ON DOMINATION OF SIERPINSKI GRAPHS

M. NANJUNDASWAMY, PUTTASWAMY, NAYAKA S. R., AND P. SIVA KOTA REDDY*

Abstract. In this article, we determine the exact values of the double Ital-
ian and perfect double Italian domination number of generalized Sierpiński
graphs S(G, t), when t = 2. In particular, when G = Cn or a graph having
exactly one universal vertex or a graph having at least two universal vertices.

1. Introduction
In this paper we study the Roman-{3} domination or double Italian domi-
nation number and the perfect double Italian domination number of the gener-
alised Sierpiński graph S(G, t). Let us begin with some required terminology.
Let G = (V, E) be a graph of order n with vertex set V = V (G) and edge set
E = E(G). Let Cn , Pn and Kn be respectively the cycle, path and complete graph
on n vertices. A tree is a connected graph with no cycles. The open neighbourhood
of a vertex v ∈ V (G) is the set N (v) = {u : uv ∈ E(G)}. The closed neighborhood
of a vertex v ∈ V (G) is N [v] = N (v)∪{v}. |N (v)| is called the degree of the vertex
v ∈ G and is denoted by d(v). The maximum degree of a vertex in G is denoted
by ∆(G). A vertex of degree 0 is known as an isolated vertex of G. A vertex of
degree 1 is called a leaf vertex. A vertex of degree n − 1 is a universal vertex,
where n = |V (G)|. If S is a non-empty subset of the vertex set V of the graph G
then the sub-graph induced by S is defined as the graph having vertex set S and
edge set consisting of edges of G having both ends in S. All graphs considered
here are simple and undirected. For any graph theoretic terminology, definition or
notation not mentioned in this article, the readers may refer to [10, 4, 3, 5, 6].

In [10], Mojdeh and Volkmann introduced the concept of double Italian domi-
nation, which is a variant of Roman domination. The origin of Roman domination
was motivated by the defense strategies used to defend the Roman Empire dur-
ing the reign of the Great, Emperor Constantine. Double Italian domination is
an optimization of a stronger version of the Roman domination. In [4], Hao et
al. initiated the study of perfect double Italian domination. They evaluated the
P
γdI of some standard graphs and examined the corresponding γdI . In [11], the
Roman domination number of generalized Sierpiński graph S(G, t) is studied and
general upper bound is found and its tightness observed. In [7], the exact Italian
domination, perfect Italian domination and double Roman domination number of

2000 Mathematics Subject Classification. 05C69, 05C76.

Key words and phrases. Dominating set, Double Italian domination, Perfect double Italian
domination, Sierpiński graph.
*Corresponding authors.
1
2 M. NANJUNDASWAMY, PUTTASWAMY, NAYAKA S. R., AND P. S. K. REDDY

generalized Sierpiński graph S(G, 2) are obtained, where G can be Cn , n ≥ 4,

K1,q or K2,q , q ≥ 2 and a bistar Bm,n , m, n ≥ 3. In [1, 2], a bound for the double
Roman domination number of generalized Sierpiński graph is obtained and exact
value of γdR (S (Kn , 2)) is found precisely.

Definition 1.1. For a graph G, a Roman{3}-dominating function or double Ital-

ian dominating function (abbreviated DIDF) is a function f : V → {0, 1, 2, 3} hav-
ing the property that for every vertex u ∈ V , if f (u) ∈ {0, 1}, then f (N [u]) ⩾ 3.
Formally, a Roman {3}-dominating function f : V → {0, 1, 2, 3} has the property
that for every vertex v ∈ V , with f (v) = 0, there exist at least either three vertices
in V1 ∩ N (v) or one vertex in V1 ∩ N (v) and one in V2 ∩ N (v) or two vertices in
V2 ∩ N (v) or one vertex in V3 ∩ N (v) and for every vertex v ∈ V , with f (v) = 1,
there exist at least either two vertices in V1 ∩N (v) or one vertex in (V2 ∪ V3 )∩N (v).
The weight of a Roman {3} dominating function or double Italian dominating
function (See [10]) is the sum wf = Σv∈V (G) f (v) and the minimum weight of
a Roman {3}-dominating function f is the Roman {3}-domination number or
double Italian domination number, denoted by γR3 (G) or γdI (G) and we can write
f = (V0 , V1 , V2 , V3 ), where Vi = {v ∈ V (G) : f (v) = i} for i = 0, 1, 2, 3.

