Wiki
Wiki

Research notes on every problem, and a library of the papers behind them. Built from the open erdos repository.

Updated

Erdos 1971 imbalances colorations

../

edge_normalization: Separates the historical edge minimax, its symmetric factor of two, and the zero value of the independently signed ordered-pair variant.

theorem_5: Records the fixed-k eventual two-sided theorem, its edge specialization, and the exact elementary one-set base case.


P. Erdős and J. Spencer, Imbalances in k-colorations, Networks 1(4), 379--385, DOI 10.1002/net.3230010407. Crossref records print publication in 1971; the scan is copyright 1972, and bibliographies also use 1971/72. These identify one article, not different mathematical versions.

For sign colorings of the kk-subsets of an nn-set, the paper defines Hk(n)H_k(n) as the least possible largest absolute induced sum, equations (1)--(4), printed pp.379--380. For every fixed integer k≥1k\ge1 and sufficiently large nn, the Theorem on p.380, display (5), gives

Ckn(k+1)/2≤Hk(n)≤Ck′n(k+1)/2.C_kn^{(k+1)/2}\le H_k(n)\le C'_kn^{(k+1)/2}.

The print calls Ck,Ck′C_k,C'_k positive absolute constants; they do not depend on nn and may depend on kk. The theorem record states the quantifiers. At k=2k=2 this is the historical unordered-edge H(n)H(n), of order n3/2n^{3/2}. The imported formula on Problem 1028 has a domain and ordered-pair ambiguity; the convention record preserves the distinction and proves the elementary cancellation and factor-of-two facts.

The p.380 upper-bound method uses random coloring and a union bound. Its printed variance normalization and boundary choice of constant do not form a complete quantitative proof. The theorem record diagnoses the exact issues. At c=2log⁡2c=\sqrt{2\log2}, the displayed bound in (7) equals 11, not a value strictly below 11. No reviewed sharp coefficient in (8) is asserted here.

For k=2k=2, equations (10)--(12), p.381, combine a large cross sum between disjoint sets with additivity to force a large induced sum in one set or their union. The cross-sum input invokes the methods of reference [3], Spencer's Optimal Ranking of Tournaments. The general argument uses Lemmas 1--3, with anti-concentration and polynomial coefficient control. These proof chains remain to be compiled. The elementary base case is H1(n)=⌈n/2⌉H_1(n)=\lceil n/2\rceil, not a fractional part; a complete counting justification is in the theorem record.

The source also recalls Erdős's earlier n/4n/4 lower bound and order-n3/2n^{3/2} upper bound; see Theorem II.

The copy read for this card is the archive's scan, https://users.renyi.hu/~p_erdos/1971-05.pdf. The original acquisition date is unknown; the selected original pages were checked. The file prints "Networks, 1: 379-385 © 1972 by John Wiley & Sons, Inc." in its first-page footer, every other right reserved.

Bears on. #1028: at k=2k=2 the Theorem gives order n3/2n^{3/2}, for sufficiently large nn, for the unordered-edge quantity H2(n)H_2(n), which the problem page treats as the intended earlier version of the statement; the site's formula read with arbitrary signs on ordered pairs has value 00 and is not covered (see the edge normalization record).

Recorded results and remaining proof work.

  • Theorem, p.380, display (5): exact fixed-kk, eventual-nn statement, claims checked; the k≥2k\ge2 proof is not fully reconstructed. The elementary k=1k=1 case is proved there.
  • Edge normalization: complete elementary comparison of unordered, arbitrary ordered, and symmetric ordered sums.
  • Equations (6)--(8), p.380: rewrite the probability argument with the correct variance and strict threshold before assigning proof credit or a quantitative coefficient.
  • Equations (10)--(12), p.381: compile the exact cross-sum input and its three-set consequence; additivity alone does not supply the input.
  • Lemmas 1--3, pp.381--384: reconstruct the general-kk lower-bound chain with its anti-concentration and coefficient estimates. This correction does not claim independent full-proof review of these lemmas.
  • Lemma 1, p.381: for fixed k≥2k\ge2 there are d1,…,dk>0d_1,\ldots,d_k>0 and t0t_0. If t>t0t>t_0 and A1,…,AkA_1,\ldots,A_k are pairwise disjoint tt-sets, then for each 1≤i≤k1\le i\le k and every sign coloring gig_i of the ii-subsets of the ground set A={1,…,n}A=\{1,\ldots,n\}, at least di2tid_i2^{ti} tuples (B1,…,Bi)(B_1,\ldots,B_i) with Bj⊆AjB_j\subseteq A_j satisfy ∣gi(B1⋯Bi)∣≥ti/2|g_i(B_1\cdots B_i)|\ge t^{i/2}. This is a statement pointer, not its proof.
  • Lemma 2, p.381: for fixed c1>0c_1>0 there are c2>0c_2>0 and t0t_0 such that, for t≥t0t\ge t_0 and real x1,…,xtx_1,\ldots,x_t with ∣xj∣≥1|x_j|\ge1 for 1≤j≤c1t1\le j\le c_1t, at least c22tc_22^t sets V⊆{1,…,t}V\subseteq\{1,\ldots,t\} have ∣∑j∈Vxj∣>t|\sum_{j\in V}x_j|>\sqrt t. The proof (pp.381--382) cites Erdős's 1945 Littlewood--Offord paper, reference [2]. The source's anti-concentration proof is uncompiled.

No file of this source is held: no license on record permits its redistribution, and the card cites the edition it names above.