Gallai-Ramsey numbers for monochromatic or
Abstract
A Gallai -coloring is a -edge coloring of a complete graph in which there are no rainbow triangles. For two given graphs and two positive integers with that , the -colored Gallai-Ramsey number is the minimum integer such that every Gallai -colored contains a monochromatic copy of colored by one of the first colors or a monochromatic copy of colored by one of the remaining colors. In this paper, we determine the value of Gallai-Ramsey number in the case that and . Thus the Gallai-Ramsey number is obtained.
Key words: Gallai coloring, Rainbow triangle, Gallai-Ramsey number, Gallai partition.
1 Introduction
All graphs considered in this paper are finite, simple and undirected. For a graph , we use to denote the number of vertices of , say the order of . The complete graph of order is denoted by . For a subset , let be the subgraph of induced by . For two disjoint subsets and of , . Let and be two graphs. The union of and , denoted by , is the graph with the vertex set and the edge set . The join of and , denoted by , is the graph obtained from by adding all edges joining each vertex of and each vertex of . For any positive integer , we write for the set . An edge coloring of a graph is called monochromatic if all edges are colored by the same color. An edge-colored graph is called rainbow if no two edges are colored by the same color.
Given graphs and , the classical Ramsey number is the smallest integer such that for any 2-edge coloring of with red and blue, there exists a red copy of or a blue copy of . A sharpness example of the Ramsey number , denoted by , is a 2-edge colored with red and blue such that there are neither red copies of nor blue copies of . Given graphs , the multicolor Ramsey number is the smallest positive integer such that for every -edge colored with the color set , there exists some such that contains a monochromatic copy of colored by . The multicolor Ramsey number is an obvious generalization of the classical Ramsey number. When , we simply denote by . The problem about computing Ramsey numbers is notoriously difficult. For more information on classical Ramsey number, we refer the readers to [5, 6, 10]. In this paper, we study Ramsey number in Gallai-coloring. A Gallai-coloring is an edge coloring of a complete graph with no rainbow triangle. Gallai-coloring naturally arises in several areas including: information theory [14]; the study of partially ordered sets, as in Gallai’s original paper [9] (his result was restated in [12] in the terminology of graphs); and the study of perfect graphs [2]. More information on this topic can be found in [7, 8]. A Gallai -coloring is a Gallai-coloring that uses at most colors. Given a positive integer and graphs , the Gallai-Ramsey number is the smallest integer such that every Gallai -colored contains a monochromatic copy of in color for some . Clearly, for any and . When , we simply denote by . When and , we use the following shorthand notation
The authors in [15] and [17] determined the Gallai-Ramsey number and , respectively. In this paper, we investigate the Gallai-Ramsey number where . We will prove the following result in Section 2.
Theorem 1.
Let be a positive integer and an integer such that . Then
When and , we can get the following Theorem 2 and Theorem 3 from Theorem 1, respectively. So Theorem 2 and Theorem 3 can be seen as two corollaries obtained from Theorem 1.
Theorem 2.
For a positive integer ,
To prove Theorem 1, the following theorem is useful.
Theorem 4.
[9, 12, 1] (Gallai-partition) For any Gallai-coloring of a complete graph , there exists a partition of into at least two parts such that there are at most two colors on the edges between the parts and only one color on the edges between each pair of parts. The partition is called a Gallai-partition.
Given a Gallai-partition of a Gallai-colored complete graph , let , for each and . Then is said to be the reduced graph of corresponding to the given Gallai-partition. By Theorem 4, all edges in the reduced graph are colored at most two colors.
2 Proof of Theorem 1
First, recall some known classical Ramsey numbers of and .
For the sake of notation, now we define functions for as follows.
Let
It is easy to check that
and the following inequations hold.
(3) |
(4) |
(5) |
Now we prove Theorem 1.
Proof. We first prove that by constructing a Gallai -colored complete graph with order which contains neither monochromatic copy of colored by one of the first colors nor monochromatic copy of colored by one of the remaining colors. For this construction, we use the sharpness example of classical Ramsey results. Let , and . Then by Lemma 2.1, is a 2-edge colored , is a 2-edge colored and is a 2-edge colored . We construct our sharpness example by taking blow-ups of these sharpness examples . A blow-up of an edge-colored graph on a graph is a new graph obtained from by replacing each vertex of with and replacing each edge of with a monochromatic complete bipartite graph in the same color with . By induction, suppose that we have constructed , where be a single vertex and is colored by the color set such that has no monochromatic copy of colored by one of the first colors and no monochromatic copy of colored by one of the remaining colors. If , then the construction is completed. Otherwise, we consider the following cases.
Case a. If , then construct by a blow-up of colored by the two colors and on . Then has no monochromatic copy in the first colors.
