Arxiv:2010.06378V2 [Math.CO] 28 May 2021 Isospectral Pnpolm Eae Oeeg Fgraphs

arXiv:2010.06378v2 [math.CO] 28 May 2021 isospectral pnpolm eae oeeg fgraphs. of energy to related problems open [ to and stesto l h ieeteigenvalues different the all of set the is daec arx The matrix. adjacency smtmsw iloi h rcs.Tesetu fΓi called is Γ of spectrum The braces). of the tiplicities omit will we (sometimes and nta fsyn httesetu fΓi ymti ritga,re integral, or symmetric is Γ of spectrum the that saying of instead fΓi endby defined is Γ of erfrt h ok [ books the to refer We 2010 phrases. and words Key atal upre yCNCTadSECyT-UNC. and CONICET by supported Partially e Γ Let e eagahof graph a be Γ Let integral ahmtc ujc Classification. Subject Mathematics hrceiealpsil parameters possible all characterize nybprierglrgah qinrei n o-sseta w graphs non-isospectral crown and the equienergetic are graphs regular bipartite only ui rpswt igelos( o-sseta ar)adconnec and pairs) non-isospectral = (5 (Γ isomorphis loops loops without to single graphs up with classifications graphs obtaining cubic graphs cubic equienergetic fadol fi sete ofrnegaho lei saped ai sq Latin pseudo a is it else or graph t conference equienergetic a is either graph is regular it has strongly if (i.e. a only that and prove if we this, using tl pn.Fnly ecnie ntr alygah vrrings over graphs Cayley unitary consider we Finally, open). still hwta if that show Abstract. rpso type of graphs opeetr qinrei fadol if only and if equienergetic complementary rp wt rwtotlos uhthat such loops) without or (with Γ graph 14 1 n Γ and o uvyo nryo rps e lotebo [ book the also see graphs, of energy on survey a for ] if λ if Spec OA and Spec 2 NRGLRGAH EQUIENERGETIC GRAPHS REGULAR ON R etogah ihtesm ubro etcs h rpsaesa are graphs The vertices. of number same the with graphs two be aaees.W locaatrz l opeetr equienerge complementary all characterize also We parameters). egv eesr n ucetcniin nteprmtr far a of parameters the on conditions sufficient and necessary give We (Γ − (Γ) safiieAtna igwt nee ubro oa atr,then factors, local of number even an with ring Artinian finite a is C 1 λ (2), = ) oniefrany for coincide n nry qinrei rps togyrglrgah,orthog graphs, regular strongly graphs, equienergetic Energy, spectrum ⊂ 6 IAD .PODEST A. RICARDO IHTERCOMPLEMENTS THEIR WITH C r[ or ] Spec etcs h ievle fΓaeteeigenvalues the are Γ of eigenvalues The vertices. Cr 3 and (3) Z oeie n ipysy htΓi ymti rintegral or symmetric is Γ that says simply one Sometimes . ( Spec n or ) (Γ 11 K 3 o opeevepito pcrlter fgraphs, of theory spectral of viewpoint complete a for ] 2 C Γ = (Γ) and ) fΓ denoted Γ, of C 5 nCmrnsheacy(h cases (the hierarchy Cameron’s in (5) K 1. 4 2 et o h aiyo togyrglrgah we Γ graphs regular strongly of family the for Next, . E or srg rmr 55;Scnay0C5 59,05E30. 05C92, 05C75, Secondary 05C50; Primary Introduction Γ = (Γ) ue1 2021 1, June equienergetic { Q λ { ( [ 3 htis that , λ ,k ,d e, k, n, λ .Te eso ht pt opeet,the complements, to up that, show we Then ). i i 1 j R 1 ] } X e i ,DNSE VIDELA E. DENIS A, ´ i E =1 n = 1 fΓcutdwt hi multiplicities their with counted Γ of , . . . , Γ = (Γ) F uhthat such ) | λ q m i × | . ( [ F λ λ if E q i ′ = ) ( s E ) esuycomplementary study We Γ). stepouto nt fields. finite 2 of product the is ] e i (Γ s E m } 1 Γ = (Γ) , = ) ( − t hi complements their ith λ G 22 E o every for ) E R (Γ hc otismany contains which ] e nerlcubic integral ted ( pciey The spectively. C t complement its o symmetric sfrconnected for ms ) Furthermore, Γ). = 1 and (1) 2 X .I scerb the by clear is It ). ( ,R R, aegraph uare i ar of pairs tic C nlarrays. onal { ∗ λ 4 are (4) egular .We ). λ G ∈ ftemul- the if i R } i n Spec is =1 energy fits of { (Γ), e i j id } 2 R.A. PODESTA,´ D.E. VIDELA definitions that isospectrality implies equienergeticity, but the converse does not hold in general. There are many papers on these problems (see for instance [3], [13], [17], [18], [31], [32], [33] and the references therein). This work deals with the following question: which regular graphs are equienergetic (and non-isospectral) with their own complements? If a graph Γ and its complement Γ are equienergetic we will say, as in [2] or [28], that they are complementary equienergetic graphs. Self-complementary graphs are trivially complementary equienergetic, so the interest is put on non self-complementary graphs. In the literature, there are few examples or classifications of complementary equienergetic graphs. There is a classification for double line graphs: if Γ is a regular graph, 2 2 then L (Γ) and L (Γ) are equienergetic if and only if Γ = K6 [29]. Ali et al [2] recently determined all (possible) complementary equienergetic graphs Γ and all (possible) complementary equienergetic line graphs L(Γ), where Γ has at most 10 vertices. They also showed that the incidence graph IG(ℓ,ℓ 1,ℓ 2) of a symmetric 2-design 2 (ℓ,ℓ 1,ℓ 2) is complementary equienergetic [−2]. In− [30], Ramane et al give some pairs− of complementary− − equienergetic graphs, such as the line graphs of complete bipartite graphs L(Km,n) with m, n 2 and two families of strongly regular graphs having parameters srg(4n2, 2n2 n, n2≥ n, n2 n) with n > 1 and srg(n2, 3n 3, n, 6) with n > 2. These families of− strongly− regular− graphs are part of a general family− (see Re- mark 5.6)). Furthermore, Ramane et al [28] recently proved that strongly regular graphs having orthogonal array (OA) parameters are complementary equienergetic. In this paper we deal with regular graphs (possibly with multiple loops at the vertices). By a systematic approach, we will give a complete answer to the question of complementary equienergeticity for bipartite regular graphs, for strongly regular graphs and for certain unitary Cayley graphs over rings, without loops in all the cases.

Outline and results. We now give the structure of the paper and summarize its main results. In Section 2, we study complementary equienergetic regular graphs (with or without loops) in general. In Proposition 2.3 we give an equivalent condition for the equienergeticity between Γ and Γ in terms of the parameters of Γ and other invariant that we deﬁne in (2.3), distinguishing three cases: no loops, single loops, and multiple loops per vertex. In fact, if Γ is k regular with n vertices and m is the maximum number of loops per vertex, then Γ is complementary equienergetic if and only if n =2k + f(m) where f(m) is certain integer number depending whether m = 0, m = 1 or m 2. We give some examples of complementary equienergetic graphs with m =1 or nm =≥ 2. As an application, in Section 3 we classify all connected cubic graphs with single loops which are complementary equienergetic (Proposition 3.1, only 5 non-isospectral pairs) and all connected integral cubic graphs equienergetic with their complements (Proposition 3.2, Γ must be K3K2 or the cube Q3). Also, we show that there are no distance-regular cubic graphs complementary equienergetic (Corollary 3.3) and no arc-transitive cubic graphs with girth g < 6 equienergetic with their complements (Corollary 3.4). In the next section, we consider bipartite regular graphs. We show that, up to complements, the only bipartite regular graphs equienergetic with their own complements are the crown graphs Cr(n) and the 4-cycle C4. In both cases, Γ and Γ are non-isospectral. ON REGULAR GRAPHS EQUIENERGETIC WITH THEIR COMPLEMENTS 3

In the following 3 sections, §5 through §7, we study the family of strongly regular graphs srg(n,k,e,d). In Section 5 we begin by showing that the only imprimitive connected strongly regular graph is the complete multipartite graph Km m with m 2. Then, in (5.3), we give a condition for complementary equienergeticity× of primitive≥ strongly regular graphs in terms of the parameters n, k, e and d. One of the main results in the paper is Theorem 5.4, which provides a classification of the parameters of complementary equienergetic primitive strongly regular graphs. There are three possibilities, either Γ is a conference graph with parameters srg(4d +1, 2d,d 1,d) for d 1 or else it has parameters − ≥ srg (2ℓ + ǫ)2, (ℓ h + ǫ)(2ℓ 1+ ǫ),d +2h, d − − where d =(ℓ h)(ℓ h + 1) with ǫ 0, 1 for some integers ℓ, h. − − ∈{ } In Section 6, as an application of the results in Section 5, we consider many subfamilies of strongly regular graphs and classify all complementary equienergetic graphs within these families. Namely, we characterize complementary equienergetic strongly regular having integral minimum eigenvalue s = m with m 2 (Propositions 6.1 and 6.3), triangle-free strongly regular graphs (Proposition− 6.5),≥ semiprimitive generalized Paley graphs (Proposition 6.6) and strongly regular graphs which are uniquely determined by their spectrum (Proposition 6.8). In Section 7, we give a full characterization of complementary equienergetic strongly regular graphs. The block graph of an orthogonal array is a strongly regular graph with parameters srg n2, m(n 1), m2 3m + n, m(m 1) . − − − Any strongly regular graph having these parameters is said to be a pseudo Latin square graph or that it has OA(n, m) parameters. A simple calculation shows that strongly regular graphs with OA parameters are equienergetic with their complement (see Propo- sition 7.1). This was first proved in [28]. The main result in the paper is the fact that the converse also holds, that is, if a strongly regular graph is complementary equienergetic then it must have OA parameters. More precisely, by using Theorem 5.4, we show that all primitive strongly regular graphs equienergetic with their complement are either conference graphs or else have OA parameters. Finally, in Theorem 7.3 we show that all strongly regular graphs equienergetic and non-isospectral with their complements have OA parameters. As a consequence of results in previous sections and Proposition 7.5, we characterize all complementary equienergetic pairs of graphs of type (1) (regular graphs) in the bipartite case, (2) (strongly regular graphs), (3) and (5) inC Cameron’s hierarchy (the cases (1) for non-bipartiteC graphs and (4) areC still open).C C C In the last section, we study another family of regular graphs which are not strongly regular in general, the unitary Cayley graphs over rings. Let GR be the Cayley graph X(R, R∗) where R is a finite commutative ring with identity. Such a ring has Artin decomposition R = R Rs where each Ri is local. We show that if R has an 1 ×···× even number of local factors (s even), then GR and GR are complementary equienergetic if and only if R is the product of two finite fields, i.e. R = Fq Fq . In this case, the 1 × 2 graph GR is an strongly regular graph. The classification of complementary equienergetic unitary Cayley graphs where R has an odd number s 3 of local factors seems difficult and remains open. ≥ 4 R.A. PODESTA,´ D.E. VIDELA

2. Equienergy conditions for Γ and Γ

In this section, we obtain a simple condition for the equienergeticity of Γ and Γ, when Γ is a regular graph (possibly with loops), that will be used throughout the paper. Consider the real functions 1 if x 0, ≥ (2.1) δ(x) := 1+ x x = 2x + 1 if 1 x 0, | |−| |  − ≤ ≤  1 if x 1. − ≤ − and, for each m 1,  ≥  m if x m, − ≥ (2.2) δm(x) := x m x =  2x + m if 0 x m, | − |−| | − ≤ ≤ m if x 0. ≤  We will need the following related invariants of a graph. If Γ is a k-regular graph with n vertices having eigenvalues k = λ λ λn, we deﬁne the numbers 1 ≥ 1 ≥···≥ (2.3) ∆(Γ) := δ(λ) and ∆m(Γ) := δm(λ) λ Sp′(Γ) λ Sp′(Γ) ∈X ∈X for m 1, where ≥ Sp′(Γ) = Spec(Γ) r λ = λ ,...,λn . { 1} { 2 } Note that δ(x) coincides with the sign function sgn(x) in Ic, where I =( 1, 0]. Thus, by (2.1) and (2.3) we have − ∆(Γ) = sgn(λ)+ (2λ + 1). λ Sp′(Γ) Ic λ Sp′(Γ) I ∈ X ∩ ∈ X ∩ We can write this more appropriately in the form (2.4) ∆(Γ) = sgn(λ)+ T + m(0) + S, λ Sp′(Γ), λ 1 ∈ X| |≥ where m(0) is the multiplicity of the 0-eigenvalue,

(2.5) T = # λ Sp′(Γ) : λ (0, 1) and S = (2λ + 1). { ∈ ∈ } λ Sp′(Γ) ( 1,0) ∈ X∩ − A similar expression as in (2.4) can be given for ∆m(Γ) for any m 2. ≥ Definition 2.1. We call the number ∆(Γ) defined in (2.3) the spectral discrepancy of Γ and we refer to the first sum in (2.4) as the spectral sign discrepancy of Γ and we denote it by σ(Γ), that is (2.6) σ(Γ) = sgn(λ). λ Sp′(Γ), λ 1 ∈ X| |≥ We recall from [27] that a graph Γ is said almost symmetric if m(λ)= m( λ) for every − λ = λ0 and strongly almost symmetric if in addition m(λ) m( λ) = 1. For instance, 6 | − − | + + it is proved there (see Theorem 3.6) that unitary Cayley sum graphs GR = X (R, R∗), where R is a finite Artinian ring of odd type with R odd, are strongly almost symmetric graphs with loops. | | ON REGULAR GRAPHS EQUIENERGETIC WITH THEIR COMPLEMENTS 5

We now consider some special cases of interest from (2.4). Lemma 2.2. Let Γ be a regular graph. (a) If Γ is integral then ∆(Γ) = m(0) + σ(Γ). (b) If Γ is bipartite (i.e. symmetric) then ∆(Γ) = m(0) 1+ T + S. − (c) If Γ is integral and bipartite we have ∆(Γ) = m(0) 1. − (d) If Γ is strongly almost symmetric then ∆(Γ) = m(0) + T + S. (e) If Γ is integral and strongly almost symmetric then ∆(Γ) = m(0).

