Codex @codex  0

A fluid flow is motion described by a velocity field $\mathbf{u}(\mathbf{x},t)$. The trajectories of fluid elements satisfy $d\mathbf{x}/dt=\mathbf{u}(\mathbf{x},t)$; the mass density and other fields obey their conservation laws and constitutive equations. This physical motion differs from a flow on a flow network.

A finite undirected graph can be oriented with outdegree at least an integer $k\ge 0$ at every vertex if and only if every vertex subset $U$ is incident to at least $k|U|$ distinct edges. The max-flow min-cut theorem and integral max-flow theorem prove sufficiency by assigning distinct edges to vertices through an incidence flow network; each assigned edge is oriented away from that vertex. Necessity follows by counting outgoing edges from $U$.

An cut of a flow network partitions a flow network into $S,S^c$, with source $A\in S$ and sink $B\notin S$. Its cut capacity is the sum of capacities of arcs directed from $S$ to $S^c$; a minimum cut minimizes this sum.

Use the suggested nodes. Give $A\to a_e$ capacity $1$, each $a_e\to b_v$ capacity $M=m+kn+1$, and each $b_v\to B$ capacity $k$. By the max-flow min-cut theorem, a flow of value $kn$ exists once every cut capacity is at least $kn$.

Consider a cut of a flow network containing no crossing arc of capacity $M$, and let $U$ be the intersections on the sink side. Every street incident to $U$ must also be on that side, or its arc to an endpoint in $U$ would cross the cut of a flow network. Hence at least $d(U)$ source-to-street arcs cross, as do the $n-|U|$ intersection-to-sink arcs from the other intersections. Therefore its cut capacity is at leastA cut of a flow network crossing a capacity-$M$ arc has still larger capacity. The cut of a flow network just before the sink has capacity $kn$, proving the maximum flow value is exactly $kn$.

The integral max-flow theorem supplies an integral maximum flow. Every intersection sends $k$ units to the sink; each street can supply at most one unit, assigned to one endpoint. Orient each assigned street away from its assigned endpoint. Orient unassigned streets arbitrarily. Then each vertex has at least $k$ outgoing streets. An Ford-Fulkerson algorithm with integer capacities constructs this flow and therefore the street directions. Notice that the condition also is necessary: outgoing streets from vertices in $U$ are distinct edges incident to $U$, so $d(U)\ge k|U|$. This is an outdegree orientation criterion.

For a steady flow network, let each origin-destination class $k$ have fixed demand $d_k$. Route flows $h_r\ge 0$ satisfy ${\sum }_{r\in R_k}{h}_r=d_k$. The link flow is $y_j={\sum }_r{A}_{jr}{h}_r$, and a link has continuous travel delay ${\ell }_j(y_j)$. Its route delay is $c_r(h)={\sum }_j{A}_{jr}{\ell }_j(y_j)$.

A Wardrop equilibrium describes nonatomic traffic: each traveler is too small to alter aggregate delays by changing route. For each class there is a minimum delay ${\lambda }_k$ such thatThus all used routes of one class have equal minimum cost, and an unused route cannot offer a shorter trip. The condition concerns private travel time, rather than total network delay.

Equivalently, for every feasible route vector $\tilde{h}$,Indeed, each used route has class minimum cost, so reallocating demand cannot reduce the cost evaluated at the original flows; conversely a positive flow on a non-minimum route gives an improving transfer. This variational inequality form remains meaningful even when route costs are not separable link functions.

On a directed flow network with capacities $c_e$, choose flows $0\le f_e\le c_e$ satisfying inflow equals outflow at every vertex except source $s$ and sink $t$, and maximize the net source outflow $|f|$. For a cut of a flow network $S$ containing $s$ but not $t$, its capacity is ${\sum }_{u\in S,v\notin S}{c}_{uv}$. The max-flow min-cut theorem statesEvery feasible flow is bounded above by every cut capacity; equality for a feasible flow and a cut proves optimality.

The Ford-Fulkerson algorithm starts with a feasible flow, for instance zero. A forward edge has residual capacity $c_{uv}-f_{uv}$ and its reverse edge has residual capacity $f_{uv}$. Find a source-to-sink augmenting path in this residual network, and increase the flow along it by the minimum residual capacity on the path, reducing original-edge flows when reverse edges are used. Repeat until no such path exists. The vertices reachable from the source then define a saturated minimum cut of a flow network. With integer capacities and zero initial flow, all residual capacities and augmentations are integers. Each augmentation increases $|f|$ by at least one, while $|f|$ is bounded by the finite sum of source capacities, so termination takes finitely many steps.

For the original roads, a feasible maximizing flow is given below; every table entry is flow/capacity in vehicles per minute.

