Paper detail

Strong Ramsey Games in Unbounded Time

For two graphs $B$ and $H$ the strong Ramsey game $\mathcal{R}(B,H)$ on the board $B$ and with target $H$ is played as follows. Two players alternately claim edges of $B$. The first player to build a copy of $H$ wins. If none of the players win, the game is declared a draw. A notorious open question of Beck asks whether the first player has a winning strategy in $\mathcal{R}(K_n,K_k)$ in bounded time as $n\rightarrow\infty$. Surprisingly, in a recent paper Hefetz et al. constructed a $5$-uniform hypergraph $\mathcal{H}$ for which they proved that the first player does not have a winning strategy in $\mathcal{R}(K_n^{(5)},\mathcal{H})$ in bounded time. They naturally ask whether the same result holds for graphs. In this paper we make further progress in decreasing the rank. In our first result, we construct a graph $G$ (in fact $G=K_6\setminus K_4$) and prove that the first player does not have a winning strategy in $\mathcal{R}(K_n \sqcup K_n,G)$ in bounded time. As an application of this result we deduce our second result in which we construct a $4$-uniform hypergraph $G'$ and prove that the first player does not have a winning strategy in $\mathcal{R}(K_n^{(4)},G')$ in bounded time. This improves the result in the paper above. An equivalent formulation of our first result is that the game $\mathcal{R}(K_ω\sqcup K_ω,G)$ is a draw. Another reason for interest on the board $K_ω\sqcup K_ω$ is a folklore result that the disjoint union of two finite positional games both of which are first player wins is also a first player win. An amusing corollary of our first result is that at least one of the following two natural statements is false: (1) for every graph $H$, $\mathcal{R}(K_ω,H)$ is a first player win; (2) for every graph $H$ if $\mathcal{R}(K_ω,H)$ is a first player win, then $\mathcal{R}(K_ω\sqcup K_ω,H)$ is also a first player win.

preprint2019arXivOpen 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.

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.