Wiki
Wiki

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

Updated


Statement

For every finite tree TT on t≥2t\geq2 vertices, every root r∈V(T)r\in V(T), and every finite simple host graph GG on n≥1n\geq1 vertices,

M(G)≤RG(T,r)+(t−2)n!,M(G)\leq R_G(T,r)+(t-2)n!,

with the [[extremal_graph_theory/adamczewski_2026_erdos548/marked_cut_count|marked and rooted state counts]] defined earlier.

Proof

Induct on tt, with the assertion uniform in the root and host graph. For t=2t=2, the tree is a single edge. Every marked cut supplies a rooted copy of that edge, so RG(T,r)=M(G)R_G(T,r)=M(G) and the assertion follows.

Now let t≥3t\geq3. Connectivity implies that rr has a neighbor. There are two cases.

If rr has just one neighbor pp, delete rr and root the resulting tree SS at pp. Removing a leaf preserves connectivity and acyclicity, so SS is a tree on t−1≥2t-1\geq2 vertices. The induction hypothesis and Lemma 2 give

M(G)≤RG(S,p)+(t−3)n!≤RG(T,r)+(t−2)n!.M(G)\leq R_G(S,p)+(t-3)n! \leq R_G(T,r)+(t-2)n!.

Otherwise rr has two distinct neighbors, say ss and zz. Write AA for the vertex set of the component of T−rsT-rs that contains rr. Deleting an edge of a tree separates it into two trees: an alternative path joining the edge's endpoints would have formed a cycle, and each of the two resulting components stays connected by the original unique paths. Thus s∉As\notin A while z∈Az\in A. Define

T1=T[A],T2=T[(V(T)∖A)∪{r}].T_1=T[A],\qquad T_2=T[(V(T)\setminus A)\cup\{r\}].

The second tree is the component containing ss, with rr attached by the edge rsrs. Both T1T_1 and T2T_2 have at least two vertices and are smaller than TT. Their union is TT, their intersection is {r}\{r\}, and there is no edge between their nonroot vertex sets. Writing ti=∣V(Ti)∣t_i=|V(T_i)| gives t1+t2=t+1t_1+t_2=t+1, because only rr is counted twice.

Apply induction to both trees, with root rr, and add the inequalities:

2M(G)≤RG(T1,r)+RG(T2,r)+(t−3)n!.2M(G)\leq R_G(T_1,r)+R_G(T_2,r)+(t-3)n!.

By Lemma 1,

RG(T1,r)+RG(T2,r)≤M(G)+n!+RG(T,r).R_G(T_1,r)+R_G(T_2,r)\leq M(G)+n!+R_G(T,r).

Substitution and subtraction of M(G)M(G) prove the desired bound. These two cases exhaust the possible degrees of the root, completing the induction.

Source and dependencies

A Counting Proof for Erdős Problem 548, preliminary exposition, equation (2) on p. 2 and its proof in §4, pp. 3–4, in the canonical PDF. The pinned formal source uses tree_root_partition, rooted_word_tree_bound_aux, and rooted_word_tree_bound; see the source record. The dependencies are Lemmas 1 and 2 and the elementary tree separation facts spelled out in the proof. No asymptotic embedding theorem is imported.

Bears on. #548, #547, #557.