## On two conjectures on sum of the powers of signless Laplacian eigenvalues of a graph

## F. Ashraf

Department of Mathematical Sciences, Isfahan University of Technology, Isfahan, 84156-83111, Iran School of Mathematics, Institute for Research in Fundamental Sciences (IPM),

P.O. Box 19395-5746, Tehran, Iran

## Abstract

Let G be a simple graph and Q G ( ) be the signless Laplacian matrix of G . Let S α ( G ) be the sum of the α -th powers of the nonzero eigenvalues of Q G ( ). We disprove two conjectures by You and Yang on the extremal values of S α ( G ) among bipartite graphs and among graphs with bounded connectivity.

AMS Classification

: 05C50

Keywords : Signless Laplacian eigenvalues of graph

## 1 Introduction

Let G be a simple graph with vertex set V ( G ) = { v , . . . , v 1 n } . The degree of a vertex v ∈ V ( G ), denoted by d v ( ), is the number of neighbors of v . The adjacency matrix of G is an n × n matrix A G ( ) whose ( i, j ) entry is 1 if v i and v j are adjacent and zero otherwise. The signless Laplacian matrix of G is the matrx Q G ( ) = A G ( ) + D G ( ), where D G ( ) is the diagonal matrix with d v ( 1 ) , . . . , d ( v n ) on its main diagonal. It is well-known that Q G ( ) are positive semidefinite and so its eigenvalues are nonnegative real numbers. The multiplicity of zero eigenvalue for Q S ( ) is equal to the number of bipartite connected components of G . The eigenvalues of Q G ( ) are called the signless Laplacian eigenvalues of G and are denoted by q 1 ( G , . . . , q ) n ( G ). We drop G from the notation when there is no danger of confusion. We denote the complete graph on n vertices by K n and the complete bipartite graph with parts with r and s vertices by K r,s . The (vertex) connectivity κ G ( ) of a

E-mail Address: firouzeh ashraf@yahoo.com

connected graph G is the minimum number of vertices of G whose deletion disconnects G . It is conventional to define κ K ( n ) = n -1. For two graphs G and H , the join of them denoted by G ∨ H is the graph obtained from disjoint union of G and H by adding edges joining every vertex of G to every vertex of H . We also denote the number of edges of G by e G ( ).

For a graph G , let q 1 ( G , . . . , q ) r ( G ) be all the nonzero signless Laplacian eigenvalues of G . You and Yang [2] studied the parameter

$$S _ { \alpha } ( G ) \coloneqq q _ { 1 } ( G ) ^ { \alpha } + \cdots + q _ { r } ( G ) ^ { \alpha }.$$

Among other things, they obtained the following two results.

Theorem 1. ([2]) Let G be a connected bipartite graph with n vertices and α ≤ 1 .

- (i) If α &lt; 0 , then S α ( G ) ≥ n α + ( /floorleft n/ 2 /floorright -1) /ceilingleft n/ 2 /ceilingright α + ( /ceilingleft n/ 2 /ceilingright -1) /floorleft n/ 2 /floorright α , with equality if and only if G = K /floorleft n/ 2 /floorright , /ceilingleft n/ 2 /ceilingright .
- (ii) If 0 &lt; α ≤ 1 , then S α ( G ) ≤ n α + ( /floorleft n/ 2 /floorright -1) /ceilingleft n/ 2 /ceilingright α +( /ceilingleft n/ 2 /ceilingright -1) /floorleft n/ 2 /floorright α , with equality if and only if G = K /floorleft n/ 2 /floorright , /ceilingleft n/ 2 /ceilingright .

Theorem 2. ([2]) Let G be a connected graph with n vertices and κ G ( ) ≤ k and α ≥ 1 . Then S α ( G ) ≤ b α ( n, k ) where

$$\stackrel { \sim } { \lambda } \times \stackrel { \sim } { \lambda } \times \stackrel { \sim } { \lambda } \times \stackrel { \sim } { \lambda } \times \stackrel { \sim } { \lambda } \times \stackrel { \sim } { \lambda } \times \stackrel { \sim } { \lambda } \times \stackrel { \sim } { \lambda } \times \stackrel { \sim } { \lambda } \times \stackrel { \sim } { \lambda } \times \stackrel { \sim } { \lambda } \times \stackrel { \sim } { \lambda } \times \stackrel { \sim } { \lambda } \times \stackrel { \sim } { \lambda } \times \stackrel { \sim } { \lambda } \times \stackrel { \sim } { \lambda } \times \stackrel { \left ( n - 2 + \frac { k } { 2 } - \frac { 1 } { 2 } \sqrt { ( k - 2 n ) ^ { 2 } + 1 6 ( k - n + 1 ) } \right ) ^ { \alpha } }. \\ \text{The e-mailitu holds if and onlu if } G = K _ { 1 } \vee ( K _ { 1 } + K _ { 2 } - 1, 1 )$$

The equality holds if and only if G = K k ∨ ( K 1 ∪ K n - -k 1 ) .

