Hostname: page-component-cb9f654ff-hqlzj Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2025-08-22T18:31:23.266Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

THE ERDŐS–SZEKERES PROBLEM AND AN INDUCED RAMSEY QUESTION

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  12 April 2019

Dhruv Mubayi
Affiliation:
Department of Mathematics, Statistics, and Computer Science, University of Illinois, Chicago, IL 60607, U.S.A. email mubayi@uic.edu
Andrew Suk
Affiliation:
Department of Mathematics, University of California at San Diego, La Jolla, CA 92093, U.S.A. email asuk@ucsd.edu

Abstract

Motivated by the Erdős–Szekeres convex polytope conjecture in $\mathbb{R}^{d}$, we initiate the study of the following induced Ramsey problem for hypergraphs. Given integers $n>k\geqslant 5$, what is the minimum integer $g_{k}(n)$ such that any$k$-uniform hypergraph on $g_{k}(n)$ vertices with the property that any set of $k+1$ vertices induces 0, 2, or 4 edges, contains an independent set of size $n$. Our main result shows that $g_{k}(n)>2^{cn^{k-4}}$, where $c=c(k)$.

MSC classification

Information

Type
Research Article
Copyright
Copyright © University College London 2019 

1 Introduction

Given a finite point set $P$ in $d$ -dimensional Euclidean space $\mathbb{R}^{d}$ , we say that $P$ is in general position if no $d+1$ members lie on a common hyperplane. Let $ES_{d}(n)$ denote the minimum integer $N$ , such that any set of $N$ points in $\mathbb{R}^{d}$ in general position contains $n$ members in convex position, that is, $n$ points that form the vertex set of a convex polytope. In their classic 1935 paper, Erdős and Szekeres [Reference Erdős and Szekeres1] proved that in the plane, $ES_{2}(n)\leqslant 4^{n}$ . In 1960 [Reference Erdős and Szekeres2], they showed that $ES_{2}(n)\geqslant 2^{n-2}+1$ and conjectured this to be sharp for every integer $n\geqslant 3$ . Their conjecture has been verified for $n\leqslant 6$  [Reference Erdős and Szekeres1, Reference Szekeres and Peters7], and determining the exact value of $ES_{2}(n)$ for $n\geqslant 7$ is one of the longest-standing open problems in Ramsey theory/discrete geometry. Recently [Reference Suk8], the second author asymptotically verified the Erdős–Szekeres conjecture by showing that $ES_{2}(n)=2^{n+o(n)}$ .

In higher dimensions, $d\geqslant 3$ , much less is known about $ES_{d}(n)$ . In [Reference Károlyi3], Károlyi showed that projections into lower-dimensional spaces can be used to bound these functions, since most generic projections preserve general position, and the preimage of a set in convex position must itself be in convex position. Hence, $ES_{d}(n)\leqslant ES_{2}(n)=2^{n+o(n)}$ . However, the best known lower bound for $ES_{d}(n)$ is only of the order of $2^{cn^{1/(d-1)}}$ , due to Károlyi and Valtr [Reference Károlyi and Valtr4]. An old conjecture of Füredi (see [Reference Matoušek5, Ch. 3]) says that this lower bound is essentially the truth.

Conjecture 1.1. For $d\geqslant 3$ , $ES_{d}(n)=2^{\unicode[STIX]{x1D6E9}(n^{1/(d-1)})}$ .

It was observed by Motzkin [Reference Motzkin6] that any set of $d+3$ points in $\mathbb{R}^{d}$ in general position contains either 0, 2, or 4 $(d+2)$ -tuples not in convex position. By defining a hypergraph $H$ whose vertices are $N$ points in $\mathbb{R}^{d}$ in general position, and edges are $(d+2)$ -tuples not in convex position, then every set of $d+3$ vertices induces 0, 2, or 4 edges. Moreover, by Carathéodory’s theorem (see [Reference Matoušek5, Theorem 1.2.3]), an independent set in $H$ would correspond to a set of points in convex position. This leads us to the following combinatorial parameter.

