Multipartite Ramsey number
Abstract.
Assume that be a complete, multipartite graph consisting of partite sets and vertices in each partite set. For given graphs , the multipartite Ramsey number (M-R-number) is the smallest integer such that for any -edge-coloring of the edges of , contains a monochromatic copy of for at least one . The size of M-R-number for and , the size of M-R-number for and , the size of M-R-number , for each , the size of M-R-number for and and the size of M-R-number for and have been computed in several papers up to now. In this article we obtain the values of M-R-number , for each and each .
Key words and phrases:
Ramsey numbers, Multipartite Ramsey numbers, Stripes.2010 Mathematics Subject Classification:
05D10, 05C55.1. Introduction
After Erdös and Rado published the paper [5] in 1956, Ramsey theory has recived attention of many mathematicians because of its vast range of application in several fields such as graph theory, number theory, geometry, and logic [14]. The classical Ramsey problem states that given numbers , any -edge-coloring of any sufficiently large complete graph contains a monochromatic complete subgraph with vertices colored with the th color, and ask for the minimum number satisfying this property. However, there is no loss to work in any class of graphs and their subgraphs instead of complete graphs. One can refer to [1, 2], and [7] and it references for further studies.
Assume that be a complete and multipartite graph consisting of partite sets and vertices in each partite set. For given graphs , the M-R-number is the smallest integer , so that for any -edge-coloring of the edges of , contains a monochromatic copy of for at least on .
In [3], Burgeet et al. studied the M-R-number , where both and are a complete multipartite graphs. Recently the M-R-number has been studied for special classes of graphs, see [13, 11, 4, 6] and its references, which can be naturally extent to several colors, see [20, 17, 19, 21, 10, 9]. The M-R-number , for where is a or a is determined in [12]. In [8], aouthers determined the M-R-number where and . The values of M-R-number where and determined in [18] and the values of M-R-number where and computed in [16]. The size of M-R-number for and and the size of M-R-number for and have been computed in [15].
In this article we obtain the values of M-R-number , for and small , also we obtain some bounds of M-R-number , where and . In particular we prove the following results:
Theorem 1.
For each positive integer , and , we have:
All the graphs considered in this paper are undirected, simple, and finite graphs. The order of a graph is defined by , which denote the set of vertices of . A stripe of a graph is defined as a set of edges without common vertex. For a vertex , the degree and neighbours of are denoted by and , respectively. The neighbourhood of a vertex is defined by . A cycle on vertices is denoted by . We use to denote the set of edges between partite sets and . The complement of a graph is denoted by . The join of two graphs and , defined by , is a graph obtained from and by joining each vertex of to all vertices of . The union of two graphs and , define by , is a graph obtain from and , where and . For convenience, we use instead of . is -colorable to if there exist a -edge decomposition of , say where for each
2. Proof of Theorem 1
2.1. Some results in term of the M-M-numbers related to stripes versus .
In this section, we prove some results in term of the size Multipartite Ramsey numbers related to stripes versus . We begin with the following theorem:
As any -bipartite graph is -free, we get the size of M-R-number , for each in the next theorem.
Theorem 3.
For each positive integers , where and , we have the following:
Suppose that be positive integer, in the next two results we get the exact value of M-R-number , for each and .
Lemma 4.
For each positive integer :
Proof.
For it is clear that , hence assume that . By considering it can be check that . As and any part of has two vertices, it is easy to say that in any two coloring of the edges of say , either or . Hence for each and . ∎
Theorem 5.
For each positive integers and :
Proof.
For , the proof is complete by Lemma 4, hence assume that . Let and consider -edge-coloring of , where and . It is easy to say that is a -partite graph with vertices in the first part and vertices in the second part. That is . By definition , it can be check that and , that is is 2-colorable to , which means that for each and each .
We prove by induction on . For theorem holds by Lemma 4. Assume that for each, , the theorem holds. By contrary suppose that with partite sets for each is -colorable to , that is there exist 2-edge-coloring of , where and . Without loss of generality (w.l.g) assume that . Now, set for each , and consider . Consider a 2-edge-coloring of . As , , one can check that . Suppose that be a M-M in . Therefore, be a matching of size in , a contradiction. Which means that , for each . Therefore for each and each , and the proof is complete. ∎
Suppose that , it is clear that . Also by considering it can be check that and as has two disjoint copy of it is easy to say that in any two coloring of the edges of say , either or . Hence . Now assume that , in the following results we get the exact value of M-R-number , for each and each . We begin with the following theorem:
Theorem 6.
Suppose that , then:
Proof.
