This paper was converted on www.awesomepapers.org from LaTeX by an anonymous user.
Want to know more? Visit the Converter page.

Clustered Colouring of Odd-𝑯H-Minor-Free Graphs

Robert Hickingbotham 444School of Mathematics, Monash University, Melbourne, Australia ({robert.hickingbotham, david.wood}@monash.edu). Research of R.H. supported by an Australian Government Research Training Program Scholarship. Research of D.W. supported by the Australian Research Council.   Dong Yeap Kang 555Extremal Combinatorics and Probability Group, Institute for Basic Science, Daejeon, South Korea ([email protected]). Research of DY.K. supported by the Institute for Basic Science (IBS-R029-Y6).   Sang-il Oum 333Discrete Mathematics Group, Institute for Basic Science, Daejeon, South Korea; and Department of Mathematical Sciences, KAIST, Daejeon, South Korea ([email protected]). Research of S.O. supported by the Institute for Basic Science (IBS-R029-C1).
Raphael Steiner 222Institut für Theoretische Informatik, ETH Zürich, Switzerland ([email protected]). Research of R.S. supported by an ETH Zurich Postdoctoral Fellowship.   David R. Wood 44footnotemark: 4
Abstract

The clustered chromatic number of a graph class 𝒢\mathcal{G} is the minimum integer cc such that every graph G𝒢G\in\mathcal{G} has a cc-colouring where each monochromatic component in GG has bounded size. We study the clustered chromatic number of graph classes 𝒢_Hodd\mathcal{G}_{\_}H^{\text{odd}} defined by excluding a graph HH as an odd-minor. How does the structure of HH relate to the clustered chromatic number of 𝒢_Hodd\mathcal{G}_{\_}H^{\text{odd}}? We adapt a proof method of Norin, Scott, Seymour and Wood (2019) to show that the clustered chromatic number of 𝒢_Hodd\mathcal{G}_{\_}H^{\text{odd}} is tied to the tree-depth of HH.

1 Introduction

We consider simple, finite, undirected graphs GG with vertex-set V(G){V(G)} and edge-set E(G){E(G)}. See [3] for graph-theoretic definitions not given here. Let {1,2,}{\mathbb{N}\coloneqq\{1,2,\dots\}} and _0{0,1,}{\mathbb{N}_{\_}0\coloneqq\{0,1,\dots\}}. For nn\in\mathbb{N}, let [n]:-{1,,n}[n]\coloneq\{1,\dots,n\}.

A colouring of a graph GG is a function that assigns one colour to each vertex of GG. For an integer k1k\geqslant 1, a kk-colouring is a colouring using at most kk colours. A colouring of a graph is proper if each pair of adjacent vertices receives distinct colours. The chromatic number χ(G)\chi(G) of a graph GG is the minimum integer kk such that GG has a proper kk-colouring. A graph HH is a minor of a graph GG if HH is isomorphic to a graph that can be obtained from a subgraph of G by contracting edges. A graph GG is HH-minor-free if HH is not a minor of GG. Let 𝒢_H\mathcal{G}_{\_}H denote the class of HH-minor-free graphs. Hadwiger [8] famously conjectured that χ(G)h1\chi(G)\leqslant h-1 for every K_hK_{\_}h-minor-free graph GG. This is one of the most important open problems in graph theory. The best known upper bound on the chromatic number of K_hK_{\_}h-minor-free graphs is O(hloglogh)O(h\log\log h) due to Delcourt and Postle [1] (see [15, 27, 21] for previous bounds). It is open whether every K_hK_{\_}h-minor-free graph is properly O(h)O(h)-colourable. See [24] for a survey on this conjecture.