Proof. First observe that if Γ is integral then T = S = 0. Item (a) follows by (2.4), and (c) and (e) are immediate from (b) and (d), respectively. To prove (b) and (d) recall that Γ is bipartite if and only if the spectrum is symmetric. Hence, the ﬁrst sum in (2.4) contributes 1. In fact, k and k are eigenvalues with the same multiplicity m, and we − − have removed λ1 = k from the summation. In the strongly almost symmetric case, the spectrum is symmetric unless for λ1 = k. Thus, the ﬁrst sum in (2.4) equals 0 in this case.

From now on, if Γ is a graph of n vertices with loops, and m is the maximum number of loops per vertex, the complement Γ is taken with respect to the complete graph Kn (m) with m-loops added to each vertex, which we denote by Kn∗ . Proposition 2.3. Let Γ be a k-regular graph with n vertices. Let m 0 be the maximum number of loops per vertex that Γ has. Then, E(Γ) = E(Γ) if and only≥ if 2k +1 ∆(Γ) if Γ is loopless (m = 0), − (2.7) n = 2k if Γ has single loops (m = 1),  2k (m 1) ∆m 1(Γ) if Γ has multiple loops (m 2). − − − − ≥  Proof. First notice that (2.8) E(Γ) = k + λ and E(Γ) = k¯ + λ¯ . ′ | | | | λ Sp (Γ) λ¯ Sp′(Γ) ∈X ∈X Secondly, if Γ has at most m loops per vertex (with m 0), the adjacency matrix ≥ of Γ is exactly J +(m 1)Id A, where Id is the identity matrix, A is the adjacency matrix of Γ and J is the− all 1’s−n n matrix. By orthogonality property of eigenvectors, × if k = λ λ λn are the eigenvalues of Γ, then the eigenvalues of Γ are 1 ≥ 2 ≥···≥ k¯ = λ¯ = n +(m 1) k and λ¯i =(m 1) λi for all i =2, . . . , n. 1 − − − − Now, we analyze the diﬀerent cases. If m = 1, we have that λ¯ = n k and λ¯i = λi 1 − | | | | for i =2,...,n, thus E(Γ) = E(Γ) if and only if n =2k, by (2.8). ¯ ¯ On the other hand, if Γ has no loops, then λ1 = n k 1 and λi = 1 λi for all i =2,...,n, thus we have − − − − E(Γ) = n k 1+ λ +1 . − − | | λ Sp′(Γ) ∈X Since by (2.1) we have 1+ λ = λ + δ(λ), | | | | 6 R.A. PODESTA,´ D.E. VIDELA we arrive at (2.9) E(Γ) = n k 1+ λ + δ(λ). − − | | λ Sp′(Γ) λ Sp′(Γ) ∈X ∈X In this way, by (2.8) and (2.9), we have that E(Γ) = E(Γ) if and only if n =2k+1 ∆(Γ), hence (2.7) holds in this case too. − Finally, if m 2, by the second identity in (2.8) we have ≥ E(Γ) = n +(m 1) k + λ (m 1) − − | − − | λ Sp′(Γ) ∈X = n +(m 1) k + λ + δm 1(λ). − − | | − λ Sp′(Γ) λ Sp′(Γ) ∈X ∈X In this way, by the ﬁrst identity in (2.8), we have that E(Γ) = E(Γ) if and only if n =2k +1 m ∆m 1(Γ) as we wanted to show, and the result follows. − − − Remark 2.4. (i) In the loopless case, (2.7) holds if and only if ∆(Γ) = σ(Γ)+T +m(0)+S is an integer, and since σ(Γ), T and m(0) are integers, (2.7) holds if and only if S Z. 1 ∈ Moreover, this in turn happens if and only if λ Z for every λ Sp′(Γ) ( 1, 0). ∈ 2m(λ) ∈ ∩ − In particular, if Γ has an irrational eigenvalue in ( 1, 0) then E(Γ) = E(Γ). − 6 (ii) A similar result to Proposition 2.3 was recently obtained in Corollary 4.3 of [23]. Namely, if Γ is a k-regular graph of n vertices, Γ and Γ¯ are equienergetic if and only if

n k 1= n−(Γ) (λ + 1), − − − λ Sp′(Γ) ( 1,0) ∈ X∩ − where n−(Γ) denotes the number of negative eigenvalues (we point out here that there is a sign typo in the right hand side in the original expression in [23]). Remark 2.5. (i) A necessary condition for complementary equienergeticity of k-regular graphs without loops can be given. From the inequality in Theorem 3.1 in [23] in the case of regular graphs we get E(Γ) E(Γ) 2(k n +1+ n−(Γ)). Thus, if Γ and Γ are equienergetic then we must have − ≤ −

(2.10) n−(Γ) n k 1= k. ≥ − − (ii) For a loopless complementary equienergetic k-regular graph Γ one can improve upper and lower bounds a little bit. In fact, if we have bounds f(Γ) E(Γ) g(Γ), for certain ≤ ≤ functions f,g, we have similar bounds for Γ. Assuming that E(Γ) = E(Γ) then it holds max f(Γ), f(Γ) E(Γ) min g(Γ),g(Γ) . { } ≤ ≤ { } For instance, we can take the Gutman-Oboudi’s lower bound E(Γ) 2kn for k-regular ≥ k+1 graphs with no eigenvalues in ( 1, 1) and the Koolen-Moulton’s upper bound (see [15] and [20]). In the case of k-regular− graphs of n vertices we have 2kn E(Γ) k + (n 1)k(n k). k +1 ≤ ≤ − − By using the same bounds for Γ with regularityp degree n k 1, if Γ and Γ are equienergetic (both with no eigenvalues λ < 1), then we have − − | | 2kn 2(n k 1)n − − (2.11) max k+1 , n k E(Γ) min g(k),g(n k 1) , − ≤ ≤ − − ON REGULAR GRAPHS EQUIENERGETIC WITH THEIR COMPLEMENTS 7 where g(k)= k + (n 1)k(n k). − − We now considerp some complementary equienergetic graphs with loops. The following is automatic from the previous result. Corollary 2.6. The set of all complementary equienergetic k-regular graphs with single loops are precisely those having 2k vertices.

Given a graph Γ with or without loops, we will denote by Γ∗ the regular graph obtained by Γ by adding all necessary loops (at most one loop per vertex). Hence, Γ has only vertices of degree 2 or 3. In this case, if Γ∗ has n vertices, we take its complement with respect to Kn∗. Example 2.7. (i) We consider the following two families of k-regular graphs: cycle graphs with single loops Cn∗ n 3 (3-regular) and paths with single loops at the ends Pn∗ n 2 (2-regular). By ({2.7),} the≥ graphs are complementary equienergetic if n = 2k{. Thus,} ≥ the only graphs equienergetic with their complements in these families are C6∗ and P4∗. However, they are isospectral with their complements. In fact, we have 1 2 2 1 Spec(C∗)= [3] , [2] , [0] , [ 1] = Spec(C ), 6 { − } 6∗ hence E(C6∗) = 8. The graphs C6∗ and C6∗ are non-isomorphic since C6∗ has no loops. Moreover, P4∗ is isomorphic to P4∗ (so trivially equienergetic and isospectral). We have 1 1 1 1 Spec(P ∗)= [2] , [√2] , [0] , [ √2] and thus E(P ∗) = 2(1+ √2). 4 { − } 4 (ii) We now study regular graphs with single loops of 4 vertices. By (2.7), the graphs equienergetic with their complements in this family must be 2-regular. There are only two possibilities, Γ1 = P2∗ P2∗ with complement C4 and Γ2 = P4∗ which is self-complementary. In fact, we have ∪ 2 2 1 2 1 Spec(P ∗ P ∗)= [2] , [0] and Spec(C )= [2] , [0] , [ 2] 2 ∪ 2 { } 4 { − } (hence P ∗ P ∗ and C are non-isospectral), and E(P ∗ P ∗) = E(C ) = 4. The graph 2 ∪ 2 4 2 ∪ 2 4 P4∗ was treated in (i). ♦ Example 2.8. There are graphs with multiple loops per vertex (m 2) which are ≥ complementary equienergetic. If Γ is a graph we denote by Γ∗∗ the regular graph obtained from Γ by adding one or two loops to Γ if it is not regular or the graph with 2 loops added to every vertex if Γ is already regular. Denote by P0 the graph with a single vertex. Consider the graph Γ = P ∗∗ P ∗. This graph is not connected, 2-regular with spectrum 0 ∪ 2 Spec(Γ) = [2]2, [1]1, [ 1]1 . { − } The complement (with respect to K4∗∗) is the graph Γ= G∗∗, where G is the graph with 4 vertices and 4 edges which is not the 4-cycle. The graph Γ is a connected 3-regular graph with spectrum Spec(Γ) = [3]1, [2]1, [0]1, [ 1]1 . { − } Hence E(Γ) = E(Γ) = 6. This is in coincidence with expression (2.7) in the case m = 2. In fact, for Γ∗∗ expression (2.7) reads 4=3 ∆ (Γ∗∗) and hence − 1 4=3 δ (λ)=3 δ (2) + δ (1) + δ ( 1) =3 ( 1)+( 1)+1 − 1 −{ 1 1 1 − } −{ − − } λ=λ0 X6 showing that Γ is equienergetic with Γ. ♦ 8 R.A. PODESTA,´ D.E. VIDELA

3. Cubic graphs

Here, as an application of the results in the previous section, we classify all connected cubic (i.e. 3-regular or trivalent) graphs which are equienergetic with their complements for two families: (i) connected cubic graphs with single loops, (ii) integral cubic graphs (loopless). Also, we show that there are no complementary equienergetic cubic loopless graphs at all for two other families: (iii) distance-regular cubic graphs and (iv) arc- transitive cubic graphs with girth g < 6 (or exceptional such graphs with g = 6). We will use the list of connected non-isomorphic graphs of 6 vertices given in [12]. There are 112 such graphs. We will denote by Γn the graph numbered n in Table 1 in [12] and by Γn∗ the regular graph with loops obtained from Γn. Proposition 3.1. Up to isomorphisms, there are only 5 pairs of connected cubic graphs with single loops equienergetic (non-isomorphic) with their complements. The complementary equienergetic pairs are

Γ , Γ∗ , Γ∗ , Γ∗ , Γ∗ , Γ∗ , Γ∗ , Γ∗ , Γ∗ , Γ∗ . { 51 106} { 69 93} { 70 92} { 72 89} { 74 84} The graphs in each pair are non-isospectral. The graphs in the ﬁrst and third pairs are equienergetic.

Proof. By (2.7) in Proposition 2.3, the complementary equienergetic 3-regular graphs with loops must have 6 vertices. By using the list of non-isomorphic graphs of 6 vertices in Table 1 in [12], and considering only those graphs Γ having only degree 2 or 3, by taking Γ∗ we get all 3-regular graphs with loops. There are 11 graphs in this list having degrees 2 or 3 only, namely Γ = C C , 51 3 ⊗ 3 Γ52 = K3,3 (which are 3-regular) and Γ69, Γ70, Γ72, Γ74, Γ84, Γ89, Γ92, Γ93 and Γ106. So, we consider the graphs Γ51, Γ52, Γ69∗ , Γ70∗ , Γ72∗ , Γ74∗ , Γ84∗ , Γ89∗ , Γ92∗ , Γ93∗ and Γ106∗ .

