Paper detail

Bipartite decomposition of random graphs

For a graph $G=(V,E)$, let $τ(G)$ denote the minimum number of pairwise edge disjoint complete bipartite subgraphs of $G$ so that each edge of $G$ belongs to exactly one of them. It is easy to see that for every graph $G$, $τ(G) \leq n -α(G)$, where $α(G)$ is the maximum size of an independent set of $G$. Erdős conjectured in the 80s that for almost every graph $G$ equality holds, i.e., that for the random graph $G(n,0.5)$, $τ(G)=n-α(G)$ with high probability, that is, with probability that tends to $1$ as $n$ tends to infinity. Here we show that this conjecture is (slightly) false, proving that for most values of $n$ tending to infinity and for $G=G(n,0.5)$, $τ(G) \leq n-α(G)-1$ with high probability, and that for some sequences of values of $n$ tending to infinity $τ(G) \leq n-α(G)-2$ with probability bounded away from $0$. We also study the typical value of $τ(G)$ for random graphs $G=G(n,p)$ with $p < 0.5$ and show that there is an absolute positive constant $c$ so that for all $p \leq c$ and for $G=G(n,p)$, $τ(G)=n-Θ(α(G))$ with high probability.

preprint2014arXivOpen access
0citations
0reviews
0saves
Nocode
Nodataset
0institutions

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.

Authors

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 graph slice

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.