This action might not be possible to undo. Are you sure you want to continue?

BooksAudiobooksComicsSheet Music### Categories

### Categories

### Categories

Editors' Picks Books

Hand-picked favorites from

our editors

our editors

Editors' Picks Audiobooks

Hand-picked favorites from

our editors

our editors

Editors' Picks Comics

Hand-picked favorites from

our editors

our editors

Editors' Picks Sheet Music

Hand-picked favorites from

our editors

our editors

Top Books

What's trending, bestsellers,

award-winners & more

award-winners & more

Top Audiobooks

What's trending, bestsellers,

award-winners & more

award-winners & more

Top Comics

What's trending, bestsellers,

award-winners & more

award-winners & more

Top Sheet Music

What's trending, bestsellers,

award-winners & more

award-winners & more

Welcome to Scribd! Start your free trial and access books, documents and more.Find out more

Lecturer: Hung Q. Ngo Scribe: Anusha R. Iyer

Lecture 6: Alterations

Often the random object generated must be altered before the result may be obtained. This is termed as an alteration.

1

1.1

Applications

Dominating Set

Recall the example from the ﬁrst lecture. Let G = (V, E) be a graph on n vertices with δ(G) = δ > 1. We constructed a dominating set of G by randomly picking a set of vertices X, where each vertex belongs to X with probability p. The set X was then augmented with vertices Y ⊆ V − X such that for each y ∈ Y , both y and its neighbors are not in X. The set X ∪ Y is then a dominating set.

1.2

Ramsey Numbers

Deﬁnition 1.1. R(k, k) is the minimum natural number n such that any 2-edge coloring (with BLUE or RED) of Kn contains either a RED Kk or a BLUE Kk . Proposition 1.2. R(k, k) > n0 where n0 = 1 k2k/2 (1 + o(1)) e Proof. Randomly color edges of Kn with RED/BLUE with probability IS = 0 if S is not monochromatic, 1 if S is a monochromatic.

1 2

each. Let

**Then, summing over all k-subsets S of [n], we get E[# monochromatic Kk ] = E [
**

S

IS ] =

S

E[IS =

n 1−(k) 2 2 k

(1)

We have used the following argument: if E[# monochromatic Kk ] < 1 then R(k, k) > n, which implied k R(k, k) > 2 2 . However, the bound was not too good. The method of alteration gives a better bound. Remove one vertex from each monochromatic Kk . k k We have at least n − n 21−(2) vertices left. Let n0 = n − n 21−(2) , then R(k, k) > n0 . We then only k k need to ﬁnd n that maximizes n0 (n). Elementary analysis gives n0 = 1 k2 2 (1 + O(1)). e

k

1.3

Independence Number α(G)

nd 2

Proposition 1.3. Let G = (V, E) where |V | = n and |E| ≤

and d ≥ 1. Then, α(G) ≥

nd 2 .

1

Proof. We show there is an independent set whose size is at least nd . 2 Pick each vertex of G at random with probability p. Let X be the set of chosen vertices. The chosen set X may not necessarily be a independent set. Let Y be the set of edges both of whose endpoints are in X. For each y ∈ Y , discard one of the endpoints. The result is an independent set of size at least (|X| − |Y |). Let 0 if both endpoints of e are not in X Ie = 1 if both endpoints of e are in X Then E[|X| − |Y |] = E[|X|] − E[|Y |] = np − E[

e

Ie ]

**= np − |E|p2 nd 2 ≥ np − p 2 Find p that maximizes E[|X| − |Y |], then E[|X| − |Y |] ≥
**

nd 2

as desired.

Side note: we will later discuss the Markov and Chebyshev inequalities that measure the probability of deviating from the expected value.

1.4

Extremal Set Theory

Recall from the ﬁrst lecture that a hypergraph H = (V, E) has property B if it is two-colorable, i.e. there exists a two-coloring so that no edge is monochromatic. Let m(n) be the minimum number of edges m such that there is an n-uniform hypergraph with m edges and it is not 2-colorable. Our problem is to ﬁnd m(n) or good bounds for m(n). To ﬁnd an upper bound m for m(n), we just have to ﬁnd some n-uniform hypergraph with at least m edges which is not 2-colorable. A trivial upper bound is then m(n) ≤ 2n−1 (why?). n To ﬁnd a lower bound m for m(n), we show that for any n-uniform hypergraph H, there is a positive probability that a 2-coloring of H is good. In what follows, we try to ﬁnd some good lower bound. 1.4.1 Naive Approach #1

Consider an n-uniform hypergraph H = (V, E) with m edges. Randomly 2-color v ∈ V . If P[no monochromatic edge] > 0, then there exists a good coloring for the graph H. This implies m(n) > m. 1.4.2 Naive Approach #2

Take any hypergraph H = (V, E) with |E| = m. Let Ie = 0 1 if e is not monochromatic if e is monochromatic.