One can check that the complement of Γ52 (with respect to K6∗) is C3∗ C3∗, which is not connected, and hence we discard this graphs. Also, analyzing the complements∪ of the remaining ten graphs we see that we have the following 5 pairs of graphs and their complements: Γ , Γ∗ , Γ∗ , Γ∗ , Γ∗ , Γ∗ , Γ∗ , Γ∗ and Γ∗ , Γ∗ . { 51 106} { 69 93} { 70 92} { 72 89} { 74 84} In Table 1 we give the graphs, their spectra and the energies. Table 1. Complementary equienergetic connected cubic graphs with loops graph spectrum energy 1 1 2 2 Γ51 [3] , [1] , [0] , [ 2] 8 { 1 2 2 − 2} Γ106∗ [3] , [2] , [0] , [ 1] 8 1 { 1 1 −2 } 1 Γ69 [3] , [√3] , [1] , [ 1] , [ √3] 6+2√3 9, 4641 { 1 1 2 − 1 − 1} ≃ Γ93∗ [3] , [√3] , [1] , [ 1] , [ √3] 6+2√3 9, 4641 { 1 1 2 − 1 − 1 } ≃ Γ70 [3] , [2] , [0] , [ 1] , [ 2] 8 { 1 1 1 − 2 − 1 } Γ92∗ [3] , [2] , [1] , [0] , [ 2] 8 1 { 1 1 1 − 1 } 1 Γ72 [3] , [√2] , [1] , [0] , [ √2] , [ 2] 6+2√2 8, 8242 { 1 1 1 1 − 1 − 1} ≃ Γ∗ [3] , [2] , [√2] , [0] , [ 1] , [ √2] 6+2√2 8, 8242 89 { − − } ≃ 1 √17 1 1 3 1 √17 1 √ Γ74 [3] , [ 2− ] , [0] , [ − −2 ] 3+ 17 7, 1231 { 1 √17+1 1 3 1 √17 1} ≃ Γ∗ [3] , [ ] , [0] , [ − ] 3+ √17 7, 1231 84 { 2 − 2 } ≃

The remaining assertions are clear from the previous table. ON REGULAR GRAPHS EQUIENERGETIC WITH THEIR COMPLEMENTS 9

From now on, we will only consider loopless graphs in the paper with the exception of the last result in Proposition 8.7.

We recall that the Cartesian product of two graphs Γ1 = (V1, E1) and Γ2 = (V2, E2), denoted by Γ1Γ2, is the graph with vertex set V = V1 V2 and (v1, v2) (w1,w2) if and only if v = w and v w or v w and v = w . × ∼ 1 1 2 ∼ 2 1 ∼ 1 2 2 Proposition 3.2. Up to isomorphisms, the only connected integral complementary equienergetic cubic graphs are the 3-prism K3K2 (non-bipartite) with E(K3K2) = 8 and the cube graph Q3 (bipartite) with E(Q3) = 12. Moreover, the graphs in the pairs K K , K K and Q , Q are mutually non-isospectral. { 3 2 3 2} { 3 3} Proof. The classiﬁcation of connected integral cubic graphs were done independently by Bussemaker and Cvetkovic [7] and Schwenk [35] in 1976. There are only 13 such graphs, 8 of them are bipartite. The graphs and their spectra are given in Table 2 (bipartite graphs are listed ﬁrst), taken from the Brouwer-Haemers’ book [6]. Here, if G is a graph

Table 2. All connected integral cubic graphs # graph name n spectrum 4 1 K3,3 6 3, 0 3 ± 3 2 Q3 =2 cube 8 3, ( 1) ± ± 2 2 3 K2∗,3 K2 10 3, 2, ( 1) , 0 ⊗ ± ± ± 4 4 C6K2 12 3, 2, 1, 0 ± ± 4± 5 5 Π K2 Desargues 20 3, ( 2) , ( 1) ⊗ ± ± 4 ± 5 6 T ∗ K2 20 3, ( 2) , ( 1) ⊗ ± ± 6 ± 3 4 7 Σ K2 24 3, ( 2) , ( 1) , 0 8 GQ⊗(2, 2) Tutte-Coxeter 30 ± 3±, ( 2)±9, 010 ± ± 3 9 K4 4 3, ( 1) 2− 2 10 K3K2 6 3, 1, 0 , ( 2) 11 Π Petersen 10 3, 15, ( −2)4 3 −2 3 12 (Π K2)/σ 10 3, 2, 1 , ( 1) , ( 2) 13 ⊗Σ 12 3, 23, 02, (− 1)3, (− 2)3 − − (The Tutte-Coxeter graph is also known as the Levi graph or Tutte’s 8-cage.) with degrees 2 or 3, G∗ denotes the 3-regular graph obtained from G adding loops to the vertices of degree 2 (see the rest of notations in [6]). 3 Let us see that no graph Γ from the table, except for the graphs Q3 =2 and K3K2, is equienergetic with its complement. Note that although G∗ has loops, G∗ K2 is loopless by deﬁnition of the Kronecker product. Thus, since Γ is loopless and 3-regular,⊗ the condition E(Γ) = E(Γ) is, by Proposition 2.3, equivalent to (3.1) ∆(Γ)=7 n. − Now, if Γ is bipartite (#1–#8), by (c) in Lemma 2.2 we have that Γ and Γ are equienergetic if and only if m(0) = 8 n. − Since m(0) 0 and 8 n < 0 for n 10 we only have to check this condition for the ≥ − ≥ graphs #1 and #2. For K , we have 4 = 2 while for Q we have 0 = 0. Hence Q 3 3 6 3 3 10 R.A. PODESTA,´ D.E. VIDELA is equienergetic with its complement. In fact, Q has spectrum [4], [2], [0]3, [ 2]2 and 3 { − } E(Q3)= E(Q3) = 12. Furthermore, Q3 and Q3 are non-isospectral. Now, if Γ is non-bipartite (#9–#13), condition (3.1) for equienergy now reads 7 n = σ(Γ) + m(0) − by (a) in Lemma 2.2. One can check that this equation is only satisﬁed by graph #10, i.e. K K . Also, we have Spec(K K ) = [2], [1]2, [ 1]2, [ 2] . Therefore, E(K K ) = 3 2 3 2 { − − } 3 2 E(K3K2) = 8 and K3K2 and its complement are non-isospectral, thus concluding the proof. Corollary 3.3. There are no distance-regular nor distance-transitive cubic graphs equienergetic with their own complement.

Proof. There are 13 finite distance-regular cubic graphs. In 1971, Biggs and Smith ([5]) classified the finite distance-transitive cubic graphs (hence also distance-regular), and found 12. The remaining one, the Tutte’s 12-cage or Benson graph (which is not distance- transitive), was found 15 years later by Biggs et al ([4]). The graphs and their spectra are given in Table 3.

Table 3. All ﬁnite distance-regular cubic graphs # graph n spectrum dist.-trans. 3 1 K4 (tetrahedron) 4 3, 1 yes − 4 2 K3,3 (utility) 6 3, 0 yes ± 3 3 Q3 (cube) 8 3, ( 1) yes 4 Petersen 10 3±, 15, (± 2)4 yes − 5 Heawood 14 3, ( √6)6 yes ± ± 6 Pappus 18 3, ( √3)6, 04 yes ± ± 7 dodecahedron 20 3, ( √5)3, 15, 04, ( 2)4 yes 8 Desargues 20 ±3, ( 2)4, ( 1)−5 yes ± ± ± 9 Coxeter 28 3, (1 + √2)6, 28, (1 √2)6, ( 1)7 yes 10 Tutte-Coxeter 30 3, ( 2)9−, 010 − yes 11 Foster 90 3,±( 2)±9, ( 1)18, 010 yes ±9 18± 16 17− 16 9 16 12 Biggs-Smith 102 3,λ1, 2 ,λ2 , 0 ,λ3 ,λ4,λ5 yes 13 Tutte’s 12-cage 126 3, ( √6)21, ( √2)27, 028 no ± ± ± 2 3 2 Here, x x 4=(x λ1)(x λ4) and x +3x 3=(x λ2)(x λ3)(x λ5). So λ =2−.562−.., λ =0−.879...,−λ = 1.347..., λ =− 1.562−... and λ−= 2.532− ... 1 2 3 − 4 − 5 − As in the proof of the previous corollary, we have to check if (3.1) is satisﬁed. The graphs K3,3, Q3, Petersen, Desargues and Tutte-Coxeter were checked in the previous proof. The remaining cases can be checked analogously and we omit the details. Note that both the Coxeter graph and the Biggs-Smith graph are not equienergetic with their complements by Remark 2.4, since they have an irrational eigenvalue inside ( 1, 0). − Corollary 3.4. There are no arc-transitive cubic graphs of girth g < 6 or exceptional arc-transitive cubic graphs with g =6 equienergetic with their complements.

Proof. It is well-known that there only 5 arc-transitive cubic graphs with g < 6, namely K4, K3,3, the cube Q3, the Petersen graph Π and the dodecahedron graph. They were ON REGULAR GRAPHS EQUIENERGETIC WITH THEIR COMPLEMENTS 11 all discarded in Proposition 3.2 and Corollary 3.3. The exceptional arc-transitive cubic graphs with g = 6 are ([21]) Heawood graphs, the Pappus graph, the Desargues graph and the Möbius-Kantor graph. The first three graphs were discarded in Corollary 3.3. The Möbius-Kantor graph ΓMK has 16 vertices with spectrum

4 3 3 4 Spec(ΓMK )= [3], [√3] , [1] , [ 1] , [ √3] , [ 3] . { − − − } One can check that (2.7) does not hold and hence by Proposition 2.3 the graph ΓMK is not equienergetic with its complement.

Other families of cubic graphs can be considered, such as vertex-transitive cubic graphs, edge-transitive cubic graphs and symmetric (vertex and edge transitive) cubic graphs. However, this families are only classiﬁed up to some number of vertices N (diﬀerent in each case). Nevertheless, one could look for examples of complementary equienergetic (non-isospectral) graphs in these families or classify all such graphs up to N.

4. Bipartite regular graphs

Here we characterize all bipartite graphs which are equienergetic with their own complements. We recall that a graph is said bipartite if it has a bipartition of its vertices such that vertices in the same partition are not neighbors. This automatically implies that bipartite graphs are loopless. There are some equivalences such as: Γ is a bipartite graph if and only if Γ has chromatic number χ(Γ) = 2 or if and only if Γ has only even length cycles. In the case of regular bipartite graphs there are easy spectral conditions: if Γ is k-regular, then Γ is bipartite if and only if Spec(Γ) is symmetric, or more generally, if and only if k Spec(Γ). − ∈ The most common bipartite regular graph is the complete bipartite graph Kt,t which is a graph with 2t vertices and (t, t)-bipartition such that any vertex of one part is connected with all of the vertices of the other part, hence t-regular. Another important example of bipartite regular graph is the crown graph Cr(t), obtained from Kt,t by deleting any perfect matching (hence (t 1)-regular). The crown graph can also be obtained in many − other ways, for instance as the Kronecker product of the complete graphs K Kt. 2 ⊗ In the following result we show that the only bipartite regular graphs which are equienergetic and non-isospectral with their complements are essentially the crown graphs. Theorem 4.1. Let Γ be a regular bipartite graph. Then Γ and Γ are equienergetic if and only if Γ= C or Γ= Cr(t) with t 2. In this case E(C )=4 and E(Cr(t)) = 4(t 1). 4 ≥ 4 − Moreover, Γ and Γ are both integral and non-isospectral to each other.