Let $g_{k}(n)$ be the minimum integer $N$ such that any $k$ -uniform hypergraph on $N$ vertices with the property that every set of $k+1$ vertices induces 0, 2, or 4 edges, contains an independent set of size $n$ . For $k\geqslant 5$ , the geometric construction of Károlyi and Valtr [Reference Károlyi and Valtr4] mentioned earlier implies that

$$\begin{eqnarray}g_{k}(n)\geqslant ES_{k-2}(n)\geqslant 2^{cn^{1/(k-3)}},\end{eqnarray}$$

where $c=c(k)$ . One might be tempted to prove Conjecture 1.1 by establishing a similar upper bound for $g_{k}(n)$ . However, our main result shows that this is not possible.

Theorem 1.2. For each $k\geqslant 5$ there exists $c=c(k)>0$ such that for any $n\geqslant k$ we have $g_{k}(n)>2^{cn^{k-4}}$ .

In the other direction, we can bound $g_{k}(n)$ from above as follows. For $n\geqslant k\geqslant 5$ and $t<k$ , let $h_{k}(t,n)$ be the minimum integer $N$ such that any $k$ -uniform hypergraph on $N$ vertices with the property that any set of $k+1$ vertices induces at most $t$ edges, contains an independent set of size $n$ . In a forthcoming paper, the authors prove the following.

Theorem 1.3. For $k\geqslant 5$ and $t<k$ , there is a positive constant $c^{\prime }=c^{\prime }(k,t)$ such that

$$\begin{eqnarray}h_{k}(t,n)\leqslant \operatorname{twr}_{t}(c^{\prime }n^{k-t}\log n),\end{eqnarray}$$

where $\operatorname{twr}$ is defined recursively as $\operatorname{twr}_{1}(x)=x$ and $\operatorname{twr}_{i+1}(x)=2^{\operatorname{twr}_{i}(x)}$ .

Hence, we have the following corollary.

Corollary 1.4. For $k\geqslant 5$ , there is a constant $c^{\prime }=c^{\prime }(k)$ such that

$$\begin{eqnarray}g_{k}(n)\leqslant h_{k}(4,n)\leqslant 2^{2^{2^{c^{\prime }n^{k-4}\log n}}}.\end{eqnarray}$$

It is an interesting open problem to improve either the upper or lower bounds for $g_{k}(n)$ .

Problem 1.5. Determine the tower growth rate for $g_{k}(n)$ .

Actually, this Ramsey function can be generalized further as follows: for every $S\subset \{0,1,\ldots ,k\}$ , define $g_{k}(n,S)$ to be the minimum integer $N$ such that any $N$ -vertex $k$ -uniform hypergraph with the property that every set of $k+1$ vertices induces $s$ edges for some $s\in S$ , contains an independent set of size $n$ . General results for $g_{k}(n,S)$ may shed light on classical Ramsey problems, but it appears difficult to determine even the tower height for any nontrivial cases.

2 Proof of Theorem 1.2

Let $k\geqslant 5$ and $N=2^{cn^{k-4}}$ where $c=c_{k}>0$ is sufficiently small to be chosen later. We are to produce a $k$ -uniform hypergraph $H$ on $N$ vertices with $\unicode[STIX]{x1D6FC}(H)<n$ and every $k+1$ vertices of $H$ span 0, 2, or 4 edges. Let $\unicode[STIX]{x1D719}:\binom{[N]}{k-3}\rightarrow \binom{[k-1]}{2}$ be a random $\binom{k-1}{2}$ -coloring, where each color appears on each $(k-3)$ -tuple independently with probability $1/\binom{k-1}{2}$ . For $f=(v_{1},\ldots ,v_{k-1})\in \binom{[N]}{k-1}$ , where $v_{1}<v_{2}<\cdots <v_{k-1}$ , define the function $\unicode[STIX]{x1D712}_{f}:\binom{f}{k-3}\rightarrow \binom{[k-1]}{2}$ as follows: for all $\{i,j\}\in \binom{[k-1]}{2}$ , let

$$\begin{eqnarray}\unicode[STIX]{x1D712}_{f}(f\setminus \{v_{i},v_{j}\})=\{i,j\}.\end{eqnarray}$$

