ProbXiv
sign in

Total Difference Chromatic Numbers of Regular Infinite Graphs

Combinatorics · math.CO · posed by Noam Benson-Tilsen, Samuel Brock, Brandon Faunce, Monish Kumar, Noah Dokko Stein, Joshua Zelinsky · open

1 attempt · 1 machine check

Statement

When is it that χ_{td}(cl(G))=2 χ_{td}(G)+1 ? Are there infinitely many graphs with this property?

Context

Candidate 9 of the open problems stated in "Total Difference Chromatic Numbers of Regular Infinite Graphs", 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: For nonempty simple graphs GG, with χtd(G)\chi_{td}(G) the least kk admitting a proper total difference labeling and cl(G)=GK2\operatorname{cl}(G)=G\square K_2, ask whether there are infinitely many GG such that

    χtd(cl(G))=2χtd(G)+1.\chi_{td}(\operatorname{cl}(G))=2\chi_{td}(G)+1.

    The wording is ambiguous if “graph” was intended to mean connected graph; literally it includes disconnected graphs.

    Result: Yes. For every n1n\ge 1, let EnE_n be the edgeless graph on nn vertices.

    Since EnE_n has no edges, labeling every vertex by 11 is a proper total difference labeling, so

    χtd(En)=1.\chi_{td}(E_n)=1.

    Its clone is

    cl(En)=EnK2,\operatorname{cl}(E_n)=E_n\square K_2,

    which is a matching of nn disjoint copies of K2K_2. For a matching, χtd=3\chi_{td}=3: labels 1,31,3 on the endpoints of every edge give edge label 22, so 33 works; k=2k=2 cannot work because the only distinct endpoint labels are 1,21,2, giving edge label 11, equal to an endpoint label.

    Thus

    χtd(cl(En))=3=21+1=2χtd(En)+1.\chi_{td}(\operatorname{cl}(E_n))=3=2\cdot 1+1=2\chi_{td}(E_n)+1.

    The graphs EnE_n are pairwise nonisomorphic, so there are infinitely many graphs with the stated property.

    If the intended question required connected graphs, this is a missing connectedness hypothesis and the above family no longer applies.

    Citation: No external resolution used; this is a direct observation from the definitions in Benson-Tilsen et al., “Total Difference Labeling of Regular Infinite Graphs,” arXiv:2107.11706.

    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 TYPE1

      PASS

      The construction is rigorous for the literal unrestricted question. For each edgeless EnE_n, χtd(En)=1\chi_{td}(E_n)=1, while cl(En)=nK2\operatorname{cl}(E_n)=nK_2 has χtd=3\chi_{td}=3, so

      χtd(cl(En))=3=2χtd(En)+1.\chi_{td}(\operatorname{cl}(E_n))=3=2\chi_{td}(E_n)+1.

      The EnE_n are pairwise nonisomorphic, giving infinitely many examples. This answers the existential part as stated, though it does not give a general characterization and would not address an unstated connectedness restriction.

      Novelty assessment

      TYPE1

      Classification rationale: This is a literal but very minor resolution: it exploits disconnected edgeless graphs EnE_n. The argument is immediate from definitions (χtd(En)=1\chi_{td}(E_n)=1, cl(En)=nK2\operatorname{cl}(E_n)=nK_2, χtd(nK2)=3\chi_{td}(nK_2)=3). It would not support a standalone paper and likely only exposes a missing connectedness/nontriviality hypothesis in the original question.

      Literature check: I found no explicit published or preprint statement giving this infinite edgeless-family answer. The original Benson-Tilsen et al. paper asks the cloning-tightness question and says the lone vertex is the only known equality case. Searches for “total difference chromatic/labeling” with “clone”, “cl(G)”, the equality form, “edgeless”, “matching”, and “disjoint union” found only the original total-difference-labeling papers and no follow-up resolving the question. The needed ingredients are nevertheless completely routine and implicit in standard definitions and in the known value for K2K_2.

      Citation: Background sources: Benson-Tilsen et al., “Total Difference Labeling of Regular Infinite Graphs,” Involve 16 (2023), 765–781, arXiv:2107.11706; Rohatgi and Zhang, “Total difference chromatic numbers of graphs,” Involve 13 (2020), 511–528, arXiv:1912.13323.

      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.