For the unsettled values of α in Theorems 1 and 2, they made the following two conjectures.

Conjecture 3. ([2]) Let G be a bipartite graph with n vertices. If α &gt; 1 , then

$$S _ { \alpha } ( G ) \leq n ^ { \alpha } + ( \lfloor n / 2 \rfloor - 1 ) \lceil n / 2 \rceil ^ { \alpha } + ( \lceil n / 2 \rceil - 1 ) \lfloor n / 2 \rfloor ^ { \alpha },$$

with equality if and only if G = K /floorleft n/ 2 /floorright , /ceilingleft n/ 2 /ceilingright .

Conjecture 4. ([2]) Let G be a graph with n vertices and κ G ( ) ≤ k .

- (i) If 0 &lt; α &lt; 1 , then S α ( G ) ≤ b α ( n, k ) with equality if and only if G = K k ∨ ( K 1 ∪ K n - -k 1 ) .
- (ii) If G is connected and α &lt; 0 , then S α ( G ) ≥ b α ( n, k ) with equality if and only if G = K k ∨ ( K 1 ∪ K n - -k 1 ) .

The purpose of this paper is to study these two conjectures. We prove the following results in this regard:

- · For α &gt; 0, we determine

$$\lim _ { n \to \infty } \frac { \max \{ S _ { \alpha } ( G ) \, | \, G \text{ is a bipartite graph with } n \text{ vertices} \} } { n ^ { \alpha + 1 } }$$

from which it follows that Conjecture 3 is not true for α &gt; 3;

- · Conjecture 3 is true for 1 ≤ α ≤ 3;
- · Conjecture 4 is not true for α &lt; -1.

The validity of Conjecture 4 for - ≤ 1 α ≤ 1 remains open.

## 2 Bipartite graphs

In this section we study the asymptotic behavior of the function

ζ ( n, α ) := max { S α ( G ) | G is a bipartite graph with n vertices } , for α &gt; 0. We start with the following well-known fact.

Lemma 5. ([1, p. 222]) Let G be a graph and e be an edge of that. Then the signless Laplacian eigenvalues of G and G ′ = G -e interlace:

$$q _ { 1 } ( G ) \geq q _ { 1 } ( G ^ { \prime } ) \geq q _ { 2 } ( G ) \geq q _ { 2 } ( G ^ { \prime } ) \geq \dots \geq q _ { n } ( G ) \geq q _ { n } ( G ^ { \prime } ).$$

The following lemma is easy to prove.

## Lemma 6.

- (i) The signless Laplacian eigenvalues of K n are 2 n -2 with multiplicity 1 and n -2 with multiplicity n -1 .
- (ii) The signless Laplacian eigenvalues of K r,s are r + s with multiplicity 1 , r with multiplicity s -1 , s with multiplicity r -1 , and 0 with multiplicity 1 .

For the next theorem, we need Taylor Theorem which we recall here. If the k -th derivative of a real function f exists on an interval containing a and a + , then there exists some /epsilon1 η between a and a + /epsilon1 such that

$$f ( a + \epsilon ) = f ( a ) + f ^ { \prime } ( a ) \epsilon + \frac { f ^ { \prime \prime } ( a ) } { 2! } \epsilon ^ { 2 } + \dots + \frac { f ^ { ( k - 1 ) } ( a ) } { ( k - 1 )! } \epsilon ^ { k - 1 } + \frac { f ^ { ( k ) } ( \eta ) } { k! } \epsilon ^ { k }.$$

In the next theorem, we determine the asymptotic behavior of ζ ( n, α ). Noting that the upper bound given in Conjecture 3 is 2 -α n α +1 + O n ( α ), the next theorem disproves Conjecture 3 for α &gt; 3.

Theorem 7. For any α &gt; 0 ,

$$\lim _ { n \to \infty } \frac { \zeta ( n, \alpha ) } { n ^ { \alpha + 1 } } = p ( \alpha )$$

where

$$p ( \alpha ) = \max \{ x ( 1 - x ) ^ { \alpha } + ( 1 - x ) x ^ { \alpha } \ | \ 0 \leq x \leq 1 \}.$$

Furthermore, for any α &gt; 3 , we have p α ( ) &gt; 2 -α .