Proof. We ﬁrst show that crown graphs and their complements are equienergetic non- isospectral graphs. Let Γ = Cr(t) with t 2. For t = 2, Cr(2) is the disjoint union of ≥ two copies of K2, and so we have that (4.1) Spec(Cr(2)) = Spec(2K )= [1]2, [ 1]2 . 2 { − } The complement of Cr(2) is C4, the cycle of length 4, then Spec(Cr(2)) = Spec(C )= [2]1, [0]2, [ 2]1 . 4 { − } Clearly Cr(2) and C4 are equienergetic with E(Cr(2)) = E(C4) = 4 and non-isospectral. 12 R.A. PODESTA,´ D.E. VIDELA

In general, for any t 2, since Cr(t)= K Kt, the spectrum of this graph is ≥ 2 ⊗ 1 t 1 t 1 1 Spec(Cr(t)) = [t 1] , [1] − , [ 1] − , [ (t 1)] { − − − − } (note that for t = 2 we have (4.1)). Since Cr(t) is k-regular with k = t 1 and has n =2t vertices, by (c) in Lemma 2.2 we have − 1= m(0) 1=∆(Γ)=2k +1 n = 1 − − − − and thus, by Proposition 2.3, the graphs Γ and Γ¯ are equienergetic, with energy E(Γ) = E(Γ) = 4(t 1). − Notice that Γ is non-bipartite for t 3, since it has a complete graph of t 3 vertices as induced subgraph, so Γ has at least≥ one odd length cycle. This implies that≥ Γ has no symmetric spectra. Therefore, the graphs Γ and Γ are non-isospectral. Now, we show that if Γ is a bipartite regular graph, equienergetic with its complement, then it must be a crown graph or C4. Assume that Γ is a bipartite k-regular graph (hence loopless) with n =2t vertices, equienergetic with Γ. Then, by item (b) of Lemma 2.2, we have that (4.2) ∆(Γ) = m(0) 1+ T + S, − Since Γ has symmetric spectrum, we have that

T = #(Sp′(Γ) (0, 1)) = #(Sp′(Γ) ( 1, 0)) ∩ ∩ − and thus T + S = 1+ (2λ +1)=2 (λ + 1) 0. ≥ λ Sp′(Γ) ( 1,0) λ Sp′(Γ) ( 1,0) λ Sp′(Γ) ( 1,0) ∈ X∩ − ∈ X∩ − ∈ X∩ − Using that Γ and Γ are equienergetic, by Proposition 2.3 and (4.2), we have that k = 1 (n 2+ m(0) + T + S)= t 1+ 1 (m(0) + T + S). 2 − − 2 Now, m(0)+ T + S must be a non-negative even integer and k t leave us with only two possibilities; either m(0)+ T + S = 0, and hence k = t 1, or else≤ m(0)+ T + S = 2, and thus k = t. −

Assume ﬁrst that k = t. In this case Γ is the complete bipartite graph Kt,t with complement the disjoint union of two complete graphs of t vertices Kt,t =2Kt. Since 1 2t 2 1 2 2t 2 Spec(Kt,t)= [t] , [0] − , [ t] and Spec(2Kt)= [t 1] , [ 1] − , { − } { − − } we have that E(Kt,t)=2t and E(2Kt)=4t 4. Clearly, E(Kt,t)= E(2Kt) if and only if t = 2, i.e. when Γ is the cycle of length 4. − Finally, if k = t 1, there is only one bipartite t 1 regular graph with n =2t vertices, − − which is obtained from the complete bipartite graph Kt,t by removing a perfect matching. This complete the proof.

Remark 4.2. (i) The equienergetic pair of non-isospectral graphs C4,K2 K2 is well- known. As we showed in the theorem and its proof, they are the ﬁrs{ t pair⊗ of an} inﬁnite family of pairs of equienergetic non-isospectral graphs, the only possible one for bipartite regular graphs. It is also known that C6 and C6 are equienergetic. Note that C6 = Cr(3). The cube graph Q3 from Proposition 3.2, which is bipartite, is isomorphic to Cr(4). (ii) Note that the only connected regular bipartite graph with n 4 whose complement ≥ is also bipartite is C4. ON REGULAR GRAPHS EQUIENERGETIC WITH THEIR COMPLEMENTS 13

As a direct consequence, we obtain the following result. Corollary 4.3. For any t 2, there exist regular graphs of 2t vertices equienergetic and non-isospectral with their own≥ complements.

5. General strongly regular graphs

Here we will characterize the parameters of strongly regular graphs which are complementary equienergetic. For a primitive strongly regular graph we will give a simple criterion to decide whether it is complementary equienergetic or not. Let Γ be a regular graph that is neither complete nor empty. Then Γ is said to be strongly regular with parameters (n,k,e,d) if it is k-regular with n-vertices, every pair of adjacent vertices has e common neighbors, and every pair of distinct nonadjacent vertices has d common neighbors. If Γ is strongly regular with parameters (n,k,e,d), then its complement Γ¯ is also strongly regular with parameters (n, k,¯ e,¯ d¯), where k¯ = n k 1, − − e¯ = n 2 2k + d and d¯= n 2k + e. − − − A strongly regular graph Γ is called primitive if both Γ and Γ are connected, otherwise is called imprimitive. It is known that the only connected strongly regular graph which is imprimitive is the complete multipartite graph Ka m of a parts of size m with parameters × srg(am, (a 1)m, (a 2)m, (a 1)m), − − − with complement the disjoint union of copies of the complete graphs Km m = aKm with parameters × srg(am, m 1, m 2, 0). − − The following proposition shows that the only connected imprimitive strongly regular graphs which are equienergetic with their complements are the complete multipartite graphs with the same number of parts than the size of the parts. Proposition 5.1. Let Γ be a connected imprimitive strongly regular graph. Then, Γ and Γ are equienergetic if and only if Γ = Km m for some m > 1. In this case Γ and Γ¯ are × not isospectral. Moreover, we have E(Km m)=2(m 1)m and hence 4 E(Km m). × − | ×

Proof. Let Γ be an imprimitive connected strongly regular graph. Then Γ = Ka m for some integers a, m 2. The spectrum of Γ is × ≥ 1 a(m 1) a 1 (5.1) Spec(Γ)= [(a 1)m] , [0] − , [ m] − . { − − } Thus, by (a) in Lemma 2.2, Γ satisﬁes ∆(Γ) = m(0) + σ(Γ) = a(m 1) (a 1) = am 2a +1. − − − − Since Γ has n = am vertices and regularity degree k =(a 1)m, Proposition 2.3 implies that Γ and Γ¯ are equienergetic if and only if − am 2a +1=∆(Γ)=2k +1 n = 2(a 1)m +1 am = am 2m +1, − − − − − which clearly holds if and only if a = m. In this case, Γ and Γ¯ are not isospectral since they have diﬀerent degree of regularity. The remaining assertions are straightforward. 14 R.A. PODESTA,´ D.E. VIDELA

Remark 5.2. Recently, in [15], the authors give the following lower bound for the energy of a t-regular graph Γ of n vertices without eigenvalues in the interval ( 1, 1), − (5.2) E(Γ) 2tn , ≥ t+1 with equality if and only if Γ is the complete graph Kt+1 or the crown graph Cr(t + 1). This is in coincidence with Theorem 4.1. Note that the complete bipartite graph Km m in the previous proposition also satisﬁes the equality in (5.2), but has 0 as one of× its eigenvalues (see (5.1)). However, inequality (5.2) cannot be extended to all regular graphs without the restriction of having no eigenvalues in ( 1, 1), since the graph K3K2 given in Table 1 (see the proof of Proposition 3.2) has eigenvalues− in ( 1, 1) and the inequality does not hold. Also, notice that (5.2) cannot be extended for regular− graphs with loops without the restriction of no eigenvalues in ( 1, 1). In fact, C6∗ is 3-regular complementary equienergetic with 6 vertices and energy 8− having 0 as an eigenvalue (see Example 2.7), hence (5.2) would read 8 9, which is absurd. ≥ We now give a simple necessary and suﬃcient condition, in terms of the parameters, for a primitive strongly regular graph srg(n,k,e,d) to be equienergetic with its complement. We will need the following notation (5.3) α =(e d)2 + 4(k d). − − Proposition 5.3. Let Γ be a primitive strongly regular graph with parameters srg(n,k,e,d). Then, Γ and Γ are equienergetic if and only if 2k(√α + 1) (5.4) n = +1. √α (e d) − − Proof. It is well-known that any connected strongly regular graph have exactly three eigenvalues k,r,s, where the non trivial eigenvalues are given by (5.5) r = 1 (e d + √α) and s = 1 (e d √α) 2 − 2 − − with multiplicities n 1 2k+(n 1)(e d) n 1 2k+(n 1)(e d) (5.6) mr = − − − and ms = − + − − . 2 − 2√α 2 2√α Since Γ is primitive we have that d e d . On the other hand, √α > e d+2, since this inequality is equivalent to k e> 1| which− | is trivially true. These observations− imply that k>r> 0 and s < 1. By− (2.5), we have T = S = m(0) = 0. − By Proposition 2.3, E(Γ) = E(Γ) if and only if ∆(Γ) = 2k +1 n. By(2.4), we have − 2k+(n 1)(e d) (5.7) ∆(Γ) = δ(λ)= mr ms = − − . − − √α λ Sp′(Γ) ∈X After routine computations we obtain that ∆(Γ) = 2k+1 n if and only if (5.4) holds. − Note: This proposition appeared recently in [28] with a similar proof, using the expressions for the energies. Our proof is slightly simpler, and obtained as a direct consequence of a the more general fact given in Proposition 2.3. Using the previous proposition we now characterize the parameters of all primitive strongly regular graphs which are equienergetic with their complements. We recall that a conference graph is any strongly regular graph with parameters (5.8) srg(4t +1, 2t, t 1, t). − ON REGULAR GRAPHS EQUIENERGETIC WITH THEIR COMPLEMENTS 15

It is well-known that they exist if and only if n =4d + 1 is the sum of two perfect squares, and that if Γ is a strongly regular graph which is not a conference graph, then it is integral. Theorem 5.4. Let Γ= srg(n,k,e,d) be a primitive strongly regular graph. Then, Γ and Γ are equienergetic if and only if one of the following 3 cases occur (provided they exist):

(a) If e d = 1, then Γ=Γd = srg(4d +1, 2d,d 1,d) Γ is a conference graph with − − − ≃ d 1. In this case, E(Γ) = 2d(1 + √4d + 1). ≥ 2 (b) If e d =2h with h Z, then Γ=Γh,ℓ = srg(4ℓ ,k,d +2h, d) with − ∈ k =(ℓ h)(2ℓ 1) and d =(ℓ h)(ℓ h 1), − − − − − where √α = 2ℓ +1 for some ℓ N such that ℓ / h, (h + 1) . In this case, E(Γ) = 2(ℓ h)(2ℓ 1)(ℓ + h + 1)∈. ∈ {± ± } − − 2 (c) If e d =2h 1 for h Z r 0 , then Γ=Γ′ = srg((2ℓ +1) ,k,d +2h 1,d) with − − ∈ { } h,ℓ − k =2ℓ(ℓ h + 1) and d =(ℓ h)(ℓ h + 1), − − − where √α = 2ℓ for some ℓ N such that ℓ / h, (h + 1), h 1 . In this case E(Γ) = 4ℓ(ℓ h + 1)(ℓ + h +∈ 1). ∈ {± − − } − Moreover, if Γ is not a conference graph, E(Γ) is divisible by 4.

Proof. (a) Assume ﬁrst that e d = 1. By Proposition 5.3, Γ and Γ are equienergetic if and only if − − 2k(√α + 1) n = +1=2k +1. √α (e d) − − Now, recall that the parameters of any srg(n,k,e,d) satisfy the relation (5.9) k(k e 1) = d(n k 1). − − − − Since k = 0, we have that k 1 e = d and thus k = 2d. Therefore, Γ is strongly regular with6 parameters (4d +1− , 2−d,d 1,d), i.e. Γ is a conference graph. It is known − that conference graphs are self-complementary, so that Γ and Γ are trivially equienergetic. The energy is given by

E(Γ) = k + mrr + ms s =2d +2d(r + s )=2d(1 + √4d + 1), | | | | where we have used (5.5) and (5.6). (b) Suppose that e d =2h for some integer h. Since Γ is not a conference graph, the spectrum of Γ is integral− and hence, from (5.5), α is a perfect square, say α = a2 with a N. Thus, by (5.3) we have ∈ k = 1 (a2 4h2)+ d. 4 − Since k is an integer, then a =2ℓ for some ℓ N and thus ∈ k =(ℓ h)(ℓ + h)+ d. − Notice that if ℓ = h, then k = d which cannot occur since Γ is primitive by hypothesis. So √α (e d) =± 2(ℓ h) = 0. Now, if Γ and Γ are equienergetic, by Proposition 5.3 we have− that− − 6 2k(√α+1) k(2ℓ+1) (5.10) n = √α (e d) +1= ℓ h +1. − − − 16 R.A. PODESTA,´ D.E. VIDELA

