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

Rainbow saturation for complete graphs

Debsoumya Chakraborti Discrete Mathematics Group, Institute for Basic Science (IBS), South Korea. E-mail: {debsoumya, kevinhendrey, benlund}@ibs.re.kr. Debsoumya Chakraborti, Kevin Hendrey, and Ben Lund were supported by the Institute for Basic Science (IBS-R029-C1).    Kevin Hendrey11footnotemark: 1    Ben Lund11footnotemark: 1    Casey Tompkins Rényi Institute, Hungary. E-mail: [email protected]. Casey Tompkins was supported by the National Research, Development and Innovation Office, NKFIH (K135800).
Abstract

We call an edge-colored graph rainbow if all of its edges receive distinct colors. An edge-colored graph Γ\Gamma is called HH-rainbow saturated if Γ\Gamma does not contain a rainbow copy of HH and adding an edge of any color to Γ\Gamma creates a rainbow copy of HH. The rainbow saturation number sat(n,(H))\operatorname{sat}(n,\mathcal{R}(H)) is the minimum number of edges in an nn-vertex HH-rainbow saturated graph. Girão, Lewis, and Popielarz conjectured that sat(n,(Kr))=2(r2)n+O(1)\operatorname{sat}(n,\mathcal{R}(K_{r}))=2(r-2)n+O(1) for fixed r3r\geq 3. Disproving this conjecture, we establish that for every r3r\geq 3, there exists a constant αr\alpha_{r} such that

r+Ω(r1/3)αrr+r1/2andsat(n,(Kr))=αrn+O(1).r+\Omega\left(r^{1/3}\right)\leq\alpha_{r}\leq r+r^{1/2}\qquad\text{and}\qquad\operatorname{sat}(n,\mathcal{R}(K_{r}))=\alpha_{r}n+O(1).

Recently, Behague, Johnston, Letzter, Morrison, and Ogden independently gave a slightly weaker upper bound which was sufficient to disprove the conjecture. They also introduced the weak rainbow saturation number, and asked whether this is equal to the rainbow saturation number of KrK_{r}, since the standard weak saturation number of complete graphs equals the standard saturation number. Surprisingly, our lower bound separates the rainbow saturation number from the weak rainbow saturation number, answering this question in the negative. The existence of the constant αr\alpha_{r} resolves another of their questions in the affirmative for complete graphs. Furthermore, we show that the conjecture of Girão, Lewis, and Popielarz is true if we have an additional assumption that the edge-colored KrK_{r}-rainbow saturated graph must be rainbow. As an ingredient of the proof, we study graphs which are KrK_{r}-saturated with respect to the operation of deleting one edge and adding two edges.

1 Introduction

Throughout this paper, given graphs GG and HH we say that GG is HH-free if no subgraph of GG is isomorphic to HH. The following two ‘dual’ problems regarding HH-free graphs are well-studied in extremal combinatorics. The classical extremal problem asks for the maximum number, denoted by ex(n,H)\mathrm{ex}(n,H), of edges in an nn-vertex HH-free graph. Turán [37] solved this problem completely when HH is a complete graph KrK_{r}. The graph saturation problem asks for the minimum number of edges in a maximal111maximal with respect to the subgraph relationship. HH-free graph with fixed number of vertices. The following three notions of graph saturation have appeared in the literature numerous times throughout the last half a century.

  • A graph GG is called HH-saturated if GG is a maximal HH-free graph, i.e., GG is HH-free and adding any edge to GG creates a copy of HH. The saturation number sat(n,H)\operatorname{sat}(n,H) denotes the minimum number of edges in an nn-vertex HH-saturated graph.

  • A graph GG is called HH-semisaturated if adding any edge to GG creates a new copy of HH. The semisaturation number ssat(n,H)\operatorname{ssat}(n,H) denotes the minimum number of edges in an nn-vertex HH-semisaturated graph.

  • A graph GG is called weakly HH-saturated if there is an ordering e1,e2,,ete_{1},e_{2},\ldots,e_{t} of the non-edges of GG such that for every i{1,2,,t}i\in\{1,2,\ldots,t\}, the graph (V(G),E(G){e1,e2,,ei})(V(G),E(G)\cup\{e_{1},e_{2},\ldots,e_{i}\}) contains a copy of HH using the edge eie_{i}. The weak-saturation number wsat(n,H)\operatorname{wsat}(n,H) denotes the minimum number of edges in an nn-vertex weakly HH-saturated graph.

Observe that for every graph HH, the following holds:

sat(n,H)ssat(n,H)wsat(n,H).\operatorname{sat}(n,H)\geq\operatorname{ssat}(n,H)\geq\operatorname{wsat}(n,H). (1)

The first result on graph saturation was obtained by Zykov [38] and independently by Erdős, Hajnal, and Moon [14]. They proved that the unique nn-vertex KrK_{r}-saturated graph with sat(n,Kr)\operatorname{sat}(n,K_{r}) edges is Kr2+Knr+2¯K_{r-2}+\overline{K_{n-r+2}}, the join of Kr2K_{r-2} and an independent set of size nr+2n-r+2. It is also well-known (see [2, 6, 7, 34]) that for complete graphs KrK_{r}, the inequalities in Eq. 1 in fact hold with equality.

Theorem 1.1 (Bollobas [6], Erdős–Hajnal–Moon [14], Zykov [38]).

