1 / 22

The Mathematical Structure Behind Asymptotic Extremal Combinatorics: Flag Algebras

This workshop focuses on identifying the mathematical structure behind arguments in the area of asymptotic extremal combinatorics, also known as Turan densities. The goal is to replace ε/δ arguments with analytic arguments. The workshop explores the theory of graph homomorphisms, utilizes counting techniques, and works with induced objects rather than homomorphisms.

peed
Download Presentation

The Mathematical Structure Behind Asymptotic Extremal Combinatorics: Flag Algebras

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Flag Algebras Alexander A. Razborov Institute for Advanced Study and Steklov Mathematical Institute DIMACS Workshop on Large Graphs, October 18, 2006 TexPoint fonts used in EMF. Read the TexPoint manual before you delete this box.: AA

  2. Identifying mathematical structure behind common arguments in the area of asympotic extremal combinatorics (aka Turan densities), as well as replacing ε/δstuff with analytic arguments is natural and highly desirable. • Very closely related to the theory of graph homomorphisms by Lovász et. al (mostly independent, partially influenced). • Single-purposed (so far): heavily oriented toward problems in asymptotic extremal combinatorics.

  3. Main differencies from graph homomorphisms • Our framework is specifically aimed at combining counting (Cauchy-Schwarz style) with various inductive arguments. • Work with arbitrary universal first-order theories in predicative languages (digraphs, hypergraphs etc.)... (with a great deal of regret we must say farewell to W: [0,1]² → [0,1]) • Work with induced objects rather than with homomorphisms (more general and intuitive in this context).

  4. M σ θ 1 2 … k Definition. A type σis a model on the ground set {1,2…,k} for some k called the size of σ Definition. A flag F of type σis a pair (M,θ), whereθis an induced embedding of σintoM (similar tok-labelled graphs, but we insist on exact copy ofσ)

  5. F F1 p(F1, F) – the probability that randomly chosen sub-flag of F is isomorphic to F1 σ

  6. Ground set

  7. F F1 F2 σ Multiplication

  8. Semantics (easy part of Lovász-Szegedy)

  9. Structure

  10. Averaging F F1 F1 F1 σ σ σ Relative version

  11. Cauchy-Schwarz

  12. Upward operators (π-operators) Nature is full of such homomorphisms, and we have a very general construction (based on the logical notion of interpretation) covering most of them.

  13. Extremal homomorphisms

  14. Differential operators

  15. Ensembles of random homomorphisms (or trying to salvate from Lovász-Szegedy what we need)

  16. Applications: triangle density Partial results: Goodman [59]; Bollobás [75]; Lovász, Simonovits [83]; Fisher [89] We completely solve this for triangles (r=3)

  17. Applications: forbidden 3-hypergraphs Not properly written down or even checked!!!

  18. Conclusion Mathematically structured approaches (like the one presented here) is certainly no guarantee to solve your favorite extremal problem… but you are just better equipped with them. The most interesting general question: can any true inequality be proved by manipulating with finitely many finite structures (flags)? In the framework of flag algebras we have several rigorous refinements of this question.

More Related