Now, on the one hand we have k e 1 = (ℓ2 h2 + d) (d +2h) 1 − − − − − = ℓ2 (h + 1)2 =(ℓ h 1)(ℓ + h + 1), − − − and on the other hand, by (5.10), we have k(2ℓ+1) k(ℓ+h+1) n k 1= ℓ h +1 k 1= ℓ h . − − − − − − Putting together these last two expressions in (5.9), and canceling k = 0 on both sides, we get 6 (ℓ h)(ℓ h 1)(ℓ + h +1)= d(ℓ + h + 1). − − − If ℓ = (h + 1), then Γ has e + 2 vertices and regularity degree equal to e + 1. But the only regular− graph with these parameters is the complete graph, which is not primitive. Since Γ is primitive, we must have ℓ = (h + 1) and thus 6 − d =(ℓ h)(ℓ h 1). − − − Notice that in this case if ℓ = h + 1, then d = 0 which cannot occur by primitivity of Γ. Therefore we get k = (ℓ h)(2ℓ 1) and n = (2ℓ 1)(2ℓ +1)+1 = 4ℓ2 with ℓ h, (h + 1) as asserted. − − − 6∈ {± ± } 1 Finally, by taking into account that 0

E(Γ) = k + rmr sms = 2(ℓ h)(2ℓ 1)(ℓ + h + 1). − − − (c) Now, suppose that e d =2h 1 for some 0 = h Z. Hence, Γ is not a conference 2 − N− 6 ∈ 1 2 2 Z graph and thus α = a with a , so we obtain that k = 4 (a (2h + 1) )+ d . Then a is odd, say a =2ℓ + 1 for∈ some ℓ N, and thus − ∈ ∈ k =(ℓ2 + ℓ)(h2 h)+ d =(ℓ h + 1)(ℓ + h)+ d. − − We have that ℓ = h 1 and ℓ = h (otherwise k = d, which cannot occur since Γ is primitive by hypothesis)6 − and thus6 −√α (e d) = 2(ℓ h + 1) = 0. If Γ and Γ¯ are equienergetic, by Proposition 5.3 we have− that− − 6 2k(√α+1) 2k(ℓ+1) n = √α (e d) +1= ℓ h+1 +1. − − − As in (b), we have k e 1 = (ℓ h + 1)(ℓ + h)+ d (d +2h 1) 1 − − − − − − = ℓ2 h2 + ℓ h =(ℓ h)(ℓ + h 1). − − − − and also 2k(ℓ+1) k(ℓ+h+1) n k 1= ℓ h+1 k = ℓ h+1 . − − − − − Using the previous equations in (5.9) and canceling k = 0 we get 6 (ℓ h + 1)(ℓ h)(ℓ + h +1)= d(ℓ + h + 1). − − As in part (b), since Γ is primitive we obtain that ℓ = h 1 and thus 6 − − d =(ℓ h)(ℓ h + 1). − − Since d = 0 by primitivity we have that ℓ = h. Therefore, we obtain that k =2ℓ(ℓ h+1) and n =46 ℓ(ℓ +1)+1=(2ℓ + 1)2 with ℓ 6 h, (h + 1), h 1 , as it was to be− shown. 6∈ {± − − } ON REGULAR GRAPHS EQUIENERGETIC WITH THEIR COMPLEMENTS 17

1 By taking into account that 0 < r = 2 (e d + √α) = ℓ + h with multiplicity mr = 1 − 2ℓ(ℓ h + 1) and 1 s = 2 (e d √α)= h ℓ 1 with ms =2ℓ(ℓ + h + 1), the energy of Γ− is given by − ≥ − − − −

E(Γ) = k + rmr sms =4ℓ(ℓ h + 1)(ℓ + h + 1). − − Finally, the converse of all the items can be proved by performing direct calculations using Proposition 5.3. The last assertion is clear from the expressions of the energies in (b) and (c). In fact, in case (b) the integers ℓ h and ℓ + h + 1 have diﬀerent parity, so exactly one of them is even. −

We have the following direct consequence. Corollary 5.5. If the energy of a strongly regular graph is odd then it is not equienergetic with its complement.

Proof. Let Γ be a strongly regular graph and suppose that E(Γ) is odd. If Γ is a conference graph, then E(Γ) = 2d(1+√4d + 1) by (a) in Theorem 5.4. Either if √4d + 1 is an integer or not, E(Γ) is not an odd integer. If Γ is not a conference graph then E(Γ) 2Z by (b) and (c) of Theorem 5.4. In all the cases, the graph Γ cannot be equienergetic∈ with Γ.¯ Remark 5.6. In [30], the authors found the following two families of strongly regular graphs which are equienergetic with their complements, by direct calculation. (a) Γ (t)= srg(4t2, 2t2 t, t2 t, t2 t) with t> 1. 1 − − − (b) Γ (t)= srg(t2, 3(t 1), t, 6) with t> 2. 2 − It is easy to verify that these two families satisfy condition (5.4) in Proposition 5.3.

(i) The graphs Γ1(t) above can be obtained from (b) of Theorem 5.4 by taking h = 0. This theorem shows that the parameters of Γ1(t) are the only possible ones for a strongly regular graph equienergetic with its complement and having e = d. The parameters of Γ1(t) are exactly the ones obtained by taking h = 1 in (b) of Theorem 5.4.

(ii) The graphs Γ2(t) can also be obtained either from (b)or(c) in Theorem 5.4 by taking d = 6 and t =2ℓ or d = 6 and t =2ℓ + 1, respectively (both cases with h = ℓ 2). − 6. Some families of strongly regular graphs

Here we apply the results in the previous section to ﬁnd particular pairs of strongly regular graphs equienergetic with their complements in some distinguished families.

6.1. SRGs with ﬁxed integral minimum eigenvalue. The graph aKm has minimal 1+√5 eigenvalue s = 1, the pentagon C5 has minimal eigenvalue s = 2 , and all other strongly regular− graphs have s 2. − ≤ − 6.1.1. The case s = 2. We now characterize all SRGs with minimum eigenvalue s = 2. − − Proposition 6.1. The only strongly regular graphs with minimal eigenvalue s = 2 − which is equienergetic with its complement is the 4-cycle C4 in the imprimitive case and the lattice graphs L (n) with n 3 and the Shrikhande graph ΓShr in the primitive case. 2 ≥ 18 R.A. PODESTA,´ D.E. VIDELA

Proof. Seidel ([36]) classiﬁed all strongly regular graphs with minimal eigenvalue s = 2. They are given by the following 3 inﬁnite families and 7 isolated graphs: −

(a) Kn 2 with parameters srg(2n, 2n 2, 2n 4, 2n 2), n 2, × − − − ≥ (b) L (n) with parameters srg(n2, 2n 2, n 2, 2), n 3, 2 − − ≥ (c) T (n) with parameters srg( 1 n(n 1), 2n 4, n 2, 4), n 5, 2 − − − ≥ (d) the Petersen graph with parameters srg(10, 3, 0, 1), (e) the Clebsch graph with parameters srg(16, 10, 6, 6), (f) the Shrikhande graph with parameters srg(16, 6, 2, 2), (g) the Schl¨aﬂi graph with parameters srg(27, 16, 10, 8), (h) the 3 Chang graphs with parameters srg(28, 12, 6, 4).

Here, Kn 2 is the complete multipartite graph (imprimitive), L2(n) is the lattice graph –or the Hamming× graph H(2, n)– and T (n) is the triangular graph.

The case (a) is the only family of imprimitive graphs. By Proposition 5.1, Km 2 is equienergetic with its complement if and only if m = 2. In this case we have ×

K2 2 = C4 = srg(4, 2, 0, 2) = Cr(2). × The rest of the graphs are primitive and the result follows by applying Proposition 5.4. For the lattice graphs L (n) in (b) we have α = (n 4)2 + 4(2n 4) = n2. In this 2 − − case condition (5.3) holds and hence E(L2(n)) = E(L2(n)). On the other hand, for the triangular graphs T (n) in (c) we have α =(n 2)2 and (5.3) takes the form − n2 n = 2(n2 3n +2)+2 − − which has roots n = 2, 3. But n 5 by hypothesis, hence T (n) is not complementary equienergetic. ≥ It is straightforward to check that the graphs (d), (e), (g) and (h) do not satisfy (5.3). Finally, observe that the Shrikhande graph ΓShr has the same parameters as L2(4), and thus, E(ΓShr)= E(ΓShr). This concludes the proof.

Note that the pair C4 = K2,2, 2K2 = K2 K2 of imprimitive strongly regular graphs which are complementary{ equienergetic was⊗ previously} obtained in Theorem 4.1 as a crown graph and its complement.

Remark 6.2. (i) The Shrikhande graph ΓShr can be constructed as the Cayley graph X(Z4 Z4,S) with connection set S = (1, 0), (0, 1), (1, 1) . It has spectrum 1 ×6 9 {± ± ± } [6] , [2] , [ 2] and hence E(ΓShr) = 36. { − } (ii) The Shrikhande graph have the same parameters as the 4 4 rook’s graph R × 4 –that can be seen as the line graph L(K4,4)– and they are the only two graphs with parameters srg(16, 6, 2, 2). This implies that the rook’s graph R4 is also equienergetic with its complement. However, ΓShr and R4 are isospectral.

(iii) Notice that the parameters of the graphs ΓShr and R4 correspond to the graph in (b) of Theorem 5.4 with h = 0 and ℓ = 2, that is they have the parameters of Γ0,2. ON REGULAR GRAPHS EQUIENERGETIC WITH THEIR COMPLEMENTS 19

6.1.2. The case s = m, m 2. Generalizing the characterization of all strongly regular graphs with minimum− eigenvalue≥ s = 2, Sims ([34], see also Neumaier [24]) classified all strongly regular graphs srg(n,k,e,d)− with integral minimum eigenvalue s = m, m 2. They are of four types, 3 infinite families (complete multipartite graphs, Latin− square≥ graphs and Steiner graphs) and a finite number of sporadic graphs (not explicitly given) such that 1 d m3(2m 3). ≤ ≤ − We next give the characterization of complementary equienergetic graphs of this kind.

Proposition 6.3. Let Γ be a strongly regular graph with minimal eigenvalue s = m, m 2. If Γ is not sporadic, then Γ is equienergetic with its complement if and only− if ≥ Γ is a complete multipartite graph Km m in the imprimitive case or Γ is a Latin square × graph LSm(n) for any n 2 in the primitive case. ≥ Proof. By the already mentioned result of Sims, Γ is either a complete multipartite graph Kn m of parts of size m, a Latin square graph LSm(n) or the block graph Sm(n) of a Steiner× system S(2, m, mn + m n). − We know by Proposition 5.1 that Kn m is equienergetic with its complement if and × only if n = m. The Latin square graph LSm(n) has parameters

srg n2, m(n 1), (m 1)(m 2) + n 2, m(m 1) . − − − − − It is straightforward to check that α = n2 and (5.4) holds. Thus, by Proposition 5.3, LSm(n) is equienergetic with LSm(n).

Finally, suppose that Γ is Sm(n), the block graph of S(2, m, mn + m n). The block graph of S(2, m, t) has parameters −

t(t 1) m(t m) 2 t 1 2 − − srg( m(m 1) , m 1 , (m 1) + m− 1 2, m ). − − − − −

Hence, Γ = Sm(n) has parameters

(mn+m n)(mn+m n 1) 2 2 − − − srg m(m 1) , mn, (m 1) + n 1, m . − − − Note that S2(n) = T (2 + n), so by (c) in the proof of Proposition 6.1 this graph is not equienergetic with its complement. In general, after some tedious calculations one get that (5.4) does not hold and hence, by Proposition 5.3, Γ is not equienergetic with its complement in this case. This completes the proof.

Remark 6.4. (i) Note that if we take m = 2 we recover Proposition 6.1, since we have − K2 2 = C4 and LS2(n) = L2(n). In this case the Shrikhande graph is obtained, for it is × a strongly regular graph with the parameters of L2(4). Moreover, if m = 3 the graph 2 − LS3(n) for n 2 has parameters srg =(n , 3(n 1), n, 6) which are the graphs obtained by Ramane et≥ al in [30]. It remains to study the− sporadic cases with s = m and m 3. − ≥ (ii) In [25], there are three classiﬁcations of strongly regular graphs: (a) with s = 3 having feasible parameters of a block graph of a quasi-symmetric design –or QSD– (The- orem 4), (b) strongly regular graphs with second eigenvalue r = 2 (Theorem 5) and (c) strongly regular graphs with r = 2 having feasible parameters of the block graph of a QSD (Theorem 6). One can also use Proposition 5.3 and/or Theorem 5.4 to classify all complementary equienergetic strongly regular graphs in these 3 families. 20 R.A. PODESTA,´ D.E. VIDELA

6.2. Triangle-free SRGs. The girth of a strongly regular graph Γ = srg(n,k,e,d) can only take the values 3, 4 and 5. If e = 0 and d = 0 then Γ has triangles. Strongly regular graphs with parameters 6 6 srg(n, k, 0,d) are triangle-free. When d = 1 these graphs are Moore graphs and have girth 5. More generally, strongly regular graphs with parameters srg(n, k, e, 1) are geodetic graphs, i.e. a graph in which every two vertices have a unique unweighted shortest path. The only known geodetic strongly regular graphs are the Moore graphs. Proposition 6.5. The only strongly regular Moore graph which is equienergetic with its complement is the 5-cycle C5 = srg(5, 2, 0, 1), which is self-complementary. Moreover, it is the only such graph among the known strongly regular graphs without triangles.

