Covering complete graphs by monochromatically bounded sets
Luka Mili\'cevi\'c

TL;DR
This paper investigates a strengthened version of a classic graph covering problem, proving that for any 4-colouring of a complete graph, three monochromatic sets with bounded diameter can cover all vertices.
Contribution
It establishes that in any 4-colouring of a complete graph, three monochromatic sets with bounded diameter suffice to cover all vertices, advancing understanding of monochromatic coverings.
Findings
For 4-colourings, three monochromatic sets with diameter ≤ 160 cover all vertices.
Strengthens the Lovász-Ryser conjecture by adding diameter constraints.
Provides bounds on the diameter of monochromatic components needed for coverage.
Abstract
Given a -colouring of the edges of the complete graph , are there monochromatic components that cover its vertices? This important special case of the well-known Lov\'asz-Ryser conjecture is still open. In this paper we consider a strengthening of this question, where we insist that the covering sets are not merely connected but have bounded diameter. In particular, we prove that for any colouring of with 4 colours, there is a choice of sets that cover all vertices, and colours , such that for each the monochromatic subgraph induced by the set and the colour has diameter at most 160.
Peer Reviews
No public reviews on file for this paper yet. If you reviewed it on a platform where reviews are public (OpenReview, ICLR, NeurIPS, ICML), you can paste yours below so the community can read it here.
Videos
No videos yet. Explain this paper in a talk, walkthrough, or lecture? Add one.
Covering complete graphs by monochromatically bounded sets
Luka Milićević
Abstract
Given a -colouring of the edges of the complete graph , are there monochromatic components that cover its vertices? This important special case of the well-known Lovász-Ryser conjecture is still open. In this paper we consider a strengthening of this question, where we insist that the covering sets are not merely connected but have bounded diameter. In particular, we prove that for any colouring of with 4 colours, there is a choice of sets that cover all vertices, and colours , such that for each the monochromatic subgraph induced by the set and the colour has diameter at most 160.
1 Introduction
Given a graph , whose edges are coloured with a colouring (where adjacent edges are allowed to use the same colour), given a set of vertices , and a colour , we write for the subgraph induced by and the colour , namely the graph on the vertex set and the edges . In particular, when , we write instead of . Finally, we also use the usual notion of the induced subgraph which is the graph on the vertex set with edges . We usually write for the vertex set of .
Our starting point is the following conjecture of Gyárfás.
Conjecture 1**.**
([2], [4]) Let be fixed. Given any colouring of the edges of in colours, we can find sets whose union is , and colours such that is connected for each .
This is an important special case of the well-known Lovász-Ryser conjecture, which we now state.
Conjecture 2**.**
(Lovász-Ryser conjecture. [6], [9]) Let be a graph, whose maximum independent set has size . Then, whenever is -coloured, we can cover by at most monochromatic components.
Conjectures 1 and 2 have attracted a great deal of attention. When it comes to the Lovász-Ryser conjecture, we should note the result of Aharoni ([1]), who proved the case of . For , the conjecture is still open. The special case of complete graphs was proved by Gyárfás ([3]) for , and by Tuza ([10]) for . For , the conjecture is open.
Let us also mention some results similar in the spirit to Conjecture 6. In [8], inspired by questions of Gyárfás ([2]), Ruszinkó showed that every -colouring of edges of has a monochromatic component of order at least and of diameter at most 5. This was improved by Letzter ([5]), who showed that in fact there are monochromatic triple stars of order at least . For more results and questions along these lines, we refer the reader to surveys of Gyárfás ([2], [4]).
In a completely different direction, relating to contaction mappings on metric spaces, the following theorem is proved in [7]. (We mention in passing that the current paper is self-contained, and in particular no knowledge of [7] is assumed.)
Theorem 3**.**
There is an absolute constant such that the following holds. If , and if are commuting continuous maps on a complete metric space with the property that for any two distinct points we have , then the maps have a common fixed point. In fact, we may take .
Some of the ingredients in the proof of Theorem 3 were the following simple lemmas. Note that Lemma 4 is in fact a classical observation due to Erdős and Rado.
Lemma 4**.**
Suppose that the edges of are coloured in two colours. Then we may find a colour such that is connected and of diameter at most 3.
Lemma 5**.**
Suppose that the edges of are coloured in three colours. Then we may find colours , (not necessarily distinct), and sets such that , with are each connected and of diameter at most 8.
In [7], a common generalization of these statements and a strengthening of Conjecture 1 was conjectured.
Conjecture 6**.**
For every , there is an absolute contant such that the following holds. Given any colouring of the edges of in colours, we can find sets whose union is , and colours such that is connected and of diameter at most , for each .
The main result of this paper is
Theorem 7**.**
Conjecture 6 holds for 4 colours, and one may take .
1.1 An outline of the proof
We begin the proof by establishing the weaker Conjecture 1 for the case of 4 colours. Although this was proved by Gyárfás in [3], the reasons for giving a proof here are twofold. Firstly, we actually give a different reformulation of Conjecture 1 that has a more geometric flavour. The proof given here and the reformulation we consider emphasize the importance of the graph , defined as a product of copies of , to Conjecture 1. Another reason for giving this proof is to make the paper self-contained.
