4

IMO 2007 Problem 3

 2 years ago
source link: http://siongui.github.io/2017/02/08/imo-2007-problem-3/
Go to the source link to view the article. You can view the picture content, updated content and better typesetting reading experience. If the link is broken, please click the button below to view the snapshot at that time.
neoserver,ios ssh client

IMO 2007 Problem 3

February 08, 2017

In a mathematical competition some competitors are friends. Friendship is always mutual. Call a group of competitors a clique if each two of them are friends. The number of members of a clique is called its size. Given that, in this competition, the largest size of a clique is even, prove that the competitors can be arranged in two rooms such that the largest size of a clique contained in one room is the same as the largest size of a clique contained in the other room.

=========================================

Proof:

Suppose not. Let graphs A and B be G and an empty graph, respectively. We move vertex one by one from A to B unless a move is invalid, meaning that after the move w(A)w(A)
Now we claim that w(A)=w(B)+1=d+1=|V(A)|. The first equalities are obvious. If there are more than d+1 vertices in A, then pick a maximum (d+1)-clique and move a vertex not in it to B.

Move a vertex v from A to B. Now w(A)=w(B)-1=d=|V(A)|. How many (d+1)-cliques in B does v belong to?

If v is in only one (d+1)-clique C, then by assumption moving every vertex in C back to A creates a (d+1)-clique in A, meaning that C, A, and v together is a clique of size 2d+1. Since the maximum clique in G has even size, it is at least of size 2d+2, a contradiction that the moving process above end up with maximum cliques of size d+1 and d in A and B, respectively.

If v is in two (d+1)-cliques C1 and C2, we arbitrarily pick vertices a and b from C1-C2 and C2-C1, respectively. Moving a or b to A does not increase w(A), but moving both does. So a and b are adjacent. Because a and b are arbitrarily chosen, the union of C1 and C2 is a clique bigger than C1 and C2, a contradiction. Notice here we do not need A to be a d-clique, but only has to contain a d-clique.

If v is in a set of k>=3 (d+1)-cliques C, we start a process of moving vertex one by one in C to A. A vertex u is moved to A if it does not belong to all cliques in C, and all cliques in C that contain u is removed from the set C right away. By the previous argument C could not be left with two (d+1)-cliques. Nor can moving a vertex not in all cliques in C results in an empty C. The process terminates when moving any remaining vertex from C to A leaves only one clique in C.

Now let's study C with k>1 (d+1)-cliques. Every vertex, except for the vertices common to all cliques in C, belongs to exactly k-1 cliques in C, meaning that any two vertices belong to at least one common clique and are therefore adjacent. So all vertices in C form a larger clique, contradiction. This concludes our proof.

Q.E.D.


post by Shen-Fu Tsai


About Joyk


Aggregate valuable and interesting links.
Joyk means Joy of geeK