We define the $(k-1)$ -uniform hypergraph $G$ , whose vertex set is $[N]$ , such that

$$\begin{eqnarray}G\,=\,G_{\unicode[STIX]{x1D719}}\,:=\,\bigg\{\!f\,\in \,\binom{[N]}{k-1}\,:\,\unicode[STIX]{x1D719}(f\setminus \{u,v\})\,=\,\unicode[STIX]{x1D712}_{f}(f\setminus \{u,v\})\text{ for all }\{u,v\}\,\in \,\binom{f}{2}\!\bigg\}.\end{eqnarray}$$

For example, if $k=4$ (which is excluded for the theorem but we allow it to illustrate this construction) then $\unicode[STIX]{x1D719}:[N]\rightarrow \{12,13,23\}$ and for $f=(v_{1},v_{2},v_{3})$ , where $v_{1}<v_{2}<v_{3}$ , we have $f\in G$ if and only if $\unicode[STIX]{x1D719}(v_{1})=23,\unicode[STIX]{x1D719}(v_{2})=13$ , and $\unicode[STIX]{x1D719}(v_{3})=12$ .

Given a subset $S\subset [N]$ , let $G[S]$ be the subhypergraph of $G$ induced by the vertex set $S$ . Finally, we define the $k$ -uniform hypergraph $H$ , whose vertex set is $[N]$ , such that

$$\begin{eqnarray}H=H_{\unicode[STIX]{x1D719}}:=\bigg\{e\in \binom{[N]}{k}:|G[e]|\text{is odd}\bigg\}.\end{eqnarray}$$

Claim 2.1. $|H[S]|$ is even for every $S\in \binom{[N]}{k+1}$ .

Proof. Let $S\in \binom{[N]}{k+1}$ and suppose for contradiction that $|H[S]|$ is odd. Then

$$\begin{eqnarray}2|G[S]|=\!\mathop{\sum }_{f\in G[S]}2=\!\mathop{\sum }_{f\in G[S]}\mathop{\sum }_{\substack{ e\in \binom{S}{k} \\ e\supset f}}1=\!\mathop{\sum }_{e\in \binom{S}{k}}|G[e]|=\!\mathop{\sum }_{e\not \in H[S]}|G[e]|+\mathop{\sum }_{e\in H[S]}|G[e]|.\end{eqnarray}$$

The first sum on the right-hand side above is even by definition of $H$ and the second sum is odd by definition of $H$ and the assumption that $|H[S]|$ is odd. This contradiction completes the proof.◻

Claim 2.2. $|G[e]|\leqslant 2$ for every $e\in \binom{[N]}{k}$ .

Proof. For sake of contradiction, suppose that for $e=(v_{1},\ldots ,v_{k})$ , where $v_{1}<\cdots <v_{k}$ , we have $|G[e]|\geqslant 3$ . Let $e_{p}=e\setminus \{v_{p}\}$ for $p\in [k]$ and suppose that $e_{i},e_{j},e_{l}\in G$ with $i<j<l$ . In what follows, we will find a set $S$ of size $k-3$ , where $S\subset e_{i}$ and $S\subset e_{l}$ , such that $\unicode[STIX]{x1D712}_{e_{i}}(S)\neq \unicode[STIX]{x1D712}_{e_{l}}(S)$ . This will give us our contradiction since $e_{i},e_{l}\in G$ implies that $\unicode[STIX]{x1D712}_{e_{i}}(S)=\unicode[STIX]{x1D719}(S)=\unicode[STIX]{x1D712}_{e_{l}}(S)$ .

Let $Y=e\setminus \{v_{i},v_{j},v_{l}\}$ and $Y^{\prime }=Y\setminus \{\min Y\}$ . Let us first assume that $i>1$ so that $\min Y=v_{1}$ . In this case,

$$\begin{eqnarray}\unicode[STIX]{x1D712}_{e_{i}}(Y^{\prime }\cup \{v_{j}\})=\{1,l-1\},\end{eqnarray}$$

since we obtain $Y^{\prime }\cup \{v_{j}\}$ from $e_{i}$ by removing $\min Y$ and $v_{l}$ which are the first and $(l-1)$ st elements of $e_{i}$ . Similarly,