We also need some auxiliary results about colourings with 2 or 3 colours, like Lemmas 4 and 5 mentioned above. In particular, we generalize the case of 2 colours to complete multipartite graphs. Another auxiliary result we use is the fact that essentially cannot have large very sparse graphs.
The main tool in our proof is the notion of -layer mappings, where are two colours. For , this is a mapping , (where is the vertex set of our graph), with the property that
sets partition as ranges over , 2. 2.
and for with , we have all edges between and coloured using only .
This is a generalization of the idea that if we fix a vertex and we assign to each vertex , where are distances in colours (which are the remaining two colours), then if satisfy , the edge cannot be coloured by or .
Given a subset of the domain , we say that it is -distant if for all distinct we have . Once we have all this terminology set up, we begin building up structure in our graph, essentially as follows:
- Step 1. We prove that if a -layer mapping has a 3-distant set of size at least 4, then Theorem 7 holds.
- Step 2. We continue the analysis of distant sets, and prove essentially that if a -layer mapping has a 6-distant set of size at least 3, then Theorem 7 holds.
- Step 3. We prove Theorem 7 when every colour induces a connected subgraph.
- Step 4. We prove Theorem 7 when any two monochromatic components of different colours intersect.
- Step 5. We put everything together to finish the proof.
Organization of the paper. In the next subsection, we briefly discuss a reformulation of Conjecture 1. In Section 2, we collect some auxiliary results, including results on 2-colourings of edges of complete multipartite graphs and the results on sparse subgraphs of and indepenent sets in . In Section 3, we prove Conjecture 1 for 4 colours, reproving a result of Gyárfás. The proof of Theorem 7 is given in Section 4, with subsections spliting the proof into the steps described above. Finally, we end the paper with some concluding remarks in Section 5.
1.2 Another version of Conjecture 1
Let be an integer, define the graph with vertex set and put an edge between any two sequences that differ at every coordinate. Equivalently, is the direct product of copies of (the complete graph on the vertex set ). We formulate the following conjecture.
Conjecture 8**.**
Given a set finite set of vertices of , we can find sets that cover and each is either contained in a hyperplane of the form or is connected.
This conjecture is actually equivalent to Conjecture 1.
Proposition 9**.**
Conjectures 1 and 8 are equivalent for .
Proof.
Conjecture 1 implies Conjecture 8. Let be a finite set. Let and define an -colouring by setting , where is the smallest coordinate index such that , otherwise, when and differ in all coordinates, set . If Conjecture 1 holds, we may find sets that cover , and colours such that are all connected. Fix now any , and let be the set of vertices corresponding to . If , then for any , there is a sequence of vertices such that , so . Hence, is subset of the plane for some value . Otherwise, if , that means that the edges of correspond to edges of , so is connected, as desired.
Conjecture 8 implies Conjecture 1. Let be any -colouring of the edges of . For every colour , look at components of . For each choice of with for , we define , which is the intersection of monochromatic components, one for each colour except . Let be the set of all -tuples for which is non-empty. If Conjecture 8 holds, then we can find that cover such that each is either contained in a hyperplane, or induces a connected subgraph of . If , then the corresponding intersections for are all subset of . On the other hand, if is connected, then taking any adjacent , we have that for all . Hence all the edges of between and are coloured by . Hence, all the sets for are subset of the same component of . This completes the proof of the proposition.∎
2 Auxiliary results
As suggested by its title, this section is devoted to deriving some auxiliary results. Firstly we extend Lemma 4 to complete multipartite graphs. The case of bipartite graphs is slightly different from the general case of more than 2 parts, and is stated separately. We also introduce additional notation. Given a colour and vertices we write for the distance between and in . If they are not in the same -component, we write . In particular, means that are in the same component of . Further, we write for the -ball of radius around , defined as , where is a colour, is a vertex, and is a nonnegative integer. For any graph , throughout the paper, the diameter of , written , is the supremum of all finite distances between two vertices of . Thus, only happens when has arbitrarily long induced paths (as we focus on the finite graphs in this paper, this will not occur). For a colour and a set of vertices , the -diameter of , writen , is the diameter of . We use the standard notation for complete multipartite graphs, so stands for the graph with vertex classes, of sizes , and all edges between different classes are present in the graph.
Lemma 10**.**
Suppose that the edges of are coloured in two colours. Then, one of the following holds:
either there is a colour , such that is connected and of diameter at most 10, or 2. 2.
there are partitions and such that all edges in are of one colour, and all the edges in are of the other colour.
Proof.
Let be the given colouring. We start by observing the following. If there are two vertices such that for colour the inequality holds, then for every vertex such that , we must also have , where is the other colour. Indeed, let be a minimal -path from to . Hence , the vertices with the same parity of index belong to the same vertex class of and the edges are all of colour (otherwise, we get a contradiction to the fact that ), implying that .
Now, suppose that a -component has diameter at least 7. The observation above tells us that if a vertex is adjacent to , and , then , so . Hence, every vertex adjacent to in , satisfies . Similarly, any vertex adjacent to satisfies . But, are in different vertex classes (as their -distance is odd), so their neighbourhhoods cover the whole vertex set, and is an edge as well, from which we conclude that is connected and of diameter at most 9. Thus, if any monochromatic component has diameter at least 7, the lemma follows, so assume that this does not occur.