We consider the intersection of both a relaxation and a strengthening of Hadwiger’s conjecture. First, the relaxation. For k_0k\in\mathbb{N}_{\_}0, a colouring has clustering kk if each monochromatic component has at most kk vertices. The clustered chromatic number χ_(𝒢)\chi_{\_}{\star}(\mathcal{G}) of a graph class 𝒢\mathcal{G} is the minimum c_0c\in\mathbb{N}_{\_}0 for which there exists k_0k\in\mathbb{N}_{\_}0 such that every graph G𝒢G\in\mathcal{G} can be cc-coloured with clustering kk. Similarly, the defective chromatic number χ_Δ(𝒢)\chi_{\_}{\Delta}(\mathcal{G}) of a graph class 𝒢\mathcal{G} is the minimum c_0c\in\mathbb{N}_{\_}0 for which there exists d_0d\in\mathbb{N}_{\_}0 such that every graph G𝒢G\in\mathcal{G} can be cc-coloured with each monochromatic component having maximum degree at most dd. See [30] for a survey on clustered and defective colouring.

Motivated by Hadwiger’s conjecture, Edwards et al. [6] proved a defective variant: χ_Δ(𝒢_K_h)=h1\chi_{\_}{\Delta}(\mathcal{G}_{\_}{K_{\_}h})=h-1 for all hh\in\mathbb{N}. They also introduced the Clustered Hadwiger Conjecture: for all hh\in\mathbb{N},

χ_(𝒢_K_h)=h1.\chi_{\_}{\star}(\mathcal{G}_{\_}{K_{\_}h})=h-1.

Kawarabayashi and Mohar [14] had previously proved the first O(h)O(h) upper bound on χ_(𝒢_K_h)\chi_{\_}{\star}(\mathcal{G}_{\_}{K_{\_}h}). The constant in the O(h)O(h) term was successively improved [14, 28, 6, 20, 17, 29, 18, 19], before a proof of the Clustered Hadwiger Conjecture was first announced to appear in a future paper by Dvořák and Norin [5]. Their full proof has not yet been made public. Dujmović et al. [4] recently proved the conjecture.

Now for the strengthening of Hadwiger’s conjecture. Let GG and HH be graphs. An HH-model in GG is a collection =(T_x:xV(H))\mathcal{H}=(T_{\_}x:x\in V(H)) of pairwise vertex-disjoint subtrees of GG such that for each xyE(H)xy\in E(H), there is an edge of GG joining T_xT_{\_}x and T_yT_{\_}y. We denote by GG\langle\mathcal{H}\rangle the subgraph of GG that is the union (T_x:xV(H))\bigcup(T_{\_}x\colon x\in V(H)) together with the edges in GG joining T_xT_{\_}x and T_yT_{\_}y for each xyE(H)xy\in E(H). Clearly HH is a minor of GG if and only if there exists an HH-model in GG. We call \mathcal{H} odd if there is a 22-colouring cc of GG\langle\mathcal{H}\rangle such that:

  • for each xV(H)x\in V(H), T_xT_{\_}x is properly 22-coloured by cc; and

  • for each xyE(H)xy\in E(H), there is a monochromatic edge in GG\langle\mathcal{H}\rangle joining T_xT_{\_}x and T_yT_{\_}y.

We say cc witnesses that \mathcal{H} is odd. If there is an odd HH-model in GG, then we say that HH is an odd-minor of GG. A graph GG is HH-odd-minor-free if HH is not an odd-minor of GG. Let 𝒢_Hodd\mathcal{G}_{\_}H^{\text{odd}} denote the class of HH-odd-minor-free graphs.

As a qualitative strengthening of Hadwiger’s conjecture, Gerards and Seymour [10, pp. 115] introduced the Odd Hadwiger Conjecture: χ(G)h1\chi(G)\leqslant h-1 for every K_hK_{\_}h-odd-minor-free graph GG. Note that in the case when h=3h=3, excluding K_3K_{\_}3 as an odd-minor is equivalent to excluding an odd cycle as a subgraph, so the class of K_3K_{\_}3-odd-minor-free graphs is exactly the class of all bipartite graphs. Recently, Steiner [25] showed that the Odd Hadwiger Conjecture is asymptotically equivalent to Hadwiger’s conjecture, in the sense that if every K_tK_{\_}t-minor-free graph is properly f(t)f(t)-colourable, then every K_tK_{\_}t-odd-minor-free graph is properly 2f(t)2\,f(t)-colourable.