Definition 1.2. A perfect double Italian dominating function (abbreviated, PDIDF

or PDID function) is a function f : V → {0 , 1 , 2 , 3 } having the property that,
(1) For any vertex v ∈ V (G), if f (v ) = 0 , then v is either adjacent to at least
3 and at most 4 vertices in V1 and no vertex in V2 ∪ V3 , or is adjacent to
at least 1 vertex and at most 2 vertices in V1 and exactly one vertex in V2
and no vertex in V3 , or is adjacent to at most one vertex in V1 and exactly
one vertex in V3 and no vertex in V2 , or is adjacent to two vertices in V2
and no vertex in V1 ∪ V3 .
(2) If f (v ) = 1 ,then v either is adjacent to at least 2 vertices and at most 3
vertices in V1 and no vertex in V2 ∪ V3 , or is adjacent to at most one vertex
of V1 and exactly one vertex in V2 and no vertex in V3 , or is adjacent
to exactly one vertex in V3 and no vertex in V1 ∪ V3 . The weight of a
perfect double Italian dominating function f is the sum wf = f (V ) =
Σv ∈V (G) f (v ) ie, we have, for v ∈ V0 ∪ V1 , 3 ⩽ Σu∈N [v ] f (u) ⩽ 4 .And
the minimum weight of a perfect double Italian dominating function on
G is the perfect double Italian domination number (abbreviated, PDID or
P
PDID number ) of G, denoted by γdI (G) [4].

Definition 1.3. Let G = (V , E ) be a non-empty graph of order n ⩾ 2 , and

t a positive integer.Let V t denote the set of words of length t on alphabet V .
The letters of a word u of length t are denoted by u1 u2 . . . ut . In [9] Klavžar and
Milutinović introduced the graph S (Kn , t) , t ⩾ 1 , S (t, n) in their notation whose
vertex set is V t , where {u, v } is an edge if and only if there exists i ∈ {1, 2, . . . , t}
such that
(i) uj = vj , if j < i
(ii) ui ̸= vi
(iii) uj = vi and vj = ui if j > i .
Later, those graphs were called Sierpiński graphs in [8].
 ON DOMINATION OF SIERPINSKI GRAPHS 3

This construction was generalized for any graph G = (V , E ), by defining the t-

th generalized Sierpiński graph of G, denoted by S(G, t), as the graph with vertex
t
set
 V and edge set
wui ujr −1 , wuj uir −1 : {ui , uj } ∈ E , i ̸= j ; r ∈ {1 , 2 , . . . , t}; w ∈ V t−r .
Vertices of the form xx . . . x are called extreme vertices of S(G, t). Note that
for any graph G of order n and any integer t ≥ 2, S(G, t) has n extreme vertices
and, if x has degree d(x) in G, then the extreme vertex xx . . . x of S(G, t) also has
degree d (x ) [1, 7, 9, 11]. Figure 1, gives S (C6 , 1) and S (C6 , 2).

Figure 1. S (C6 , t), when t = 1 , 2 .

See that S(G, 1) is G itself. If V = {1 , 2 , . . . , n} is the vertex set of G, then Vi

= {ij : j = 1 , 2 , . . . , n} induces a copy of G in S(G, 2) for each i ∈ {1, 2, . . . , n}.
The sub-graph induced by Vi is denoted by Gi , for i ∈ {1, 2, . . . , n} [7]. The
following theorem and observations are useful in this paper.
Theorem 1.4. For any tree T, γdI (T ) = γdR (T )..
Observation 1.1: [10] For any graph G, γdI (G) ⩽ γdR (G) ie, by definition every
double Roman dominating function is a double Italian dominating. In fact, double
Italian domination is a variant of double Roman domination.
Observation 1.2: [10] If G is a graph of order n ≥ 2, then γdI (G) ≥ 3, with
equality if and only if G has at least one universal vertex.
Observation 1.3: [10, 4] Let n ≥ 1. Then
(
P n if n ≡ 0(mod3)
γdI (Pn ) = γdI (Pn ) =
n + 1 otherwise
P
Observation 1.4: [10, 4] For a cycle Cn , we have γdI (Cn ) = γdI (Cn ) = n.
P
Observation 1.5: [4]. For any graph G, γdI (G) ≤ γdI (G) by the definition.
Observation 1.6: [10, 7, 12] For any tree T and any positive integer t, S(T, t)
is a tree. Then the double Italian domination number of generalised Sierpinski
graph S (Bm,n , 2) is γdI (S (Bm,n , 2)) = 6(m + n + 1), m, n ⩾ 3.
4 M. NANJUNDASWAMY, PUTTASWAMY, NAYAKA S. R., AND P. S. K. REDDY

2. Double Italian and Perfect Double Italian Domination number of

S (Cn , 2)
In this section we obtain the exact double Italian and perfect double Italian
domination number of S (Cn , 2).