Now we need to understand the monochromatic components. From the work above, it suffices to find monochromatic components of the desired structure, the diameter is automatically bounded by 6. Suppose that there are at least 3 -components, with subsets of one class of and subsets of the other. Let be arbitrary vertices. Then we can find in different -component from . Hence, , so . Therefore, both vertex classes of are -connected and consequently the whole graph is -connected.
Finally, assume that each colour has exactly 2 monochromatic components. Let be such that are the -components. Hence, , and all edges in and are of colour . Thus, sets and are -connected and cover the vertices of , so they must be the 2 -components. Thus, all edges in and must be coloured by , proving the lemma. ∎
Lemma 11**.**
Let , and suppose that is a complete -partite graph . Suppose that the edges of are 2-coloured. Then, there is a colour such that is connected and of diameter at most , where we can take , and for .
Proof.
Assume first that . Let be the vertex classes. We shall use Lemma 10 throughout this part of the proof, applying to every pair of vertex classes. We distinguish three cases, motivated by the possible outcomes of Lemma 10 (although not exactly these outcomes, but resembling them).
Observation. Suppose that is a permutation of and that is contained in a -component of diameter at most , and for each colour splits into two monochromatic components, all of diameter at most . Then, is connected and of diameter at most .
Case 1. Suppose that is a permutation of , and that Lemma 10 gives different outcomes when applied to pairs and . Then, by the Observation, there is a colour such that is connected and of diameter at most 14. (We took and .)
Case 2. Suppose that is a permutation of , and that Lemma 10 gives a single monochromatic component for each of pairs and . If we use the same colour for both pairs, then is connected and of diameter at most 20. Otherwise, let be -connected, and let be -connected, with . Apply Lemma 10 to . If it results in a single monochromatic component, it must be of colour or , so once again has diameter at most 20 for some . Finally, if splits in two pairs of monochromatic components, by Observation has diameter at most 14, for some .
Case 3. Lemma 10 gives the second outcome for each pair of vertex classes. Look at complete bipartite graphs and . Then, we have partitions , and such that all edges receive colour , while the edges take the other colour . If , then we must have that some intersects both , or vice-versa. In particular, since any two vertices in the same set among obey , this means that for any two vertices , we have . Now, every point in in on -distance at most 1 from a vertex in , so is connected and of diameter at most 8. Hence, we may assume that and are the same partitions of , and similarly for and , we get the same partition for both pairs of vertex classes involving each of and . Let be these partitions, so the colouring is constant on each product , . Renaming , we may also assume that all receive colour . Thus all receice colour . But looking at the colour of , we see that is connected and of diameter at most 5. This finishes the proof of the case , and we may take .
Now suppose that . Let be the vertex classes. Fix the vertex class , and look at the 2-colouring of the edges of defined as follows: whenever are distinct, then applying the case of this lemma that we have just proved to the subgraph induced by , we get a colour such that has diameter at most 20; we set . By Lemma 4, we have a colour such that is of diameter at most 3 for the colouring . Returning to our original graph, we claim that has diameter at most 60. Suppose that are any two vertices of . If any of these points lies in , or if they lie in the same , then we can pick such that and . Hence, by the definition of , we actually have in . Now, assume that lie in different vertex classes and outside of . Let . Under the colouring of we have that , so we have a sequence , with , such that . For each between 1 and , pick a representative , with . Then, , so , as desired.∎
2.1 Induced subgraphs of
Recall that is the graph on , with edges between pairs of points whose all coordinates differ. In this subsection we prove a few properties of such graphs, particularly focusing on . We begin with a general statement, which will be reproved for specific cases with stronger conclusions.
Lemma 12**.**
If is a set of vertices in and the maximal degree of is at most , then the number of non-isolated vertices of is at most .
Proof.
By Ramsey’s theorem we have an such that whenever is coloured using colours, there is a monochromatic . Let be the set of non-isolated vertices in . We show that . Suppose contrary, since the maximal degree is at most , we have a subset of size such that sets are disjoint for all (simply pick a maximal such subset, their second neighbourhoods must cover the whole ). In particular, is an independent set in , so for every pair of vertices , the set is non-empty. Thus, is colouring of the edges of a complete graph on the vertex set . By Ramsey’s theorem, there is a monochromatic clique on subset of size at least , whose edges are coloured by some set . Take a vertex , and since is not isolated and the neighbourhoods of vertices in are disjoint, we can find such that is an edge, but is not for other . Hence, for all and for distinct we have if and only if . Thus, for all and . But, is not an edge for , so we always have such that . But, for each , the values of are distinct for each . Hence, for each , there is at most one vertex such that . Therefore , so , which is a contradiction.∎
We may somewhat improve on the bound in the proof of the lemma above by observing that for colour we only need a clique of size . Thus, instead of Ramsey number
[TABLE]
we could use
[TABLE]
where are the non-empty sets of . But, even for paths in , which we shall use later, taking , we get the final bound of , where 7 comes from factor we lose when moving from to . We now improve this bound.
Lemma 13**.**
If is a set of vertices of such that is a path, then .
Proof.
Let be such that is an induced path in , so the only edges are .
Case 1. For all , coincides with one of or in at least two coordinates.