For every nr2n\geq r-2,

sat(n,Kr)=ssat(n,Kr)=wsat(n,Kr)=(r2)(nr+2)+(r22).\operatorname{sat}(n,K_{r})=\operatorname{ssat}(n,K_{r})=\operatorname{wsat}(n,K_{r})=(r-2)(n-r+2)+\binom{r-2}{2}.

Moreover, the unique graph witnessing the saturation number of KrK_{r} is Kr2+Knr+2¯K_{r-2}+\overline{K_{n-r+2}}.

For more results and problems related to graph saturation, we refer the readers to the survey by Faudree, Faudree, and Schmitt [15].

In the setting of edge-colored graphs, a rainbow copy of a graph HH (denoted (H)\mathcal{R}(H)) is a graph isomorphic to HH whose edges are all assigned distinct colors. There is a long history of studying rainbow analogs of classical results in combinatorics in the setting of edge-colored graphs. To mention a few of them in the context of Turán-type extremal problems, see, e.g., [1, 10, 23, 28, 29] and the references therein. Graph saturation was first studied in the setting of edge-colorings with a bounded number of colors by Hanson and Toft [24], who focused on monochromatic cliques. In the same setting, Barrus, Ferrara, Vandenbussche, and Wenger [4] studied the saturation problem for rainbow copies of a given graph HH. Several further papers studied this problem for complete graphs and a few other simple graphs, such as paths, see, e.g., [4, 8, 17, 30].

In this paper, we focus on rainbow saturation problems in the setting of edge-colored graphs with infinitely many allowed colors (for concreteness, we can take the set of colors to be the set of natural numbers). An edge-colored graph Γ\Gamma is (H)\mathcal{R}(H)-saturated if it contains no (H)\mathcal{R}(H) subgraph and, for every non-edge ee and every color cc, adding ee to Γ\Gamma with color cc creates a copy of (H)\mathcal{R}(H). This version of rainbow saturation was first considered by Girão, Lewis, and Popielarz [22], who defined the rainbow saturation number sat(n,(H))\operatorname{sat}(n,\mathcal{R}(H)) to be the minimum number of edges in an edge-colored nn-vertex (H)\mathcal{R}(H)-saturated graph. Note that if an edge-colored graph is (Kr)\mathcal{R}(K_{r})-saturated, then the underlying graph (ignoring the edge-coloring) has the property that adding any edge creates a new copy of KrK_{r}. Thus, Theorem 1.1 implies that whenever nr2n\geq r-2, we have that sat(n,(Kr))ssat(n,Kr)=(r2)n(r12)\operatorname{sat}(n,\mathcal{R}(K_{r}))\geq\operatorname{ssat}(n,K_{r})=(r-2)n-\binom{r-1}{2}. Girão, Lewis, and Popielarz [22] conjectured the following.

Conjecture 1.2 ([22]).

For every r3r\geq 3, there exists a constant CrC_{r} depending only on rr such that, for any n2(r2)n\geq 2(r-2), we have

sat(n,(Kr))=2(r2)n+Cr.\operatorname{sat}(n,\mathcal{R}(K_{r}))=2(r-2)n+C_{r}.

This conjecture was speculated based on the following construction. Consider the join graph between an independent set of size n2(r2)n-2(r-2) and K2(r2)K_{2(r-2)} minus a perfect matching. Then, color all the edges with distinct colors. Disproving Conjecture 1.2 (it is also recently disproved in [5], however, we obtain a slightly better upper bound) and also improving upon the trivial lower bound obtained by applying Theorem 1.1, we obtain the following.

Theorem 1.3.

For each r3r\geq 3, there exist non-negative integers αr,βr\alpha_{r},\beta_{r}, and NN such that

  • (r2)+(1/2)(r2)1/31/2αr(r2)+r1(r-2)+(1/2)(r-2)^{1/3}-1/2\leq\alpha_{r}\leq(r-2)+\sqrt{r-1},

  • βr(αr2)\beta_{r}\leq\binom{\alpha_{r}}{2}, and

  • for all nNn\geq N, we have sat(n,(Kr))=αr(nαr)+βr.\operatorname{sat}(n,\mathcal{R}(K_{r}))=\alpha_{r}(n-\alpha_{r})+\beta_{r}.

We believe that the value of αr\alpha_{r} is closer to the upper bound; see the concluding remarks for a precise conjecture on this. For fixed rr, calculating αr\alpha_{r} amounts to solving a finite combinatorial problem, which we describe and analyze in Section 3. In particular, we prove the following easy lower bound on αr\alpha_{r}.

Proposition 1.4.

For each r3r\geq 3, the integer αr\alpha_{r} defined in Theorem 1.3 satisfies that

  1. 1.

    αrr1\alpha_{r}\geq r-1 and

  2. 2.

    αrr\alpha_{r}\geq r for every r5r\geq 5.

For sufficiently large nn, this proposition already allows us to determine sat(n,(Kr))\operatorname{sat}(n,\mathcal{R}(K_{r})) exactly for r{3,4,5}r\in\{3,4,5\} and to determine αr\alpha_{r} exactly for r{6,7,8,9}r\in\{6,7,8,9\} (see Theorem 3.9).

Behague, Johnston, Letzter, Morrison, and Ogden [5] asked whether, for each graph HH there exists a constant c(H)c(H) such that sat(n,H)=c(H)n+o(n)\operatorname{sat}(n,H)=c(H)n+o(n). Theorem 1.3 answers this question for complete graphs. We remark that the upper bound in Theorem 1.3 only disproves Conjecture 1.2 for r4r\geq 4. It turns out that Conjecture 1.2 is true for r=3r=3, as shown in Theorem 1.6.