Consider a -edge-coloring of , where , and . It is easy to say that is a -partite graph with vertices in parts and vertices in one parts. That is . By definition , one can check that , also as for each , hence it can be say that , that is is 2-colorable to , which means that for each .
Now for each , consider with partite sets for each . Suppose that be a 2-edge-coloring of , where . Assume that and w.l.g let that . Now, set for and for each , and consider . It can be check that , therefore . Consider a 2-edge-coloring of . As by Theorem 5 , , and , one can check that . Suppose that be a M-M in . Therefore, is a matching of size in , which means that . Since by Theorem 5 for each , then for by the proof is same as the case that , we have , so the proof is complete. ∎
It is clear that for each also it is clear that for each . In the following results we get a general lower bounds of M-R-number , for each and each .
Theorem 7.
Suppose that and , then:
Proof.
Consider a -edge-coloring of , where , , and . It is easy to say that is a -partite graph with vertices in parts and vertices in the last parts. That is . By definition , one can check that , also as and , then one can say that for each and each , hence , that is is 2-colorable to , which means that for each and each . ∎
2.2. Size Multipartite Ramsey numbers related to stripes versus
In this section, we obtain the values of M-R-number for each and . By Theorem 3 we have for , also by Lemma 4 and Theorem 5 we have for each , and by Theorem 6 we have for each . It can be check that for each also it is clear that for each and . Hence assume that and . In the following results we get the size of M-R-number , for each .
Theorem 8.
Suppose that , then:
Proof.
By Theorem 7 the lower bound holds. So we most show that . We prove by induction on . For theorem holds by Theorem 6. Assume that for each, , the theorem holds. By contrary suppose that with partite sets for each and is -colorable to , that is there exist 2-edge-coloring of , where and . For each , if , then it can be check that . Therefor assume that for each , and set for each . Now consider . Consider a 2-edge-coloring of . As , , one can check that . Suppose that be a copy of in . Therefore, as and , one can say that there is at least one edges of say , so that , where . So is a matching of size in , a contradiction. Which means that , for each where . Now assume that for some . Hence, it can be check that . Set for each . Consider and let be a 2-edge-coloring of . As , , one can check that where . Suppose that be a M-M in . If , then, as and , one can say that there is at least one edges of say , so that , where . So is a matching of size in , a contradiction. Hence assume that . Now, as , and it is easy to say that the following claim is true:
Claim 9.
For each , where , there exist at lest one vertex of say , so that .
Proof.
As, we have , that is is even. Also we have . Therefore as we have . Hence, for each , where , it can be say that . Which means that for each there exist a vertex of say , so that . ∎
Therefore, since , by Claim 9, and by pigeon-hole principle, there exist three partition of , say , so that for each there exist a vertex of say so that not belongs to . W.l.g assume that and for each . Set . Therefore, it can be check that . Therefore . Consider a 2-edge-coloring of . As by Lemma 4, , , and , one can check that . Suppose that be a M-M in . Therefore, is a matching of size in , which means that where . Therefore for each we have . Which means that for each , and the proof is complete. ∎
Theorem 10.
Suppose that and . Given that , then:
Proof.
To prove consider with partite sets for each and . Suppose that is -colorable to , that is there exist 2-edge-coloring of , where and . Thus where , , so it can be check that . As and , where ba a M-M in , then one can show that the following claim is true:
Claim 11.
There exists at least vertices of , say so that the vertices of not belongs to .
Proof.
It can be check that , hence , as , we have , and the proof of claim is complete. ∎
If either for at least four parts of or , then one can check that , a contradiction. Hence, let , as and , we can assume that for three . W.l.g let for each . As , it can be check that . Also as and , it is easy to say that there exist at least one edges of say , so that for . Therefore w.l.g let and . Now, by considering and , where is the vertices of not belongs to , we have the following claim:
Claim 12.
W.l.g. let . If , then . If , then and if , then and have the same neighbor in .
Proof.
By contradiction. Suppose that and , in this case, we set . Clearly, is a matching with , which contradicts the . If and has a different neighbor then the proof is same. ∎
Therefore by Claim 12 it can be check that for at least one , there exist at least one vertex of , say , so that . Hence . So, one can check that , a contradiction again. So, we have for each and . Therefore by Theorem 7, we have for each and , which means that the proof is complete.
∎
Combining Theorems 3, 5, 6, 8, and 10, and Lemma 4 we obtain the next theorem which characterize the exact value of the M-R-number for each and each as follows:
Theorem 13.