Case b. If and , then construct by a blow-up of colored by the color on . Then has no monochromatic copy in the first colors.
Case c. If and , then construct by a blow-up of colored by the two colors and on . Then contains neither monochromatic copy of colored by one of the first colors nor monochromatic copy of colored by the color .
Case d. If and , then construct by a blow-up of colored by the color on . Then contains neither monochromatic copy of colored by one of the first colors nor monochromatic copy of colored by one of the remaining colors.
Case e. If and , then construct by a blow-up of colored by the two colors and on . Then contains neither monochromatic copy of colored by one of the first colors nor monochromatic copy of colored by one of the remaining colors.
By the above construction, it is clear that is Gallai -colored and contains neither monochromatic copy of in any of the first colors nor monochromatic copy of in any of the remaining colors. If and are both even, then by Case a, we can first construct of order . Next by Case e, we continue to construct . So we can get . If is even and is odd, then by Case a, we can first construct of order . Next by Case e, we continue to construct and we can get . Finally by Case d, we can construct of order . Similarly, we can get that in the remaining three cases. Therefore,
Now we prove that by induction on . Let and be a Gallai -colored complete graph of order . The statement is trivial in the case that . The statement holds in the case that by Lemma 2.1. The statement holds in the case that by Theorem 3. So we can assume that and , and the statement holds for any and such that . Then and . Suppose, to the contrary, that contains neither monochromatic copy of in any of the first colors nor monochromatic copy of in any of the remaining colors. By Theorem 4, there exists a Gallai-partition of . Choose a Gallai-partition with the smallest number of parts, say and let for . Then . Choose one vertex and set . Then is a reduced graph of colored by at most two colors.
We first consider the case that . W.L.O.G, suppose that the color on the edges between two parts is red. If red is in the last colors (so ), then and both have no red edges, otherwise, there exists a red , a contradiction. Hence for each . By the induction hypothesis and (1),
a contradiction. If red is in the first colors (W.L.O.G, suppose that red is the th color), then has no red edges or has no red edges, otherwise, there exists a red in , a contradiction. W.L.O.G, suppose that has no red edges. Then . If has a red , then we can find a red in , a contradiction. Hence contains no monochromatic copy of in any of the first colors and no monochromatic copy of in any of the remaining colors. Hence . By the induction hypothesis and (5), we get that
a contradiction.
Then we can assume that and since is smallest, is colored by exactly two colors. Suppose that the two colors appeared in the Gallai-partition are red and blue, that is, the reduced graph is colored by red and blue. If the edge is red in , then is said to be a red neighbor of . Let all red neighbors of , named the red neighborhood of , and be the blue neighborhood of symmetrically. For each vertex , let , named the red degree of in , and be the blue degree of in . Then . If there exists one part (say ) such that all edges joining to the other parts are colored by the same color, then we can find a new Gallai-partition with two parts , which contradicts with that is smallest. It follows that and the following fact holds.
Fact 1.
For any , we have that and .
Now we can assume that . We consider the following three cases.
Case 1.
Both red and blue are in the last colors (so ).
This means that there is neither red nor blue in . Since , we have . By Fact 1, contains neither red edges nor blue edges for each . Then for . By the induction hypothesis and (2), we get that
a contradiction.
Now we only consider the case that red or blue are in the first colors in the following. Then we have the following Facts.
Fact 2.
If red is in the first colors, then for any and any parts , has no red , and the statement holds for blue symmetrically.
Otherwise, suppose that there is a red in . If there exists one red edge in , then contains a red , a contradiction. It follows that all edges in are blue. Then is a new Gallai-partition which contradicts with that and is smallest.
Fact 3.
If red is in the first colors, then every has no red , and the statement holds for blue symmetrically.
Fact 4.
If red is in the first colors and is contained in a red of , then has no red edge, and the statement holds for blue symmetrically.
Fact 5.
If red is in the first colors, and and both contain red edges, then the edges are blue, that is, edge is blue in , and the statement holds for blue symmetrically.
Let : contains at least one red edge and : contains at least one blue edge. Clearly by Fact 5, if red is in the first colors, then the induced subgraph of by is a blue complete graph and if blue is in the first colors, then the induced subgraph of by is a red complete graph.
Fact 6.
If red and blue are both in the first colors, then .
Suppose, to the contrary, that , . We know that is either red or blue. Then we can find either a red or a blue in , which contradicts with Fact 2.
Suppose that for each and for each with . Then . Otherwise, . Then is 2-edge colored, which contradicts with that . Let be the number of () which contains neither red nor blue edges, the number of which contains either red or blue edges and the number of which contains both red and blue edges. Then , and .
Case 2.
Exactly one of red and blue is in the first colors and the other is in the last colors. (so ).