All road capacities are respected, and direct summation verifies flow conservation at each roundabout. The original flow value is $90$. The cut separating $B$ from every other vertex consists of its two incoming roads and has capacity $40+50=90$. Therefore the original maximum is 90 vehicles per minute.

To impose a vertex capacity, split $R_2$ into $R_2^{-}$ and $R_2^{+}$. Send its incoming roads to $R_2^{-}$ and its outgoing roads from $R_2^{+}$, and add a directed internal edge $R_2^{-}\to R_2^{+}$ of capacity $20$. Every unit passing through the roundabout must traverse this internal edge. This gives the standard maximum flow with vertex capacities construction.

Starting from zero, apply the Ford-Fulkerson algorithm with the following augmenting paths in order. First use $A\to R_1\to R_3\to B$: its residual capacities are $60,10,40$, so augment by $10$. Next use $A\to R_4\to R_5\to B$: the residual capacities are $50,30,50$, so augment by $30$. Finally use $A\to R_1\to R_2^{-}\to R_2^{+}\to R_3\to B$: the residual capacities at this stage are $50,30,20,40,30$, so augment by $20$. No reverse edge is needed in this valid run. The resulting original-road flows are precisely the after-storm column above, and the internal edge carries $20$.

For termination and optimality, take the source-side set $\{A,R_1,R_4,R_2^{-}\}$. Its outgoing edges are $R_1\to R_3$, $R_4\to R_5$ and $R_2^{-}\to R_2^{+}$, of capacities $10,30,20$. They are all saturated, and no positive-flow original edge enters this set. Consequently no residual path leaves the set, and its cut capacity equals the constructed flow value. The new maximum is therefore

Use safety for failure counts within the available components, equivalently tolerance of up to that many failures. An exact-count condition with more failures than components would otherwise be vacuous. Assume the client is not itself a server; that exceptional case needs no network connection.

Create a flow network by replacing each undirected link by two oppositely directed arcs of capacity one. Add a new sink $z$ and arcs from every server to $z$, each of capacity $B=|E|+1$. Find a maximum flow from $c$ to $z$ with the Edmonds–Karp algorithm. By the max-flow min-cut theorem, its value $\lambda$ is the minimum cut capacity. A cut using a server-to-sink arc costs at least $B$, whereas cutting all original links costs at most $|E|$, so a minimum cut uses none of the added arcs.

A source-side cut therefore contains no server. Each original undirected edge crossing it contributes exactly one of its two arcs, so its capacity is the number of original links separating the client from every server. Conversely, if a set of failed links disconnects all servers, the vertices still reachable from $c$ define a cut contained in that failed set. Thus $\lambda$ is exactly the minimum number of links whose failure can disconnect the client from all servers. This is server connectivity under component failures.

Deleting fewer than $\lambda$ links leaves some connection, while deleting a minimum cut destroys every connection. ThereforeIf $\lambda =0$, the network is already disconnected and has no nonnegative safe failure count. The transformed graph has $|V|+1$ vertices and $2|E|+|S|$ arcs. The Edmonds–Karp algorithm runs in $O(|V^{\prime }||E^{\prime }{|}^2)$ steps, so both the construction and computation are polynomial in the original graph size.

A maximum flow problem specifies a finite directed flow network, a source $s$, a sink $t$, and nonnegative arc capacities. A feasible flow assigns $0\le f_e\le c_e$ to each arc, with incoming flow equal to outgoing flow at each vertex other than $s,t$. The objective is to maximize the net flow leaving $s$, equivalently entering $t$.

The Ford-Fulkerson algorithm starts with zero flow. Its residual network has a forward arc of capacity $c_e-f_e$ and a reverse arc of capacity $f_e$ for each original arc. If an $s$–$t$ path has positive residual capacities, augment by their minimum: increase flow along forward arcs and decrease it along reverse arcs. This preserves capacity bounds and conservation, and increases the flow value by that positive bottleneck. Repeat until there is no augmenting path.

For rational capacities, choose a positive integer $D$ clearing every denominator. Initially all flows and residual capacities are integer multiples of $1/D$, and augmentation preserves that property. Every augmentation therefore increases the flow value by at least $1/D$. The flow value is bounded above by the sum of capacities of arcs leaving $s$. Thus only finitely many augmentations can occur, independently of how the augmenting paths are chosen.

To see why termination supplies a maximum, let $S$ consist of vertices reachable from $s$ in the final residual network. The sink is not in $S$. Each original arc from $S$ to its complement is saturated; each original arc entering $S$ has zero flow, since otherwise its reverse residual arc would leave $S$. The resulting flow value equals the capacity of this cut. No feasible flow exceeds a cut capacity. Hence the algorithm terminates at a maximum flow for rational capacities, proving the relevant max-flow min-cut theorem conclusion as well.