Proof. For a bipartite graph G with parts of sizes r and n -r , by Lemma 5, we have S α ( G ) ≤ S α ( K r,n -r ). Therefore the maximum occurs for some K r,n -r , i.e. for any n there exists some r for which ζ ( n, α ) = S α ( K r,n -r ). We now fix α and let

$$f ( x ) \coloneqq x ( 1 - x ) ^ { \alpha } + ( 1 - x ) x ^ { \alpha }.$$

By Lemma 6,

$$S _ { \alpha } ( K _ { r, n - r } ) & = n ^ { \alpha } + ( r - 1 ) ( n - r ) ^ { \alpha } + ( n - r - 1 ) r ^ { \alpha } \\ & = \left [ \frac { r } { n } \left ( 1 - \frac { r } { n } \right ) ^ { \alpha } + \left ( 1 - \frac { r } { n } \right ) \left ( \frac { r } { n } \right ) ^ { \alpha } \right ] n ^ { \alpha + 1 } + O ( n ^ { \alpha } ) \\ & = f \left ( \frac { r } { n } \right ) n ^ { \alpha + 1 } + O ( n ^ { \alpha } ). \\ \text{lows that for large enough $n$}.$$

It follows that for large enough n ,

$$\frac { \zeta ( n, \alpha ) } { n ^ { \alpha + 1 } } \leq p ( \alpha ) + o ( 1 ).$$

Now we choose 0 &lt; b &lt; 1 so that f ( b ) = p α ( ). Let r n = /floorleft bn /floorright . From (1), for large enough n we have

$$\frac { \zeta ( n, \alpha ) } { n ^ { \alpha + 1 } } & \geq \frac { S _ { \alpha } ( K _ { r _ { n }, n - r _ { n } } ) } { n ^ { \alpha + 1 } } \\ & \geq f \left ( \frac { \lfloor b n \rfloor } { n } \right ) + o ( 1 ).$$

Combining (2) and (3), and then taking the limit, shows that lim n →∞ ζ ( n, α /n ) α +1 exists and equals to p α ( ).

For the second part of the theorem, we fix α &gt; 3. Not that since α &gt; 3, we have ( α 2 ) -α &gt; 0. So we may choose 0 &lt; /epsilon1 &lt; / 1 2 small enough so that

$$\left [ \binom { \alpha } { 2 } - \alpha \right ] \epsilon ^ { 2 } ( 1 / 2 ) ^ { \alpha - 2 } - 2 \binom { \alpha } { 3 } \epsilon ^ { 4 } > 0.$$

We will show that by this choice of /epsilon1 , one has f (1 / 2 + /epsilon1 ) &gt; f (1 / 2) = 2 -α , and consequently p α ( ) &gt; 2 -α .

By applying Taylor Theorem for f ( x ) with k = 3 and a = 1 2, there exit / η , η 1 2 with 1 2 -/epsilon1 &lt; η 1 &lt; 1 2 &lt; η 2 &lt; 1 2 + /epsilon1 such that

$$\mu _ { 1 } \quad & \mu _ { 2 } ( 1 / 2 - \epsilon ) ^ { \alpha } = ( 1 / 2 ) ^ { \alpha } - \alpha \epsilon ( 1 / 2 ) ^ { \alpha - 1 } + \binom { \alpha } { 2 } \epsilon ^ { 2 } ( 1 / 2 ) ^ { \alpha - 2 } - \binom { \alpha } { 3 } \epsilon ^ { 3 } \eta _ { 1 } ^ { \alpha - 3 }, \\ & ( 1 / 2 + \epsilon ) ^ { \alpha } = ( 1 / 2 ) ^ { \alpha } + \alpha \epsilon ( 1 / 2 ) ^ { \alpha - 1 } + \binom { \alpha } { 2 } \epsilon ^ { 2 } ( 1 / 2 ) ^ { \alpha - 2 } + \binom { \alpha } { 3 } \epsilon ^ { 3 } \eta _ { 2 } ^ { \alpha - 3 }. \\ \dots \quad &.$$