Similar to ordinary saturation, we next define semisaturation and weak-saturation in the edge-colored setting. Define the rainbow semisaturation number ssat(n,(H))\operatorname{ssat}(n,\mathcal{R}(H)) to be the minimum number of edges in an edge-colored nn-vertex (H)\mathcal{R}(H)-semisaturated graph, where an edge-colored graph Γ\Gamma is called (H)\mathcal{R}(H)-semisaturated if adding any edge with any color to GG creates a copy of (H)\mathcal{R}(H). Note that there is a (H)\mathcal{R}(H)-semisaturated edge-colored graph with underlying graph GG if and only if (G)\mathcal{R}(G) is (H)\mathcal{R}(H)-semisaturated. On the other hand, Behague, Johnston, Letzter, Morrison, and Ogden [5] defined an edge-colored graph Γ\Gamma to be weakly (H)\mathcal{R}(H)-saturated if there exists an ordering of the non-edges e1,e2,,ete_{1},e_{2},\ldots,e_{t} of Γ\Gamma such that, for any list of c1,c2,,ctc_{1},c_{2},\ldots,c_{t} of distinct colors, the non-edges eie_{i} in color cic_{i} can be added to Γ\Gamma, one at a time, so that every added edge creates a new copy of (H)\mathcal{R}(H). Then, define wsat(n,(H))\operatorname{wsat}(n,\mathcal{R}(H)) to be the minimum number of edges in an edge-colored nn-vertex weakly (H)\mathcal{R}(H)-saturated graph.

As remarked by Behague, Johnston, Letzter, Morrison, and Ogden [5], the requirement to have distinct colors c1,c2,,ctc_{1},c_{2},\ldots,c_{t} excludes the possibility that all added edges have the same color, in which case the previously added edges do not contribute to making new copies of (H)\mathcal{R}(H), and the problem trivially reduces to rainbow semisaturation.

Similar to the case of ordinary saturation, we observe the following.

Observation 1.5.

For every graph HH, we have

sat(n,(H))ssat(n,(H))wsat(n,(H)).\operatorname{sat}(n,\mathcal{R}(H))\geq\operatorname{ssat}(n,\mathcal{R}(H))\geq\operatorname{wsat}(n,\mathcal{R}(H)).

By a similar argument as before, it is easy to see that ssat(n,(Kr))ssat(n,Kr)\operatorname{ssat}(n,\mathcal{R}(K_{r}))\geq\operatorname{ssat}(n,K_{r}). We precisely determine ssat(n,(Kr))\operatorname{ssat}(n,\mathcal{R}(K_{r})) for all rr and sufficiently large nn in the following theorem.

Theorem 1.6.

For every r3r\geq 3, there exists NN such that for all nNn\geq N, we have

ssat(n,(Kr))={sat(n,(K3))=2(n2),if r=3.(r1)(nr+1)+(r12),otherwise.\operatorname{ssat}(n,\mathcal{R}(K_{r}))=\begin{cases}\operatorname{sat}(n,\mathcal{R}(K_{3}))=2(n-2),&\text{if $r=3$}.\\ (r-1)(n-r+1)+\binom{r-1}{2},&\text{otherwise}.\end{cases}

Moreover, the equality is uniquely achieved by (K2¯+Kn2¯)\mathcal{R}(\overline{K_{2}}+\overline{K_{n-2}}) if r=3r=3 and by (Kr1+Kn+1r¯){\mathcal{R}(K_{r-1}+\overline{K_{n+1-r}})} otherwise.

Next, answering Question 6.2 of [5] in the negative, we show that rainbow versions of the weak-saturation and semisaturation numbers of complete graphs of order at least 55 are smaller than the rainbow saturation number by an additive linear factor. This behavior is different from the ordinary saturation numbers of complete graphs as mentioned in Theorem 1.1. As a simple corollary of Theorems 1.3, 1.4, 1.6 and 1.5, we obtain the following.

Corollary 1.7.

For every r5r\geq 5, there exists NN such that for all nNn\geq N, we have

sat(n,(Kr))n/2ssat(n,(Kr))wsat(n,(Kr)).\operatorname{sat}(n,\mathcal{R}(K_{r}))-n/2\geq\operatorname{ssat}(n,\mathcal{R}(K_{r}))\geq\operatorname{wsat}(n,\mathcal{R}(K_{r})).

Now, we turn our attention to proving a variant of Conjecture 1.2 with an extra condition. Notably, our constructions for the upper bound in Theorem 1.3 are not rainbow. In fact, we show that a modified version of 1.2 is correct, with the added hypothesis that no color appears more than once in the (Kr)\mathcal{R}(K_{r})-saturated graph. For any graph HH, let sat((Kn),(H))\operatorname{sat}(\mathcal{R}(K_{n}),\mathcal{R}(H)) denote the minimum number of edges in an nn-vertex graph GG such that (G)\mathcal{R}(G) is (H)\mathcal{R}(H)-saturated, if such a graph exists; otherwise, define sat((Kn),(H))\operatorname{sat}(\mathcal{R}(K_{n}),\mathcal{R}(H)) to be infinity222As an example, we show that sat((Kn),(K1,4))=\operatorname{sat}(\mathcal{R}(K_{n}),\mathcal{R}(K_{1,4}))=\infty for odd n5n\geq 5. Given an nn-vertex graph GG, observe that if (G)\mathcal{R}(G) is (K1,4)\mathcal{R}(K_{1,4})-free, then GG has no vertex of degree more than 33, and that some vertex vv has degree less than 33 since nn is odd. When adding an edge to (G)\mathcal{R}(G) incident to vv, at most one copy of K1,4K_{1,4} is created, and the color of the new edge may be chosen so that this copy is not rainbow.. Note that sat(n,(H))sat((Kn),(H))\operatorname{sat}(n,\mathcal{R}(H))\leq\operatorname{sat}(\mathcal{R}(K_{n}),\mathcal{R}(H)) for every graph HH. We have the following result.