We are interested in understanding the clustered chromatic number of graph classes defined by a forbidden odd-minor HH. How does the structure of HH relate to the clustered chromatic number of 𝒢_Hodd\mathcal{G}_{\_}H^{\text{odd}}? Kawarabayashi [13] first proved χ_(𝒢_K_hodd)O(h)\chi_{\_}{\star}(\mathcal{G}_{\_}{K_{\_}h}^{\text{odd}})\in O(h). The constant factor term in the O(h)O(h) was improved in [12, 18], culminating in a result of Steiner [26] who showed that χ_(𝒢_K_hodd)2h2\chi_{\_}{\star}(\mathcal{G}_{\_}{K_{\_}h}^{\text{odd}})\leqslant 2h-2 using chordal partitions. So χ_(𝒢_Hodd)2|V(H)|2\chi_{\_}{\star}(\mathcal{G}_{\_}H^{\text{odd}})\leqslant 2|V(H)|-2 for every graph HH. We show that the clustered chromatic number of 𝒢_Hodd\mathcal{G}_{\_}H^{\text{odd}} is tied to the connected tree-depth of HH, which we now define.

The vertex-height of a rooted tree TT is the maximum number of vertices on a path from a root to a leaf in TT. For two vertices uu, vv in a rooted tree TT, we say that uu is a descendant of vv in TT if vv lies on the path from the root to uu in TT. The closure of TT is the graph with vertex set V(T)V(T) where uvE(T)uv\in E(T) if uu is a descendant of vv or vice versa. The connected tree-depth td¯(G)\operatorname{\overline{td}}(G) of a graph GG is the minimum vertex-height of a rooted tree TT with V(T)=V(G)V(T)=V(G) such that GG is a subgraph of the closure of TT***A forest is rooted if each component has a root vertex (which defines the ancestor relation). The closure of a rooted forest FF is the disjoint union of the closure of each rooted component of FF. The tree-depth td(G)\operatorname{td}(G) of a graph GG is the minimum vertex-height of a rooted forest FF with V(F)=V(G)V(F)=V(G) such that GG is a subgraph of the closure of FF. If GG is connected, then td(G)=td¯(G)\operatorname{td}(G)=\operatorname{\overline{td}}(G). In fact, td(G)=td¯(G)\operatorname{td}(G)=\operatorname{\overline{td}}(G) unless GG has two connected components G_1G_{\_}1 and G_2G_{\_}2 with td(G_1)=td(G_2)=td(G)\operatorname{td}(G_{\_}1)=\operatorname{td}(G_{\_}2)=\operatorname{td}(G), in which case td¯(G)=td(G)+1\operatorname{\overline{td}}(G)=\operatorname{td}(G)+1..

Ossona de Mendez et al. [23] showed that td¯(H)\operatorname{\overline{td}}(H) is a lower bound for the defective chromatic number of 𝒢_H\mathcal{G}_{\_}H. In particular, for every graph HH,

td¯(H)1χ_Δ(𝒢_H).\operatorname{\overline{td}}(H)-1\leqslant\chi_{\_}{\Delta}(\mathcal{G}_{\_}H).

Ossona de Mendez et al. [23] conjectured that this inequality holds with equality. A partial answer to this conjecture was given by Norin et al. [22], who showed that the defective chromatic number of 𝒢_H\mathcal{G}_{\_}H, the clustered chromatic number of 𝒢_H\mathcal{G}_{\_}H, and the connected tree-depth of HH are tied. In particular,

td¯(H)1χ_Δ(𝒢_H)χ_(𝒢_H)2td¯(H)+14.\operatorname{\overline{td}}(H)-1\leqslant\chi_{\_}{\Delta}(\mathcal{G}_{\_}H)\leqslant\chi_{\_}{\star}(\mathcal{G}_{\_}H)\leqslant 2^{\operatorname{\overline{td}}(H)+1}-4. (1)