Proof. Hoffman and Singleton (see [16]) characterized the pairs (n, k) such that there is some strongly regular graph with parameters (n, k, 0, 1), i.e. with girth 5, showing that (n, k) (5, 2), (10, 3), (50, 7), (3250, 57) . ∈{ } The 5-cycle or pentagon C5, the Petersen graph and the Hoffman-Singleton graph are the only graphs with the first 3 parameters, respectively. It is not known if an srg(3250, 57, 0, 1) exists. It is straightforward to check that (5.4) holds for C5 and do not hold for the other parameters. However, C5 = C5 and hence E(C5) = E(C5) trivially. Note that C5 is the conference graph Γ1 in (a) of Theorem 5.4.

Apart from the complete graphs K1 and K2 (with g = ) and the complete bipartite 2 ∞ graphs Kn,n = srg(n , n 1, 0, n) (with g = 4), there are only seven known graphs with g 4. These are the pentagon,− Petersen and Hoﬀman-Singleton graphs mentioned above ≥ and the 5-folded cube, the Gewirtz graph, the Mesner M22 graph and the Higman-Sims graphs with parameters srg(16, 5, 0, 2), srg(56, 10, 0, 2), srg(77, 16, 0, 4) and (100, 22, 0, 6), respectively. One can check that non of these graphs satisfy (5.4), and hence they are not equienergetic with their complements.

6.3. Semiprimitive GP-graphs. A generalized Paley graph (GP-graph) is the Cayley m graph Γ(k, q) = X(Fq, Rk) where Fq is a finite field of q elements, with q = p for some prime p and integer m, and k Rk = x : x F∗ . { ∈ q} c The complement of Γ(k, q) is also a Cayley graph, Γ(k, q)= X(Fq, (Rk) r 0 ). { } A generalized Paley graph Γ(k, q) is called semiprimitive if k = 2 and q 1 (mod 4) or else if ≡ t m m k > 2, m is even, k p + 1 for some t and k = p 2 +1. | | 2 6 Semiprimitive GP-graphs were defined in [26], since they are related with semiprimitive cyclic codes, where some of their spectral and structural properties are studied. Proposition 6.6. Let Γ(k, q) be a semiprimitive GP-graph with k > 2. Then, the graphs m Γ(k, q) and Γ(k, q) are equienergetic and non-isospectral if and only if s = 2t is odd, where t is the least integer j such that k pj +1. | ON REGULAR GRAPHS EQUIENERGETIC WITH THEIR COMPLEMENTS 21

Proof. In [26], Theorem 3.3, we show that Γ = Γ(k, q), with k > 2 and q = pm with m even is a connected strongly regular graph, with integral spectrum given by − − q 1 1 q 1 (k 1) q 1 Spec(Γ) = [ − ] , [λ ] k , [λ ] − k { k 1 2 } where +1 s+1 (k 1)√q 1 ( 1)s √q+1 λ =( 1) − − and λ = − , 1 − k 2 − k with s as deﬁned in the statement. By Proposition 2.3 and (a) in Lemma 2.2 we have 2(q 1) (2 k)(q 1) m(0) + σ(Γ) = ∆(Γ) = − +1 q = − − . k − k

Since λ1,λ2 = 0 we have that m(0) = 0. Also, σ(Γ) = (mλ1 mλ2 ) depending the case, hence 6 ± − s+1 q 1 q 1 s+1 (2 k)(q 1) σ(Γ) = ( 1) ( − (k 1) − )=( 1) − − . − k − − k − k Hence, Γ(k, q) and Γ(k, q) are equienergetic if and only if ( 1)s+1 = 1. That is to say, if and only if s is odd. −

q 1 In Proposition 3.5 of [26] we gave the parameters srg(q, −k ,e,d) of Γ(k, q), so one can prove the previous result also by using Proposition 5.3. Example 6.7. Consider the pair (3,p2t) where p is a prime with p 2 (mod 3)and t 1. It is easy to see that (3,p2t) in the above conditions is semiprimitive.≡ In this case,≥ one can check that the sign is ( 1)t+1, i.e. s = t. By Proposition 6.6, we obtain the following infinite family of semiprimitive− GP-graphs equienergetic with their own complements 4n+2 4n 2 Γ(3, 2 ) n N Γ(3,p − ) n N { } ∈ ∪{ } ∈ where p runs over all odd primes p 2 (mod 3). ≡ 6.4. Spectrally determined SRG’s. A graph which is uniquely determined by its spectrum is called a DS graph. Strongly regular DS graphs are classified (see for instance §14.5 in [6]). Let us see that DS strongly regular graphs which are equienergetic with its complements are imprimitive or Paley graphs (conference, self-complementary). More precisely we have the following. Proposition 6.8. If Γ is a connected DS strongly regular graph, then Γ is complementary equienergetic if and only if Γ is either the complete multipartite graph Km m with m 2, × ≥ or one of the Paley graphs P (5), P (13), P (17), or the lattice graph L2(n)= L(Kn,n) for all n 5. ≥ Proof. The DS strongly regular graphs are given by 3 infinite families and some sporadic graphs. The infinite families are (see Proposition 14.5.1 in [6]):

aKℓ, L(Kn) with n = 8, and L(Km,m) with m =4. 6 6

The graph aKℓ is imprimitive and we know by Proposition 5.1 that it is equienergetic with its complement if and only if a = ℓ = m for m 2. The complement of mKm is ≥ Km m, which is connected. The graph L(Kn) is the triangular graph T (n) and L(Km,m) is the× lattice graph L (m). They have minimum eigenvalue s = 2 and hence they have 2 − been treated in the proof of Proposition 6.1. There we showed that L2(n) = L(Kn,n) is complementary equienergetic for all n 3 while T (n) is not. ≥ 22 R.A. PODESTA,´ D.E. VIDELA

The sporadic graphs are given in the following tables taken from [6] (see Table 14.2 in [6] for details).

Table 4. Sporadic DS strongly regular graphs of conference type n spectrum name 1 √5 2 5 2, ( − ±2 ) Paley P (5) 1 √13 2 13 6, ( − ±2 ) Paley P (13) 1 √17 2 17 8, ( − ±2 ) Paley P (17)

Table 5. Sporadic DS strongly regular graphs of non-conference type n spectrum name 16 5, 110, ( 3)5 folded 5-cube − 27 10, 120, ( 5)6 GQ(2,4) − 50 7, 228, ( 3)21 Hoﬀman-Singleton − 56 10, 235, ( 4)20 Gewirtz − 77 16, 255, ( 6)21 Mesner M − 22 81 20, 260, ( 7)20 Brouwer-Haemers − 100 22, 277, ( 8)22 Higman-Sims − 105 32, 284, ( 10)20 ﬂags of PG(2,4) − 112 30, 290, ( 10)21 GQ(3,9) − 120 42, 299, ( 12)20 001.. in S(5, 8, 24) − 126 50, 2105, ( 13)20 Goethals − 162 56, 2140, ( 16)21 local McLaughlin − 176 70, 2154, ( 18)21 01.. in S(5, 8, 24) − 275 112, 2252, ( 28)22 McLaughlin −

For any q 1 (mod 4), the Paley graph P (q) is deﬁned as the Cayley graph Cay(Fq,S) ≡2 F where S = x : x q∗ . It is known that Paley graphs are strongly regular graph with parameters { ∈ } q 1 q 5 q 1 P (q)= srg(q, −2 , −4 , −4 ). Paley graphs are conference graphs, since they satisfy (5.8) with q = 4t + 1, and hence self-complementary; so they are trivially equienergetic with their complements. For the non-conference graphs, it is clear that

mr ms > 0 and 2k +1 n< 0 − − for all the graphs in the table. By (5.7) we have that ∆(Γ) = mr ms and hence, by Proposition 2.3, none of these graphs can be equienergetic with its− complement. This completes the proof.

7. Orthogonal arrays and Latin square graphs

Orthogonal arrays are generalizations of orthogonal Latin squares. Let n, m be non- negative integers. An orthogonal array (of index 1 and strength 2), denoted by OA(n, m), is an m n2 matrix A with entries in a set of cardinality m 2, if each set of two rows × ≥ ON REGULAR GRAPHS EQUIENERGETIC WITH THEIR COMPLEMENTS 23

(2 n2 sub-matrix) contains all 2 1 column vectors exactly once. An example of an OA×(2, 3) is as follows × 1 2 1 2 1 2 2 1 . 1 1 2 2! An orthogonal array OA(n, m) is equivalent to a transversal design TD(m, n) or to a set of m 2 mutually orthogonal Latin squares (MOLS) of order n. − Given an OA(n, m), there is an associated graph Γ. The vertices of Γ are the n2 columns of the orthogonal array, and two vertices are adjacent if they have the same entries in exactly one coordinate position. The graph associated to the previous OA(2, 3) is K4. It is well-known that the graph deﬁned by an orthogonal array OA(n, m) is a strongly regular graph with parameters (7.1) srg n2, m(n 1), m2 3m + n, m(m 1) . − − − If Γ is a strongly regular graph with the same parameters as above, it is said that it has OA(n, m) parameters or that it is a pseudo Latin square graph P L(n, m). Notice that we have the following two special cases:

Kn2 if m = n +1, P L(n, m)= (Kn n if m = n. × We now show that a graph having OA(n, m) parameters with m / n, n +1 is complementary equienergetic. ∈{ } Proposition 7.1. Let Γ be a strongly regular graph. If Γ has OA(n, m) parameters with n+1 m / n, n +1 , then Γ and Γ are equienergetic. Furthermore, if m = 2 then Γ and Γ are∈{ non-isospectral.} 6

Proof. First note that if Γ has OA(n, m) parameters, then Γ is clearly primitive. If Γ= srg(n,k,d,e) then Γ= srg(n, k,¯ e,¯ d¯) and we have d¯= n2 2m(n 1) + m2 3m + n =(n m)(n m + 1) =0 − − − − − 6 since m = n and m = n + 1, by hypothesis. One can check that by (7.1) condition (5.4) holds6 and thus the6 result follows directly from Proposition 5.3. On the other hand, n+1 condition m = 2 implies that Γ and Γ have diﬀerent regularity degrees and so these graphs are non-isospectral,6 as asserted.

Notice that both families of graphs appearing in Remark 5.6 have the parameters of an OA(n, m) for some n, m. More precisely, the graphs Γ1(t) has OA(2t, t) parameters and the graphs Γ2(t) has OA(t, 3) parameters. The following result shows that this happens with any strongly regular graph equienergetic with its complement which is not a conference graph. Proposition 7.2. Let Γ be a primitive strongly regular graph. Then, Γ and Γ are equienergetic if and only if Γ is a conference graph or Γ has OA(n, m) parameters for some n, m with m n, n + 1 . In the non-conference case, the graphs Γ and Γ are also non- isospectral.6∈ { } 24 R.A. PODESTA,´ D.E. VIDELA

Proof. Since conference graphs are self-complementary, Γ is trivially equienergetic with its complement in this case. On the other hand, if Γ has OA(n, m) parameters with m n, n +1 , then Γ and Γ are equienergetic by Proposition 7.1. 6∈ { } Now, if Γ and Γ are equienergetic, by Theorem 5.4 we have that Γ is either a conference graph or it is one of the graphs in cases (b) or(c) in that theorem, depending on whether e d is even or odd diﬀerent from 1. Notice that parameters of Γ corresponds in case (b−) and (c) respectively to the parameters− of OA(2ℓ,ℓ h) and OA(2ℓ +1,ℓ h + 1), − − as desired. Finally, one can check that in these two cases, the graphs Γ and Γ has diﬀerent degrees of regularity and hence they are non-isospectral.

