اشترك بالحزمة الذهبية واحصل على وصول غير محدود شمرا أكاديميا
تسجيل مستخدم جديدResolution of the Oberwolfach problem
55
0
0.0
(
0
)
اسأل ChatGPT حول البحث
ﻻ يوجد ملخص باللغة العربية
The Oberwolfach problem, posed by Ringel in 1967, asks for a decomposition of $K_{2n+1}$ into edge-disjoint copies of a given $2$-factor. We show that this can be achieved for all large $n$. We actually prove a significantly more general result, which allows for decompositions into more general types of factors. In particular, this also resolves the Hamilton-Waterloo problem for large $n$.
قيم البحث
اقرأ أيضاً
We prove that any quasirandom dense large graph in which all degrees are equal and even can be decomposed into any given collection of two-factors (2-regular spanning subgraphs). A special case of this result gives a new solution to the Oberwolfach problem.
The concept of a $1$-rotational factorization of a complete graph under a finite group $G$ was studied in detail by Buratti and Rinaldi. They found that if $G$ admits a $1$-rotational $2$-factorization, then the involutions of $G$ are pairwise conjug
ate. We extend their result by showing that if a finite group $G$ admits a $1$-rotational $k=2^nm$-factorization where $ngeq 1$, and $m$ is odd, then $G$ has at most $m(2^n-1)$ conjugacy classes containing involutions. Also, we show that if $G$ has exactly $m(2^n-1)$ conjugacy classes containing involutions, then the product of a central involution with an involution in one conjugacy class yields an involution in a different conjugacy class. We then demonstrate a method of constructing a $1$-rotational $2n$-factorization under $G times mathbb{Z}_n$ given a $1$-rotational $2$-factorization under a finite group $G$. This construction, given a $1$-rotational solution to the Oberwolfach problem $OP(a_{infty},a_1, a_2 cdots, a_n)$, allows us to find a solution to $OP(2a_{infty}-1,^2a_1, ^2a_2cdots, ^2a_n)$ when the $a_i$s are even ($i eq infty$), and $OP(p(a_{infty}-1)+1, ^pa_1, ^pa_2 cdots, ^pa_n)$ when $p$ is an odd prime, with no restrictions on the $a_i$s.
Suppose we have a network that is represented by a graph $G$. Potentially a fire (or other type of contagion) might erupt at some vertex of $G$. We are able to respond to this outbreak by establishing a firebreak at $k$ other vertices of $G$, so that
the fire cannot pass through these fortified vertices. The question that now arises is which $k$ vertices will result in the greatest number of vertices being saved from the fire, assuming that the fire will spread to every vertex that is not fully behind the $k$ vertices of the firebreak. This is the essence of the {sc Firebreak} decision problem, which is the focus of this paper. We establish that the problem is intractable on the class of split graphs as well as on the class of bipartite graphs, but can be solved in linear time when restricted to graphs having constant-bounded treewidth, or in polynomial time when restricted to intersection graphs. We also consider some closely related problems.
We consider three graphs, $G_{7,3}$, $G_{7,4}$, and $G_{7,6}$, related to Kellers conjecture in dimension 7. The conjecture is false for this dimension if and only if at least one of the graphs contains a clique of size $2^7 = 128$. We present an aut
omated method to solve this conjecture by encoding the existence of such a clique as a propositional formula. We apply satisfiability solving combined with symmetry-breaking techniques to determine that no such clique exists. This result implies that every unit cube tiling of $mathbb{R}^7$ contains a facesharing pair of cubes. Since a faceshare-free unit cube tiling of $mathbb{R}^8$ exists (which we also verify), this completely resolves Kellers conjecture.
The finite colliding bullets problem is the following simple problem: consider a gun, whose barrel remains in a fixed direction; let $(V_i)_{1le ile n}$ be an i.i.d. family of random variables with uniform distribution on $[0,1]$; shoot $n$ bullets o
ne after another at times $1,2,dots, n$, where the $i$th bullet has speed $V_i$. When two bullets collide, they both annihilate. We give the distribution of the number of surviving bullets, and in some generalisation of this model. While the distribution is relatively simple (and we found a number of bold claims online), our proof is surprisingly intricate and mixes combinatorial and geometric arguments; we argue that any rigorous argument must very likely be rather elaborate.
سجل دخول لتتمكن من نشر تعليقات
التعليقات
جاري جلب التعليقات
سجل دخول لتتمكن من متابعة معايير البحث التي قمت باختيارها
