CACrown ArchivesThe cinema collection
Menu
Research dossier · General Reference

Cycle rank

connectivity measure for directed graphs

Cross-disciplinary reference desk with index cards, atlas, dictionary and catalogue
General referenceInterpretive dossier study · Crown Archives visual atlas
Record originEnglish Wikipedia
Text licenseCC BY-SA 4.0
Source revisionMay 27, 2025
Entity authorityQ5198174
Source-derived summary

In graph theory, the cycle rank of a directed graph is a digraph connectivity measure proposed first by Eggan and Büchi (Eggan 1963). Intuitively, this concept measures how close a

digraph is to a directed acyclic graph (DAG), in the sense that a DAG has

cycle rank zero, while a complete digraph of order n with a self-loop at

each vertex has cycle rank n. The cycle rank of a directed graph is closely related to the tree-depth of an undirected graph and to the star height of a regular language. It has also found use

in sparse matrix computations (see Bodlaender et al. 1995) and logic

(Rossman 2008).

Definition

The cycle rank r(G) of a digraph G = (V, E) is inductively defined as follows:

If G is acyclic, then r(G) = 0.

If G is strongly connected and E is nonempty, then

r

(

G

)

=

1

+

min

v

V

r

(

G

v

)

,

{\displaystyle r(G)=1+\min _{v\in V}r(G-v),\,}

where ⁠

G

v

{\displaystyle G-v}

⁠ is the digraph resulting from deletion of vertex v and all edges beginning or ending at v.

If G is not strongly connected, then r(G) is equal to the maximum cycle rank among all strongly connected components of G.

The tree-depth of an undirected graph has a very similar definition, using undirected connectivity and connected components in place of strong connectivity and strongly connected components.

History

Cycle rank was introduced by Eggan (1963) in the context of star height of regular languages. It was rediscovered by (Eisenstat & Liu 2005) as a generalization of undirected tree-depth, which had been developed beginning in the 1980s

and applied to sparse matrix computations (Schreiber 1982).

Editorial summary

Begin with the source’s own compact description: “Cycle rank” is connectivity measure for directed graphs. The dossier treats that line as a proposition to test through Cycle, rank and connectivity, not as a finished interpretation.

Editorial reviewA concise reference frame for defining the subject, testing terminology and identifying the institution closest to the evidence. The current lead gives the account dated anchors—1963, 1995, 2008, 2005—that can be checked directly. The selected authority fields contribute no independent date. For this dossier, Cycle, rank and connectivity is the immediate research focus.
Editorial analysis

Why this record matters

The phrase “connectivity measure for directed graphs” supplies a clear boundary for inquiry. It also exposes the unanswered questions: who defined that boundary, when it became stable and which sources sit outside it.

Evidence profile

Vocabulary and entity names are the principal evidence signals here, because they determine the precision of every later search. The source revision retrieved here is dated May 27, 2025. The linked authority identifier is Q5198174. None of the 0 selected statements returned an explicit reference. The first chronological checks are 1963, 1995, 2008 and 2005.

Critical limits

A concise general-reference account can conceal disagreements about scope, terminology or the weight assigned to individual sources. The lead is largely declarative, so disagreement and counter-evidence require a deliberate search beyond the opening account. Authority statements aid reconciliation but still require their own references, qualifiers and ranks to be checked.

How to read it

Use the entry as an orientation point, then follow its citations and revision history. Names, dates and institutional relationships should be checked against the original record.

Best used for
  • Subject orientation
  • Search vocabulary
  • Locating named sources
Verify next

The closest primary source, responsible institution and strongest cited specialist reference.

Three-step research path

  1. Establish the record: confirm the title “Cycle rank”, its source revision and the description used here.
  2. Expand the search: follow Cycle rank primary sources, Cycle rank archive and Cycle research across catalogues and specialist indexes.
  3. Test the account: compare the strongest cited source with the responsible institution’s current record and note any disagreement.

Questions for further research

  1. Which source most directly establishes the central claim about “Cycle rank”?
  2. What terminology or title could unlock a more precise catalogue search?
  3. Which cited source is closest to the event, object or claim?
Subject index

Search terms from this dossier

Source & attribution

This entry incorporates text from Cycle rank” on English Wikipedia. Contributors are listed in the page history. Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 License. Selected authority identifiers and statements are retrieved from Wikidata under CC0; their references and qualifiers remain part of the verification path.