Your English writing platform
Discover LudwigSuggestions(5)
Exact(12)
Hence Δ G ′ (M ) ⊆ Δ G (M ) L. Conversely, let S ∈ Δ G (M ) L. First we show that if no F-edge f of G ′ (M) crosses S (i.e. f = xy where S separates x and y), then S is a minimal separator of G ′ (M).
Each minimal separator of G ′ (M) is legal by Theorem 3.1.
Let F be any minimal separator of LG (P ) and u be any vertex of any input tree.
If F is a minimal separator of LG (P ), then LG (P ) − F has exactly two connected components.
Hence S ′ is illegal, and any legal minimal separator of G(M) is not crossed by any F-edge.
Then, Inc u)⊆ F. But F is a minimal separator of LG (P ), and by Lemma 3, Inc u) ⊈ F, a contradiction.
Similar(48)
Let Δ G denote the minimal separators of graph G.
Then the legal minimal separators of G M) are exactly the minimal separators of G ′ (M) (i.e., Δ G ′ (M ) = Δ G (M ) L ).
□ Let Δ G (M ) L denote the set of legal minimal separators of G M).
□ This suggests that analyzing the minimal separators of G ′ (M) suffices for 3-state construction.
This proves our characterization of parallel minimal separators of Δ G (M ) ∗.
Write better and faster with AI suggestions while staying true to your unique style.
Since I tried Ludwig back in 2017, I have been constantly using it in both editing and translation. Ever since, I suggest it to my translators at ProSciEditing.

Justyna Jupowicz-Kozak
CEO of Professional Science Editing for Scientists @ prosciediting.com