

(a).

(n4(v)n_{4}(v), n5(v)n_{5}(v), n6(v)n_{6}(v)) = (1, 0, 4).
By Lemma 2.8(1), we have m3(w)4m_{3}(w)\leq 4 for any 6-vertex ww adjacent to vv. Thus R7 can be applied to vv. By R1, R6, and R7, μ(v)=14×13+1×15+4×215=25\mu^{\prime}(v)=1-4\times\frac{1}{3}+1\times\frac{1}{5}+4\times\frac{2}{15}=\frac{2}{5}.

(b).

(n4(v)n_{4}(v), n5(v)n_{5}(v), n6(v)n_{6}(v)) = (0, 2, 3).
By Lemma 2.8(2), we have m3(w)4m_{3}(w)\leq 4 for any 6-vertex ww adjacent to vv. Thus R7 can be applied to vv. By R1, R6, and R7, μ(v)=14×13+1×15+3×215=415\mu^{\prime}(v)=1-4\times\frac{1}{3}+1\times\frac{1}{5}+3\times\frac{2}{15}=\frac{4}{15}.

(c).

(n4(v)n_{4}(v), n5(v)n_{5}(v), n6(v)n_{6}(v)) = (0, 1, 4).
By Lemma 2.8(3), there exists at least one 6-vertex ww adjacent to vv with m3(w)5m_{3}(w)\leq 5. Thus vv receives at least 215\frac{2}{15} from such a 6-vertex by R7. By R1, R6, and R7, μ(v)14×13+1×15+1×215=0\mu^{\prime}(v)\geq 1-4\times\frac{1}{3}+1\times\frac{1}{5}+1\times\frac{2}{15}=0.

(d).

(n4(v)n_{4}(v), n5(v)n_{5}(v), n6(v)n_{6}(v)) = (0, 0, 5).
By Lemma 2.8(4), there exist at least two 6-vertices w1w_{1}, w2w_{2} adjacent to vv with m3(w1)5m_{3}(w_{1})\leq 5 and m3(w2)5m_{3}(w_{2})\leq 5. Thus vv receives at least 2×2152\times\frac{2}{15} from such 6-vertices by R7. By R1, R6, and R7, μ(v)14×13+1×15+2×215=215\mu^{\prime}(v)\geq 1-4\times\frac{1}{3}+1\times\frac{1}{5}+2\times\frac{2}{15}=\frac{2}{15}.

Case 3.3. m3(v)3.m_{3}(v)\leq 3.


The only rule by which vv loses charge is R1. By R1 and m3(v)3m_{3}(v)\leq 3, we have μ(v)13×13=0\mu^{\prime}(v)\geq 1-3\times\frac{1}{3}=0.

Case 4. dG(v)=6.d_{G}(v)=6.


The initial charge is μ(v)=dG(v)4=2\mu(v)=d_{G}(v)-4=2. We divide the case based on the value of m3(v)m_{3}(v).

Case 4.1. m3(v)=6.m_{3}(v)=6.


Since m3(v)=6m_{3}(v)=6, R2, R5, and R7 cannot be applied to vv. The only rule by which vv loses charge is R1. Thus μ(v)=26×13=0\mu^{\prime}(v)=2-6\times\frac{1}{3}=0.

Case 4.2. m3(v)=5.m_{3}(v)=5.


By R1, vv sends 13\frac{1}{3} to each of its incident 3-faces. Since m3(v)=5m_{3}(v)=5, vv loses 5×13=535\times\frac{1}{3}=\frac{5}{3} charge. By Lemma 2.2(2), vv is not adjacent to any 3-vertex. The remaining face incident to vv is either one 4-face or one 5+5^{+}-face. First, we consider the case where the remaining face is a 4-face. By Lemma 2.9(1), we have n4(v)2n_{4}(v)\leq 2. Thus we further divide the case based on the value of n4(v)n_{4}(v).

Case 4.2.1. m4(v)=1m_{4}(v)=1, n4(v)=2.n_{4}(v)=2.