It follows that

$$f ( 1 / 2 + \epsilon ) & = ( 1 / 2 + \epsilon ) ( 1 / 2 - \epsilon ) ^ { \alpha } + ( 1 / 2 - \epsilon ) ( 1 / 2 + \epsilon ) ^ { \alpha } \\ & = ( 1 / 2 ) ^ { \alpha } + \binom { \alpha } { 2 } \epsilon ^ { 2 } ( 1 / 2 ) ^ { \alpha - 2 } + \binom { \alpha } { 3 } \frac { \epsilon ^ { 3 } } { 2 } ( \eta _ { 2 } ^ { \alpha - 3 } - \eta _ { 1 } ^ { \alpha - 3 } ) - 2 \alpha \epsilon ^ { 2 } ( 1 / 2 ) ^ { \alpha - 1 } - \binom { \alpha } { 3 } \epsilon ^ { 4 } ( \eta _ { 1 } ^ { \alpha - 3 } + \eta _ { 2 } ^ { \alpha - 3 } ).$$

Note that

$$\binom { \alpha } { 2 } \epsilon ^ { 2 } ( 1 / 2 ) ^ { \alpha - 2 } - 2 \alpha \epsilon ^ { 2 } ( 1 / 2 ) ^ { \alpha - 1 } & - \binom { \alpha } { 3 } \epsilon ^ { 4 } ( \eta _ { 1 } ^ { \alpha - 3 } + \eta _ { 2 } ^ { \alpha - 3 } ) \\ & = \left [ \binom { \alpha } { 2 } - \alpha \right ] \epsilon ^ { 2 } ( 1 / 2 ) ^ { \alpha - 2 } - \binom { \alpha } { 3 } \epsilon ^ { 4 } ( \eta _ { 1 } ^ { \alpha - 3 } + \eta _ { 2 } ^ { \alpha - 3 } ). \quad ( 5 )$$

As η α -3 1 + η α -3 2 &lt; 2, from (4) it follows that the right side of (5) is positive. This implies that f (1 / 2 + /epsilon1 ) &gt; (1 / 2) α , as desired. /square

Theorem 8. Conjecture 3 is true for 1 ≤ α ≤ 3 .

## Proof. Let

$$g ( x ) \coloneqq ( x - 1 ) ( n - x ) ^ { \alpha } + ( n - x - 1 ) x ^ { \alpha }.$$

Then S α ( K r,n -r ) = n α + ( ). We prove the theorem by showing that for 1 g r ≤ α ≤ 3 and for any 1 ≤ r ≤ n -1, g r ( ) ≤ g ( /floorleft n/ 2 ). /floorright Since g x ( ) = g n ( -x ), we may assume that 1 ≤ x ≤ n/ 2. So it suffices to show that g is increasing on the interval 0 &lt; x ≤ n/ 2.

## We have

$$g ^ { \prime } ( x ) & = ( n - x ) ^ { \alpha } - \alpha ( x - 1 ) ( n - x ) ^ { \alpha - 1 } - x ^ { \alpha } + \alpha ( n - x - 1 ) x ^ { \alpha - 1 } \\ & = x ^ { \alpha } \left [ \left ( \frac { n } { x } - 1 \right ) ^ { \alpha } - \alpha \left ( 1 - \frac { 1 } { x } \right ) \left ( \frac { n } { x } - 1 \right ) ^ { \alpha - 1 } - 1 + \alpha \left ( \frac { n } { x } - 1 - \frac { 1 } { x } \right ) \right ]. \\ \_. \quad. \quad. \quad. \quad. \quad. \quad. \quad. \quad. \quad. \quad.$$

Since n/x ≥ 2, we see n x -1 -1 x ≥ ( 1 -1 x ) ( n x -1 . )

$$\frac { n } { x } - 1 - \frac { 1 } { x } \geq \left ( 1 - \frac { 1 } { x } \right ) \left ( \frac { n } { x } - 1 \right ) ^ { \alpha - 1 }.$$

First assume that 1 &lt; α ≤ 2. So ( n x -1 ) ≥ ( n x -1 ) α -1 . Therefore,

This together with ( n/x -1) α ≥ 1 imply that g ′ ( x ) ≥ 0 for 0 &lt; x ≤ n/ 2 and so g is increasing.

