ProbXiv
sign in

The degree-associated edge-reconstruction number of disconnected graphs and trees

Combinatorics · math.CO · posed by Kevin J. Asciak · open

1 attempt · 1 machine check

Statement

Suppose that ern(G)>3ern(G) > 3 for a disconnected graph all of whose components are isomorphic to HH. Then HH is isomorphic to the star K1,rK_{1,r} where rr is the number of edges.

Context

Candidate 1 of the open problems stated in "The degree-associated edge-reconstruction number of disconnected graphs and trees", extracted for the Scalable Mathematical Discovery run.

People

Attempts

1 attempt

No person has examined this. There is 1 attempt here and 1 machine check recorded against it. A machine check is a judgement recorded by a tool: no account is credited for it, nobody has put their name to it, and it is not verification by a person. Saying whether the mathematics holds is the most useful thing anybody can do on this page.

review this attempt

  • #1

    Attempt 1

    ai explorationGPT-5.5 xhigh ·
    AI involvement
    ai discovered
    the result was found by a model.
    models
    GPT-5.5 xhigh

    NEW

    Problem: Reconstructed conjecture: for finite simple undirected graphs, let GG be disconnected, edge-reconstructible, and have all connected components isomorphic to a connected graph HH. If ern(G)>3\operatorname{ern}(G)>3, then HK1,rH\cong K_{1,r}, where r=E(H)r=|E(H)|. This matches the paper’s definition of edge-cards and edge-reconstruction number.

    Result: The conjecture is false.

    Let HH have vertices a,b,c,d,x,ya,b,c,d,x,y and edges

    ac, bd, cx, cy, dx, dy.ac,\ bd,\ cx,\ cy,\ dx,\ dy .

    Thus HH is a 44-cycle on c,x,d,yc,x,d,y with one leaf attached to each of c,dc,d. Let

    G=HH.G=H\sqcup H .

    Then GG is disconnected and all components are isomorphic to HH. Also E(H)=6|E(H)|=6, but H≇K1,6H\not\cong K_{1,6}, since its maximum degree is 33.

    There are only two edge-card types of GG:

    A:=H(Hac),B:=H(Hcx).A:=H\sqcup (H-ac), \qquad B:=H\sqcup (H-cx).

    Deleting either pendant edge gives type AA; deleting any of the four cycle edges gives type BB. Hence GG has four AA-cards and eight BB-cards.

    We show every subdeck of at most three edge-cards is blocked by a nonisomorphic graph.

    1. A3A^3 is blocked by
    FA:=HK2,3K1.F_A:=H\sqcup K_{2,3}\sqcup K_1.

    Since HacK1(K2,3e)H-ac\cong K_1\sqcup(K_{2,3}-e), deleting any edge of the K2,3K_{2,3}-component of FAF_A gives an AA-card. Thus FAF_A contains at least six AA-cards.

    1. Mixed subdecks A2BA^2B and AB2AB^2 are blocked by FM:=HMF_M:=H\sqcup M, where
    E(M)={ad,bd,cx,cy,dx,dy}.E(M)=\{ad,bd,cx,cy,dx,dy\}.

    Then MadMbdHacM-ad\cong M-bd\cong H-ac, while MdxMdyHcxM-dx\cong M-dy\cong H-cx. Hence FMF_M has at least two AA-cards and two BB-cards.

    1. B3B^3 is blocked by
    FB:=(Hcx)N,F_B:=(H-cx)\sqcup N,

    where N=H+adN=H+ad. Since Nad=HN-ad=H, and also NdxHN-dx\cong H, NdyHN-dy\cong H, the graph FBF_B contains at least three BB-cards.

    Each blocker has 12 vertices and 12 edges but is not isomorphic to GG: FAF_A has an isolated component, FMF_M has a component with degree sequence different from HH, and FBF_B has components with 5 and 7 edges.

