MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4408986240 · doi:10.1007/s00493-025-00147-1

Induced Subgraphs of $$K_r$$-Free Graphs and the Erdős–Rogers Problem

2025· article· lv· W4408986240 on OpenAlexaff
Lior Gishboliner, Oliver Janzer, Benny Sudakov

Bibliographic record

VenueCOMBINATORICA · 2025
Typearticle
Languagelv
FieldMathematics
TopicLimits and Structures in Graph Theory
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMathematicsCombinatoricsDiscrete mathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract For two graphs F , H and a positive integer n , the function $$f_{F,H}(n)$$ <mml:math xmlns:mml="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML"> <mml:mrow> <mml:msub> <mml:mi>f</mml:mi> <mml:mrow> <mml:mi>F</mml:mi> <mml:mo>,</mml:mo> <mml:mi>H</mml:mi> </mml:mrow> </mml:msub> <mml:mrow> <mml:mo>(</mml:mo> <mml:mi>n</mml:mi> <mml:mo>)</mml:mo> </mml:mrow> </mml:mrow> </mml:math> denotes the largest m such that every H -free graph on n vertices contains an F -free induced subgraph on m vertices. This function has been extensively studied in the last 60 years when F and H are cliques and became known as the Erdős–Rogers function. Recently, Balogh, Chen and Luo, and Mubayi and Verstraëte initiated the systematic study of this function in the case where F is a general graph. Answering, in a strong form, a question of Mubayi and Verstraëte, we prove that for every positive integer r and every $$K_{r-1}$$ <mml:math xmlns:mml="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML"> <mml:msub> <mml:mi>K</mml:mi> <mml:mrow> <mml:mi>r</mml:mi> <mml:mo>-</mml:mo> <mml:mn>1</mml:mn> </mml:mrow> </mml:msub> </mml:math> -free graph F , there exists some $$\varepsilon _F&gt;0$$ <mml:math xmlns:mml="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML"> <mml:mrow> <mml:msub> <mml:mi>ε</mml:mi> <mml:mi>F</mml:mi> </mml:msub> <mml:mo>&gt;</mml:mo> <mml:mn>0</mml:mn> </mml:mrow> </mml:math> such that $$f_{F,K_r}(n)=O(n^{1/2-\varepsilon _F})$$ <mml:math xmlns:mml="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML"> <mml:mrow> <mml:msub> <mml:mi>f</mml:mi> <mml:mrow> <mml:mi>F</mml:mi> <mml:mo>,</mml:mo> <mml:msub> <mml:mi>K</mml:mi> <mml:mi>r</mml:mi> </mml:msub> </mml:mrow> </mml:msub> <mml:mrow> <mml:mo>(</mml:mo> <mml:mi>n</mml:mi> <mml:mo>)</mml:mo> </mml:mrow> <mml:mo>=</mml:mo> <mml:mi>O</mml:mi> <mml:mrow> <mml:mo>(</mml:mo> <mml:msup> <mml:mi>n</mml:mi> <mml:mrow> <mml:mn>1</mml:mn> <mml:mo>/</mml:mo> <mml:mn>2</mml:mn> <mml:mo>-</mml:mo> <mml:msub> <mml:mi>ε</mml:mi> <mml:mi>F</mml:mi> </mml:msub> </mml:mrow> </mml:msup> <mml:mo>)</mml:mo> </mml:mrow> </mml:mrow> </mml:math> . This result is tight in two ways. Firstly, it is no longer true if F contains $$K_{r-1}$$ <mml:math xmlns:mml="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML"> <mml:msub> <mml:mi>K</mml:mi> <mml:mrow> <mml:mi>r</mml:mi> <mml:mo>-</mml:mo> <mml:mn>1</mml:mn> </mml:mrow> </mml:msub> </mml:math> as a subgraph. Secondly, we show that for all $$r\ge 4$$ <mml:math xmlns:mml="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML"> <mml:mrow> <mml:mi>r</mml:mi> <mml:mo>≥</mml:mo> <mml:mn>4</mml:mn> </mml:mrow> </mml:math> and $$\varepsilon &gt;0$$ <mml:math xmlns:mml="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML"> <mml:mrow> <mml:mi>ε</mml:mi> <mml:mo>&gt;</mml:mo> <mml:mn>0</mml:mn> </mml:mrow> </mml:math> , there exists a $$K_{r-1}$$ <mml:math xmlns:mml="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML"> <mml:msub> <mml:mi>K</mml:mi> <mml:mrow> <mml:mi>r</mml:mi> <mml:mo>-</mml:mo> <mml:mn>1</mml:mn> </mml:mrow> </mml:msub> </mml:math> -free graph F for which $$f_{F,K_r}(n)=\Omega (n^{1/2-\varepsilon })$$ <mml:math xmlns:mml="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML"> <mml:mrow> <mml:msub> <mml:mi>f</mml:mi> <mml:mrow> <mml:mi>F</mml:mi> <mml:mo>,</mml:mo> <mml:msub> <mml:mi>K</mml:mi> <mml:mi>r</mml:mi> </mml:msub> </mml:mrow> </mml:msub> <mml:mrow> <mml:mo>(</mml:mo> <mml:mi>n</mml:mi> <mml:mo>)</mml:mo> </mml:mrow> <mml:mo>=</mml:mo> <mml:mi>Ω</mml:mi> <mml:mrow> <mml:mo>(</mml:mo> <mml:msup> <mml:mi>n</mml:mi> <mml:mrow> <mml:mn>1</mml:mn> <mml:mo>/</mml:mo> <mml:mn>2</mml:mn> <mml:mo>-</mml:mo> <mml:mi>ε</mml:mi> </mml:mrow> </mml:msup> <mml:mo>)</mml:mo> </mml:mrow> </mml:mrow> </mml:math> . Along the way of proving this, we show in particular that for every graph F with minimum degree t , we have $$f_{F,K_4}(n)=\Omega (n^{1/2-6/\sqrt{t}})$$ <mml:math xmlns:mml="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML"> <mml:mrow> <mml:msub> <mml:mi>f</mml:mi> <mml:mrow> <mml:mi>F</mml:mi> <mml:mo>,</mml:mo> <mml:msub> <mml:mi>K</mml:mi> <mml:mn>4</mml:mn> </mml:msub> </mml:mrow> </mml:msub> <mml:mrow> <mml:mo>(</mml:mo> <mml:mi>n</mml:mi> <mml:mo>)</mml:mo> </mml:mrow> <mml:mo>=</mml:mo> <mml:mi>Ω</mml:mi> <mml:mrow> <mml:mo>(</mml:mo> <mml:msup> <mml:mi>n</mml:mi> <mml:mrow> <mml:mn>1</mml:mn>

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.093
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.012
GPT teacher head0.255
Teacher spread0.243 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designTheoretical or conceptual
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations1
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCOMBINATORICASame topicLimits and Structures in Graph TheoryFrench-language works237,207