Theorem 1.8.

For every r3r\geq 3, there exists NN such that for all nNn\geq N, we have

sat((Kn),(Kr))=2(r2)(nr+1).\operatorname{sat}(\mathcal{R}(K_{n}),\mathcal{R}(K_{r}))=2(r-2)(n-r+1).

Moreover, the equality is uniquely achieved by ((r2)K2¯+Kn+42r¯)\mathcal{R}(\overline{(r-2)K_{2}}+\overline{K_{n+4-2r}}), the rainbow the complete multipartite graph with r2r-2 parts of size 22 and one part of size n+42rn+4-2r.

To prove Theorems 1.6 and 1.8, we consider a variant of graph saturation that does not involve colors. A graph GG is (H,1)(H,1)-saturated if GG is HH-saturated, and it is not possible to remove an edge and add two new edges without creating a copy of HH (see the concluding remarks for a discussion on a natural generalization of this notion). Note that if GG is an nn-vertex HH-saturated graph with the maximum possible number of edges, then it is (H,1)(H,1)-saturated. Let sat1(n,H)\operatorname{sat}_{1}(n,H) denote the minimum number of edges in an nn-vertex (H,1)(H,1)-saturated graph.

We use the following variant of semisaturation to prove Theorem 1.6. A graph GG is (H,1)(H,1)-semisaturated if GG is HH-semisaturated, and it is not possible to remove an edge and add two new edges without creating a copy of HH. Let ssat1(n,H)\operatorname{ssat}_{1}(n,H) denote the minimum number of edges in an nn-vertex (H,1)(H,1)-semisaturated graph. The next statement highlights the relationship of (H,1)(H,1)-saturation with rainbow saturation.

Proposition 1.9.

For all graphs HH and GG, if (G)\mathcal{R}(G) is (H)\mathcal{R}(H)-semisaturated, then GG is (H,1)(H,1)-semisaturated. In particular, if (G)\mathcal{R}(G) is (H)\mathcal{R}(H)-saturated, then GG is (H,1)(H,1)-saturated.

In light of 1.9, our strategy to prove Theorem 1.6 is to simultaneously determine ssat1(n,Kr)\operatorname{ssat}_{1}(n,K_{r}) and ssat(n,(Kr))\operatorname{ssat}(n,\mathcal{R}(K_{r})), and our strategy to prove Theorem 1.8 is to simultaneously determine sat1(n,Kr)\operatorname{sat}_{1}(n,K_{r}) and sat((Kn),(Kr))\operatorname{sat}(\mathcal{R}(K_{n}),\mathcal{R}(K_{r})). Thus we also obtain the following results.

Theorem 1.10.

For every r3r\geq 3, there exists NN such that for all nNn\geq N, we have

ssat1(n,(Kr))={2(n2),if r=3.(r1)(nr+1)+(r12),otherwise.\operatorname{ssat}_{1}(n,\mathcal{R}(K_{r}))=\begin{cases}2(n-2),&\text{if $r=3$}.\\ (r-1)(n-r+1)+\binom{r-1}{2},&\text{otherwise}.\end{cases}

Moreover, the equality is uniquely achieved by K2¯+Kn2¯\overline{K_{2}}+\overline{K_{n-2}} if r=3r=3, and by Kr1+Knr+1¯K_{r-1}+\overline{K_{n-r+1}} otherwise.

Theorem 1.11.

For every r3r\geq 3, there exists NN such that for all nNn\geq N, we have

sat1(n,Kr)=2(r2)(nr+1).\operatorname{sat}_{1}(n,K_{r})=2(r-2)(n-r+1).

Moreover, the equality is uniquely achieved by (r2)K2¯+Kn+42r¯\overline{(r-2)K_{2}}+\overline{K_{n+4-2r}}.

A major ingredient of all of our results is a structural lemma which we prove in the next section. Aside from unifying our proofs, the advantage of this lemma is that it gives us a form of structural stability for constructions that are within a small number of edges of the optimal bounds we obtain. In particular, for sat1(n,Kr)\operatorname{sat}_{1}(n,K_{r}) (and also for sat((Kn),(Kr))\operatorname{sat}(\mathcal{R}(K_{n}),\mathcal{R}(K_{r}))), there is a unique construction within no(n)n-o(n) edges of the 11-saturation number. Conversely, for sat(n,(Kr))\operatorname{sat}(n,\mathcal{R}(K_{r})), we show in Section 3 that for nn sufficiently large in terms of rr, there are nn-vertex (Kr)\mathcal{R}(K_{r})-saturated edge-colored graphs with any desired number of edges between sat(n,(Kr))\operatorname{sat}(n,\mathcal{R}(K_{r})) and (n2)\binom{n}{2}.