W.L.O.G., suppose that red appears in the first colors, blue appears in the last colors and red is the th color. This means that there is neither red nor blue in . Then by Fact 1, we can get that every contains no blue edge, which implies that . Since , we have that .
Claim 1.
.
Otherwise, suppose that . Then W.L.O.G., suppose that , and are three corresponding subgraphs which contain red edges. By Fact 5, is a blue . So has a blue , a contradiction.
Claim 2.
Proof. First let and contain no red edges. Then is colored with exactly colors and satisfies that it contains neither monochromatic in one of the first color nor monochromatic in one of the remaining colors. Hence by the induction hypothesis and (4),
Next suppose that contains a red edge. Then is colored with exactly colors and by Fact 3, contains neither monochromatic in one of the first colors nor monochromatic in one of the remaining colors. Hence by the induction hypothesis and (3),
Therefore by the above inequalities, we get that
We now consider subcases based on the values of and .
Subcase 2.1.
.
Subcase 2.2.
and .
Subcase 2.3.
and .
Claim 3.
In this case, . Further, if , then .
Proof. First, to the contrary, we can assume that and both contain a red edge, and each other contains no red edge by Claim 1. Then by Fact 5, we have that the edges in are blue. If there are two blue edges in , then we can find a blue triangle () which contradicts with that has no blue or find a red which is (), which contradicts with Fact 4. So we can assume that all edges in are red. It follows that either we can find a red triangle () which contradicts with Fact 4, or we can find a blue which is , a contradiction. Secondly, let . To the contrary, we can assume that contains a red edge and each other contains no red edge. Then by Fact 4 and since has no blue , there are at most two red edges in . So we can assume that all edges in are blue. It follows that either we can find a blue which is , where , a contradiction, or we can find a red induced by , which contradicts with Fact 2.
If , then by Claim 3 and Claim 2, we have that and
a contradiction. The proof of Case 2 is completed.
Case 3.
Red and blue are both in the first colors (so ).
This means that there exists neither red nor blue in . W.L.O.G., suppose that red and blue are the th and th color, respectively. Since , we know that . Since and , . First we prove some claims.
Claim 4.
For any , we have and in .
W.L.O.G., suppose, to the contrary, that . Since , then the subgraph of induced by contains either a red or a blue . So contains a red or blue . Thus contains also, a contradiction.
Claim 5.
If , then , and if , then .
Suppose that . To the contrary, suppose that contains a red edge. If the induced subgraph contains a red edge, say , then we find a red which is , which contradicts with Fact 4. Otherwise, contains a blue . So contains a blue , which contradicts with Fact 2. So we have that . The proof for blue is as same as the above one for red symmetrically.
Claim 6.
.
If there is a vertex , then by Fact 4, is contained in neither a red nor a blue in . By Fact 5, we know that the induced subgraph of by is a blue complete graph and the induced subgraph of by is a red complete graph. It follows that and .
Now we can assume that by Fact 6. To the contrary, suppose that . If , then by Fact 5, the subgraph contains a red , which contradicts with Fact 2. Then . By the same reasons, we know that . Then or . W.L.O.G., suppose that . Then . Let and . By Fact 5, is a red triangle and is a blue edge in . It is easy to check that there exists a red triangle such that and or a blue such that , which contradicts with Fact 4.
Claim 7.
Proof. First suppose that () contains neither red nor blue edges. This means that is colored with exactly colors and satisfies that it has neither monochromatic in one of the first colors nor monochromatic in one of the remaining colors. It is easy to check that
for any . Hence by the induction hypothesis,
Next suppose that contains no red edges but contains blue edges. This means that is colored with exactly colors and satisfies that it contains neither monochromatic in one of the first colors nor monochromatic in one of the remaining colors by Fact 3. It is easy to check that
So by the induction hypothesis,
The same inequality holds if contains no blue edges but contains red edges.
Finally suppose that contains both red and blue edges. This means that is colored with all colors and satisfies that it contains neither monochromatic in one of the first colors nor monochromatic in one of the remaining colors by Fact 3. It is easy to check that so by the induction hypothesis,
Combining Inequalities(6)-(8), we have the following inequality
We now consider subcases based on the value of and .
Subcase 3.1.
.
By Claim 4, and in for any . Since , we have that and in . Then by Claim 5, every contains neither red nor blue edge. So . Thus . By Claim 7, we have that
a contradiction.
Next, we consider the case that . By Fact 6, we have that .
Subcase 3.2.
.
Subcase 3.3.
.
First suppose that . It follows that . Otherwise, for any , we have that or in since . Then by Claim 5, every contains no red edge or contains no blue edge, which contradicts with the assumption that . By Claim 6, we have that . Thus, by Claim 7, we have that
a contradiction.
Subcase 3.4.
.