Theorem 2.1. The double Italian domination number of generalized Sierpiński

graph S (Cn , 2) , γdI (S (Cn , 2)) = n(n − 1) for n ⩾ 3.

Proof. Let V (Cn ) = {v1 , v2 , . . . , vn }. Then S (Cn , 2) has the vertex set {vi vj : i, j ∈ {1 , 2 , . . . , n}}
and edge set {(vi vj , vi vk ) : vj vk ∈ E (Cn )} ∪ {(vi vj , vj vi )} : vi vj ∈ E (Cn )}. Now,
Consider the function,


1
 i ∈ {1, 2, 3, . . . n}, j = i + 1(modn)
f (vi vj ) = 2 i ∈ {1, 2, 3, . . . n}, j = i + 1 + 2l(modn), l = 1, 2, 3, . . . n − 4

0 otherwise


Clearly this is a DIDF on S (Cn , 2) . So, f (S (Cn , 2)) ⩽ n + 2n + 2 n−4

2 n=
n(n− 1). Conversely , in each Cni , vi vi is the extreme vertex and vi vi−1 , vi vi+1 are
the only vertices adjacent to other copies of Cn . The remaining vertices (other
i
than vi vi−1 , vi vi , vi vi+1 ) form a path on n − 3 vertices, say Pn−3 . Let f be
a DIDF of S (Cn , 2). Note that the extreme vertices vi vi and adjacent vertices
vi vi−1 , vi vi+1 of all n copies of Cn form a cycle C of length 3n.
If f (vi vi−1 ) + f (vi vi+1 ) = 0. Then f (vi vi−1 ) = f (vi vi+1 ) = 0 such that
f (vi vi ) ⩾

2, the remaining vertices
form a path of length n − 3 ≡ 0 (mod3 ) and
i
f Pn−3 ⩾ n − 3 . So, f Cni ⩾ n − 3 + 2 = n − 1 .
If f (vi vi−1 ) + f (vi vi+1 ) = 1.For definiteness let f
(vi vi−1 ) = 0 and f (vi vi+1 ) =
i
1 then
clearly f (vi vi ) ⩾ 2 and f Pn−3 − (vi vi+2 ) ⩾ n − 4 + 1 = n − 3 . So,
i
f Cn ⩾ n − 3 + 2 + 1 = n.
If f (vi vi−1 ) + f (vi vi+1 ) = 2, let f (vi vi−1 ) = 0
and f (vi vi+1 ) = 2 for
definite-
i
ness then, f (vi vi ) ⩾ 1. Also, f Pn−3 − (vi vi+2 ) ⩾ n − 3 hence f Cni ⩾ n or
consider the case when f (vi vi−1 ) = 1 and f (vi vi+1 ) = 1 then f
(vi vi ) ⩾ 1 and if
i
f (vi−1 vi ) = 2, f
(vi+1 vi ) = 2 then f Pn−3 − (vi vi+2 ) , (vi vi−2 ) ⩾ n − 5 + 1 =
i
n − 4 . So, f Cn ⩾ n − 4 + 3 = n − 1 .
If f (vi vi−1 ) + f (vi vi+1 ) = 3. Then either f (vi vi−1 ) = 0 and f (vi vi+1 ) = 3 or
vice versa or f (vi vi−1 ) = 1 and f (vi vi+1 ) = 2 or vice versa. For let, f (vi vi−1 ) = 0
and f (vi vi+1 ) = 3 then, f
(vi vi ) = 0.

i
Again f Pn−3 − (vi vi+2 ) ⩾ n − 4 + 1 = n − 3. So, f Cni ⩾ n − 3 +
3 = n.If
i
f (vi vi−1 ) =
i