$$\begin{eqnarray}\unicode[STIX]{x1D712}_{e_{l}}(Y^{\prime }\cup \{v_{j}\})=\{1,i\},\end{eqnarray}$$

since we obtain $Y^{\prime }\cup \{v_{j}\}$ from $e_{l}$ by removing $\min Y$ and $v_{i}$ which are the first and $i$ th elements of $e_{l}$ . Because $l>i+1$ , we conclude that $\unicode[STIX]{x1D712}_{e_{i}}(Y^{\prime }\cup \{v_{j}\})\neq \unicode[STIX]{x1D712}_{e_{l}}(Y^{\prime }\cup \{v_{j}\})$ as desired.

Next, we assume that $i=1$ and $\min Y=v_{q}$ where $q>1$ . In this case,

$$\begin{eqnarray}\unicode[STIX]{x1D712}_{e_{i}}(Y^{\prime }\cup \{v_{j}\})=\{q-1,l-1\},\end{eqnarray}$$

since we obtain $Y^{\prime }\cup \{v_{j}\}$ from $e_{i}$ by removing $v_{q}$ and $v_{l}$ which are the $(q-1)$ st and $(l-1)$ st elements of $e_{i}$ . Similarly,

$$\begin{eqnarray}\unicode[STIX]{x1D712}_{e_{l}}(Y^{\prime }\cup \{v_{j}\})=\{1,q^{\prime }\}\quad \text{where }q^{\prime }=q\text{ if }q<l\text{ and }q^{\prime }=q-1\text{ if }q>l,\end{eqnarray}$$

since we obtain $Y^{\prime }\cup \{v_{j}\}$ from $e_{l}$ by removing $v_{i}=v_{1}$ and $v_{q}$ which are the first and $q^{\prime }$ th elements of $e_{l}$ . If $q\neq 2$ , then we immediately obtain $\unicode[STIX]{x1D712}_{e_{i}}(Y^{\prime }\cup \{v_{j}\})\neq \unicode[STIX]{x1D712}_{e_{l}}(Y^{\prime }\cup \{v_{j}\})$ as desired. On the other hand, if $q=2$ , then $q^{\prime }=q=2$ as well and $l\geqslant 4$ , so $l-1\neq q^{\prime }$ and again

$$\begin{eqnarray}\unicode[STIX]{x1D712}_{e_{i}}(Y^{\prime }\cup \{v_{j}\})=\{q-1,l-1\}\neq \{1,q^{\prime }\}=\unicode[STIX]{x1D712}_{e_{l}}(Y^{\prime }\cup \{v_{j}\}).\end{eqnarray}$$

This completes the proof of the claim. ◻

Let $T_{3}$ be the $(k-1)$ -uniform hypergraph with vertex set $S$ with $|S|=k+1$ and three edges $e_{1},e_{2},e_{3}$ such that there are three pairwise disjoint pairs $p_{1},p_{2},p_{3}\in \binom{S}{2}$ with $p_{i}=\{v_{i},v_{i}^{\prime }\}$ and $e_{i}=S\setminus p_{i}$ for $i\in \{1,2,3\}$ .

Claim 2.3. $T_{3}\not \subset G$ .

Proof. Suppose for a contradiction that there is a subset $S\subset [N]$ of size $k+1$ such that $T_{3}\subset G[S]$ . Using the notation above, assume without loss of generality that $v_{1}=\min \cup _{i}p_{i}$ and $v_{2}=\min (p_{2}\cup p_{3})$ . Let $Y=S\setminus (p_{1}\cup p_{3})$ and note that $Y\in \binom{e_{1}\cap e_{3}}{k-3}$ . Let $Y_{1}\subset Y$ be the set of elements in $Y$ that are smaller than $v_{1}$ , so we have the ordering

$$\begin{eqnarray}Y_{1}<v_{1}<v_{2}<\{v_{3},v_{3}^{\prime }\}.\end{eqnarray}$$

Now, $\unicode[STIX]{x1D712}_{e_{1}}(Y)$ is the pair of positions of $v_{3}$ and $v_{3}^{\prime }$ in $e_{1}$ . Both of these positions are at least $|Y_{1}|+2$ as $Y_{1}\cup \{v_{2}\}$ lies before $p_{3}$ . On the other hand, the smallest element of $\unicode[STIX]{x1D712}_{e_{3}}(Y)$ is $|Y_{1}|+1$ which is the position of $v_{1}$ in $e_{3}$ . This shows that $\unicode[STIX]{x1D712}_{e_{1}}(Y)\neq \unicode[STIX]{x1D712}_{e_{3}}(Y)$ , which is a contradiction as both must be equal to $\unicode[STIX]{x1D719}(Y)$ as $e_{1},e_{3}\subset G$ .◻