Since is an edge, and have all three coordinates different. Thus, for , we have for all coordinates . Hence, there are only at most 6 possible choices of (as ), so .
Case 2. There is with at most one common coordinate with each of . Since are not edges, w.l.o.g. we have , where , . Consider any point , for . It is not adjacent to any of . If and , then . Similarly, if and , then . Also, if , then . Hence, for , the point is on one of the lines
[TABLE]
where stands for the line , etc. Note that a point on is not adjacent to any point on , and the same holds for lines and . Hence, along out path, a point on the line is followed either by a point on or the point (the latter may happen only once). In any case, if , then among , we must get a contiguous sequence of points
[TABLE]
Finally, we look at . These four points form an independent set, but gives , so one of holds, and similarly, one of holds as well. Choosing a point among and a point among for which equality does not hold gives an edge, which is impossible. ∎
Finally, we study independent sets in . Note that Lemma 12 in this case does not tell us anything about the structure of such sets. When we refer to line or planes, we always think of very specific cases, namely the lines are the sets of the form and the planes are . Similarly, collinearity and coplanarity of points have stronger meaining, and imply that points lie on a common line or plane defined as above.
Lemma 14**.**
Let be a set of vertices in . If every two points of are collinear, then is a subset of a line. If every three points of are coplanar, then is a subset of a plane.
Proof.
We first deal with the collinear case. Take any pair of points, , w.l.o.g. they coincide in the first two coordinates. Take third point . If does not share the values of the first 2 coordinates with and , then we must have , which is impossible. As was arbitary, we are done.
Suppose now that we have all triples coplanar. W.l.o.g. we have a noncolinear pair , which only coincide in the first coordinate. Then all other points may only be in the plane .∎
Lemma 15**.**
(Structure of the independent sets of size 4.) Given an independent set of of size 4 (at least) one of the following alternatives holds
- (S1) is coplanar, or
- (S2) , where and , or
- (S3) up to permutation of coordinates , where and .
Proof.
Suppose that is not a subset of any plane. We distinguish between two cases.
Case 1. There are no collinear pairs in .
Let . But is not an edge and not colinear so and differ in precisely two coordinates. Thus, w.l.o.g. where and . If also equals , then we must have with different from and from . However, looking at , we cannot have as otherwise , so must differ at all three coordinates from one of the points , making them joined by an edge, which is impossible. Thus , with . Since and are not edges, . The same argument works for , so , and . However, if , then are either collinear or adjacent in , which are both impossible. Hence , and , as desired.
Case 2. W.l.o.g. and are collinear.
Let with . Since does not contain the whole set , we have w.l.o.g. . If , then or is an edge, which is impossible. Therefore, . Hence , and by similar argument . Finally is not an edge, so their third coordinate must be the same, proving the lemma.∎
Lemma 16**.**
(Structure of the independent sets of size 5.) Given an independent set of of size 5 (at least) one of the following alternatives holds
* is coplanar, or* 2. 2.
* is a subset of a union of three lines, all sharing the same point.*
Proof.
List the vertices of as . W.l.o.g. are not coplanar. By the previous lemma, for may have structure S2 or S3. But if both structures are S2, then we must have that in both quadruples, at each coordinate, each value appears precisely two times. This implies . Hence, w.l.o.g. has structure S3. Therefore, assume w.l.o.g. that
[TABLE]
for some (which corresponds to the choice in the previous Lemma, switching the roles of and if necessary). Looking at , if it had S2 for its structure, we would get , which is adjacent to , and thus impossible. Hence also has structure S3. Permutting the coordinates only permutes , and does not change the number of zeros in . Thus, w.l.o.g.
[TABLE]
for some . But in the first coordinate, only zero can appear three times, so . Similarly, , so , after a permutation of coordinates. Thus has at least 2 zeros, so our independent set is a subset of the union of lines passing through the point , as required.∎
3 Conjecture 1 for 4 colours
In this short section we reprove the result of Gyárfás.
Theorem 17**.**
(Gyárfás) Conjecture 1 for 4 colours and Conjecture 8 for are true.
Proof.
By the equivalence of conjectures, it suffices to prove Conjecture 8 for . Let be the given finite set of vertices in . Assume that has at least 4 components, otherwise we are done immediately. By a representatives set we mean any set of vertices that contains at most one vertex from each component of . A complete representative set is a representative set that intersects every component of .
Observation 18**.**
If there are three colinear points, each in different component, then can be covered by two planes. In particular, if two planes do not suffice, then among every three points in different components, there is a non-colinear pair.
Proof.
W.l.o.g. these are points . Then, unless , we have a point of the form with both non-zero, so it is a neighbour of at least two of the points we started with, contradicting the fact that they belong to different components. For the second part, recall that if every pair in a triple is colinear, then the whole triple lies on a line.∎
By the observation above, every representative set of size at least 3 has a noncollinear pair. Suppose firstly that every complete representative set is a subset of a plane. Pick a complete representative set , with , where are the components. W.l.o.g. is a noncollinear pair, therefore, it determines a plane , forcing components to be entirely contained in this plane. Hence, we may cover the whole set by components and , and the plane . Therefore, we may assume that we have a representative set of size three which does not lie in any plane.
Case 1. has more than 4 components.