1 and f (vi vi+1 ) = 2 then, f (vi vi ) = 0, f Pn−3 − (vi vi+2 ) ⩾ n − 3
and f Cn ⩾ n. Here consider
the particular case when f (v
i−1 vi ) = 2 and
i
f Pn−3 − (vi vi+2 ) , (vi vi−2 ) ⩾ n − 5 + 1 = n − 4 . Hence, f Cni ⩾ n − 4 + 3 =
n − 1.

i
If f (vi vi−1 ) +
f (vi vi+1 ) ⩾ 4.Then f Pn−3 − (vi vi+2 ) , (vi vi−2 ) ⩾ n − 5 + 1 =
n − 4 . So, f Cni ⩾ n − 4
+ 4 = n.
Thus in all cases, f Cni ⩾ n − 1 ∀i
So, f (S (Cn , 2)) ⩾ n(n − 1). Hence f (S (Cn , 2)) = n(n − 1). □
 ON DOMINATION OF SIERPINSKI GRAPHS 5

Corollary 2.2. The perfect double Italian domination number of generalised Sierpiński
P
graph S (Cn , 2) is γdI (S (Cn , 2)) = n(n − 1) for n ⩾ 3.
Proof. Consider the function,

1 i ∈ {1, 2, 3, . . . n}, j = i + 1(modn)

f (vi vj ) = 2 i ∈ {1, 2, 3, . . . n}, j = i + 1 + 2l(modn), l = 1, 2, 3, . . . n − 4

0 otherwise


P
in Theorem 2.1, it is a PDIDF on S (Cn , 2) as well.So, γdI (S (Cn , 2)) ⩽ n + 2n+
n−4

P
2 2 n = n(n − 1) and γdI (S (Cn , 2)) ⩽ γdI (S (Cn , 2)).Hence by Theorem 2.1,
P P
n(n − 1 ) ⩽ γdI (S (Cn , 2 )).So, γdI (S (Cn , 2)) = n(n − 1 ). □

Remark 2.3. In [7], γdR ( S (Cn , 2 )) is found and we get γdI ( S (Cn , 2 )) <
γdR ( S (Cn , 2 )) for n ̸= 3k +1 , k ⩾ 1 . Note that we have used the same technique
to prove so.

3. Double Italian domination number and perfect double Italian

domination number of S(G, 2) with certain conditions
Firstly we obtain, the double Italian domination number of S(G, 2) where G has
a universal vertex followed by determining the perfect double Italian domination
number of S(G, 2) where G has exactly one universal vertex and then the perfect
double Italian domination number of S(G, 2) where G has at least two universal
vertices.
Theorem 2.3. If a graph G has a universal vertex,then γdI (S(G, 2)) = 3n − 1.
Proof. The case when n = 1 , 2 can be proved through inspection.Let V =
{v1 , v2 , . . . vn } be the vertex set of G having a universal vertex v1 . Then let
{v1 v1 , v2 v1 , . . . vn v1 } be the corresponding vertices on each copy of G, say Gi , i =
1, 2, 3, . . . ∈ S(G, 2).Then G1 contains the extreme vertex v1 v1 .Now consider a
DIDF function f such that f (vi v1 ) = 3 for all i ̸= 1 and f (v1 v1 ) = 2 .So,
γdI (S(G, 2)) ⩽ 3(n − 1) + 2 = 3n − 1. Conversely, let f be a γdI - function and to
i
double Italian dominate the extreme vertex vi vi in
G , either f (vi vi ) = 2 , 3 or if
i
f (vi vi ) ∈ {0 , 1 } then,

f (N [v v
i i ]) ⩾ 3 and f G ≥ 3 . We know γdI
(S(G, 2)) ⩽
3n − 1 and f G ≥ 3 ∀i except possibly when f (vi vi ) = 2 = f G i . So, in the
i

latter case, to double Italian dominate vi vj , j ̸= i, vi vj must be adjacent to all vj vi

indicating that vi is a universal vertex in the base graph say, vi = v1 . To double
Italian dominate v1 vj , j ̸= 1 , vj v1 must have weight at least 1.If vj v1 has weight
1 then Gj contains at least one more vertex with weight at least 2 and if vj v1 has
weight 2 then Gj contains at least one more vertex with weight
at least 1 if not
vj vj cannot be double Italian dominated.Therefore, f G j ≥ 3 ∀j ̸= 1 . Hence,
γdI (S(G, 2)) ⩾ 3(n − 1) + 2 = 3n − 1. So, γdI (S(G, 2)) = 3n − 1 . □