Organization. In the next section, we prove the structural lemma that will be used to prove the main results of this paper. In Section 3, we prove Theorem 1.3. We also determine sat(n,Kr)\operatorname{sat}(n,K_{r}) for small values of rr, provide some explicit constructions, and prove some related results about (Kr)\mathcal{R}(K_{r})-saturated graphs. In Section 4, we prove 1.9 and Theorems 1.6, 1.8, 1.10, and 1.11, obtaining stability results for edge-minimal constructions. In Section 5, we finish with several concluding remarks, which include (i) a few open questions and conjectures, (ii) a natural extension of the function sat1(n,H)\operatorname{sat}_{1}(n,H) along with some preliminary observations.

Notation. For a positive integer ss, we use the standard notation [s][s] to denote the set {1,2,,s}\{1,2,\ldots,s\}. For a graph GG, we denote its vertex set by V(G)V(G), its edge set by E(G)E(G), and the maximum degree by Δ(G)\Delta(G). We denote by ω(G)\omega(G) the clique number of GG, which is the maximum order of a clique in GG. For a graph GG and a set SV(G)S\subseteq V(G), let G[S]G[S] denote the subgraph induced by SS and GSG-S denote the subgraph induced by V(G)SV(G)\setminus S. For sV(G)s\in V(G), we will write GsG-s instead of G{s}G-\{s\}. For a vertex vV(G)v\in V(G) we denote by NG(v)N_{G}(v) the set of neighbors of vv and by NG[v]N_{G}[v] the set {v}NG(v)\{v\}\cup N_{G}(v), and for a set SV(G)S\subseteq V(G) we denote by NG[S]N_{G}[S] the set {NG[v]:vS}\bigcup\{N_{G}[v]:v\in S\}. We may omit the subscripts if the graph is clear from the context. We use the same notation for edge-colored graphs, where a subgraph Λ\Lambda of an edge-colored graph Γ\Gamma inherits the restricted edge-coloring.

2 Central lemma

We start with a key lemma which we use to prove our main results (i.e., Theorems 1.3, 1.6, 1.8, 1.10, and 1.11) in this paper. Expanding on ideas used in [9, 11], this lemma determines the global structure of a graph with a linear number of edges based on some local forbidden substructures, which reduces all of the problems we consider to simpler problems. Not only does this unify the proofs of all of our main results, but it also gives us a form of structural stability each time we apply it. We expect that it may also be useful for providing lower bounds in other graph saturation problems.

Lemma 2.1.

Given positive integers kk and \ell and a positive real number ϵ\epsilon, there is some positive integer NN such that given nNn\geq N, an nn-vertex graph GG with at most (k+1ϵ)n(k+1-\epsilon)n edges and family \mathcal{F} of kk-vertex graphs, at least one of the following holds for some subset SV(G)S\subseteq V(G) of size kk:

  1. 1.

    there is some independent set XX in GSG-S of size at least \ell and some vXv\in X such that for every wX{v}w\in X\setminus\{v\}, we have that N(v)N(w)SN(v)\cap N(w)\subseteq S and G[N(v)N(w)]G[N(v)\cap N(w)] is not isomorphic to a graph in \mathcal{F}, or

  2. 2.

    SS is complete to V(G)SV(G)\setminus S and G[S]G[S] is isomorphic to a graph in \mathcal{F}.

When applying the above lemma, we will always show that the first condition is impossible and thus obtain the second condition, which gives a lower bound on the number of edges. We remark that the above lemma with ϵ=1\epsilon=1 is sufficient for our main results. However, allowing ϵ<1\epsilon<1 gives us information about constructions that are close to optimal, and in some cases, gives a stability result. We can interpret this lemma as giving a (k+1)no(n)(k+1)n-o(n) lower bound on the number of edges in an nn-vertex graph with no such set SS of size kk. For integers k1k\geq 1, 2\ell\geq 2, and n2(k+1)n\geq 2(k+1) the graph Kk+1,n(k+1)K_{k+1,n-(k+1)} has (k+1)n(k+1)2(k+1)n-(k+1)^{2} edges and does not satisfy either condition (regardless of the choice of \mathcal{F} or SS), since every pair of non-adjacent vertices has more than kk common neighbors and no set of kk vertices is complete to its complement. Thus our (k+1)no(n)(k+1)n-o(n) lower bound is tight up to the o(n)o(n) term. It would be nice to replace o(n)o(n) with a constant depending only on kk and \ell, and we suspect that this is possible.

Proof of Lemma 2.1.

Given NN sufficiently large, we will assume that the first condition fails and prove that the second condition holds.

We begin by defining Vbig(G)V_{\textrm{big}}(G) to be the set of vertices vv with d(v)n1/4d(v)\geq n^{1/4}, and Vsmall(G)=V(G)Vbig(G)V_{\textrm{small}}(G)=V(G)\setminus V_{\textrm{big}}(G). Let GkG_{k} be the graph with V(Gk):={vVsmall(G):|N(v)Vbig(G)|k}V(G_{k}):=\{v\in V_{\textrm{small}}(G):|N(v)\cap V_{\textrm{big}}(G)|\leq k\}, such that vertices vv and ww are adjacent if the distance from vv to ww in G[Vsmall(G)]G[V_{\textrm{small}}(G)] is at most 22.