Let be a representative set, , which is not coplanar. Then, for any choice of , such that is a complete representative set, we have 3 lines that meet in a single point, that contain all these points. Observe that this structure is determined entirely by . Indeed, since these three points are not coplanar, they cannot coincide in any coordinate. However, since there are at least 5 components, extend to an independent set of size 5, which must be a subset of three lines sharing a point . But we can identify , since must be the value that occurs precisely two times among , and hence the lines are . Thus, the union of lines contains whole components and . By the Observation above, each has representatives from at most two components. Hence, we may not have the common point of the three lines present in , as otherwise some line would have three components meeting it. W.l.o.g. intersect two components, and may intersect 1 or 2. Then, picking any in a different component than that of and any with a component different from that of , using the argument above applied to instead of , we deduce that , . Thus, we actually have singleton components . Finally, any point in must be either in the plane of or on the line , so we can cover by two planes.
Case 2. has precisely 4 components and there exists a coplanar complete representative set.
Let be a complete representative set, with . W.l.o.g. we have . As a few times before, we do not have a collinear triple among these 4 points, so each of the sequences and has the property that a value may appear at most twice in the sequence.
Suppose for a moment that each of these two sequences has at most one value that appears twice. Write for the value that appears two times in , if it existis, and let be the corresponding value for . If we take a point outside the plane , then the number of appearances of in and in combined is at least three. So, either is the unique doubly-appearing value for or is , so the three planes and cover .
Now, assume that w.l.o.g. has two doubly-appearing values, i.e. . If is outside the plane , then if , one of the pairs must be an edge, so and are not edges, so we must have . Similarly, if is outside the plane and , then . Hence, for all points , we have or , and three planes cover once again.
Case 3. has precisely 4 components, but no complete representative set is coplanar.
Thus, by Lemma 15, every complete representative set has either S2 or S3 as its structure. Observe that if S2 is always the structure, then all the components are singleton, and we are done by taking a plane to cover two vertices. So, there is a representative set with structure S3. Take such a representative set , w.l.o.g. . Take any that shares the component with , and any that shares the component with . Then, is also a complete representative set, so it is not coplanar. But, as are collinear, it may not have structure S2, so the structure must be S3, which forces . Hence, we can cover by components of and and the plane . This completes the proof.∎
Note that the theorem is sharp – we can take , where .
4 Conjecture 6 for 4 colours
Recall, by a diameter of a colour , written , we mean the maximal distance between vertices sharing the same component of . In the remaining part of the paper, for a given 4-colouring , we say that satisfies Conjecture 6 with (constant) if there are sets whose union is and colours such that each is connected and of diameter at most . Thus, our goal can be phrased as: there is an absolute constant such that every 4-colouring of satisfies Conjecture 6 with .
We begin the proof of the main result by observing that essentially we may assume that at least two colours have arbitrarily large diameters. We argue by modifying the colouring slightly.
Lemma 19**.**
Suppose is a 4-colouring of such that three colours have diameters bounded by . Then satisfies Conjecture 6 with .
Proof.
Write , and observe that if a point does not receive all 4 colours at its edges, we are immediately done. Let be the given colouring of the edges, and let colours 1, 2 and 3 have diameter bounded by . We begin by modifying the colouring slightly. Let be any edge coloured by colour 4. If and share the same component in for some , change the colour of to the colour (if there is more than one choice, pick any). Note that such a modification does not change the monochromatic components, except possibly shrinking the components for the colour 4. Let stand for the modified colouring.
Observe that the diameter of colour 4 in is also bounded. Begin by listing all the components for colours as . For , consider the sets . Let be the set of all such that . If (where the superscript indicates the relevant colouring) has an induced path , then if is defined to be such that , in fact becomes an induced path in . But Lemma 13 implies that . Hence, the 4-diameter in the colouring is at most 30.
Applying Theorem 17 for the colouring , gives three monochromatic components that cover the vertex set, let these be , where the superscript indicates the relevant colouring. Using the same sets and colours, but returning to the original colouring, we have that are all still connected, as 1, 2 and 3-components are the same in and , while there can only be more 4-coloured edges in the colouring . Also, 1, 2 and 3-diameters are bounded by , and 4-diameters of sets may only decrease when returning to colouring , so the lemma follows.∎
Let us introduce some additional notions. Let be a set, and let be a function with the property that form a partition of and there a two colours 111This choice of indices was chosen on purpose – we shall first use colours to define and , and the remaining colours will be and .such that whenever and , then all edges between the sets and are coloured with and only. We call the -layer mapping and we refer to as the layer index set. Further, we call a subset a -distant set if for every two distinct points we have .
Let us briefly motivate this notion. Suppose that and are both connected. Fix a vertex and let . Let for all (this also motivates the choice of the letter , we think of as a layer). Then, if for with , by triangle inequality, we cannot have nor , so takes either the colour or the colour . As we shall see, we may have more freedom in the definition of and if there is more than one component in a single colour.
We now explore these notions in some detail, before using them to obtain some structural results on the 4-colourings that possibly do not satisfy Conjecture 6.
Lemma 20**.**
Let be a 4-colouring, a -layer mapping with layer index set , and suppose that is a -distant set. Write . Then the following hold.
For some colour we have connected and of diameter at most 20. 2. 2.
