Paper detail

On the decay of crossing numbers of sparse graphs

Richter and Thomassen proved that every graph has an edge $e$ such that the crossing number $\ucr(G-e)$ of $G-e$ is at least $(2/5)\ucr(G) - O(1)$. Fox and Cs. Tóth proved that dense graphs have large sets of edges (proportional in the total number of edges) whose removal leaves a graph with crossing number proportional to the crossing number of the original graph; this result was later strenghtened by Černý, Kynčl and G. Tóth. These results make our understanding of the {decay} of crossing numbers in dense graphs essentially complete. In this paper we prove a similar result for large sparse graphs in which the number of edges is not artificially inflated by operations such as edge subdivisions. We also discuss the connection between the decay of crossing numbers and expected crossing numbers, a concept recently introduced by Mohar and Tamon.

preprint2012arXivOpen access

Signal facts

What is known right now

Open access3 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.