2

**Then E[#monochromatic edges] = E[
**

e

Ie ]

= mE[Ie ] = m21−n . Thus, if m < 2n−1 then there is a good 2-coloring, which implies m(n) > 2n−1 . Some History Erd¨ s (1965) m(n) ≥ 2n−1 o 1 Beck (1978) m(n) ≥ Ω(2n n 3 ) n 1 ..., ... (2000) m(n) ≥ Ω(2n ( lnn ) 2 ) Open Problem 1.4. The gap between the upper and lower bound is still very large. 1.4.3 Using Alterations

**Algorithm: 1. Order all vertices randomly 2. For each v ∈ V , ﬂip 2 coins.
**

1 coin 1: head/tail with probability 2 / 1 2

coin 2: head/tail with probability p/ 1 − p Let ci (v) be the value of coin i of v. 3. Color v RED if c1 (v) = head BLUE if c1 (v) = tail 4. Let D = {v|v is in some monochromatic edge} For each v ∈ D in the random ordering, if v is still in some monochromatic edge e of the ﬁrst coloring and e is still monochromatic at the point when v is considered, then switch v’s color if c2 (v) = head. We bound the probability that the coloring fails to be good: P[the coloring is not good] ≤

e∈E

**Pr[e is monochromatic] Pr[e is RED]
**

e∈E

≤ 2

Let Ae be the event that e is RED in the ﬁrst place and none of the vertices in e changed color. Let Ce be the event e started with some BLUE vertices and then e was RED at the end. Pr[e is RED] ≤ Pr[Ae ] + Pr[Ce ] 1 ≤ ( )n (1 − p)n + ... 2 Let v be the last vertex of e which changed color from BLUE to RED. The reason v changed its color was because there is some f ∈ E such that f was BLUE in the ﬁrst coloring, and remains blue until the 3

point v is considered. Moreover, f ∩ e = {v}, since another v ∈ f ∩ e would necessarily be BLUE (v ∈ f ) and necessarily be RED after the second coloring (v ∈ e); however, v must have changed its color before v, which means f was no longer BLUE at the point v was considered. Consequently, if Ce happens then there exists and edge f such that • e ∩ f = {v} • v was the last of e that changed color. • When v changed color, f was still BLUE. • The ﬁrst coloring of f was BLUE, but the second coloring of e is RED. Let Bef be the event that e and f are related in this way. Each random coloring of V induces a random coloring σ of f ∪ e. Let i be the # of elements of e that come before v in σ. Let j be the # of elements of f that come before v in σ. P[Bef |σ] ≤

p 2× 1

(v started BLUE, turned RED) (the rest of f is BLUE) (all of elements of e after v are RED) (the elements of f before v are unaltered) (every elem of e before v must be RED already or BLUE turned RED) p)j

2n−1 1 × 2n−1−i j× (1 − p) 1 (2

×

= Therefore P[Bef ] =

p 22n−1

(1

+ p )j × 2 − p)j (1 +

P[Bef |σ]P[σ]

σ

=

σ

p 1 (1 − p)j(σ) (1 + p)j(σ) 22n−1 (2n − 1)! p

n−1 n−1

≤

1 2n−1 (2n − 1)! 2 p 22n−1

(1 − p)j (1 + p)i

j=0 i=0

n−1 i

n−1 (i + j)!(2n − 2 − i − j)! j

≤ ... ≤ Now P[Ce ] <

e

m2 p 2 22n−1

**Returning to our original equation P[failing] ≤ 2[m (1 − p)n m2 p + ] 2n 2 22n−1
**

1

n If P[failing] < 1, then m(n) > m. After some analysis, we may arrive at m(n) > Ω(2n ( lnn ) 2 ).

4

Are you sure?

This action might not be possible to undo. Are you sure you want to continue?

We've moved you to where you read on your other device.

Get the full title to continue

Get the full title to continue listening from where you left off, or restart the preview.

scribd