If additionally for such that and some distinct we have contained in a subgraph that is connected and of diameter at most , then the given colouring satisfies Conjecture 6 with .
Proof of Lemma 20..
(1): Observe that all edges between are of colours and . This is a complete tripartite graph and by Lemma 11 w.l.o.g. is -connected and of -diameter at most 20.
(2): W.l.o.g. . Pick any . Note that since are 3-distant, is 2-distant from at least one of (otherwise, by pigeonhole principle, for some among and some index , we have , so , which is impossible). Let be such that are -distant. Thus, all the edges between and are of colours and , so Lemma 10 applies to .
Let be the set of all such that Lemma 10 gives that either is -connected and of -diameter at most 10, or the second conclusion of that lemma holds. Hence, every vertex in for some is on -distance at most 10 to a vertex in , which itself has -diameter at most 20. Hence, is -connected and of -diameter at most 40.
For all other , Lemma 10 applied to for a relevant implies that is -connected and of diameter at most 10. Let be the set of for which , and let (for which therefore ). Hence, is -connected and of -diameter at most , and finally is also -connected and of -diameter at most 20. Hence, taking
[TABLE]
proves the lemma.∎
Lemma 21**.**
Suppose that is a 4-colouring of and that is a -layer mapping for some colours with a -distant set of size at least 4. Then satisfies Conjecture 6 with constant 160.
Proof.
Write . Suppose that some are 3-distant. All edges between are of colours and only, so by Lemma 11 w.l.o.g. is connected and of diameter at most 60. Pick any . If has difference at most 1 in absolute value in some coordinate from at least three points among , by pigeonhole princple, there are among these four and coordinate such that so , which is impossible. Hence, is 2-distant from at least two points among . Hence, is a 2-distant set, so edges between and are of colours and only. By Lemma 11, for some colour we have connected and of diameter at most 20. We split as follows: is the set of all such that , and for each pair of we define as the set of all such that and . We now look at the set of all pairs for which .
Case 1: there are such that and are non-empty and . W.l.o.g. . For every we already have connected and of diameter at most 40. Hence, is also connected and of diameter at most 80. But, any other pair must intersect , so we have
[TABLE]
connected and of diameter at most 160, where ranges over all pairs. Taking additionally
[TABLE]
proves the claim.
Case 2: all pairs such that are disjoint. There are at most 2 such pairs. Thus, if we take
[TABLE]
for such pairs (these are connected and of diameter at most 40), and
[TABLE]
the claim follows. ∎
Lemma 22**.**
Suppose that is a 4-colouring of and that is a -layer mapping for some colours with a -distant set of size at least 3. Suppose additionally that takes at least 28 values for each . Then satisfies Conjecture 6 with constant 160.
Proof.
Let be a 7-distant set. Pick any other . If is 3-distant from each of , we obtain a 3-distant set of size 4, so by Lemma 21 we are done. Hence, for every we have such that for some . (Note that this is the main contribution to the constant 160 in the statement.)
Since is a 7-distant set, by Lemma 20, we have w.l.o.g. connected and of diameter at most 20. We now derive some properties of for points be such that for some . (Note that such points exist by assumptions.)
Let be such a point and let be such that . Since the set is -distant, there are distinct such that . Thus, is also a 3-distant set. Applying Lemma 20 to implies that is connected and of diameter at most 20, for some . However, if , is contained in a subgraph of that is connected and of diameter at most 20, so Lemma 20 (2) applies once again and the claim follows. Hence, we must have is connected and of diameter at most 20. In particular, whenever satisfies for some , then every point in is on -distance at most 20 from .
By assumptions takes at least 28 values. Hence, we can find such that . Similarly, there is such that . W.l.o.g . If , then form a 3-distant set of size 4, and once again the claim follows from Lemma 21. Hence, w.l.o.g. . By the work above, we also have that every point in is on -distance at most 20 from . Note also that are 3-distant.
It remains to analyse such that for both there is an such that . We show that in all but one case on the choice of sets , we in fact have on bounded -distance to . If we have an such that both and hold, then taking such that , we have 3-distant, so Lemma 20 once again implies that every vertex in is on -distance at most 20 from (or we are done by the second part of Lemma 20).
We distinguish the following cases.
- •
If , then form a 3-distant set. Let us check this. We already have 2-distant. By triangle inequality, we obtain , , and .
We also know that is contained in a subgraph that is connected and of diameter at most 20, so applying Lemma 20 implies that we are done, unless is connected and of diameter at most 20. Hence is on -distance at most 40 from .
- •
If , then the same argument we had in the case above proves that is on -distance at most 40 from .
- •
If , then the same argument we had in the case above proves that is on -distance at most 40 from .
Finally, we define as
[TABLE]
which are disjoint and if we know that is on -distance at most 40 from . Let also . Hence, since for we have , all edges between and are coloured using and , we actually have all edges between and coloured using only these two colours. Applying Lemma 10 we have connected and of diameter at most 10 for some , or is on -distance 1 from . Similarly, all edges between and , and all edges between and are taking only the colours and . Observe that if then . Similarly, , so all edges between and are only of colours and . Apply Lemma 10 to and , implying either is connected and of diameter at most 10, or is on -distance at most 30 from . Similarly, apply Lemma 10 to and , implying either is connected and of diameter at most 10, or is on -distance at most 30 from . Finally, let , which is -connected and of -diameter at most 100. We distinguish the following cases.