Then . Hence or for each . It follows that by Claim 5. If and for each , then by Claim 5. So . By Claim 7, we have that
a contradiction. So, W.L.O.G., we can assume that and . By Claim 4, we know that . Let and . Then . Let be the subgraph of induced by . So . Clearly, has no red . Otherwise we can find a red obtained by a red in and , which contradicts with Fact 2.
Claim 8.
, and .
First we claim that the red degree of in is at most 3 for each . Otherwise, suppose that has at least four red neighbors in . Since has no red , we can find a blue induced by the red neighbors of in , which contradicts with Fact 2. Then the blue degree of in is at least 3 for each . It follows that every vertex of is contained in a blue triangle of . Thus, by Fact 4, for each , we have that . Secondly, we claim that the blue degree of in is at most 5 for each . Otherwise, we find a blue induced by the blue neighbors of in since and has no red . Then there exists a blue in , which contradicts with Fact 2. It follows that the red degree of in is at least 1 for each . Hence and are contained in the same red triangle of for each vertex of . Thus, by Fact 4, and for each , we have that .
If , then by Claim 7, we get that
a contradiction. If , we can assume that . Then by Claim 8, . By Fact 2, . Then by Claim 8, . So . Then by Claim 7, we get that
a contradiction.
Now we consider the remaining cases that . Then we can assume that . First consider the case that there is a blue edge spanned by vertices in , say . Then is a blue . By Fact 4, we have that . Then by Claim 8, . So . If , then by Claim 7, we get that
a contradiction. If , then and are red. Then by Fact 2, . So . Then by Claim 7, we get that
a contradiction.
Secondly, we consider the case that is a red . By Fact 4, . Then . By Fact 2, for each vertex in , there is at least one blue edge in . This means that there are at least 7 blue edges between and . By the pigeonhole principle, there is a vertex in , say , such that . If the subgraph induced by contains no blue edge, then along with induce a red in , which contradicts with Fact 2. Then the subgraph induced by contains a blue edge. So is contained in both a red and a blue . Thus by Fact 4. So . By Claim 7, we have that
a contradiction.
References
- [1] K. Cameron and J. Edmonds. Lambda composition. J. Graph Theory, 26(1):9–16, 1997.
- [2] K. Cameron, J. Edmonds, and L. Lovász. A note on perfect graphs. Period. Math. Hungar., 17:173–175, 1986.
- [3] F. R. K. Chung and R. L. Graham. Edge-colored complete graphs with precisely colored subgraphs. Combinatorica, 3:315–324, 1983.
- [4] M. Clancy. Some small ramsey numbers. J. Graph Theory, pages 89–91, 1977.
- [5] P. Erdős, R. Faudree, C. Rousseau, and R. Schelp. The size ramsey number. Period. Math. Hungar., 9 (1–2):145–161, 1978.
- [6] R. Faudree and Schelp R. A survey of results on the size ramsey number. in: Paul Erdős and his mathematics, II (Budapest, 1999), in: Bolyai Soc. Math. Stud., vol. 11, János Bolyai Math. Soc., Budapest, pages 291–309, 2002.
- [7] J. Fox, A. Grinshpun, and Pach J. The erdos-hajnal conjecture for rainbow triangles. J. Combin. Theory Ser. B, 111:75–125, 2015.
- [8] S. Fujita, C. Magnant, and K. Ozeki. Rainbow generalizations of ramsey theory: a survey. Graphs and Combin., 26:1–30, 2010.
- [9] T. Gallai. Transitiv orientierbare graphen. volume 18, pages 25–66. 1967.
- [10] R. Graham, B. Rothschild, and J. Spencer. Ramsey theory. Wiley, New York, 1990.
- [11] A. Gyárfás, G. Sárközy, A. Sebő, and S. Selkow. Ramsey-type results for gallai-colorings. J. Graph Theory, 64:233–243, 2010.
- [12] A. Gyárfás and G. Simonyi. Edge colorings of complete graphs without tricolored triangles. J. Graph Theory, 46(3):211–216, 2004.
- [13] H. Harborth and I. Mengersen. All ramsey number for five vertices and seven or eight edges. Discrete Math., pages 91–98, 1988.
- [14] J. Körner and G. Simonyi. Graph pairs and their entropies: modularity problems. Combinatorica, 20:227–240, 2000.
- [15] H. Liu, Magnant C., Saito A., I. Schiermeyer, and Y. Shi. Gallai-ramsey number for . J. Graph Theory, pages 1–14, 2019.
- [16] S. P. Radziszowski. Small ramsey numbers. Electron. J. Combin., 1994.
- [17] H. Wu and Magnant C. Gallai-ramsey numbers for monochromatic trangles or 4-cycles. Graphs Combin., 34:1315–1324, 2018.