Maximum spread of graphs and bipartite graphs
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Given any graph <inline-formula content-type="math/mathml"> <mml:math xmlns:mml="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" alttext="upper G"> <mml:semantics> <mml:mi>G</mml:mi> <mml:annotation encoding="application/x-tex">G</mml:annotation> </mml:semantics> </mml:math> </inline-formula> , the spread of <inline-formula content-type="math/mathml"> <mml:math xmlns:mml="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" alttext="upper G"> <mml:semantics> <mml:mi>G</mml:mi> <mml:annotation encoding="application/x-tex">G</mml:annotation> </mml:semantics> </mml:math> </inline-formula> is the maximum difference between any two eigenvalues of the adjacency matrix of <inline-formula content-type="math/mathml"> <mml:math xmlns:mml="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" alttext="upper G"> <mml:semantics> <mml:mi>G</mml:mi> <mml:annotation encoding="application/x-tex">G</mml:annotation> </mml:semantics> </mml:math> </inline-formula> . In this paper, we resolve a pair of 20-year-old conjectures of Gregory, Hershkowitz, and Kirkland regarding the spread of graphs. The first states that for all positive integers <inline-formula content-type="math/mathml"> <mml:math xmlns:mml="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" alttext="n"> <mml:semantics> <mml:mi>n</mml:mi> <mml:annotation encoding="application/x-tex">n</mml:annotation> </mml:semantics> </mml:math> </inline-formula> , the <inline-formula content-type="math/mathml"> <mml:math xmlns:mml="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" alttext="n"> <mml:semantics> <mml:mi>n</mml:mi> <mml:annotation encoding="application/x-tex">n</mml:annotation> </mml:semantics> </mml:math> </inline-formula> -vertex graph <inline-formula content-type="math/mathml"> <mml:math xmlns:mml="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" alttext="upper G"> <mml:semantics> <mml:mi>G</mml:mi> <mml:annotation encoding="application/x-tex">G</mml:annotation> </mml:semantics> </mml:math> </inline-formula> that maximizes spread is the join of a clique and an independent set, with <inline-formula content-type="math/mathml"> <mml:math xmlns:mml="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" alttext="left floor 2 n slash 3 right floor"> <mml:semantics> <mml:mrow> <mml:mo fence="false" stretchy="false"> ⌊ </mml:mo> <mml:mn>2</mml:mn> <mml:mi>n</mml:mi> <mml:mrow class="MJX-TeXAtom-ORD"> <mml:mo>/</mml:mo> </mml:mrow> <mml:mn>3</mml:mn> <mml:mo fence="false" stretchy="false"> ⌋ </mml:mo> </mml:mrow> <mml:annotation encoding="application/x-tex">\lfloor 2n/3 \rfloor</mml:annotation> </mml:semantics> </mml:math> </inline-formula> and <inline-formula content-type="math/mathml"> <mml:math xmlns:mml="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" alttext="left ceiling n slash 3 right ceiling"> <mml:semantics> <mml:mrow> <mml:mo fence="false" stretchy="false"> ⌈ </mml:mo> <mml:mi>n</mml:mi> <mml:mrow class="MJX-TeXAtom-ORD"> <mml:mo>/</mml:mo> </mml:mrow> <mml:mn>3</mml:mn> <mml:mo fence="false" stretchy="false"> ⌉ </mml:mo> </mml:mrow> <mml:annotation encoding="application/x-tex">\lceil n/3 \rceil</mml:annotation> </mml:semantics> </mml:math> </inline-formula> vertices, respectively. Using techniques from the theory of graph limits and numerical analysis, we prove this claim for all <inline-formula content-type="math/mathml"> <mml:math xmlns:mml="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" alttext="n"> <mml:semantics> <mml:mi>n</mml:mi> <mml:annotation encoding="application/x-tex">n</mml:annotation> </mml:semantics> </mml:math> </inline-formula> sufficiently large. As an intermediate step, we prove an analogous result for a family of operators in the Hilbert space over <inline-formula content-type="math/mathml"> <mml:math xmlns:mml="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" alttext="script upper L squared left-bracket 0 comma 1 right-bracket"> <mml:semantics> <mml:mrow> <mml:msup> <mml:mrow class="MJX-TeXAtom-ORD"> <mml:mi mathvariant="script">L</mml:mi> </mml:mrow> <mml:mn>2</mml:mn> </mml:msup> <mml:mo stretchy="false">[</mml:mo> <mml:mn>0</mml:mn> <mml:mo>,</mml:mo> <mml:mn>1</mml:mn> <mml:mo stretchy="false">]</mml:mo> </mml:mrow> <mml:annotation encoding="application/x-tex">\mathscr {L}^2[0,1]</mml:annotation> </mml:semantics> </mml:math> </inline-formula> . The second conjecture claims that for any fixed <inline-formula content-type="math/mathml"> <mml:math xmlns:mml="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" alttext="m less-than-or-equal-to n squared slash 4"> <mml:semantics> <mml:mrow> <mml:mi>m</mml:mi> <mml:mo> ≤ </mml:mo> <mml:msup> <mml:mi>n</mml:mi> <mml:mn>2</mml:mn> </mml:msup> <mml:mrow class="MJX-TeXAtom-ORD"> <mml:mo>/</mml:mo> </mml:mrow> <mml:mn>4</mml:mn> </mml:mrow> <mml:annotation encoding="application/x-tex">m \leq n^2/4</mml:annotation> </mml:semantics> </mml:math> </inline-formula> , if <inline-formula content-type="math/mathml"> <mml:math xmlns:mml="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" alttext="upper G"> <mml:semantics> <mml:mi>G</mml:mi> <mml:annotation encoding="application/x-tex">G</mml:annotation> </mml:semantics> </mml:math> </inline-formula> maximizes spread over all <inline-formula content-type="math/mathml"> <mml:math xmlns:mml="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" alttext="n"> <mml:semantics> <mml:mi>n</mml:mi> <mml:annotation encoding="application/x-tex">n</mml:annotation> </mml:semantics> </mml:math> </inline-formula> -vertex graphs with <inline-formula content-type="math/mathml"> <mml:math xmlns:mml="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" alttext="m"> <mml:semantics> <mml:mi>m</mml:mi> <mml:annotation encoding="application/x-tex">m</mml:annotation> </mml:semantics> </mml:math> </inline-formula> edge
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.003 | 0.028 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.005 | 0.004 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.004 | 0.008 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.008 | 0.002 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".