Since GG has at most (k+1)n(k+1)n edges, we have |Vbig(G)|2(k+1)n3/4|V_{\textrm{big}}(G)|\leq 2(k+1)n^{3/4}. Note that by the definition of V(Gk)V(G_{k}), we have |E(G)|(k+1)|Vsmall(G)V(Gk)||E(G)|\geq(k+1)|V_{\textrm{small}}(G)\setminus V(G_{k})|, and so

|V(Gk)||Vsmall(G)|(k+1ϵ)n/(k+1)=ϵn/(k+1)|Vbig(G)|.|V(G_{k})|\geq|V_{\textrm{small}}(G)|-(k+1-\epsilon)n/(k+1)=\epsilon n/(k+1)-|V_{\textrm{big}}(G)|.

Note that Δ(Gk)<(n1/4)+n1/4(n1/41)=n\Delta(G_{k})<(n^{1/4})+n^{1/4}(n^{1/4}-1)=\sqrt{n}. For each vV(Gk)v\in V(G_{k}), define Bv:=V(Gk)B_{v}:=V(G_{k}) if G[N(v)Vbig(G)]G[N(v)\cap V_{\textrm{big}}(G)] is not isomorphic to a graph in \mathcal{F}, and otherwise define

Bv:={v}{wV(Gk):|N(w)N(v)Vbig(G)|<k}.B_{v}:=\{v\}\cup\{w\in V(G_{k}):|N(w)\cap N(v)\cap V_{\textrm{big}}(G)|<k\}.

If |Bv|>(1)(n+1)|B_{v}|>(\ell-1)(\sqrt{n}+1), then we can find an independent set X={v0,,v1}X=\{v_{0},\dots,v_{\ell-1}\} in Gk[Bv]G_{k}[B_{v}] by setting v0:=vv_{0}:=v and iteratively selecting viv_{i} for i[1]i\in[\ell-1] to be a vertex in BvNGk[{v0,,vi1}]B_{v}\setminus N_{G_{k}}[\{v_{0},\dots,v_{i-1}\}]. This is possible since |NGk[{v0,,vi1}]|i(Δ(Gk)+1)<|Bv||N_{G_{k}}[\{v_{0},\dots,v_{i-1}\}]|\leq i(\Delta(G_{k})+1)<|B_{v}|. Since XX is independent in GkG_{k}, we have NG(v0)NG(vi)NG(v0)Vbig(G)N_{G}(v_{0})\cap N_{G}(v_{i})\subseteq N_{G}(v_{0})\cap V_{\textrm{big}}(G) for all i[1]i\in[\ell-1], where the subset relation is strict if G[NG(v0)NG(vi)]G[N_{G}(v_{0})\cap N_{G}(v_{i})] is isomorphic to a graph in \mathcal{F}. Since all graphs in \mathcal{F} have kk vertices, the first condition of the lemma is satisfied (with S=N(v)Vbig(G)S=N(v)\cap V_{\textrm{big}}(G)).

We may therefore assume that |Bv|(1)(n+1)|B_{v}|\leq(\ell-1)(\sqrt{n}+1) for each vV(Gk)v\in V(G_{k}), and hence (given that nn is sufficiently large) for any pair of vertices v,vV(Gk)v,v^{\prime}\in V(G_{k}), there is some wV(Gk)(BvBv)w\in V(G_{k})\setminus(B_{v}\cup B_{v^{\prime}}). Thus,

k=|N(v)Vbig(G)|=|N(v)N(w)Vbig(G)|=|N(v)N(w)Vbig(G)|=|N(v)Vbig(G)|,k=|N(v)\cap V_{\textrm{big}}(G)|=|N(v)\cap N(w)\cap V_{\textrm{big}}(G)|=|N(v^{\prime})\cap N(w)\cap V_{\textrm{big}}(G)|=|N(v^{\prime})\cap V_{\textrm{big}}(G)|,

and G[N(v)Vbig(G)]G[N(v)\cap V_{\textrm{big}}(G)] is isomorphic to a graph in \mathcal{F}. It follows that there is a set SVbig(G)S\subseteq V_{\textrm{big}}(G) of size kk such that V(Gk)V(G_{k}) is complete to SS, and G[S]G[S] is isomorphic to a graph in \mathcal{F}. Note that by the definition of GkG_{k}, each vertex wV(Gk)w\in V(G_{k}) satisfies N(w)Vbig(G)=SN(w)\cap V_{\textrm{big}}(G)=S.

Now suppose there is a vertex vVsmall(G)V(Gk)v\in V_{\textrm{small}}(G)\setminus V(G_{k}) which is not adjacent to every vertex of SS. We construct an independent set X={v0,,v1}X=\{v_{0},\dots,v_{\ell-1}\} in G[V(Gk){v}]G[V(G_{k})\cup\{v\}] by setting v0:=vv_{0}:=v and for each i[1]i\in[\ell-1], choosing an arbitrary vertex viV(Gk)v_{i}\in V(G_{k}) such that viv_{i} is at distance more than 2 from vv in G[Vsmall]G[V_{\textrm{small}}]. This works since the number of vertices at distance at most 2 from vv in G[Vsmall]G[V_{\textrm{small}}] is less than n|V(Gk)|l\sqrt{n}\leq|V(G_{k})|-l. Thus, the first condition is satisfied with the constructed XX.

We may therefore assume that VsmallV_{\textrm{small}} is complete to SS. In particular, we have

|E(GS)|(k+1ϵ)n|Vsmall(G)|k(1ϵ)n+o(n).|E(G-S)|\leq(k+1-\epsilon)n-|V_{\textrm{small}}(G)|k\leq(1-\epsilon)n+o(n).

