Researcher profile

Neil Thapen

Neil Thapen contributes to research discovery and scholarly infrastructure.

ResearcherAffiliation not importedOpen to collaborate

Trust snapshot

Quick read

Trust 13 - UnverifiedVerification L1Unclaimed author
2works
0followers
2topics
3close collaborators

Actions

Decide how to stay connected

Follow researcher0

Identity and collaboration

How to connect with this researcher

Claiming links this public author record to a researcher profile and unlocks direct collaboration workflows.

Log in to claim

Direct collaboration

Open a focused conversation when the fit is right

Claim this author entity first to unlock direct invitations.

Research graph

See the researcher in context

Open full explorer

Inspect adjacent work, topics, institutions and collaborators without jumping out to a separate graph page.

Building this graph slice

BZPEER is loading the nearby papers, people, topics and institutions for this page.

Published work

2 published item(s)

preprint2022arXiv

Notes on switching lemmas

We prove three switching lemmas, for random restrictions for which variables are set independently; for random restrictions where variables are set in blocks (both due to Hastad [Hastad 86]); and for a distribution appropriate for the bijective pigeonhole principle [Beame et al. 94, Krajicek et al. 95]. The proofs are based on Beame's version [Beame 94] of Razborov's proof of the switching lemma in [Razborov 93], except using families of weighted restrictions rather than families of restrictions which are all the same size. This follows a suggestion of Beame in [Beame 94]. The result is something between Hastad's and Razborov's methods of proof. We use probabilistic arguments rather than counting ones, in a similar way to Hastad, but rather than doing induction on the terms in our formula with an inductive hypothesis involving conditional probability, as Hastad does, we explicitly build one function to bound the probabilities for the whole formula.

preprint2013arXiv

The complexity of proving that a graph is Ramsey

We say that a graph with $n$ vertices is $c$-Ramsey if it does not contain either a clique or an independent set of size $c \log n$. We define a CNF formula which expresses this property for a graph $G$. We show a superpolynomial lower bound on the length of resolution proofs that $G$ is $c$-Ramsey, for every graph $G$. Our proof makes use of the fact that every Ramsey graph must contain a large subgraph with some of the statistical properties of the random graph.