Wiki
Wiki

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

Updated


Statement

Notation (printed p. 633): for a fixed graph HH and an integer nn, f(n,H)f(n,H) is the largest mm for which the edges of KnK^n can be colored with mm colors without a copy of HH in KnK^n whose edges all have different colors; PkP^k and CkC^k are the path and the cycle on kk vertices. A subgraph with no two edges of the same color is "totally multicoloured" (TMC, p. 634). The site's AR(n,G)\mathrm{AR}(n,G) is this f(n,G)f(n,G).

Conjecture 1 (printed p. 636).

f(n,Ck)=n(k−22+1k−1)+O(1).f(n,C^k)=n\Bigl(\frac{k-2}2+\frac1{k-1}\Bigr)+O(1).

"The conjecture says that the best way to colour KnK^n so that no TMC CkC^k would occur is to divide the points into nk−1\frac n{k-1} groups of k−1k-1 vertices and then colour all the edges joining vertices of the same group by different colours, and the edges joining vertices from different groups colour by nk−1\frac n{k-1} further colours in the following way: the vertices of the ii-th group are joined by the ii-th extra colour to the vertices of the jj-th group if j>ij>i. We do not assert, however the uniqueness of the extremal colourings. This conjecture will be proved only for k=3k=3 in Theorem 5." (pp. 636–637, as printed; Theorem 5 on p. 637 is stated for Conjecture 2, the path conjecture, so the cross-reference does not match the theorem it names. The case k=3k=3 is proved in part A of the Appendix (p. 642), which opens "Here we prove Conjecture 2 for k=3k=3" but proves f(n,C3)=n−1f(n,C^3)=n-1, the triangle case of Conjecture 1. The site records AR(n,C3)=n−1\mathrm{AR}(n,C_3)=n-1 with "a simple proof" from this paper.)

Remark 2 (p. 636) places the cycle and path problems: when d=1d=1 in Theorem 1 "the information yielded by Theorem 1 is that f(n,H)=o(n2)f(n,H)=o(n^2) ... This case will be called degenerated", and "Two degenerated problems will be discussed here: the problems of CkC^k and PkP^k."

Source. P. Erdős, M. Simonovits and V. T. Sós, Anti-Ramsey theorems, Infinite and finite sets (Colloq., Keszthely, 1973), Vol. II, Colloq. Math. Soc. János Bolyai 10, North-Holland (1975), 633–643; printed pp. 636–637 = PDF pp. 4–5 of the Rényi archive scan, with the notation on printed p. 633 = PDF p. 1 and part A of the Appendix on printed p. 642 = PDF p. 10, read on the page images (the OCR text layer garbles every formula). The edition is identified in the source digest.

Read depth. Claims checked: the conjecture, the description of the coloring, the two sentences after it and Remark 2 were read clause by clause on the page images, as was part A of the Appendix (p. 642) with its short proof of the case k=3k=3. A conjecture; the paper proves nothing about CkC^k for k≥4k\ge4.

Proof pointer

For k=3k=3, part A of the Appendix (p. 642). With nn colors, one edge of each color gives nn edges on nn vertices, hence a cycle, and that cycle is totally multicolored. A shortest totally multicolored cycle a1…asa_1\ldots a_s with s≥4s\ge4 would yield a shorter one, since the color of the chord a1a3a_1a_3 lies on at most one of the two arcs it closes, so a totally multicolored triangle exists. Coloring each edge xixjx_ix_j with i<ji<j by jj uses n−1n-1 colors and leaves no totally multicolored cycle, so f(n,C3)=n−1f(n,C^3)=n-1. For k≥4k\ge4 the paper has no proof. The cycle case was settled by Montellano-Ballesteros and Neumann-Lara, Graphs Combin. 21 (2005), 343--354, which is filed as montellano_ballesteros_neumann_lara_2005_anti_ramsey_theorem_cycles. Their Theorem 5 (printed p. 352), h(n,p)=E(n,p)h(n,p)=\mathbf E(n,p) for every n≥p≥3n\ge p\ge3 with h(n,p)=f(n,Cp)+1h(n,p)=f(n,C^p)+1, yields this conjecture as its Corollary 1 (printed p. 353, where the printed sign differs from the plus sign of the conjecture, read there as a misprint). That page records the two statements read clause by clause on the page images and the proof read in the text layer for structure only, with nothing independently reviewed. This page's own standing is unchanged: the 1975 paper proves nothing about CkC^k for k≥4k\ge4.

Dependencies

None.

Bears on

  • Problem 1105: the first question of the problem, verbatim (the site's CkC_k is the paper's CkC^k).