Next, assume that 2 &lt; α ≤ 3. We have

$$g ^ { \prime \prime } ( x ) & = - 2 \alpha \left [ ( n - x ) ^ { \alpha - 1 } + x ^ { \alpha - 1 } \right ] + \alpha ( \alpha - 1 ) \left [ ( x - 1 ) ( n - x ) ^ { \alpha - 2 } + ( n - x - 1 ) x ^ { \alpha - 2 } \right ]. \\ \intertext { r...... } \,. \,. \,. \,. \,. \,. \,. \,. \,. \,. \,. \,. \,. \,. \,. \,. \,. \,. \,. \,. \,. \,. \,. \,. \,. \,. \,. \,. \,. \,. \,. \,. \,. \,. \,. \,. \,. \,. \,. \,. \,. \,. \,. \,. \,. \,. \,. \,. \,. \,. \,. \,. \,. \,. \,. \,.$$

Note that since 0 &lt; x ≤ n/ 2, ( n -x ) α -2 ( n -2 x +1) &gt; x α -2 ( n -2 x -1) which implies that

$$( n - x ) ^ { \alpha - 1 } - ( x - 1 ) ( n - x ) ^ { \alpha - 2 } > ( n - x - 1 ) x ^ { \alpha - 2 } - x ^ { \alpha - 1 }.$$

So we have

$$( n - x ) ^ { \alpha - 1 } + x ^ { \alpha - 1 } > ( x - 1 ) ( n - x ) ^ { \alpha - 2 } + ( n - x - 1 ) x ^ { \alpha - 2 }.$$

Since 1 &lt; α ≤ 3, 2 α &gt; α α ( -1) and so it follows that g ′′ ( x ) &lt; 0 for 0 &lt; x ≤ n/ 2. Hence g ′ is decreasing, and so g ′ ( x ) ≥ g ′ ( n/ 2) = 0, and again we are done. /square

## 3 Graphs with bounded connectivity

In this section we consider S α ( G ) for graphs G with bounded connectivity and disprove Conjecture 4 for α &lt; -1. Let G be an n -vertex graph with κ G ( ) ≤ k . Then G must be a subgraph of one of the graphs K k ∨ ( K r ∪ K n - -k r ) for some r = 1 , . . . , /floorleft ( n -k / ) 2 . In view of Lemma 5, it follows that (as /floorright observed in [2]) the extremal values of S α ( G ) correspond to one of the graphs K k ∨ ( K r ∪ K n - -k r ) for some r ∈ { 1 , . . . , /floorleft ( n -k / ) 2 /floorright} . We first compute the signless Laplacian eigenvalues of these graphs.

For a graph G , consider a partition P = { V , . . . , V 1 m } of V ( G ). The partition of P is equitable if each submatrix Q ij of Q G ( ) formed by the rows of V i and the columns of V j has constant row sums r ij . The m × m matrix R = ( r ij ) is called the quotient matrix of Q G ( ) with respect to P . The proof of the following theorem is similar to the one given in [1, p. 187] where a similar result is presented for Laplacian matrix.

Lemma 9. Any eigenvalue of the quotient matrix R is an eigenvalue of Q G ( ) .

Lemma 10. The signless Laplacian eigenvalues of K k ∨ ( K r ∪ K n - -k r ) for 1 ≤ k ≤ n -2 and 1 ≤ r ≤ ( n -k / ) 2 are

$$& ( n - 2 ) ^ { [ k ] }, \, ( k + r - 2 ) ^ { [ r - 1 ] }, \, ( n - r - 2 ) ^ { [ n - k - r - 1 ] }, \, n - 2 + \frac { k } { 2 } \pm \frac { 1 } { 2 } \sqrt { ( k - 2 n ) ^ { 2 } + 1 6 r ( k - n + r ) }, \\ &. &. &. &. &. &. &. &. &. &. &. &. &. &. &. &. &. &. &. &. &. &. &. &. &. &. &. &. &. &. &. &. &. &. &. &. &. &. &. &. &. &. &. &. &. &. &. &. &. &. &. &. &. &. &. &. &. &. &. &. &. &. &. &. &. &. &. &. &. &. &. &. &. &. &. &. &. &. &. &. &. &. &. &. &. &. &. &. &. &. &. &. &. &. &. &. &. &. &. &. &. &. &. &. &. &. &. &. &. &. &. &. &. &. &. &. &. &. &. &. &. &. &. &. &. &. &. &. &. &. &. &. &. &. &. &. &. &. &. &. &. &. &. &. &. &. &. &. &. &. &. &. &. &. &. &. &. &. &. &. &. &. &. &. &. &. &. &. &. &. &. &. &. &. &. &. &. &. &. &. &. &. &. &. &. &. &. &. &. &. &. &. &. &. &. &. &. &. &. &. &$$

where the exponents indicate multiplicities.