Remark 3.2. Clearly γdI (S(G, 2)) = γdR (S(G, 2)) = 3n −1 because if there exists
a γdI - function f such that f (v ) = 1 for no v ∈ V (G) then γdI (G) = γdR (G). In
particular γdI (S (Kn , 2)) = 3n − 1 and γdI (S (K1,q , 2)) = 3q + 2 . Note that for
P
a graph G with no edges and n vertices, γdI (G) = γdI (G) = 2n.
6 M. NANJUNDASWAMY, PUTTASWAMY, NAYAKA S. R., AND P. S. K. REDDY

Remark 3.3. Note that if G contains no universal vertex γdI (S(G, 2)) > 3n − 1 .
The motivation for the above proof is from [1, 2].
Theorem 2.4. The perfect double Italian domination number of the generalised
Sierpiński graph S(G, 2) is given by
(
P 3n − 1 G ∈ G
γdI (S(G, 2)) =
3n otherwise
where, G is the class of graphs with exactly one universal vertex and all other
vertices of degree n − 2 where n ≡ 1(mod4), for n ⩾ 3.
Proof. Consider S(G, 2). Let V = {v1 , v2 , . . . vn } be the vertex set of G having ex-
actly one universal vertex v1 . Then let {v1 v1 , v2 v1 , . . . vn v1 } be the corresponding
vertices on each copy of G, say Gi , i = 1, 2, 3, . . . n. in S(G, 2). Then G1 contains
the extreme vertex v1 v1 . Consider the function
(
3 vi v1 ∈ {2, 3, . . . n}, u = v1 vj for some j ̸= 1
f (u) =
0 otherwise
P
Clearly this function is a PDIDF of S(G, 2). So, γdI S (G, 2 ) ⩽ 3n. Now con-
P P
versely, γdI (S(G, 2)) ⩽ γdI (S(G, 2)).So,by Theorem 3.1, 3n − 1 ⩽ γdI (S (G, 2 )).If
P
possible let f be a γdI - function such that f (S (G, 2 )) = 3n − 1 , then G has a uni-
versal vertex
by Remark 3.3.Since G has exactly one universal vertex v1 , f (v1 v1 ) =
2 = f G 1 by Theorem 3.1.If f (vj v1 ) = 3 for some j ̸= 1 , then f (N [vj v1 ]) = 5 .
To perfect double italian dominate

we must have 3 ≤ f (N [vj v1 ]) ≤ 4 . Hence
1 ≤ f (vj v1 ) ≤ 2 and f G j = 3, for j ̸= 1 . There arise two cases.
Case 1. For some j , f (vj vj ) ̸= 0 If f (vj v1 ) = 1 , either f (vj vj ) = 1 and
f (vj vk ) = 1 such that vj vk and vj vj are adjacent in Gj or f (vj vj ) = 2 . If
f (vj v1 ) = 2 , then f (vj vj ) = 1 . Consider Gj , since there exists only one universal
vertex in the base graph which corresponds to vj v1 in Gj there exists at least
one vertex vj vs perfect double italian dominated by vs vj , s ̸= 1 , j , k . ie, vj vs is
adjacent to vj vj .This is true for all such S. Then vj vj , j ̸= 1 is adjacent to all
other vertices in Gj , a contradiction.
Case 2. f (vj vj ) = 0 for all j . If f (vj vj ) = 0 then either f (vj v1 ) = 1 and
f (vj vk ) = 2 or vice versa such that vj vk and vj vj are adjacent in Gj .For definite-
ness let f (vj v1 ) = 1 for any j.First let us prove the following Claim A.
P
Claim A: γdI (S(G, 2)) = 3n − 1 for G ∈ G where, G is the class of graphs
with exactly one universal vertex and all other vertices of degree n − 2 and n ≡
1(mod4), for n ⩾ 3
Suppose there exists at least one vertex with degree at most n-3, say vl in
G.If there exists no Gk , k ̸= l , such that vl vk is perfect double Italian dominated
by vk vl ie, in Gl all vertices vl vk , for all k , is perfect double Italian dominated
by Gl alone, a contradiction as base graph G has exactly one universalvertex.So,
there exists a Gk , k ̸= l , such that vl vk is perfect double Italian dominated by
vk vl ie, f (vk vl ) = 2 because f (vl v1 ) = 1 and f (vk v1 ) = 1 then, there exists at
least two vertices vk vj and vk vi not perfect double Italian dominated by vk vl in
Gk , i, j ̸= k , l and i ̸= j · So, f (vj vk ) = 2 and f (vi vk ) = 2 . Again in Gj and Gi
 ON DOMINATION OF SIERPINSKI GRAPHS 7