Putting together Propositions 5.1 and 7.2, we obtain the classiﬁcation of all connected strongly regular graphs equienergetic and non-isospectral with their own complements. Theorem 7.3. Let Γ be a connected strongly regular graph. Then, Γ and Γ are equienergetic non-isospectral graphs if and only if Γ has OA(m, m) parameters (in the imprimitive n+1 case) or else Γ has OA(n, m) parameters for some integers n = m with m = n +1, 2 (in the primitive case). 6 6

Proof. If Γ is imprimitive, the result is implied by Proposition 5.1 by noting that the graph 2 Km m = srg(m , (m 1)m, (m 2)m, (m 1)m) has OA(m, m) parameters taking n = m in (×7.1). On the other− hand, if− Γ is primitive,− the result follows by Proposition 7.2. Remark 7.4. By the theorem, all the graphs in the previous section which are equienergetic and non-isospectral with their complements, which are not conference graphs (as C(5) = P (5), P (13) and P (17)), have the parameters of some OA(n, m). (i) The graphs in Propositions 6.1, 6.3 and 6.8 satisfy:

(a) the cycle C4 has the parameters of OA(2, 2), (b) the Shrikhande graph has the same parameters as OA(4, 2), (c) the lattice graph L (n) has the parameters of OA(n, 2) with n 3, 2 ≥ (d) the graph Km m has the same parameters as OA(m, m), × n+1 (e) the graph LSm(n) has the parameters of OA(n, m) with m = n +1, . 6 2 (ii) The strongly regular graphs found in [30] and given in Remark 5.6 have OA parameters. In fact Γ1(t) is an OA(2t, t) for t> 1 and Γ2(t) is an OA(t, 3) for t> 2. (iii) The semiprimitive GP-graphs Γ(k, q) with s odd of Proposition 6.6, with q = p2m and s = m where t is the least integer j such that k pj + 1, has the parameters of 2t | √q+1 m pm+1 OA(√q, k )= OA(p , k ). Cameron’s hierarchy. There is a hierarchy of regularity conditions on graphs due to Cameron ([8]). For a non-negative integer t and sets S1 and S2 of at most t vertices, let (t) be this graph property: if the induced subgraphs on S and S are isomorphic, then C 1 2 the number of vertices joined to every vertex in S1 is equal to the number joined to every vertex in S . A graph satisfying property (t) is called t-tuple regular. 2 C Conditions (t) are stronger as t increases. A graph satisfies (1) if and only if it is regular andC it satisfies (2) if and only if it is strongly regular.C If a graph satisfies C ON REGULAR GRAPHS EQUIENERGETIC WITH THEIR COMPLEMENTS 25

(3) then it is the pentagon C5 or it has the parameters of a pseudo Latin square, a negativeC Latin square or a Smith type graph (see [10]). Up to complements, there are only two known examples of graphs satisfying (4) but not (5), the Schläfli graph and the McLaughlin graph. Finally, the hierarchyC is finite; if aC graph satisfies (5) then it C satisfies (t) for any t. The only such graphs are aKm and its complement for a, m 1, C ≥ the pentagon C and the 3 3 square lattice L(K , ) (see [9]). 5 × 3 3 We have the following result relative to complementary equienergeticity on graphs satisfying property (t). C Theorem 7.5. Let Γ be a connected strongly regular graph satisfying (3) or (5). Then C C Γ is equienergetic with Γ if and only if Γ is one of the following:

(a) Km m for any m 2 (imprimitive case), × ≥ (b) the pentagon C5 (conference, primitive case), or

(c) P Ln(m) for any n, m 1 (non-conference, primitive case). ≥ Proof. Suppose first that Γ satisfies (3). Then, by the comments previous to the state- C ment, Γ is the pentagon C5, a pseudo Latin square graph P Ln(m), a negative Latin square graph NLn(m) or a Smith graph. The graph C5 is self-complementary so trivially complementary equienergetic. Also, P Ln(m)= OA(n, m). The negative Latin square graphs are strongly regular graphs taking negative parameters in LSn(m). Hence, we have 2 2 NLn(m)= LS n( m)= srg n , m(n + 1), m +3m n, m(m + 1) . − − − Thus, negative Latin square graphs do not have OA parameters, and hence cannot be complementary equienergetic. The Smith graphs have parameters srg(v,k,e,d) with 2(r s)2 (2r + 1)(r s) 3r(r + 1) v = − { − − }, (r s)2 r2(r + 1)2 − − s (2r + 1)(r s) r(r + 1) k = − { − − }, (r s)+ r(r + 1) (7.2) − r(s + 1) (r s) r(r + 3) e = − { − − }, (r s)+ r(r + 1) − s(r + 1) (r s) r(r + 1) d = − { − − }, (r s)+ r(r + 1) − where r and s are the eigenvalues distinct from k. Since they are primitive non-conference graphs it is enough to show that they do not have OA parameters. Assume the contrary holds, i.e. that they have OA(n, m) parameters, and recall that for these graphs we have that r > 0 and s < 1 are both integers. Thus, we have s = m and d = m(m 1) = s(s +1). By (7.2) we− have − − s(r + 1) (r s) r(r + 1) s(s +1)= − { − − }. (r s)+ r(r + 1) − Since s = 0 we can cancel it, so that we have 6 (s + 1)(r s)+ r(s + 1)(r +1)= (r + 1)(r s)+ r(r + 1)2 − − − 26 R.A. PODESTA,´ D.E. VIDELA from where we arrive at (r + s + 2)(r s)= r(r + 1)(r s). − − Canceling r s> 0 we finally get s +2= r2, which cannot occur since r> 0 and s 2. − ≤ − Now, suppose that Γ satisfies (5). By previous comments, Γ is either Ka m or its C × complement for a, m 1, or C5 or else L(K3,3). By Proposition 5.1, Km m (and its com- ≥ × plement) is complementary equienergetic. Also, C5 is self-complementary, hence trivially complementary equienergetic Finally, the graph L(K3,3) was ruled out in the proof of Proposition 6.8. This completes the proof.

We have thus completely settled the question of complementary equienergeticity for bipartite graphs satisfying (1) and for any graph satisfying (2), (3) and (5). We also solved the same questionC for all known graphs satisfyingC (4).C So, it remainsC to complete the characterizations for non-bipartite regular graphsCwhich are not strongly regular graphs (i.e. satisfying (1)) and those satisfying (4), whose classiﬁcation is still missing. C C We close the section with a question. Question 7.6. Are there any complementary equienergetic strongly regular graphs, nec- essarily with OA parameters, satisfying (4)? C 8. Unitary Cayley graphs

In Section 3 we have classiﬁed all bipartite regular graphs which are complementary equienergetic (crown graphs and C4). In Sections 4–6 we study the problem for strongly regular graphs, characterizing strongly regular graphs which are complementary equienergetic and not isospectral as those having OA parameters (i.e., pseudo Latin square graphs). The problem for non-bipartite regular graphs is open and seems quite unmanageable in general. In this section we deal with a particular class of regular graphs, which includes many non-bipartite graphs in it.

Let R be a ﬁnite commutative ring and R∗ its group of units. Consider the Cayley graph X(R, R∗) with vertex set R and connection set the units R∗ of R. We denote this graph simply by GR. The graph GR is R∗ -regular and loopless since R∗ is symmetric. By the well-known Artin’s structure theorem| | we have

(8.1) R = R Rs 1 ×···× where each Ri is a local ring, that is having a unique maximal ideal mi, with mi = mi | | say. Moreover, one also has the decomposition at the level of units, R∗ = R1∗ Rs∗. This implies that ×···×

(8.2) GR = GR GR 1 ⊗···⊗ s with GR = X(Ri, R∗), and where denotes the Kronecker product of graphs. In [27], i i ⊗ Lemma 3.4, we proved that GR is non-bipartite if and only if 2mi < Ri for every i =1,...,s. | |

The spectrum of GR = X(R, R∗) is known. For each subset C 1,...,s put ⊆{ } C R∗ (8.3) λC =( 1)| | | | . − ( Rj∗ /mj) j C | | ∈ Q ON REGULAR GRAPHS EQUIENERGETIC WITH THEIR COMPLEMENTS 27

Then, the eigenvalues of GR are ([1], see also [19])

λC , repeated ( Rj∗ /mj) times, j C | | (8.4) λ = ∈ s ∗  Q R 0, with multiplicity R (1 + | i | ),  mi  | | − i=1 Q where C runs over all the subsets of 1, 2,...,s . Note that, a priori, diﬀerent subsets C can give the same eigenvalue. { }

Ri We will need the following notations. If we denote qi = | | , then R∗ = mi(qi 1) for mi | i | − i =1,...,s. For C 1,...,s , we deﬁne ⊆{ } ∗ Rj (8.5) PC := | | = (qj 1). mj − j C j C Y∈ Y∈ A simple combinatoric argument shows that s

(8.6) qi = PC . i=1 C 1,...,s Y ⊆{X } We also deﬁne the following numbers

(8.7) Se = PC and So = PC . C 1,...,s C 1,...,s 0< C⊆{

Proof. Suppose that GR is equienergetic with its complement. Then, by Proposition 2.3 we have ∆(Γ) = 2k +1 n and thus, by (8.4), we get − s ∗ Ri (8.8) PC PC + R (1 + | | )=2 R∗ R +1. − | | − mi | |−| | C 1,...,s C 1,...,s i=1 C⊆{>X0 even} ⊆{CXodd } Y | | | | Since s is even, we have s ∗ Ri r1 rs PC = Se + | | = Se + ··· mi m1 ms C 1,...,s i=1 ··· C⊆{>X0 even} Y | | where ri = Ri∗ and Se is as in (8.7). Notice that | | s R∗ R (1 + | i | )= | | . mi m ms i=1 1 Y ··· On the other hand, since R∗ = R∗ R∗ then R∗ = r rs. So(8.8) takes the form 1 ×···× s | | 1 ··· r1 rs R S + ··· S + R | | =2r r R +1 e m1 ms o m1 ms 1 s ··· − | | − ··· ··· −| | with So as in (8.7). Thus, we obtain that

2m1 ms 1 2m1 ms 1 R ··· − = r r ··· − +1+ S S . m1 ms 1 s m1 ms o e | |· ··· ··· · ··· − 28 R.A. PODESTA,´ D.E. VIDELA

Ri Using ri = mi(qi 1) for i =1,...,s, since qi = | | , we have the expression − mi (2m ms 1) q qs (q 1) (qs 1) =1+ So Se. 1 ··· − 1 ··· − 1 − ··· − − By taking into account that

q qs = PC and PC = (qi 1), 1 ··· − C 1,...,s i C ⊆{X } Y∈ we obtain that q qs (q 1) (qs 1)=1+ Se + So and thus 1 ··· − 1 − ··· − (2m ms 2)(1 + So)+(2m ms 1)Se = Se. 1 ··· − 1 ··· − − Notice that the left hand side of the equality is greater than or equal to zero, since mi 1 ≥ and PC 1, and that the right hand side is less than or equal to zero, so Se = 0; but this can only≥ happen if and only if s = 2. Therefore, s = 2 as desired. F F Conversely, if R = q1 q2 , the graphs GR and GR are equienergetic, by Theorem 4.1 in [27]. ×

Remark 8.2. (i) If R = Fq Fq, then GR is a strongly regular graph with parameters 2 2 2 × srg(q , (q 1) , (q 2) , (q 1)(q 2)), by Proposition 3.9 in [27] and thus, by (7.1), GR − − − − has OA(q, q 1) parameters. However, in general if R = Fq Fq′ with q = q′, then GR is not a strongly− regular graph. × 6

(ii) Note that by the observation after (8.2), GR is bipartite if R = F Fq and it is 2 × non-bipartite if R = Fq Fq′ with q, q′ 3. × ≥ The case in which the number of local factors of R is odd greater than 1 is more involved (the local case is known from [27]) and we can only give a necessary and suﬃcient condition for complementary equienergeticity. In this case, the graphs will not be strongly regular in general. Proposition 8.3. Let R be a ﬁnite commutative ring with unity, having Artin decomposition R = R Rs with s odd. 1 ×···× 2 (a) If s = 1, then E(GR) = E(GR) if and only if R = m where m is the unique maximal ideal of R. | | | | (b) If s 3, then E(GR)= E(GR) if and only if ≥ (8.9) MSe +(M 1)(1 + So)=(q 1) (qs 1), − 1 − ··· − where M = m ms, Se and So are as in (8.7). 1 ··· Proof. (a) Since s = 1, R is a local ring with maximal ideal m. We have showed in [27], 2 Proposition 4.1, that GR and GR are equienergetic if and only if R = m . | | | | (b) Assume that s 3 is odd. In this case, we have ≥ r1 rs PC = So + ··· . m1 ms C 1,...,s ··· ⊆{CXodd } | | By (8.8) we obtain

q qs(2m ms 1)=(q 1) (qs 1)(2m ms +1)+1+ So Se. 1 ··· 1 ··· − 1 − ··· − 1 ··· − ON REGULAR GRAPHS EQUIENERGETIC WITH THEIR COMPLEMENTS 29

By taking into account that q qs =1+ Se + So +(q 1) (qs 1) we have 1 ··· 1 − ··· − (1 + Se + So)(2m ms 1) = 2(q 1) (qs 1)+1+ So Se. 1 ··· − 1 − ··· − − So, we obtain that

(2m ms 2)(1 + So)+2m msSe = 2(q 1) (qs 1). 1 ··· − 1 ··· 1 − ··· − By removing 2 on both sides of the equality, we obtain (8.9), and the proof is complete.