Norin et al. [22] also gave examples of graphs HH such that χ_(𝒢_H)2td¯(H)2\chi_{\_}{\star}(\mathcal{G}_{\_}H)\geqslant 2\operatorname{\overline{td}}(H)-2, and conjectured that χ_(𝒢_H)2td¯(H)2\chi_{\_}{\star}(\mathcal{G}_{\_}H)\leqslant 2\operatorname{\overline{td}}(H)-2 for every graph HH. Recently, Liu [16] proved the above conjecture of Ossona de Mendez et al. [23] which, together with a result in Liu and Oum [17], implies that for every graph HH,

td¯(H)1=χ_Δ(𝒢_H)χ_(𝒢_H)3χ_Δ(𝒢_H)3td¯(H)3.\operatorname{\overline{td}}(H)-1=\chi_{\_}{\Delta}(\mathcal{G}_{\_}H)\leqslant\chi_{\_}{\star}(\mathcal{G}_{\_}H)\leqslant 3\chi_{\_}{\Delta}(\mathcal{G}_{\_}H)\leqslant 3\operatorname{\overline{td}}(H)-3.

Now consider the defective and clustered chromatic numbers of 𝒢_Hodd\mathcal{G}_{\_}H^{\text{odd}}. We prove the following analogue of the above result of Norin et al. [22] for odd-minors.

Theorem 1.

For every graph HH,

χ_(𝒢_Hodd)32td¯(H)4.\chi_{\_}{\star}(\mathcal{G}_{\_}H^{\text{odd}})\leqslant 3\cdot 2^{\operatorname{\overline{td}}(H)}-4.

This implies that χ_Δ(𝒢_Hodd)\chi_{\_}{\Delta}(\mathcal{G}_{\_}H^{\text{odd}}) and χ_(𝒢_Hodd)\chi_{\_}{\star}(\mathcal{G}_{\_}H^{\text{odd}}) are tied to the connected tree-depth of HH. In particular,

td¯(H)1=χ_Δ(𝒢_H)χ_Δ(𝒢_Hodd)χ_(𝒢_Hodd)32td¯(H)4and\displaystyle\operatorname{\overline{td}}(H)-1=\chi_{\_}{\Delta}(\mathcal{G}_{\_}H)\leqslant\chi_{\_}{\Delta}(\mathcal{G}_{\_}H^{\text{odd}})\leqslant\chi_{\_}{\star}(\mathcal{G}_{\_}H^{\text{odd}})\leqslant 3\cdot 2^{\operatorname{\overline{td}}(H)}-4\quad\text{and}
td¯(H)1=χ_Δ(𝒢_H)χ_(𝒢_H)χ_(𝒢_Hodd)32td¯(H)4.\displaystyle\operatorname{\overline{td}}(H)-1=\chi_{\_}{\Delta}(\mathcal{G}_{\_}H)\leqslant\chi_{\_}{\star}(\mathcal{G}_{\_}H)\leqslant\chi_{\_}{\star}(\mathcal{G}_{\_}H^{\text{odd}})\leqslant 3\cdot 2^{\operatorname{\overline{td}}(H)}-4.

We conjecture the following improved upper bounds.

Conjecture 2.

For every graph HH,

χ_(𝒢_Hodd)2td¯(H)2andχ_Δ(𝒢_Hodd)=td¯(H)1.\chi_{\_}{\star}(\mathcal{G}_{\_}H^{\text{odd}})\leqslant 2\operatorname{\overline{td}}(H)-2\quad\text{and}\quad\chi_{\_}{\Delta}(\mathcal{G}_{\_}H^{\text{odd}})=\operatorname{\overline{td}}(H)-1.