there exists at least one vertex vj vs (correspondingly vi vs ) perfect double Italian

dominated by vs vj (correspondingly vs vi ).We have f (vs vj ) = 2 and f (vs vi ) = 2
in Gs , s ̸= i , j . So, f (G s ) > 3, a contradiction. So, all vertices in G are of degree
greater than or equal to n − 2 and exactly one of which is a universal vertex. Now
2
to prove G ∈ G, the number of edges in G will be (n−1) 2 , which is a positive integer
and so n is odd.Due to the symmetry in G, let us assume that v2 is not adjacent
to v3 , v4 not adjacent to v5 and so on. We have f (v2 v2 ) = 0 and f (v2 v1 ) = 1 ,
then we let f (v2 vj ) = 2 for some j ̸= 3 , then there exists some k such that v2 vk
is perfect double Italian dominated by vk v2 (as vk is not adjacent to vj in base
graph G) ie, f (v2 vk ) = 0 if and only if f (vk v2 ) = 2 , then f (vk v3 ) = 0 if and
only if f (v3 vk ) = 2 (as v2 is not adjacent to v3 in base graph G) and that forces
f (v3 vj ) = 0 if and only if f (vj v3 ) = 2 then eventually f (vj v2 ) = 0 if and only
if f (v2 vj ) = 2 which is true. This assignment perfect double Italian dominates
vertices in four distinct copies G2 , G3 , Gj and Gk together with G1 .Now consider
Gs , s ̸= 1 , 2 , 3 , j , k and repeat the process above, then we will get another four
distinct copies of G perfect double Italian dominated and so on.So, n must be such
that n ≡ 1(mod4) (See Fig. 2).

Fig. 2. S(G, t), when t = 1 , 2 and G ∈ G.

In Fig. 2 the majenta colour vertices represent those vertices with weight 2
and cyan colour vertices represent those with weight 1 and all other vertices are
P
of weight 0 and it represents the γdI - function given below. If n ≡ 3 (mod4 ) the
above process of perfect double Italian domination cannot be done for the last
remaining
two distinct copies of G in S(G, 2).Now consider the function,


 1 i ∈ {2, 3, . . . n}, j = 1

2 i ∈ {2, 3, 4, 6, 7, 8, . . . n − 1}, j = i + 1 or
f (vi vj ) =


 i ∈ {5, 9, 13 . . . n}, j = i − 3 or i = j = 1
0 otherwise

Clearly this is a PDIDF with f (S (G, 2 )) = (n − 1 ) + 2n = 3n − 1 . So,
P P
γdI (S(G, 2)) ⩽ 3n − 1 for G ∈ G alone, leading to γdI (S(G, 2)) = 3n − 1 for
8 M. NANJUNDASWAMY, PUTTASWAMY, NAYAKA S. R., AND P. S. K. REDDY

P
G ∈ G. This proves the Claim A. Then γdI (S(G, 2)) > 3n − 1 for G ∈
/ G. Hence
P P
γdI ( S (G, 2 )) ⩾ 3n.So, γdI S (G, 2 ) = 3n otherwise. □
P
Remark 3.5. In particular γdI (S (K1,q , 2)) = 3(q + 1 ).
Theorem 2.5. The perfect double Italian domination number of generalised Sier-
P
pinski graph S(G, 2) such that G has at least two universal vertices is γdI (S(G, 2))
= 3n − 1.
Proof. Consider S(G, 2). Let V = {v1 , v2 , . . . vn } be the vertex set of G hav-
ing atleast two universal vertices say, v1 and v2 . Then let {v1 v1 , v2 v1 , . . . vn v1 }
and {v1 v2 , v2 v2 , . . . vn v2 } be the corresponding vertices on each copy of G, say
Gi , i = 1, 2, 3, . . .. in S(G, 2). Since γdI ( S (G, 2 )) ⩽ γdI P
( S (G, 2 )), 3n − 1 ⩽
P
γdI ( S (G, 2 )). Now conversely, consider the function,