By Lemma 2.9(2), we have n5(v)1n_{5}(v)\leq 1. In the worst situation, vv is adjacent to one 5-vertex uu with m3(u)4m_{3}(u)\geq 4. By R1, R5, and R7, μ(v)2532×1151×215=115\mu^{\prime}(v)\geq 2-\frac{5}{3}-2\times\frac{1}{15}-1\times\frac{2}{15}=\frac{1}{15}.

Case 4.2.2. m4(v)=1m_{4}(v)=1, n4(v)=1.n_{4}(v)=1.


By Lemma 2.9(3), we have n5(v)3n_{5}(v)\leq 3, and if n5(v)=3n_{5}(v)=3, then m3(u)3m_{3}(u)\leq 3 for any 5-vertex uu adjacent to vv. Thus if n5(v)=3n_{5}(v)=3, then vv does not lose charge by R7. The vertex vv loses the most charge when vv is adjacent to two 5-vertices to which R7 applies. By R1, R5, and R7, μ(v)2531×1152×215=0\mu^{\prime}(v)\geq 2-\frac{5}{3}-1\times\frac{1}{15}-2\times\frac{2}{15}=0.

Case 4.2.3. m4(v)=1m_{4}(v)=1, n4(v)=0.n_{4}(v)=0.


By Lemma 2.9(4) and Lemma 2.9(4.1), we have n5(v)5n_{5}(v)\leq 5, and if n5(v)=5n_{5}(v)=5, then m3(u)3m_{3}(u)\leq 3 for any 5-vertex uu adjacent to vv. Thus if n5(v)=5n_{5}(v)=5, then vv does not lose charge by R7. If n5(v)4n_{5}(v)\leq 4, then there exist at most two 5-vertices uu with m3(u)4m_{3}(u)\geq 4 by Lemma 2.9(4.2) and Lemma 2.9(4.3). This implies that vv loses at most 2×2152\times\frac{2}{15} charge by R7. By R1 and R7, μ(v)2532×215=115\mu^{\prime}(v)\geq 2-\frac{5}{3}-2\times\frac{2}{15}=\frac{1}{15}.

Next, we consider the case where the remaining face is a 5+5^{+}-face. By Lemma 2.10(1), we have n4(v)2n_{4}(v)\leq 2. Thus we further divide the case based on the value of n4(v)n_{4}(v).

Case 4.2.4. m5+(v)=1m_{5^{+}}(v)=1, n4(v)=2.n_{4}(v)=2.


By Lemma 2.10(2), we have n5(v)2n_{5}(v)\leq 2. This implies that vv loses at most 2×2152\times\frac{2}{15} charge by R7. By R1, R5, R7, and R8, μ(v)2532×1152×215+15=215\mu^{\prime}(v)\geq 2-\frac{5}{3}-2\times\frac{1}{15}-2\times\frac{2}{15}+\frac{1}{5}=\frac{2}{15}.

Case 4.2.5. m5+(v)=1m_{5^{+}}(v)=1, n4(v)=1.n_{4}(v)=1.


By Lemma 2.10(3), we have n5(v)4n_{5}(v)\leq 4, and if n5(v)=4n_{5}(v)=4, then m3(u)3m_{3}(u)\leq 3 for any 5-vertex uu adjacent to vv. Thus if n5(v)=4n_{5}(v)=4, then vv does not lose charge by R7. The vertex vv loses the most charge when vv is adjacent to three 5-vertices to which R7 applies. By R1, R5, R7, and R8, μ(v)2531×1153×215+15=115\mu^{\prime}(v)\geq 2-\frac{5}{3}-1\times\frac{1}{15}-3\times\frac{2}{15}+\frac{1}{5}=\frac{1}{15}.

Case 4.2.6. m5+(v)=1m_{5^{+}}(v)=1, n4(v)=0.n_{4}(v)=0.


By Lemma 2.10(4), if n5(v)=6n_{5}(v)=6, then m3(u)3m_{3}(u)\leq 3 for any 5-vertex uu adjacent to vv. Hence if n5(v)=6n_{5}(v)=6, then vv does not lose charge by R7. By Lemma 2.10(5), if n5(v)=5n_{5}(v)=5, then there exist at most two 5-vertices uu with m3(u)4m_{3}(u)\geq 4. Thus vv loses the most charge when vv is adjacent to four 5-vertices to which R7 applies. By R1, R7, and R8, μ(v)2534×215+15=0\mu^{\prime}(v)\geq 2-\frac{5}{3}-4\times\frac{2}{15}+\frac{1}{5}=0.

