Research notes on every problem, and a library of the papers behind them. Built from the open erdos repository.
Updated
Statement
Notation as on the Theorem 1 page.
Definition (p. 295, quoted). "A graph is a vertex-critical Ramsey graph for iff , and for every vertex deleted subgraph of [sic]." The final "of " is as printed; the sense requires "of ". Every critical Ramsey graph for is vertex-critical (p. 295).
Conjecture 1 (p. 295, quoted). "For a graph , the following three statemens [sic] are equivalent:
- has an infinite number of nonisomorphic vertex-critical Ramsey graphs
- contains at least two edges."
The conjecture is attributed to the authors' earlier paper, Partitions of vertices, Comment. Math. Univ. Carolinae 17 (1976), 85--95 (the paper's [6]). The paper calls 1)$\Rightarrow\Rightarrow$3) and 2)$\Leftrightarrow\Rightarrow$1). It proves that implication for the graphs covered by Theorem 1, Theorem 2 and the forest theorem, in the stronger form for critical Ramsey graphs, and says it did not reach the full solution (p. 296). For critical rather than vertex-critical Ramsey graphs the analogue fails: a graph with can have only finitely many critical Ramsey graphs, for example disjoint edges or a star with an odd number of edges, citing Burr, Erdős and Lovász (p. 295). For partitions of vertices instead of edges, the paper states that the analogue of Conjecture 1 is true, by the methods of [6] (p. 299).
Source. J. Nešetřil and V. Rödl, The structure of critical Ramsey graphs, Acta Math. Acad. Sci. Hungar. 32 (1978), no. 3--4, 295--300, doi:10.1007/BF01902367; the definition and Conjecture 1 on p. 295, remark 3) on p. 299. Edition as on the source card.
Read depth. Claims checked: read clause by clause on the page images. Nothing here is independently reviewed.
Bears on
No problem page consumes this conjecture.