We now show that every $(k+1)$ -set $S\subset [N]$ spans $0,2$ or $4$ edges of $H$ . By Claim 2.1, $|H[S]|$ is even. Let $G^{\prime }$ be the graph with vertex set $S$ and edge set $\{S\setminus f:f\in G[S]\}$ . So there is a one-to-one correspondence between $G[S]$ and $G^{\prime }$ via the map $f\rightarrow S\setminus f$ . If $G^{\prime }$ has a vertex $x$ of degree at least three, then $|G[S\setminus \{x\}]|\geqslant 3$ which contradicts Claim 2.2. Therefore $G^{\prime }$ consists of disjoint paths, cycles, and isolated vertices. This implies that a $k$ -set $A\subset S$ is an edge in $H$ exactly when $S\setminus A$ is a vertex of degree one in $G^{\prime }$ . Next, observe that Claim 2.3 implies that $G^{\prime }$ does not contain a matching of size three, for the complementary sets of this matching yield a copy of $T_{3}\subset G$ . Hence, the number of degree-one vertices in $G^{\prime }$ is 0, 2, or 4, and therefore $|H[S]|\in \{0,2,4\}$ for all $S\in \binom{[N]}{k+1}$ .

Let us now argue that $\unicode[STIX]{x1D6FC}(H)<n$ , which is a straightforward application of the probabilistic method. Indeed, we will show that this happens with positive probability and conclude that an $H$ with this property exists. For a given $k$ -set, the probability that it is an edge of $H$ is $p>0$ , where $p$ depends only on $k$ . Consequently, the probability that $H$ has an independent set of size $n$ is at most

$$\begin{eqnarray}\binom{N}{n}(1-p)^{c^{\prime }n^{k-3}}\end{eqnarray}$$

for some $c^{\prime }>0$ . Note that the exponent $k-3$ above is obtained by taking a partial Steiner $(n,k,k-3)$ system $S$ within a potential independent set of size $n$ and observing that we have independence within the edges of $S$ . A short calculation shows that this probability is less than 1 as long as $c$ is sufficiently small. This completes the proof of Theorem 1.2.◻

Acknowledgement

We thank the referee for helpful comments.

Footnotes

The first author’s research was partially supported by NSF grant DMS-1763317. The second author was supported by an NSF CAREER award and an Alfred Sloan Fellowship.

References

Erdős, P. and Szekeres, G., A combinatorial problem in geometry. Compos. Math. 2 1935, 463470.Google Scholar
Erdős, P. and Szekeres, G., On some extremum problems in elementary geometry. Ann. Univ. Sci. Budapest. Eötvös Sect. Math. 3–4 1960–61, 5362.Google Scholar
Károlyi, G., Ramsey-remainder for convex sets and the Erdős–Szekeres theorem. Discrete Appl. Math. 109 2001, 163175.Google Scholar
Károlyi, G. and Valtr, P., Point configurations in d-space without large subsets in convex position. Discrete Comput. Geom. 30 2003, 277286.Google Scholar
Matoušek, J., Lectures in Discrete Geometry, Springer (2002).Google Scholar
Motzkin, T., Cooperative classes of finite sets in one and more dimensions. J. Combin. Theory 3 1967, 244251.Google Scholar
Szekeres, G. and Peters, L., Computer solution to the 17-point Erdős–Szekeres problem. ANZIAM J. 48 2006, 151164.Google Scholar
Suk, A., On the Erdős–Szekeres convex polygon problem. J. Amer. Math. Soc. 30 2017, 10471053.Google Scholar