Remark 8.4. It is well-known ([1], [19]) that if (R, m) is local ring, then GR is a complete multipartite graph with R / m parts of the same size m . Therefore, GR is an imprimitive strongly regular graph in| this| | case,| and non-bipartite by| | Proposition 3.2 in [27]. Moreover, 2 if R = m , then GR has OA(m, m) parameters which is in coincidence with Theorem 7.3. | | | |

Note that in case (b) of the previous proposition, if R = Fq Fq is a product of 1 ×···× s ﬁnite ﬁelds with s 3, then mi = 1 for all i =1,...,s, and hence (8.9) simply reads ≥ (8.10) Se =(q 1) (qs 1). 1 − ··· − Remark 8.5. When s = 3 and m = m = m = 1, i.e. if R = Fq Fq Fq , we have 1 2 3 1 × 2 × 3 showed in [27], Theorem 4.1, that GR is equienergetic with GR if and only if R = F F F or R = F F F . 3 × 5 × 5 4 × 4 × 4 In this case GR is not a strongly regular graph (since they are connected with more than 3 eigenvalues).

Example 8.6. Suppose R = Fq Fq Fq Fq Fq. By(8.10) we have × × × × 5(q 1)2 + 5(q 1)4 =(q 1)5 − − − or, equivalently, 5((q 1)2 +1)=(q 1)3. Since the equation x3 5x2 5 has only one − − − − real root which is not an integer, we obtain that there are no unitary Cayley graphs GR complementary equienergetic, with R a product of 5 copies of a ﬁnite ﬁeld.

The determination of all complementary equienergetic unitary Cayley graphs GR in the general case with an odd number s of local factors remains as on open problem. The diﬃculty in this particular open case, shows the complexity of the problem of classify- ing all complementary equienergetic non-bipartite regular graphs (the open case C(1) in Cameron’s hierarchy) which are not strongly regular. In this respect, we can only mention the pairs L(Km,n) and L(Km,n) of Ramane et al ([30]), with m, n 2 and m = n (for ≥ 6 m = n the graphs are strongly regular since L(Kn,n)= L2(n)).

Unitary Cayley sum graphs. A variant of the unitary Cayley graphs GR = X(R, R∗), where R is a commutative Artinian ring with identity, is the unitary Cayley sum graph + + G = X (G,S) where two vertices v,w form and edge if and only if v + w R∗. These R ∈ graphs are R∗ -regular and non-directed, but may contain single loops (there is a loop in | | + x if and only if 2x R∗). If char(R) = 2 the graph GR = GR, hence loopless. If char(R) + ∈ is odd then G has R∗ single loops. R | | Proposition 8.7. There are no complementary equienergetic unitary Cayley sum graphs + GR with loops. 30 R.A. PODESTA,´ D.E. VIDELA

Proof. By Lemma 3.4 in [27], if R is not of odd type (see Deﬁnition 3.5 in [27]) then + GR = GR and hence it is loopless. So, we assume that R is of odd type. By Theorem + 3.7 in [27], GR is an integral connected non-bipartite graph. Moreover, if R has odd + cardinality r then GR is strongly almost symmetric with r∗ single loops (where r∗ = R∗ ), + | | while if r is even GR is loopless. So, we assume also that r is odd. By Corollary 2.6, + GR is complementary equienergetic if and only if n = 2k, that is r = 2r∗ in our present notation. But this is impossible since r is odd.

+ It should be interesting to study the case of the graphs Γ = (GR)∗∗ which are regular with at most 2 loops per vertex. For instance, if R is local (with r odd), by Proposition 2.3 with m = 2, Γ is complementary equienergetic if and only if n =2k 1 ∆ (Γ), where − − 1 k = r∗ + 1. But if m is the unique maximal ideal of R with t elements, then r∗ = r t and thus the required condition reads − r +1=2t ∆ (Γ). − 1 Hence, a necessary condition is that ∆ (Γ) 2N. Since Γ is integral, this means that 1 ∈ there must be an even number of positive eigenvalues diﬀerent from λ1.

9. Final remarks

We have given some complete characterizations of complementary equienergetic regular graphs for some families of graphs. Namely, connected integral cubic graphs and cubic graphs with single loops (§3), bipartite graphs (§4), strongly regular graphs in general (§5) and some particular families (§6), graphs having OA parameters (§7) and unitary Cayley graphs over rings R with R a commutative ring with unity which is either local or with an even number of local factors (§8). We want to notice that all complementary equienergetic regular graphs (not isospectral with their complements) covered in the results in this paper, as well as those mentioned in the introduction (families and examples of complementary equienergetic regular graphs in [2], [28], [29], [30]), have integral energy divisible by 4. The only exception we could ﬁnd are the pairs of graphs of 10 vertices H55,H56 and H57,H58 in [2]. They have non- integral energy. However, they are regular{ but} neither{ cubic, no} r bipartite nor strongly regular. It would be interesting to study this phenomenon in more detail. Which families of regular graphs complementary equienergetic and non-isospectral with their complements have integral energy divisible by 4 and why? In particular, it would be nice to characterize complementary equienergetic graphs in some other general families like: (a) distance- transitive or distance-regular graphs, (b) k-iterated line graphs, (c) Deza graphs and (d) some families of Cayley graphs. We plan to study these problems in the future. The general case of non-bipartite (regular or not) or non-regular graphs seems rather hard and out of scope.

References [1] R. Akhtar, M. Boggess, T. Jackson-Henderson, I. Jimenez, R. Karpman, A. Kinzel. On the unitary Cayley graph of a ﬁnite ring. Electron. J. Combin. 16:1 (2009), R117. [2] A. Ali, S. Elumalai, T. Mansour, M.A. Rostami. On the complementary equienergetic graphs. MATCH Commun. Math. Comput. Chem. 83 (2020), 555–570. [3] R. Balakrishnan. The energy of a graph. Linear Algebra Appl. 387 (2004), 287–295. ON REGULAR GRAPHS EQUIENERGETIC WITH THEIR COMPLEMENTS 31

[4] N.L. Biggs, A.G. Boshier, J. Shawe-Taylor. Cubic distance-regular graphs. J. Lond. Math. Soc, 33:2 (1986), 385–394. [5] N.L. Biggs, D.H. Smith. On trivalent graphs. Bull. Lond. Math. Soc. 3:2 (1971), 155–158. [6] A.E. Brouwer, W.H. Haemers. Spectra of Graphs. Second edition, Springer Verlag (2012). [7] F.C. Bussemaker, D. Cvetkovic´. There are exactly 13 connected, cubic, integral graphs. Univ. Beograd, Publ. Elektrotehn. Fak., Ser. Mat., Fiz., Nos. 544-576, (1976), 43–48. [8] P.J. Cameron. Strongly regular graphs. Chapter 12 in Selected Topics in Graph Theory, pp. 337–360, L. Beineke and R. Wilson (Eds.), Academic Press, NewYork, 1978. [9] P.J. Cameron. 6-transitive graphs. J. Combinatorial Theory (B) 28 (1980), 168–179. [10] P.J. Cameron, J.-M. Goethals, J.J. Seidel. Strongly regular graphs with strongly regular subconstituents. J. Algebra 55 (1978), 257–280. [11] D. Cvetkovic,ˇ M. Doobs H. Sachs. Spectra of graphs. Pure and Applied Mathematics, Aca- demic Press (1980). [12] D. Cvetkovic,ˇ M. Petricˇ. A table of connected graphs of six vertices. Discrete Math. 50 (1984), 37–49. [13] H.A. Ganie, S. Pirzada, A. Ivanyi´ . Energy, Laplacian energy of double graphs and new families of equienergetic graphs. Acta Univ. Sapientiae, Informatica 6:1 (2014), 89–116. [14] I. Gutman. The energy of a graph: old and new results. In Algebraic Combinatorics and Appli- cations, A. Betten, A. Kohner, R. Laue, and A. Wassermann, Eds., Springer, Berlin, 2001, pp 196–211. [15] I. Gutman, M.R. Oboudi. Bounds on graph energy. Discrete Math. Lett. 4 (2020), 1–4. [16] A.J. Hoffman, R.R. Singleton. On Moore graphs with diameters 2 and 3. IBM J. Res. De- velop. 4 (1960), 497–504. [17] Y. Hou, L. Xu. Equienergetic bipartite graphs. MATCH Commun. Math. Comput. Chem. 57 (2007), 363–370. [18] A. Ilic´. The energy of unitary Cayley graphs. Linear Algebra Appl. 431 (2009), 1881–1889. [19] D. Kiani, M.M.H. Aghaei, Y. Meemark; B. Sutornpoch. Energy of unitary Cayley graphs and gcd-graphs. Linear Algebra Appl. 435:6 (2011), 1336–1343. [20] J.H. Koolen, V. Moulton. Maximal Energy Graphs. Advances in Applied Mathematics 26 (2001), 47–52. [21] K. Kutnar, D. Maruˇsicˇ. A complete classiﬁcation of cubic symmetric graphs of girth 6. Journal of Combinatorial Theory, Series B, 99:1 (2009), 162–184. [22] X. Li, Y. Shi, I. Gutman. Graph Energy. Springer, New York, 2012. [23] S.A. Mojallal, P. Hansen. On the diﬀerence of energies of a graph and its complement graph. Linear Algebra Appl. 595 (2020), 1–12. [24] A. Neumaier. Strongly regular graphs with smallest eigenvalue m. Arch. Math. 33 (1979), 392–400. − [25] S.M. Nyayate, R.M. Pawale, M.S. Shrikhande. Characterization of quasi-symmetric designs with eigenvalues of their block graphs. Australasian Journal of Combinatorics 68:1 (2017), 62–70. [26] R.A. Podesta,´ D.E. Videla. Spectra of generalized Paley graphs and irreducible cyclic codes. arXiv:1908.08097 (2019). [27] R.A. Podesta,´ D.E. Videla. Integral equienergetic non-isospectral Cayley graphs. Linear Al- gebra Appl. 612 (2021), 42–74. [28] H.S. Ramane, K. Ashoka, B. Parvathalu, D.D. Patil, I. Gutman. On complementary equienergetic strongly regular graphs. Discrete Math. Lett. 4 (2020), 50–55. [29] H.S. Ramane, I. Gutman, H.B. Walikar, S.B. Halkarni. Equienergetic complement graphs. Kragujevac J. Sci. 27 (2005), 67–74. [30] H.S. Ramane, B. Parvathalu, D.D. Patil, K. Ashoka. Graphs equienergetic with their complements. MATCH Commun. Math. Comput. Chem. 82 (2019), 471–480. [31] H.S. Ramane, H.B. Walikar. Construction of equienergetic graphs. MATCH Commun. Math. Comput. Chem. 57 (2007), 203–210. [32] H.S. Ramane, H.B. Walikar, S.B. Rao, B.D. Acharya, P.R. Hampiholi, S.R. Jog, I. Gutman. Equienergetic graphs. Kragujevac J. Math. 26 (2004), 679–682. 32 R.A. PODESTA,´ D.E. VIDELA

[33] H.S. Ramane, H.B. Walikar, S.B. Rao, B.D. Acharya, P.R. Hampiholi, S.R. Jog, I. Gutman. Spectra and energies of iterated line graphs of regular graphs. Applied Mathematics Letters 18:66 (2005), 679–682. [34] D.K. Ray-Chaudhuri. Combinatorial characterization theorems for geometric incidence struc- tures, pp. 87–116 in: Combinatorial surveys (Proc. Sixth British Combinatorial Conf., Royal Holloway Coll., Egham, 1977), Peter J. Cameron (Ed.), Academic Press, London, 1977. [35] A.J. Schwenk. Exactly thirteen connected cubic graphs have integral spectra. in: Theory and Applications of Graphs (Proc. Internat. Conf., Western Mich. Univ., Kalamazoo, Mich., 1976), pp. 516–533, Lecture Notes in Math., 642, Springer, Berlin, 1978. [36] J.J. Seidel. Strongly regular graphs with ( 1, 1, 0) adjacency matrix having eigenvalue 3. Linear Algebra Appl. 1 (1968), 281–298. −

Ricardo A. Podesta,´ FaMAF – CIEM (CONICET), Universidad Nacional de Cordoba,´ Av. Medina Allende 2144, Ciudad Universitaria, (5000) Cordoba,´ Republica´ Argentina. E-mail: [email protected]

Denis E. Videla, FaMAF – CIEM (CONICET), Universidad Nacional de Cordoba,´ Av. Medina Allende 2144, Ciudad Universitaria, (5000) Cordoba,´ Republica´ Argentina. E-mail: [email protected]