- •
. In this case, we can take and if necessary (otherwise ).
- •
. Thus, is connected and of diameter at most 10, so taking and , and additionally if necessary, we are done.
- •
. Thus, is connected and of diameter at most 10, so taking and , and additionally if necessary, we are done.
- •
In this case, we have and connected and of diameter at most 10. Apply Lemma 10 to and . If and are on -distance at most 10, we may take , and if necessary. Otherwise, we have is connected and of diameter at most 10. In this case, take and if necessary.
This completes the proof of the lemma. ∎
Let us now briefly discuss a way of defining -layer mappings. Pick two colours , and take to be the remaining two colours. List all the vertices as . To each vertex, we shall assign two nonnegative integers, and , initially marked as undefined. We apply the following procedure.
- Step 1
Pick the smallest index such that or is undefined. If there is no such , terminate the procedure.
- Step 2
For , if is undefined, pick an arbitrary value for it.
- Step 3
For , if was undefined before the second step, for all vertices in the same -component of set . Return to Step 1.
Upon the completion of the procedure, set and as .
Claim. The mapping above is well-defined and is a -layer mapping.
Proof.
Observe that each time we pick whose value(s) are to be defined, we end up defining on one -component or on one -component or both. Hence, for every vertex , the values change precisely once from undefined to a nonnegative integer value. Hence, are well-defined and take values in , so and are well-defined and forms a partition of as ranges over . Finally, consider an edge coloured by . Let be defined with chosen in Step 2 (possibly ). Since is of colour , these are in the same -component, and hence and . Therefore,
[TABLE]
hence, if , then . Similarly, we get the corresponding statement for the colour . It follows that if are such that , then if , we have , so is coloured by or , as desired.∎
4.1 Monochromaticly connected case
Proposition 23**.**
Suppose that is a 4-colouring of such that every colour induces a connected subgraph of . Then satisfies Conjecture 6 with constant 160.
Proof.
Suppose contrary, in particular every colour has diameter greater than 480. Our main goal in the proof is to find a pair of vertices with a control over their 1-distance and 2-distance. We need both distances sufficiently large so that we can make a use of distant sets in -layer mappings, and also bounded by a constant so that if a vertex is on small 1-distance from , it is also on small 1-distance from and vice-versa.
More precisely,
Lemma 24**.**
Suppose that there are vertices such that . Then we obtain a contradiction.
Proof.
Pick any point . Apply the procedure for defnining -layer mapping starting from . If we obtain a 7-distant set of size at least 3, we obtain a contradiction with Lemma 22. Hence, the distances corresponding to cannot give such a set, so we must have one of
[TABLE]
In particular, we must have or . Recalling the definition of monochromatic balls, and cover all the vertices, giving a contradiction.∎
Claim. There are such that and .
Proof of the claim..
Suppose contrary, for every such that , we must have . Pick any such that . Since the 1-diameter is greater than 160, we can find such that . By triangle inequality, we also have . Hence, , from which we conclude that whenever an edge is coloured by 1, then . Hence, taking any the balls
[TABLE]
cover the vertex set. However, these have diameter less than 160, which is a contradiction.∎
Take given by the claim above. Since the subgraph is connected, there is a minimal 2-path between and , with . Look at the vertices with such that .
Consider for some and check whether we can define -layer mapping so that these three points become a 7-distant set. Apply the procedure for defining -layers mapping, starting from , i.e. we want to see whether and are 7-distant. If they are 7-distant, Lemma 22 gives us a contradiction. Since
[TABLE]
we must have either or (implying ). Similarly, if we start from instead of in our procedure, we see that either or (implying ) must hold.
Observe that for the vertex we must have . Otherwise, we would have and , resulting in a contradiction by Lemma 24 (applied to the pair ). For every we must have either the first inequality () or the second (), and we have that the first vertex among these, namely , satisfies the first inequality. Suppose that there was an index such that obeys the second inequality, and pick the smallest such . Then, by the triangle inequality, we would have
[TABLE]
and , so Lemma 24 applies now to the pair and gives a contradiction. Hence, for all we must have the first inequality for . But then and satisfy the conditions of Lemma 24, giving the final contradiction, since and
[TABLE]
This completes the proof.∎
4.2 Intersecting monochromatic components
Proposition 25**.**
Suppose that be a 4-colouring with the property that, whenever and are monochromatic components of different colours, and one of them has diameter at least 30 (in the relevant colour), then and intersect. Then satisfies Conjecture 6 with constant 160.
Proof.
Suppose contrary, we have a colouring that satisfies the assumptions but for which the conclusion fails. By Lemma 19, we have that at least two colours have monochromatic diameters greater than 160. Let be such a component for colour , and let be such a component for colour , with . Further, by the Proposition 23 we have a colour (which might equal one of ) with at least two components, w.l.o.g. .
First, we find a pair of vertices with the property that and are in different -components. We do this as follows. If there are a couple of vertices with that are in different -components, then, since -diameter of is large, we can find with . Hence, , and is in different -component from one of , yielding the desired pair. Otherwise, we have that all pairs of vertices with also share the same -component. But then, we must have the whole -component contained in one -component, making it unable to intersect other -components, which is impossible. Hence, we have in different -components, with .