If , and , then:
2.3. Size Multipartite Ramsey numbers related to stripes versus
In this section, we obtain the values of M-R-number for each and . By Theorem 5 we have for , also by Lemma 4 and Theorem 5 we have for each , and by Theorem 6 we have for each . It can be check that for each . Now suppose that and be positive integers, it is clear that . Also by considering it can be check that and as has two disjoint copy of it is easy to say that in any two coloring of the edges of say , either or . Hence . In the following results we get the exact value of M-R-number , for each . We begin with the following theorem:
Theorem 14.
For each , we have:
Proof.
Consider a -edge-coloring of , where , and . It is easy to say that is a -partite graph with vertices in parts and vertices in the last parts. That is . By definition , one can check that , also as for each , hence . Which means that is 2-colorable to , that is for each .
Now,let with partite sets . Consider 2-edge-coloring of , where . Now we consider three cases as follow:
Case 1: . As and , we can say that . As, and , then it can be check that the following claim is true:
Claim 15.
For each , where , there exists two vertex of say , so that .
Also as , one can say that there exist two parts of say so that all vertices of and lie in , where ba a M-M in . W.l.g assume that . Therefore by Claim 15 for each we have , where be the vertices of that is not belongs to . W.l.g assume that for each . Hence, it can say that . Since for , and , it is easy to check that there exist at least one edges of say , so that . Therefore w.l.g let . Hence by the proof is same as proof of Claim 12 it can be check that, there exist at least one vertex of , say , so that . Hence . So, one can check that , a contradiction again. Which means that .
Case 2: . As and , we can say that for ( for the proof is same). Therefore the proof is same as the Case 1.
Hence by Cease 1,2 we have the proof is complete.
∎
Theorem 16.
For each , we have:
Proof.
Consider a -edge-coloring of , where and , and . It is easy to say that is a -partite graph with vertices in parts and vertices in the last parts. That is . By definition , one can check that , also as for each , hence one can check that and , that is is 2-colorable to , which means that for each .
Now, for each , let with partite sets where . Consider 2-edge-coloring of , where . We prove by induction on , for theorem holds by Theorem 6 and 14. Assume that for each, , the theorem holds. Now we consider two cases as follow:
Case 1: . Hence we have , therefore by induction, as and , we can say that , where for each and . As, and , then it can be check that , which means that the proof is complete.
Case 2: . Hence we have , therefore by induction, as and , we can say that . As, and , then it can be check that the following claim is true:
Claim 17.
For each , where , there exist at lest two vertex of say , so that .
Also as , one can say that there exist two parts of say so that all vertices of and lie in , where ba a M-M in . W.l.g assume that . Therefore by Claim 17 for each we have , where be the vertices of that is not belongs to . W.l.g assume that for each . Hence, it can say that . Since for , and and , it is easy to check that there exist at least one edges of between and . Therefore w.l.g let . Hence by the proof is same as proof of Claim 12 it can be check that, there exist at least one vertex of , say , so that . Hence . So, one can check that , a contradiction again. Which means that .
Hence by Cease 1,2 we have the proof is complete.
∎
It can be say that for each . In the following results we get the exact value of M-R-number , for each and each .
Theorem 18.
Suppose that and . Given that , then:
Proof.
To prove consider with partite sets for each and . Suppose that is -colorable to , that is there exist 2-edge-coloring of , where and . Thus where , , so it can be check that . As and where ba a M-M in , then one can show that the following claim is true:
Claim 19.
There exists at least vertices of , say so that the vertices of not belongs to .
Proof.
It can be check that , hence , as we have , and the proof of claim is complete. ∎
If for at least five parts of , then one can check that , a contradiction. Hence as and , we can assume that for four . W.l.g let for each . As , and if it can be check that , a contradiction. Hence assume that . So, one can so that . Also as and , it is easy to say that there exist at least one edges of say , so that for each . Therefore w.l.g let and . Now, by considering and , where is the vertices of not belongs to , we have the following claim:
Claim 20.
W.l.g. let . If , then . If , then and if , then and have the same neighbor in .
Proof.
By contradiction. Suppose that and , in this case, we set . Clearly, is a matching with , which contradicts the . If and has a different neighbor then the proof is same. ∎
Therefore by Claim 20 it can be check that for at least one , there exist at least one vertex of , say , so that . Hence . So, one can check that , a contradiction again. So, we have for each and .
∎
Combining Theorems 14, 16 and 18, we obtain the next theorem which characterize the exact value of the M-R-number for and each as follows:
Theorem 21.
If , and , then:
2.4. General results
Theorem 22.
Suppose that , and . Given that , then:
Proof.
To prove consider with partite sets for each and . Suppose that is -colorable to , that is there exist 2-edge-coloring of , where and . Thus where , , so it can be check that . As and where ba a M-M in , then one can show that the following claim is true:
Claim 23.
There exists at least vertices of , say so that the vertices of not belongs to .