Case 4.3. m3(v)=4.m_{3}(v)=4.


By R1, vv sends 13\frac{1}{3} to each of its incident 3-faces. Since m3(v)=4m_{3}(v)=4, vv loses 4×13=434\times\frac{1}{3}=\frac{4}{3} charge. We further divide the case based on the faces incident to vv, which can be either two 4-faces, one 4-face and one 5+5^{+}-face, or two 5+5^{+}-faces.

Case 4.3.1. m4(v)=2.m_{4}(v)=2.


By Lemma 2.11(1), vv is not adjacent to any 3-vertex. The rule by which vv loses the most charge, except for R1, is R7. Thus if all neighbours of vv are 5-vertices to which R7 applies, then vv loses 6×215=456\times\frac{2}{15}=\frac{4}{5} by R7. This discussion implies that μ(v)=24345=215<0\mu^{\prime}(v)=2-\frac{4}{3}-\frac{4}{5}=-\frac{2}{15}<0. However, by Lemma 2.11(3), the situation does not arise. The next situation in which vv loses the most charge is when vv is adjacent to five 5-vertices uu with m3(u)4m_{3}(u)\geq 4 and one 4-vertex, but by Lemma 2.11(2), this situation cannot occur. In the possible cases, vv loses the most charge when vv is adjacent to either four 5-vertices uu with m3(u)4m_{3}(u)\geq 4 and two 4-vertices, or five 5-vertices uu with m3(u)4m_{3}(u)\geq 4 and one 6-vertex. In the former case, μ(v)=2432×1154×215=0\mu^{\prime}(v)=2-\frac{4}{3}-2\times\frac{1}{15}-4\times\frac{2}{15}=0 by R1, R5, and R7. In the latter case, μ(v)=2435×215=0\mu^{\prime}(v)=2-\frac{4}{3}-5\times\frac{2}{15}=0 by R1 and R7.

Case 4.3.2. m4(v)=1,m5+(v)=1.m_{4}(v)=1,m_{5^{+}}(v)=1.


By Lemma 2.12, vv is adjacent to at most one 3-vertex, and if vv is adjacent to one 3-vertex, then vv is not adjacent to any 4-vertex. Since vv is incident to one 5+5^{+}-face, R8 or R9 can be applied to vv. If vv is adjacent to one 3-vertex, then vv loses the most charge when vv is adjacent to five 5-vertices to which R7 applies. By R1, R2, R7, and R9, μ(v)=2431×195×215+1×19=0\mu^{\prime}(v)=2-\frac{4}{3}-1\times\frac{1}{9}-5\times\frac{2}{15}+1\times\frac{1}{9}=0. If vv is not adjacent to a 3-vertex, then vv loses the most charge when vv is adjacent to six 5-vertices to which R7 applies. By R1, R7, and R8, μ(v)=2436×215+1×15=115\mu^{\prime}(v)=2-\frac{4}{3}-6\times\frac{2}{15}+1\times\frac{1}{5}=\frac{1}{15}.

Case 4.3.3. m5+(v)=2.m_{5^{+}}(v)=2.


By Lemma 2.13, vv is adjacent to at most one 3-vertex, and if vv is adjacent to one 3-vertex, then vv is not adjacent to any 4-vertex. Since vv is incident to two 5+5^{+}-faces, vv receives at least 2×192\times\frac{1}{9} charge by R9. If vv is adjacent to one 3-vertex, then vv loses the most charge when vv is adjacent to five 5-vertices to which R7 applies. By R1, R2, R7, and R9, μ(v)=2431×195×215+2×19=19\mu^{\prime}(v)=2-\frac{4}{3}-1\times\frac{1}{9}-5\times\frac{2}{15}+2\times\frac{1}{9}=\frac{1}{9}. If vv is not adjacent to a 3-vertex, then vv loses the most charge when vv is adjacent to six 5-vertices to which R7 applies. By R1, R7, and R8, μ(v)=2436×215+2×15=415\mu^{\prime}(v)=2-\frac{4}{3}-6\times\frac{2}{15}+2\times\frac{1}{5}=\frac{4}{15}.