Since each component CC of GSG-S satisfies |E(G[C])||C|1|E(G[C])|\geq|C|-1, it follows that GSG-S has at least \ell components provided nn is sufficiently large. Now, if some vertex vV(G)Sv\in V(G)\setminus S is not complete to SS, we can find the independent set XX satisfying the first condition by taking each vertex from a different component of GSG-S (with vv as the specially selected vertex). Hence, if the first condition does not hold, then SS is complete to V(G)SV(G)\setminus S, and the second condition is satisfied. ∎

3 Rainbow Complete Graphs — Proof of Theorem 1.3

In this section, we aim to prove Theorem 1.3. In the next subsection, we apply Lemma 2.1 to find an alternative description of αr\alpha_{r} in Theorem 1.3 as promised in the introduction. In the subsequent two subsections, using this alternative formulation, we provide upper and lower bounds on αr\alpha_{r}. We note that while we cannot precisely determine αr\alpha_{r} for r10r\geq 10, our machinery still gives us a surprising amount of structural information about (Kr)\mathcal{R}(K_{r})-saturated graphs which have close to the minimum possible number of edges. In particular, these graphs contain (Kαr,nαr)\mathcal{R}(K_{\alpha_{r},n-\alpha_{r}}) as a subgraph (see, 3.2). On the other hand, we conclude this section by proving a non-stability result (see, Theorem 3.12), namely that for sufficiently large nn and any mm between sat(n,(Kr))\operatorname{sat}(n,\mathcal{R}(K_{r})) and (n2)\binom{n}{2}, there is a (Kr)\mathcal{R}(K_{r})-saturated edge-colored graph with exactly nn vertices and mm edges.

3.1 Reducing 𝓡(𝑲𝒓)\mathcal{R}(K_{r})-saturation to an equivalent problem

Given a positive integer kk, let ^k\hat{\mathcal{F}}_{k} be the class of all edge-colored graphs Γ\Gamma satisfying the following properties.

  1. 1.

    Γ\Gamma does not contain (Kk+1)\mathcal{R}(K_{k+1}),

  2. 2.

    for each vV(Γ)v\in V(\Gamma), the edge-colored graph induced by V(Γ){v}V(\Gamma)\setminus\{v\} contains (Kk)\mathcal{R}(K_{k}), and

  3. 3.

    for every color cc, Γ\Gamma contains a (Kk)\mathcal{R}(K_{k}) that does not use cc.

Define f(k)f(k) to be the smallest integer such that there exists an edge-colored f(k)f(k)-vertex graph in ^k\hat{\mathcal{F}}_{k}. Let Λk\Lambda_{k} be an f(k)f(k)-vertex (Kk+1)\mathcal{R}(K_{k+1})-saturated edge-colored graph in ^k\hat{\mathcal{F}}_{k} with as few edges as possible (such a graph exists since the f(k)f(k)-vertex graph in ^k\hat{\mathcal{F}}_{k} with the most edges is (Kk+1)\mathcal{R}(K_{k+1})-saturated). Let g(k)=|E(Λk)|g(k)=|E(\Lambda_{k})|, and let g(k)g^{\prime}(k) be the minimum number of edges of an f(k)f(k)-vertex graph in ^k\hat{\mathcal{F}}_{k}.

The motivation for these definitions is the following construction. For positive integers r3r\geq 3 and nf(r2)+2n\geq f(r-2)+2, we define Γr,n\Gamma_{r,n} to be the edge-colored graph obtained by taking the complete join of Λr2\Lambda_{r-2} with an independent set II of size nf(r2)n-f(r-2), and assigning all edges incident with II unique colors which do not appear anywhere else in the graph. Now Property 1 guarantees that Γr,n\Gamma_{r,n} is (Kr)\mathcal{R}(K_{r})-free, Properties 2 and 3 ensure that adding any edge to II in any color will create a copy of (Kr)\mathcal{R}(K_{r}), and the fact that Λr2\Lambda_{r-2} is (Kr1)\mathcal{R}(K_{r-1}) saturated and |I|2|I|\geq 2 ensures that adding any edge not incident to II in any color will create a copy of (Kr)\mathcal{R}(K_{r}). Thus Γr,n\Gamma_{r,n} is (Kr)\mathcal{R}(K_{r})-saturated. The main result of this subsection is that this construction is either optimal or at most g(r2)g(r2)1g(r-2)-g^{\prime}(r-2)-1 edges away from being optimal.

Given r3r\geq 3, let r2\mathcal{F}_{r-2} be the class of all f(r2)f(r-2)-vertex edge-colored graphs Γ\Gamma such that some subgraph of Γ\Gamma is in ^r2\hat{\mathcal{F}}_{r-2}.

Lemma 3.1.

Given positive integers nr3n\geq r\geq 3 and an nn-vertex (Kr)\mathcal{R}(K_{r})-saturated edge-colored graph Γ\Gamma, there is no set SV(Γ)S\subseteq V(\Gamma) of size f(r2)f(r-2) for which there is an independent set XX in ΓS\Gamma-S of size 2(f(r2)(f(r2)2))f(r2)2(f(r-2)\binom{f(r-2)}{2})^{f(r-2)} such that for some vXv\in X and every wX{v}w\in X\setminus\{v\}, we have that N(v)N(w)SN(v)\cap N(w)\subseteq S and Γ[N(v)N(w)]r2\Gamma[N(v)\cap N(w)]\notin\mathcal{F}_{r-2}.