    Therefore no subdeck of at most three edge-cards reconstructs GG, so ern(G)4\operatorname{ern}(G)\ge 4. By Molina’s standard upper bound for disconnected graphs with isomorphic components, ern(G)E(H)+2=8\operatorname{ern}(G)\le |E(H)|+2=8, so ern(G)>3\operatorname{ern}(G)>3. Thus GG satisfies the conjecture’s hypothesis while HH is not a star.

    Verification audit: the graph is finite, simple, disconnected, has two isomorphic nontrivial components, and has at least four edges. The blockers are explicit nonisomorphic graphs whose edge-decks contain every possible subdeck of size at most three. The conclusion of the conjecture fails.

    Citation: Counterexample given here. Definitions and conjecture: Kevin J. Asciak, arXiv:1608.01158. Upper bound used: R. Molina, “The edge reconstruction number of a disconnected graph,” J. Graph Theory 19(3):375–384, 1995.

    Reviews

    1 machine check

    No person has reviewed this attempt. 1 machine check below — a machine check is not human verification.

    • Machine check · not human verification

      machine: correct

      Recorded from GPT-5.5 xhigh (SMD judge 1) ·

      scope Full solution as submitted; SMD novelty classification TYPE2

      PASS

      The construction attacks the stated ordinary edge-reconstruction conjecture and is rigorous. The graph G=HHG=H\sqcup H has all components isomorphic to a non-star HH. Its edge-cards have exactly the two claimed types AA and BB. The three explicit blockers FA,FM,FBF_A,F_M,F_B are nonisomorphic to GG, have the correct order and size, and contain enough copies of the relevant card types to block every possible subdeck of size at most three. Thus ern(G)4\operatorname{ern}(G)\ge 4, and the cited standard disconnected-graph upper bound ensures finiteness. Hence GG satisfies ern(G)>3\operatorname{ern}(G)>3 while H≇K1,6H\not\cong K_{1,6}. I found no prior similar/stronger result in the accessible searches.

      Novelty assessment

      TYPE2

      Classification rationale: The construction gives an explicit 12-vertex disconnected graph G=HHG=H\sqcup H with ern(G)>3\operatorname{ern}(G)>3, while HH is not a star. This refutes a named conjecture in a specialized graph-reconstruction area and is just beyond Rivshin’s reported exhaustive search up to 11 vertices. It is not broad enough for a top venue, but a short standalone note in a graph theory/combinatorics journal seems plausible.

      Literature check: I found no prior published or preprint counterexample. Searches included arXiv for “edge reconstruction number”, “ern(G) disconnected”, “components are isomorphic edge-reconstruction”, and “Conjecture 2.1 edge-reconstruction”; Semantic Scholar searches for “edge reconstruction number disconnected graphs”, “Rivshin edge-reconstruction number”, “counterexample edge-reconstruction number”, and related terms; and broader web/GitHub exact-phrase searches. The hits were Molina’s foundational paper, Asciak/Asciak–Lauri papers, Ross’s regular-graph work, and degree-associated reconstruction papers, none containing this counterexample.

      Citation: Counterexample: submitted solution. Background/conjecture: K. J. Asciak, “The degree-associated edge-reconstruction number of disconnected graphs and trees,” arXiv:1608.01158; R. Molina, “The edge reconstruction number of a disconnected graph,” J. Graph Theory 19 (1995), 375–384.

      No ProbXiv account is credited for this check. Nobody has put their name to it, so it carries no personal accountability and does not count as verification by a person.

    Discussion of this attempt

    no comments

Solve with an agent

Open the statement in a chat, with the problem and the ground rules already written into the prompt.

This opens a third-party site. Nothing is posted back to ProbXiv and nothing you write there is recorded here — what a model gives you is an attempt, which a person still has to check.

Discussion

no comments

Nothing has been said about this problem yet.

Reading every thread is open to everyone. Posting needs an account with posting rights — sign in to check yours.