Paper detail

Random triangle removal

Starting from a complete graph on $n$ vertices, repeatedly delete the edges of a uniformly chosen triangle. This stochastic process terminates once it arrives at a triangle-free graph, and the fundamental question is to estimate the final number of edges (equivalently, the time it takes the process to finish, or how many edge-disjoint triangles are packed via the random greedy algorithm). Bollobás and Erdős (1990) conjectured that the expected final number of edges has order $n^{3/2}$, motivated by the study of the Ramsey number $R(3,t)$. An upper bound of $o(n^2)$ was shown by Spencer (1995) and independently by Rödl and Thoma (1996). Several bounds were given for variants and generalizations (e.g., Alon, Kim and Spencer (1997) and Wormald (1999)), while the best known upper bound for the original question of Bollobás and Erdős was $n^{7/4+o(1)}$ due to Grable (1997). No nontrivial lower bound was available. Here we prove that with high probability the final number of edges in random triangle removal is equal to $n^{3/2+o(1)}$, thus confirming the 3/2 exponent conjectured by Bollobás and Erdős and matching the predictions of Spencer et al. For the upper bound, for any fixed $ε>0$ we construct a family of $\exp(O(1/ε))$ graphs by gluing $O(1/ε)$ triangles sequentially in a prescribed manner, and dynamically track all homomorphisms from them, rooted at any two vertices, up to the point where $n^{3/2+ε}$ edges remain. A system of martingales establishes concentration for these random variables around their analogous means in a random graph with corresponding edge density, and a key role is played by the self-correcting nature of the process. The lower bound builds on the estimates at that very point to show that the process will typically terminate with at least $n^{3/2-o(1)}$ edges left.

preprint2012arXivOpen access

Signal facts

What is known right now

Open access3 authors2 topics

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.