Proof.
It can be check that , hence , as we have , and the proof of claim is complete. ∎
If for at least parts of , then one can check that , a contradiction. Hence as and , we can assume that for parts. W.l.g let for each . As , and if it can be check that , a contradiction. Hence assume that . So it can be check that . Also as and , it is easy to say that there exist at least one edges of say , so that for . Therefore w.l.g let and . Now, by considering and , where is the vertices of not belongs to , we have the following claim:
Claim 24.
W.l.g. let . If , then . If , then and if , then and have the same neighbor in .
Proof.
By contradiction. Suppose that and , in this case, we set . Clearly, is a matching with , which contradicts the . If and has a different neighbor then the proof is same. ∎
Therefore by Claim 24 it can be check that for at least one , there exist at least one vertex of , say , so that . Hence . So, one can check that , a contradiction again. So, we have for each and .
∎
References
- [1] Lane Barton IV. Ramsey theory. Walla walla: Whitman College, 2016.
- [2] Fabrıcio Siqueira Benevides. A multipartite ramsey number for odd cycles. Journal of Graph Theory, 71(3):293–316, 2012.
- [3] Alewyn P Burger and Jan H van Vuuren. Ramsey numbers in complete balanced multipartite graphs. part ii: Size numbers. Discrete mathematics, 283(1-3):45–49, 2004.
- [4] AP Burger, PJP Grobler, EH Stipp, and JH van Vuuren. Diagonal ramsey numbers in multipartite graphs. Utilitas Mathematica, 66:137–164, 2004.
- [5] Paul Erdös and Richard Rado. A partition calculus in set theory. Bulletin of the American Mathematical Society, 62(5):427–489, 1956.
- [6] Mostafa Gholami and Yaser Rowshan. The bipartite ramsey numbers {}. arXiv preprint arXiv:2108.02630, 2021.
- [7] András Gyárfás, Gábor N Sárközy, and Richard H Schelp. Multipartite ramsey numbers for odd cycles. Journal of Graph Theory, 61(1):12–21, 2009.
- [8] Chula Janak Jayawardene, Edy Tri Baskoro, Lilanthi Samarasekara, and Syafrizal Sy. Size multipartite ramsey numbers for stripes versus small cycles. Electronic Journal of Graph Theory and Applications, 4(2):157–170, 2016.
- [9] R Lakshmi and DG Sindhu. Three-colour bipartite ramsey number r_b (g_1, g_2, p_3). Electron. J. Graph Theory Appl., 8(1):195–204, 2020.
- [10] Tomasz Łuczak and Joanna Polcyn. The multipartite ramsey number for the 3-path of length three. Discrete Mathematics, 341(5):1270–1274, 2018.
- [11] Anie Lusiani, Edy Tri Baskoro, and Suhadi Wido Saputro. On size multipartite ramsey numbers for stars versus paths and cycles. Electronic Journal of Graph Theory and Applications, 2017.
- [12] Anie Lusiani, Edy Tri Baskoro, and Suhadi Wido Saputro. On size multipartite ramsey numbers for stars versus paths and cycles. Electronic Journal of Graph Theory and Applications, 5(1):43–50, 2017.
- [13] Pablo H Perondi and Emerson L Monte Carmelo. Set and size multipartite ramsey numbers for stars. Discrete Applied Mathematics, 250:368–372, 2018.
- [14] Vera Rosta. Ramsey theory applications. the electronic journal of combinatorics, 1000:DS13–Dec, 2004.
- [15] Yaser Rowshan. The multipartite ramsey numbers . arXiv preprint arXiv:2109.12210, 2021.
- [16] Yaser Rowshan. The multipartite ramsey numbers . arXiv preprint arXiv:2109.02257, 2021.
- [17] Yaser Rowshan and Mostafa Gholami. A proof of a conjecture on ramsey numbers . arXiv preprint arXiv:2108.03572, 2021.
- [18] Yaser Rowshan, Mostafa Gholami, and Stanford Shateyi. The size, multipartite ramsey numbers for nk2 versus path–path and cycle. Mathematics, 9(7), 2021.
- [19] Syafrizal Sy. On size multipartite ramsey numbers for paths versus cycles of three or four vertices, far east journal appl. Math, 44:109–116, 2010.
- [20] Syafrizal Sy. On the size multipartite ramsey numbers for small path versus cocktail party graphs, far east journal appl. Math, 55(1):53–60, 2011.
- [21] Syafrizal Sy, ET Baskoro, S Uttunggadewa, and H Assiyatun. Path-path size multipartite ramsey numbers. Journal of Combinatorial Mathematics and Combinatorial Computing, 71:265, 2009.