Paper detail

A Sparse Regular Approximation Lemma

We introduce a new variant of Szemerédi's regularity lemma which we call the "sparse regular approximation lemma" (SRAL). The input to this lemma is a graph $G$ of edge density $p$ and parameters $ε, δ$, where we think of $δ$ as a constant. The goal is to construct an $ε$-regular partition of $G$ while having the freedom to add/remove up to $δ|E(G)|$ edges. As we show here, this weaker variant of the regularity lemma already suffices for proving the graph removal lemma and the hypergraph regularity lemma, which are two of the main applications of the (standard) regularity lemma. This of course raises the following question: can one obtain quantitative bounds for SRAL that are significantly better than those associated with the regularity lemma? Our first result answers the above question affirmatively by proving an upper bound for SRAL given by a tower of height $O(\log 1/p)$. This allows us to reprove Fox's upper bound for the graph removal lemma. Our second result is a matching lower bound for SRAL showing that a tower of height $Ω(\log 1/p)$ is unavoidable. We in fact prove a more general multicolored lower bound which is essential for proving lower bounds for the hypergraph regularity lemma.

preprint2016arXivOpen access

Signal facts

What is known right now

Open access2 authors1 topic

Next steps

Decide what to do with this paper

Use like or dislike for the fast social read. The more specific scholarly feedback stays available below when needed.

Log in to curate

Reading frame

Keep the important context close to the paper

Keep the important signals around this paper in one place: votes, save state, collection context, reviews and the metadata you need before deciding what to do next.

Institutions

Add specific reaction

Move through the context

Research map

Open full explorer

Move through nearby people, institutions, topics and adjacent work without leaving the paper page.

Building this map preview

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

Structured reviews

0 review(s)

ContributeLeave structured feedbackUse the review template when you have a concrete strength, concern or method question.Open review form

No structured reviews yet. High-signal critique starts here.

Work discussion

0 comment(s)

DiscussAdd a high-signal commentKeep quick notes, caveats and replication pointers separate from formal reviews.Open comment form

No discussion yet. The first strong comment sets the tone.