Liu and Wood [18] proved that for every graph HH and for all integers s,ts,t\in\mathbb{N}, every HH-odd-minor-free K_s,tK_{\_}{s,t}-subgraph-free graph is (2s+1)(2s+1)-colourable with clustering at most some function f(H,s,t)f(H,s,t). With s=1s=1 this says that for every graph HH and integer tt, every HH-odd-minor-free graph with maximum degree less than tt is 3-colourable with clustering at most some function f(H,t)f(H,t). This implies that χ_(𝒢_Hodd)3χ_Δ(𝒢_Hodd)\chi_{\_}{\star}(\mathcal{G}_{\_}H^{\text{odd}})\leqslant 3\,\chi_{\_}{\Delta}(\mathcal{G}_{\_}H^{\text{odd}}).

2 Proof

We now work towards proving Theorem 1. Our proof uses the same strategy that Norin et al. [22] used to prove (1) with some modifications in the odd-minor-free setting.

We need the following definition. A tree-decomposition of a graph GG is a collection 𝒲=(W_x:xV(T)){\mathcal{W}=(W_{\_}x\colon x\in V(T))} of subsets of V(G){V(G)} indexed by the nodes of a tree TT such that (a) for every edge vwE(G){vw\in E(G)}, there exists a node xV(T){x\in V(T)} with v,wW_x{v,w\in W_{\_}x}; and (b) for every vertex vV(G){v\in V(G)}, the set {xV(T):vW_x}{\{x\in V(T)\colon v\in W_{\_}x\}} induces a non-empty (connected) subtree of TT. The width of 𝒲\mathcal{W} is max{|W_x|:xV(T)}1{\max\{\lvert W_{\_}x\rvert\colon x\in V(T)\}-1}. The treewidth tw(G)\operatorname{tw}(G) of a graph GG is the minimum width of a tree-decomposition of GG. Treewidth is the standard measure of how similar a graph is to a tree. Indeed, a connected graph has treewidth at most 1 if and only if it is a tree.

The following result due to Demaine et al. [2] allows us to work in the bounded treewidth setting.

Lemma 3 ([2]).

For every graph HH, there exists a constant ww\in\mathbb{N} such that every HH-odd-minor-free graph GG has a 22-colouring where each monochromatic component has treewidth at most ww.

The following Erdős-Pósa type result is folklore (see [9, Lemma 9] which implies this).

Lemma 4.

For every graph GG, for every collection \mathcal{F} of connected subgraphs of GG, and for every \ell\in\mathbb{N}, either:

  1. \edefcmrcmr\edefmm\edefitn(a\edefcmrcmr\edefmm\edefitn)

    there are \ell vertex-disjoint subgraphs in \mathcal{F}, or

  2. \edefcmrcmr\edefmm\edefitn(b\edefcmrcmr\edefmm\edefitn)

    there is a set SV(G)S\subseteq V(G) of size at most (1)(tw(G)+1)(\ell-1)(\operatorname{tw}(G)+1) such that SV(F)S\cap V(F)\neq\varnothing for all FF\in\mathcal{F}.

For h,dh,d\in\mathbb{N}, let U_h,dU_{\_}{h,d} be the closure of the complete dd-ary tree of vertex-height hh. Observe that U_h,dU_{\_}{h,d} has connected tree-depth hh. Moreover, for every graph HH of connected tree-depth at most hh, HH is isomorphic to a subgraph of U_h,dU_{\_}{h,d} for d=|V(H)|d=|V(H)|. So to prove Theorem 1, it suffices to do so for U_h,dU_{\_}{h,d} for all h,dh,d\in\mathbb{N}.

The next definition is critical in allowing us to lift the proof of Norin et al. [22] from the minor-free setting to the odd-minor-free setting. Say an HH-model (T_x:xV(H))(T_{\_}x:x\in V(H)) in GG is non-trivial if |V(T_x)|2|V(T_{\_}x)|\geqslant 2 for each xV(H)x\in V(H). Non-trivial models have been previously studied, for example, in [7]. The next lemma is the heart of the paper.

Lemma 5.