1 i ∈ {2, 3, 4, . . . n}, j = 1

f (vi vj ) = 2 i ∈ {2, 3, 4, . . . n}, j = 2, and v1 v1

0 otherwise


Clearly f is a PDIDF of S(G, 2) such that f (S (G, 2 )) = 1 (n − 1 ) + 1 + 2 (n −

P P
1 ) + 2 = 3n − 1 . So, γdI ( S (G, 2 )) ⩽ 3n − 1 . Hence γdI ( S (G, 2 )) = 3n − 1 . □

4. Conclusion
In this paper we computed the exact value of double Italian and perfect double
Italian domination numbers of generalised Sierpiński graph S(G, 2) and found that
γdI ( S (Cn , 2 )) = n(n −1 ), γdI (S (G, 2 )) = 3n −1 where G has a universal vertex,
(
P 3n − 1 G ∈ G
γdI (S(G, 2)) =
3n otherwise
where, G is the class of graphs with exactly one universal vertex and all other
P
vertices of degree n − 2 and n ≡ 1 ( mod 4 ), for n ⩾ 3 and γdI ( S (G, 2 )) = 3n − 1
if G has at least 2 universal vertices.

References
[1] V. Anu and S. Aparna Lakshmanan, The double Roman domination number of generalized
Sierpiński graphs, Discrete Math Algorithms Appl., 12(4) (2020) 2050047.
[2] V. Anu, A study on two graph parameters - double roman domination number and homo-
metric number, PhD Dissertation (2020).
[3] R. Balakrishnan and K. Ranganathan, A textbook of graph theory, Springer Science &
Business Media, (2012).
[4] G.Hao, P. Jalilolghadr and D.A. Mojdeh, Perfect double Italian domination of a
graph,AKCE Int. J. Graphs Comb., (2023): 1-11.
[5] T.W.Haynes, S. Hedetniemi, and P. Slater, Fundamentals of domination in graphs, CRC
press,( 2013).
[6] T.W.Haynes,Domination in graphs: volume 2: advanced topics,Routledge, (2017).
[7] V. Jismy, V. Anu and S. Aparna Lakshmanan, Domination parameters of generalized
Sierpiński graphs, AKCE Int. J. Graphs Comb., (2022) 1-7.
[8] S. Klavžar,U. Milutinović and C. Petr, 1-perfect codes in Sierpiński graphs,Bull. Aust. Math.
Soc., 66(3) (2002) 369-384.
 ON DOMINATION OF SIERPINSKI GRAPHS 9

[9] S.Klavžar and U. Milutinović, Graphs S ( n, k ) and a variant of the Tower of Hanoi problem,
Czechoslov. Math. J.,47 (1997) 95-104.
[10] D.A.Mojdeh and L.Volkmann, Roman {3}-domination (double Italian domination), Discret.
Appl. Math. , 283 (2020) 555-564.
[11] F. Ramezani, E. D. Rodrıguez-Bazan and J. A. Rodrıguez-Velázquez,On the Roman Domi-
nation Number of Generalized Sierpinski Graphs,Filomat,31(20) (2017) 65156528.
[12] J.A.Rodrı́guez-Velázquez, E. D. Rodrı́guez-Bazan and A. Estrada-Moreno, On Generalized
Sierpiński Graphs,Discuss. Math. Graph Theory,37(3) (2017) 547-560.

M. Nanjundaswamy: Department of Mathematics, Government First Grade College

for Women, Byrapura, T. Narasipura-571 124, INDIA & Department of Mathematics,
PET Research Foundation (Affiliated to University of Mysore), P.E.S College of
Engineering, Mandya-571 401, INDIA.
Email address: [email protected]

Puttaswamy: Department of Mathematics, PET Research Foundation (Affiliated

to University of Mysore), P.E.S College of Engineering, Mandya-571 401, INDIA.
Email address: [email protected]

Nayaka S. R.: Department of Mathematics, PET Research Foundation (Affiliated

to University of Mysore), P.E.S College of Engineering, Mandya-571 401, INDIA.
Email address: [email protected]

P. Siva Kota Reddy: Department of Mathematics, JSS Science and Technology

University, Mysuru-570 006, Karnataka, INDIA.
Email address: [email protected]; [email protected]