Proof. Let G = K k ∨ ( K r ∪ K n - -k r ). The partition of V ( G ) into the vertex sets of the subgraphs K ,K ,K k r n - -k r forms an equitable partition of Q G ( ). The corresponding quotient matrix is

$$\left ( \begin{array} { c c c } n + k - 2 & r & n - k - r \\ k & 2 r + k - 2 & 0 \\ k & 0 & 2 ( n - r - 1 ) - k \end{array} \right ), \\ \left ( \begin{array} { c c c } n + k - 2 & r & n - k - r \\ k & 2 r + k - 2 & 0 \\ k & 0 & 2 ( n - r - 1 ) - k \end{array} \right ),$$

with eigenvalues n -2 , n -2 + k 2 ± 1 2 √ ( k -2 n ) 2 +16 ( r k -n + ). r

To determine the rest of the eigenvalues, note that in the matrices Q G ( ) -( n -2) I , Q G ( ) -( k + r -2) I and Q G ( ) -( n -r -2) I , the rows corresponding to the vertices of K k , K r and K n - -k r , respectively, are identical. It follows that the nullities of the matrices Q G ( ) -( n -2) I , Q G ( ) -( k + r -2) I and Q G ( ) -( n - -r 2) I , are at least k -1, r -1 and n -k - -r 1, respectively. Therefore n -2, k + r -2 and n -r -2 are eigenvalues of Q G ( ) with multiplicities at least k -1, r -1 and n -k -r -1, respectively. So far we have obtained n -1 eigenvalues of Q G ( ). To determine the remaining eigenvalue we use the fact that the sum of all eigenvalues of Q G ( ) equals 2 ( e G ); it turns out that the remaining eigenvalue is also n -2. The proof is now complete. /square

The next proposition disproves Conjecture 4 for α &lt; -1.

Proposition 11. For any α &lt; -1 , any positive integer k and for large enough n , there exist k -connected graphs G with n vertices such that S α ( G &lt; b ) α ( n, k ) .

## Proof. Note that

$$\lim _ { n \to \infty } \left ( n - 2 + \frac { k } { 2 } - \frac { 1 } { 2 } \sqrt { ( k - 2 n ) ^ { 2 } + 1 6 ( k - n + 1 ) } \right ) = k.$$

For α &lt; -1, the other terms of b α ( n, k ) tends to zero as n →∞ . Hence

$$\lim _ { n \to \infty } b _ { \alpha } ( n, k ) = k ^ { \alpha }.$$

On the other hand, by Lemma 10, S α ( K k ∨ ( K ( n -k / ) 2 ∪ K ( n -k / ) 2 ) ) equals to

$$k ( n - 2 ) ^ { \alpha } + \frac { 1 } { 2 } ( n - k - 2 ) ( n + k - 4 ) ^ { \alpha } + \left ( n - 2 + \frac { k } { 2 } + \frac { 1 } { 2 } \sqrt { 4 k n - 3 k ^ { 2 } } \right ) ^ { \alpha } + \left ( n - 2 + \frac { k } { 2 } - \frac { 1 } { 2 } \sqrt { 4 k n - 3 k ^ { 2 } } \right ) ^ { \alpha }.$$

It is seen that for α &lt; -1,

$$\lim _ { n \to \infty } S _ { \alpha } \left ( K _ { k } \vee ( K _ { ( n - k ) / 2 } \cup K _ { ( n - k ) / 2 } ) \right ) = 0. \\ \intertext { a m a t i n d i n d i n d }$$

This means that for any positive integer k and for large enough n ,

$$S _ { \alpha } \left ( K _ { k } \vee \left ( K _ { ( n - k ) / 2 } \cup K _ { ( n - k ) / 2 } \right ) \right ) < b _ { \alpha } ( n, k ).$$

/square

## Acknowledgments

The author thanks Dr. B. Tayfeh-Rezaie for his comments on the manuscript.

## References

- [1] D.M. Cvetkovi´ c, P. Rowlinson, and S.K. Simi´ c, An Introduction to the Theory of Graph Spectra , Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 2010.
- [2] L. You and J. Yang, Notes on the sum of powers of the signless Laplacian eigenvalues of graphs, Ars Combinatoria 117 (2014), 10 pp.
F. Ashraf
On two conjectures on sum of the powers of signless Laplacian eigenvalues of a graph
Let $G$ be a simple graph and $Q(G)$ be the signless Laplacian matrix of $G$.
Let $S_\alpha(G)$ be the sum of the $\alpha$-th powers of the nonzero
eigenvalues of $Q(G)$. We disprove two conjectures by You and Yang on the
extremal values of $S_\alpha(G)$ among bipartite graphs and among graphs with
bounded connectivity.