For all d,h,wd,h,w\in\mathbb{N}, every graph GG with treewidth at most ww that does not contain a non-trivial odd U_h,dU_{\_}{h,d}-model is (32h12)(3\cdot 2^{h-1}-2)-colourable with clustering at most dw+dwdw+d-w.

Proof.

We proceed by induction on hh. In the base case h=1h=1, we have U_1,dK_1U_{\_}{1,d}\cong K_{\_}1, implying GG contains no tree on at least two vertices, and thus E(G)=E(G)=\varnothing. Hence GG can be coloured with 1=321121=3\cdot 2^{1-1}-2 colour with clustering 11.

Now assume h2h\geqslant 2 and the claim holds for h1h-1. Without loss of generality, we may assume that GG is connected. Fix rV(G)r\in V(G). For each i_0i\in\mathbb{N}_{\_}0, let V_i:-{vV(G):dist_G(v,r)=i}V_{\_}i\coloneq\{v\in V(G):\operatorname{dist}_{\_}G(v,r)=i\}. We refer to each V_iV_{\_}i as a layer. Fix i1i\geqslant 1 where V_iV_{\_}i\neq\varnothing, and let u_iV_iu_{\_}i\in V_{\_}i. Let \mathcal{M} be the collection of all non-trivial odd U_h1,dU_{\_}{h-1,d}-models in G[V_i{u_i}]G[V_{\_}i\setminus\{u_{\_}i\}], and let :-{G:}\mathcal{F}\coloneq\{G\langle\mathcal{H}\rangle:\mathcal{H}\in\mathcal{M}\}. Each element of \mathcal{F} is a connected subgraph of G[V_i{u_i}]G[V_{\_}i\setminus\{u_{\_}i\}] since U_h1,dU_{\_}{h-1,d} is connected.

Suppose that \mathcal{F} contains dd pairwise vertex-disjoint subgraphs G_1,,G_dG\langle\mathcal{H}_{\_}1\rangle,\dots,G\langle\mathcal{H}_{\_}d\rangle. Then each _j\mathcal{H}_{\_}j is a non-trivial odd U_h1,dU_{\_}{h-1,d}-model in G[V_i{u_i}]G[V_{\_}i\setminus\{u_{\_}i\}]. Say _j=(T_x(j):xV(U_h1,d))\mathcal{H}_{\_}j=(T_{\_}x^{(j)}\colon x\in V(U_{\_}{h-1,d})). Let c_jc_{\_}j be a red–blue colouring of G_jG\langle\mathcal{H}_{\_}j\rangle that witnesses _j\mathcal{H}_{\_}j being odd. Since _j\mathcal{H}_{\_}j is non-trivial, T_x(j)T_{\_}x^{(j)} contains both a red vertex and a blue vertex for each xV(U_h1,d)x\in V(U_{\_}{h-1,d}). Let TT be a spanning tree of G[V_0V_i1{u_i}]G[V_{\_}0\cup\dots\cup V_{\_}{i-1}\cup\{u_{\_}i\}] rooted at rr, where for each non-root vertex uV(T)V_ju\in V(T)\cap V_{\_}j there is exactly one edge uwuw in TT with wV(T)V_j1w\in V(T)\cap V_{\_}{j-1}. Then |V(T)|2|V(T)|\geqslant 2. Moreover, there is a proper 22-colouring c_Tc_{\_}T of TT where each vertex in V_i1V_{\_}{i-1} is coloured red. Since every vertex in V_iV_{\_}i has a neighbour in V_i1V_{\_}{i-1}, for each xV(H)x\in V(H) and j[d]j\in[d], each red vertex in T_x(j)T_{\_}x^{(j)} is adjacent to a red vertex in TT. Observe that U_h,dU_{\_}{h,d} can be constructed by taking dd disjoint copies of U_h1,dU_{\_}{h-1,d} plus a dominant vertex. By taking _1,,_d\mathcal{H}_{\_}1,\dots,\mathcal{H}_{\_}d together with TT and all the edges between G_1G_dG\langle\mathcal{H}_{\_}1\rangle\cup\dots\cup G\langle\mathcal{H}_{\_}d\rangle and V_i1V_{\_}{i-1}, it follows that GG contains a non-trivial U_h,dU_{\_}{h,d}-model =(T_x:xV(U_h,d))\mathcal{H}=(T_{\_}x\colon x\in V(U_{\_}{h,d})). Furthermore, let c(v):=c_T(v)c(v):=c_{\_}T(v) for all vV(T)v\in V(T) and c(w):-c_j(w)c(w)\coloneq c_{\_}j(w) for all wV(G_j)w\in V(G\langle\mathcal{H}_{\_}j\rangle) and j[d]j\in[d]. Then cc witnesses that \mathcal{H} is odd, a contradiction.

