ProbXiv
sign in

Two Dimensional Bandwidth

Combinatorics · math.CO · posed by C.M. Duran · open

1 attempt · 1 machine check

Statement

If 2cd2 \leq c \leq d, then β2(Kd2×Kc2)=d(c1)\beta_{2}\left(K_{d^{2}}\times K_{c^{2}}\right)=d(c-1).

Context

Candidate 1 of the open problems stated in "Two Dimensional Bandwidth", 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 statement: Km×KnK_m\times K_n denotes the Cartesian product, and for a graph GG with N2N^2 vertices,

    β2(G)=minfmaxuvE(G)f(u)f(v),\beta_2(G)=\min_f\max_{uv\in E(G)}\|f(u)-f(v)\|_\infty,

    where f:V(G)[N]×[N]f:V(G)\to [N]\times[N] is a bijection. The conjecture asserts that for integers 2cd2\le c\le d,

    β2(Kd2×Kc2)=d(c1).\beta_2(K_{d^2}\times K_{c^2})=d(c-1).

    Result: The conjecture is false. Take c=d=3c=d=3. It predicts

    β2(K9×K9)=6.\beta_2(K_9\times K_9)=6.

    But place vertex (i,j)(i,j) in the 9×99\times9 grid at the position occupied by entry ijij below:

    171127214715412545979112931395222343679262966516422646946124551937817535575128534499827349181477488771312985985272386963323383686478566634367686545874845988897939\begin{array}{ccccccccc} 17&11&27&21&47&15&41&25&45\\ 97&91&12&93&13&95&22&23&43\\ 67&92&62&96&65&16&42&26&46\\ 94&61&24&55&19&37&81&75&35\\ 57&51&28&53&44&99&82&73&49\\ 18&14&77&48&87&71&31&29&85\\ 98&52&72&38&69&63&32&33&83\\ 68&64&78&56&66&34&36&76&86\\ 54&58&74&84&59&88&89&79&39 \end{array}

    This is a bijection. For every fixed first coordinate ii, the nine entries ijij lie in a 6×66\times6 subgrid; likewise, for every fixed second coordinate jj, the nine entries ijij lie in a 6×66\times6 subgrid. Hence any two adjacent vertices of K9×K9K_9\times K_9, i.e. vertices sharing one coordinate, are placed at \ell_\infty-distance at most 55. Therefore

    β2(K9×K9)5<6,\beta_2(K_9\times K_9)\le 5<6,

    contradicting the conjecture.

    Citation: No literature citation used; the displayed labeling is an explicit counterexample.

    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 displayed 9×99\times 9 labeling is a valid explicit counterexample for c=d=3c=d=3, assuming the standard Cartesian-product interpretation used in the statement. Direct inspection shows it is a bijection on the 81 vertices (i,j)(i,j), and each fixed first- or second-coordinate fiber lies within a 6×66\times6 block, so every edge has \ell_\infty-length at most 55. Thus β2(K9×K9)5<6=d(c1)\beta_2(K_9\times K_9)\le 5<6=d(c-1), disproving the conjectured equality. I found no relevant existing stronger published result in accessible searches.

      Novelty assessment

      TYPE1

      Classification rationale: The result appears genuinely new, but it is a very small counterexample: one explicit 9×99\times 9 labeling refuting an undergraduate REU conjecture at c=d=3c=d=3. It does not determine β2(K9×K9)\beta_2(K_9\times K_9) exactly or give a general replacement theorem. This is likely unpublishable on its own, though useful as an erratum or as part of a broader study.

      Literature check: Searches for the exact conjecture, β2(Kd2×Kc2)\beta_2(K_{d^2}\times K_{c^2}), d(c1)d(c-1), K9×K9K_9\times K_9, “two-dimensional bandwidth,” “rook graph,” “Hamming graph,” and the explicit labeling did not reveal this counterexample or a stronger published result. The relevant literature found treats related two-dimensional bandwidth models, products with paths/cycles, complete graphs, complete bipartite graphs, or heuristic/exact algorithms for the L1L_1 version, but not this LL_\infty counterexample to Duran’s conjecture.

      Citation: No prior citation found for the counterexample. Relevant sources checked include C.M. Duran, “Two Dimensional Bandwidth,” REU in Mathematics at CSUSB, 2006; J.X. Hao, “Two-Dimensional Bandwidth of Graphs,” Ars Combinatoria 74 (2005), 77–88; L. Lin and Y. Lin, “Two models of two-dimensional bandwidth problems,” Information Processing Letters 110 (2010), 469–473.

      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.