Research notes on every problem, and a library of the papers behind them. Built from the open erdos repository.
Updated
Sauermann 2019 rousseau schelp subgraphs minimum degree
fact_1_1: The sharp edge threshold, due to Erdős, Faudree, Rousseau and Schelp, at or above which every graph on at least k − 1 vertices has a subgraph of minimum degree at least k, with the generalized wheel showing that such a subgraph may have to use every vertex.
theorem_1_3: For k at least 2 and t between 1 and (k−2)(k+1)/2 − 1, every graph on at least k − 1 vertices with at least (k−1)n − t edges has a subgraph of minimum degree at least k on a constant fraction fewer vertices; at the largest t this proves the Erdős–Faudree–Rousseau–Schelp conjecture.
Sauermann, Lisa, A proof of a conjecture of Erdős, Faudree, Rousseau and Schelp on subgraphs of minimum degree . J. Combin. Theory Ser. B 134 (2019), 36--75, doi:10.1016/j.jctb.2018.05.002 (Crossref record read; the site's reference text gives "J. Combin. Theory Ser. B (2019), 36--75"). Preprint arXiv:1705.09979 (v1 28 May 2017; v2 26 June 2018). The arXiv record names arXiv's non-exclusive distribution license (arXiv:1705.09979), every other right reserved.
Edition read. The copy read for this card is arXiv:1705.09979v2, stamped "[math.CO] 26 Jun 2018" and dated June 28, 2018 on its title page, 34 pages with a complete text layer, the arXiv comment reading "34 pages, minor revisions"; the arXiv record lists no journal reference. The journal text was not compared; every locator on this card and on the result pages is a preprint page. Result pages: theorem_1_3 and fact_1_1.
Read status: claims checked for Fact 1.1 and its proof (p. 1), Conjecture 1.2, Theorem 1.3 and the deduction of (p. 2), read clause by clause on the page images on 2026-09-18, and for the induced-subgraph remark (p. 3, text layer); the proof of Theorem 1.3 (Sections 2--5, pp. 3--33) and the appendix were not read.
Erdős, Faudree, Rousseau and Schelp observed (Fact 1.1, p. 1) that edges on vertices always force a subgraph of minimum degree at least , that this is sharp, and that generalized wheels ( joined to ) have no such subgraph on fewer than vertices; they conjectured (Conjecture 1.2, p. 2, due to Erdős for , who also listed that case in his 1993 collection of favorite problems, "[1, p. 13]") that one extra edge forces such a subgraph on at most vertices. Sauermann proves the conjecture through the stronger Theorem 1.3 (p. 2): for and any integer , a graph on vertices with at least edges always has a subgraph of minimum degree at least on at most vertices. Taking recovers Conjecture 1.2 with ; the range of is empty when , so the theorem as printed covers . This improves the partial results of Erdős, Faudree, Rousseau and Schelp, who obtained vertices, and of Mousset, Noever and Škorić, whose bound the paper quotes as (the form of their journal version, Electron. J. Combin. 24 (2017), Paper 4.9; their arXiv v1 prints , with a proof the journal version revised); the method uses and extends the ideas of Mousset, Noever and Škorić. Theorem 1.3 at its largest , with the induced-subgraph remark of p. 3, answers the question of Problem 814 in the affirmative for every (see Bears on).
Source: https://arxiv.org/abs/1705.09979.
Contents
- Fact 1.1 (p. 1, after Erdős, Faudree, Rousseau and Schelp): edges on vertices force a subgraph of minimum degree at least ; proved by deleting a vertex of degree at most ; sharp, with the generalized wheel as an example in which no subgraph on fewer than vertices has minimum degree at least .
- Conjecture 1.2 (p. 2): for each there is such that any graph on vertices with edges has a subgraph of minimum degree at least on at most vertices; proved for by Theorem 1.3.
- Theorem 1.3 (p. 2): for and , every graph on vertices with at least edges has a subgraph of minimum degree at least on at most vertices; at this is from edges.
- The remark of p. 3: "subgraph" may be replaced by "induced subgraph" in all the statements, since the induced subgraph on the same vertex set has minimum degree at least too.
- The proof (pp. 3--33): induction on with ; Claim 2.1 on the edges meeting a vertex set; an iterative coloring in which deleting one color class leaves minimum degree at least ; Lemma 3.1 (extending Lemma 2.7 of Mousset, Noever and Škorić) proved in Section 5 after Section 4; Lemma 2.2 proved in the appendix along the lines of Lemma 4 of Erdős, Faudree, Rousseau and Schelp.
- References (p. 33): [1] Erdős, Quaestiones Math. 16 (1993), 333--350; [2] Erdős, Faudree, Rousseau, Schelp, Discrete Math. 85 (1990), 53--58; [3] Mousset, Noever, Škorić, Electron. J. Combin. 24 (2017), Paper 4.9.
Compiled scope
Statements at claims-checked depth on pp. 1--3; no proof read beyond the four-line proof of Fact 1.1. Nothing here is independently reviewed. The 1990 paper is not held; its fact, conjecture and bound appear here as this paper states them.
Bears on. #814: Theorem 1.3 at is the page's statement with for every , the induced subgraph being the one on the same vertex set; the case lies outside the theorem's range and is checked on the problem page.
No file of this source is held: no license on record permits its redistribution, and the card cites the edition it names above.