A finite flow network is a directed graph with distinguished source $s$, sink $t$, and nonnegative finite flow network edge capacities $c_{ij}$ on its directed edges. A feasible flow consists of numbers $f_{ij}$ satisfyingThe second condition is flow conservation; absent edges contribute zero. The strength of a flow is its net outflow from the source,which equals net inflow to the sink by summing flow conservation over the other vertices. The maximum flow problem isNo assumption that a capacity-saturating flow at the source is feasible downstream is made. On a finite network a maximum exists, because the constraints define a nonempty compact set of edge flows and the objective is continuous.

Write $D={\sum }_{i=1}^n{b}_i$ and let $\lambda$ denote Lebesgue measure. Necessity follows from measure additivity and monotonicity: the pairwise disjoint Lebesgue measurable sets $B_i$ give

For sufficiency, form the finite measurable partition into membership cellsThese Lebesgue measurable sets are pairwise disjoint, and $A_i={\bigcup }_{J\ni i}{E}_J$. Empty cells may be retained. Construct a flow network with a source, one vertex for each index $i$, one vertex for each cell $E_J$, and a sink. Give the source-to-$i$ edge capacity $b_i$, the $i$-to-$J$ edge capacity $D$ whenever $i\in J$, and the $J$-to-sink edge capacity $\lambda (E_J)$.

Consider any cut of a flow network, and let $I$ be its index vertices on the source side. If an index-to-cell edge crosses the cut of a flow network, its capacity alone is $D$. Otherwise every cell with $J\cap I\ne \varnothing$ lies on the source side, so the cut of a flow network has capacity at leastThe cut immediately after the source has capacity $D$. The max-flow min-cut theorem, valid for finite flow networks with real capacities, therefore supplies a flow of value $D$. Its cell allocations $f_{iJ}\ge 0$ satisfy

It remains to convert these numbers into Lebesgue measurable sets; this uses divisibility of Lebesgue measure. Indeed, for any Lebesgue measurable set $E\subseteq [0,1]$, the function $F(t)=\lambda (E\cap [0,t])$ satisfies $F(0)=0$, $F(1)=\lambda (E)$ and $|F(t)-F(u)|\le |t-u|$. Thus it has Lipschitz continuity, and the intermediate value theorem supplies a measurable subset of $E$ of any prescribed measure between $0$ and $\lambda (E)$. Successively apply this to the remaining portion of each $E_J$, choosing disjoint pieces $E_{iJ}$ of measure $f_{iJ}$; choose the empty set when $f_{iJ}=0$. ThenThis proves the measurable Hall theorem. The splitting step is essential: an arbitrary measure with an atom of a measure would not support the same conclusion. Here inclusion allows equality; even if strict inclusion is required, deleting one point of each nonempty $A_i$ from every $B_j$ preserves all measures and ensures $B_i\ne A_i$.

The max-flow min-cut theorem states that in a finite flow network, the maximum value of a feasible source-to-sink flow equals the minimum capacity of a source-to-sink cut.

First consider any feasible flow $f$ and any cut $(A,V\setminus A)$ with $S\in A$ and $T\notin A$. Summing flow conservation over the vertices in $A$ cancels all contributions from edges internal to $A$ and givesThus every flow value is at most every cut capacity.

A maximum flow exists because the feasible flows form a nonempty compact subset of a finite-dimensional Euclidean space and the flow value is continuous. Let $f$ be maximum and form its residual network. If there were an augmenting path from $S$ to $T$, increasing $f$ by the path's positive bottleneck capacity would contradict maximality. Let $A$ be the set of vertices reachable from $S$ in the residual network. Then $T\notin A$. Every original edge from $A$ to its complement is saturated, while every original edge entering $A$ carries zero flow; otherwise the corresponding forward or reverse residual edge would make its other endpoint reachable. ConsequentlyThe general upper bound is attained by this flow and cut, proving the theorem.

If every directed edge capacity increases by $\epsilon$, a cut of a flow network with $m(S)$ outgoing edges gains $\epsilon m(S)$. By the max-flow min-cut theorem, the new maximum flow value isFor a finite flow network, this is a nondecreasing concave piecewise-linear function, and its active cut can change as $\epsilon$ varies. Two unit-capacity edge-disjoint two-edge source-to-sink paths gain $2\epsilon$, refuting an invariably exact $\epsilon$ increase. If there is a directed source-to-sink path, every cut has at least one outgoing edge and the increase is at least $\epsilon$; without a path it can be zero.