Case 4.4. m3(v)3.m_{3}(v)\leq 3.


By R1, vv loses at most 3×13=13\times\frac{1}{3}=1 charge. The rule by which vv loses the most charge, except for R1, is R7. Thus if all neighbours of vv are 5-vertices uu with m3(u)4m_{3}(u)\geq 4, then vv loses 6×215=456\times\frac{2}{15}=\frac{4}{5} charge by R7. The final charge is μ(v)2145=15>0\mu^{\prime}(v)\geq 2-1-\frac{4}{5}=\frac{1}{5}>0, which implies that μ(v)0\mu^{\prime}(v)\geq 0 holds when m3(v)3m_{3}(v)\leq 3.

Now, we have confirmed μ(x)0\mu^{\prime}(x)\geq 0 for all xV(G)F(G)x\in V(G)\cup F(G), which is a contradiction. Therefore, Theorem 1.2 holds.

References

  • [1] J. A. Bondy and U. S. R. Murty. Graph theory, volume 244 of Graduate Texts in Mathematics. Springer, New York, 2008.
  • [2] N. Bousquet, Q. Deschamps, L. de Meyer, and T. Pierron. Improved square coloring of planar graphs. Discrete Mathematics, 346(4):113288, 2023.
  • [3] N. Bousquet, Q. Deschamps, L. de Meyer, and T. Pierron. Square coloring planar graphs with automatic discharging. SIAM J. Discrete Math., 38(1):504–528, 2024.
  • [4] D. W. Cranston. Coloring, list coloring, and painting squares of graphs (and other related problems). Electron. J. Combin., DS25:42, 2023.
  • [5] Z. Deniz. On 2-distance 16-coloring of planar graphs with maximum degree at most five. arXiv preprint arXiv:2310.15899, 2023.
  • [6] Z. Deniz. A 2-distance (2Δ+7)(2\Delta+7)-coloring of planar graphs. arXiv preprint arXiv:2403.12302, 2024.
  • [7] S. G. Hartke, S. Jahanbekam, and B. Thomas. The chromatic number of the square of subcubic planar graphs. arXiv preprint arXiv:1604.06504, 2016.
  • [8] F. Havet, J. van den Heuvel, C. McDiarmid, and B. Reed. List colouring squares of planar graphs. Electronic Notes in Discrete Mathematics, 29:515–519, 2007. European Conference on Combinatorics, Graph Theory and Applications.
  • [9] F. Havet, J. van den Heuvel, C. McDiarmid, and B. Reed. List colouring squares of planar graphs. arXiv preprint arXiv:0807.3233, 2017.
  • [10] J. Hou, Y. Jin, L. Miao, and Q. Zhao. Coloring squares of planar graphs with maximum degree at most five. Graphs and Combinatorics, 39(2):20, 2023.
  • [11] F. Kramer and H. Kramer. Ein färbungsproblem der knotenpunkte eines graphen bezüglich der distanz p. Rev. Roumaine Math. Pures Appl, 14(2):1031–1038, 1969.
  • [12] F. Kramer and H. Kramer. Un probleme de coloration des sommets d’un graphe. CR Acad. Sci. Paris A, 268(7):46–48, 1969.
  • [13] M. Krzyziński, P. Rza̧ żewski, and S. Tur. Coloring squares of planar graphs with small maximum degree. Discuss. Math. Graph Theory, 44(3):817–835, 2024.
  • [14] C. Thomassen. The square of a planar cubic graph is 7-colorable. Journal of Combinatorial Theory, Series B, 128:192–218, 2018.
  • [15] G. Wegner. Graphs with given diameter and a coloring problem. Technical University of Dortmund, 1977.
  • [16] J. Zhu and Y. Bu. Minimum 2-distance coloring of planar graphs and channel assignment. Journal of Combinatorial Optimization, 36(1):55–64, 2018.