Pick any vertex outside . Let be the two colours different from . We now apply our procedure for defining -layers mapping with vertices listed as . Note that (recall the notation from the procedure). Hence, we get a 7-distant set, unless or . Hence, , and cover the vertex set and we get a contradiction. ∎
4.3 Final steps
In the final part of the proof, we show how to reduce the general case to the case of intersecting monochromatic components.
Theorem 26**.**
Conjecture 6 holds for 4 colours and we may take 160 for the diameter bounds.
Proof.
Let be the given -colouring of . Our goal is to apply the Proposition 25. We start with an observation.
Observation 27**.**
Suppose that is a -component, that is disjoint from a -component with . Then for every pair of vertices we have or or the colouring satisfies Conjecture 6 with the constant 160.
Proof of the Observation 27.
Pick with and take arbitrary . Apply our procedure for generating -layers mapping to the list , with chosen to be the two colours different from . Since is in different - and -components from , these three vertices result in a 7-distant set, unless , as desired.∎
Corollary 28**.**
Suppose that we have a -component , that is disjoint from a -component with and has -diameter at least 30. Then the colouring satisfies Conjecture 6 with the constant 160.
Proof.
By the Observation 27 we are either done, or any two vertices with satisfy . Furthermore, given any two vertices , since the -diameter of is at least 30, we can find such that , so by triangle inequality holds for all .
Now, take an arbitrary vertex , let be the two remaining colours, and consider the sets
[TABLE]
Given any , if is coloured by any of or , it is already in the sets above. On the other hand, if is of colour , then so , thus . Thus, these sets cover the vertex sets and have monochromatic diameters at most 24, so we are done.∎
Finally, we are in the position to apply the Proposition 25 which finishes the proof of the theorem.∎
5 Concluding remarks
Apart from the main conjectures 1 (and its equivalent 8) and 6, here we pose further questions. Recall the section 2 that contains the auxiliary results. There we first discussed Lemmas 10 and 11, which were variants of the main conjectures with different underlying graph instead of . Recall that Lovasz-Ryser conjecture is also about different underlying graphs. Another natural question would be the following.
Question 29**.**
Let be a graph, and let be fixed. Suppose that is a -colouring of the edges of . For which is it possible to find monochromaticly connected sets that cover the vertices of ? What bounds on their diameter can we take?
Observe already that for 3 colours, the situation becomes much more complicated than that for 2 colours, where complete multipartite graphs behaved well. Consider the following example.
Pick vertices labelled as and . Define the graph to be the complete graph on these vertices with 3 edges and removed. Define the colouring as follows.
- •
Edges of colour 1 are and for all .
- •
Edges of colour 2 are and for all .
- •
Edges of colour 3 are and for all .
- •
Edges of the form are coloured arbitrarily.
It is easy to check that this colouring has no covering of vertices by two monochromatic components. Is this essentially the only way the conjecture might fail for such a graph?
Question 30**.**
Let be the complete graph with a mathching of size three omitted. Suppose that is a 3-colouring of the edges such that no two monochromatic components cover . Is such a colouring isomorphic to an example similar to the one above? What about with a perfect matching removed?
Finally, recall that the one of the main contributions in the final bound in Theorem 7 came from Lemma 13 and that in general the Ramsey approach of Lemma 12 would give much worse value. It would be interesting to study the right bounds for this problem as well.
Question 31**.**
For fixed , what is the maximal size of a set of vertices of such that is a path? What about other families of graphs of bounded degree? In particular, for fixed and , what is the maximal size of a set of vertices of such that is a connected graph of degrees bounded by ?
5.1 Acknowledgements
I would like to thank Trinity College and the Department of Pure Mathematics and Mathematical Statistics of Cambridge University for their generous support. I am particularly indebted to András Gyárfás and Imre Leader for the helpful discussions concerning this paper.
The reference list from the paper itself. Each links out to its DOI / PubMed record.
- 1[1] R. Aharoni, Ryser s conjecture for tripartite 3-graphs, Combinatorica, 21 (2001), 1-4
- 2[2] A. Gyárfás, Large Monochromatic Components in Edge-Colorings of Graphs: A Survey. Progress in Mathematics, (285), 77-96, 2010
- 3[3] A. Gyárfás, Partition coverings and blocking sets in hypergraphs (in Hungarian) Commun. 634 Comput. Autom. Inst. Hungar. Acad. Sci. 71 (1977) 62 pp
- 4[4] A. Gyárfás, Vertex covers by monochromatic pieces - a survey of results and problems, Discrete Math., 339 (2016) 1970-1977
- 5[5] Sh. Letzter, Large monochromatic triple stars in edge colourings, J. of Graph Theory, 80:323-328, 2015
- 6[6] L. Lovász, A kombinatorika minimax t eteleir ol (On minimax theorems in combinatorics), Matematikai Lapok 26 (1975), 209 - 264
- 7[7] L. Milićević, Commuting Contractive Families, Fundamenta Mathematicae 231 (2015), 225-272
- 8[8] M. Ruszinko, Large components in r 𝑟 r -edge-colorings of K n subscript 𝐾 𝑛 K_{n} have diameter at most five, J. of Graph Theory, 69:337-340, 2011