Thus \mathcal{F} does not contain dd pairwise vertex-disjoint subgraphs. By Lemma 4 applied to \mathcal{F}, there is a set S_iV_iS_{\_}i\subseteq V_{\_}i such that |S_i|(d1)(w+1)|S_{\_}i|\leqslant(d-1)(w+1) and G[V_i(S_i{u_i})]G[V_{\_}i\setminus(S_{\_}i\cup\{u_{\_}i\})] contains no subgraph in \mathcal{F}. Hence G[V_i(S{u_i})]G[V_{\_}i\setminus(S\cup\{u_{\_}i\})] contains no non-trivial odd U_h1,dU_{\_}{h-1,d}-model. By induction, G[V_i(S_i{u_i})]G[V_{\_}i\setminus(S_{\_}i\cup\{u_{\_}i\})] can be (32h22)(3\cdot 2^{h-2}-2)-coloured with clustering dw+dwdw+d-w. Use a new colour for the vertices in S_i{u_i}S_{\_}i\cup\{u_{\_}i\}. So G[V_i]G[V_{\_}i] can be (32h21)(3\cdot 2^{h-2}-1)-coloured with clustering at most dw+dwdw+d-w. Moreover, G[V_0]G[V_{\_}0] can be 11-coloured with clustering 11 since |V_0|=1|V_{\_}0|=1. By alternating the colour sets used for each layer, it follows that GG can be coloured with 2(32h21)=32h122(3\cdot 2^{h-2}-1)=3\cdot 2^{h-1}-2 colours and with clustering at most dw+dwdw+d-w, as required. ∎

We are now ready to prove our main result.

Proof of Theorem 1.

Let GG be an HH-odd-minor-free graph. Then GG is U_td¯(H),dU_{\_}{\operatorname{\overline{td}}(H),d}-odd-minor-free for d=|V(H)|d=|V(H)|. By Lemma 3, there exists an integer w=w(td¯(H),d)w=w(\operatorname{\overline{td}}(H),d) such that GG has a red–blue colouring where each monochromatic component of GG has treewidth at most ww. Since GG is U_td¯(H),dU_{\_}{\operatorname{\overline{td}}(H),d}-odd-minor-free, GG contains no non-trivial odd U_td¯(H),dU_{\_}{\operatorname{\overline{td}}(H),d}-model. By Lemma 5, each monochromatic component of GG can be (32td¯(H)12)(3\cdot 2^{\operatorname{\overline{td}}(H)-1}-2)-coloured with clustering dw+dwdw+d-w. Using distinct colour sets for the red and blue components of GG, we conclude that GG can be (32td¯(H)4)(3\cdot 2^{\operatorname{\overline{td}}(H)}-4)-coloured with clustering dw+dwdw+d-w. Hence, χ_(𝒢_Hodd)32td¯(H)4\chi_{\_}{\star}(\mathcal{G}_{\_}H^{\text{odd}})\leqslant 3\cdot 2^{\operatorname{\overline{td}}(H)}-4. ∎

Acknowledgements

Theorem 1 was first published in the Ph.D. thesis of the second author [11]. This result was independently discovered at the IBS-MATRIX “Structural Graph Theory Downunder III” workshop at the Mathematical Research Institute MATRIX (April 2023).

References