Proof.

Suppose for contradiction that such an SS, XX, and vv exist. Let SS^{\prime} be a maximal subset of SS such that there is a set BSXB_{S^{\prime}}\subseteq X of size at least 2(f(r2)(f(r2)2))f(r2)|S|2(f(r-2)\binom{f(r-2)}{2})^{f(r-2)-|S^{\prime}|} with the property that for all uSu\in S^{\prime} and w,wBSw,w^{\prime}\in B_{S^{\prime}}, we have that uwuw and uwuw^{\prime} are edges of Γ\Gamma and have the same color. If S=S^{\prime}=\emptyset, we take BS=XB_{S^{\prime}}=X. Note that |S||S|=f(r2)|S^{\prime}|\leq|S|=f(r-2) and so |BS|2|B_{S^{\prime}}|\geq 2.

Fix a vertex vBSv^{\prime}\in B_{S^{\prime}}, with v=vv^{\prime}=v if S=S^{\prime}=\emptyset, and consider an arbitrary vertex wBS{v}w\in B_{S^{\prime}}\setminus\{v^{\prime}\}. Consider the edge-colored graph Λv,w\Lambda_{v^{\prime},w} obtained from Γ[(N(v)N(w))S]\Gamma[(N(v^{\prime})\cap N(w))\setminus S^{\prime}] by deleting every edge uuuu^{\prime} for which uvuv^{\prime} has the same color as uvu^{\prime}v^{\prime} or uwuw has the same color as uwu^{\prime}w. Now, if there is some vertex uV(Λv,w)u\in V(\Lambda_{v^{\prime},w}) such that Λv,wu\Lambda_{v^{\prime},w}-u is (Kr2)\mathcal{R}(K_{r-2})-free, then we can add vwv^{\prime}w to Γ\Gamma and assign it the same color as vuv^{\prime}u without creating a copy of (Kr)\mathcal{R}(K_{r}), a contradiction. Similarly, if there is some color cc which is used by every copy of (Kr2)\mathcal{R}(K_{r-2}) in Λv,w\Lambda_{v^{\prime},w}, then we can add vwv^{\prime}w to Γ\Gamma and assign it color cc without creating (Kr)\mathcal{R}(K_{r}), a contradiction. Note that by our assumption and choice of vv^{\prime}, Λv,w^r\Lambda_{v^{\prime},w}\notin\hat{\mathcal{F}}_{r}, since if vvv^{\prime}\neq v, then |V(Λv,w)|<f(r2)|V(\Lambda_{v^{\prime},w})|<f(r-2). Hence, by the definition of ^r\hat{\mathcal{F}}_{r}, we conclude that Λv,w\Lambda_{v^{\prime},w} contains (Kr1)\mathcal{R}(K_{r-1}). Now given that Γ\Gamma does not contain (Kr)\mathcal{R}(K_{r}), for each w{v,w}w^{\prime}\in\{v^{\prime},w\} there is some edge eΛv,we\in\Lambda_{v^{\prime},w} and some vertex uV(Λv,w)u\in V(\Lambda_{v^{\prime},w}) such that wuw^{\prime}u has the same color as ee. Hence, for each wBSw\in B_{S^{\prime}}, there is some eΓ[S]e\in\Gamma[S] and some vertex uSSu\in S\setminus S^{\prime} such that wuwu has the same color as ee. By the pigeonhole principle, there is a vertex uSSu\in S\setminus S^{\prime} and a subset BS′′B_{S^{\prime\prime}} of BSB_{S^{\prime}} of size at least |BS|/(f(r2)(f(r2)2))|B_{S^{\prime}}|/(f(r-2)\binom{f(r-2)}{2}) such that for all w,wBS′′w,w^{\prime}\in B_{S^{\prime\prime}}, we have that uwuw and uwuw^{\prime} are edges of Γ\Gamma and have the same color. Now S′′:=S{u}S^{\prime\prime}:=S^{\prime}\cup\{u\} contradicts the maximality of SS^{\prime}, which completes the proof. ∎

Now the following is an immediate corollary of Lemmas 2.1 and 3.1, where we take \mathcal{F} to be the class of all underlying graphs of edge-colored graphs in r2\mathcal{F}_{r-2}.

Corollary 3.2.

For every integer r3r\geq 3 and real number ϵ>0\epsilon>0, there is some positive integer NN such that for every nNn\geq N, every nn-vertex edge-colored graph Γ\Gamma with at most (f(r2)+1ϵ)n(f(r-2)+1-\epsilon)n edges which is (Kr)\mathcal{R}(K_{r})-saturated has a set SS of f(r2)f(r-2) vertices such that SS is complete to V(Γ)SV(\Gamma)\setminus S and |E(Γ[S])|g(r2)|E(\Gamma[S])|\geq g^{\prime}(r-2).

We now prove the main result of this subsection, which shows that the constant αr\alpha_{r} in Theorem 1.3 is always equal to f(r2)f(r-2).

Lemma 3.3.

For every integer r3r\geq 3, there exist integers βr\beta_{r} and NN such that

min{g(r2),g(r2)+1}βrg(r2),\min\{g(r-2),g^{\prime}(r-2)+1\}\leq\beta_{r}\leq g(r-2), (2)

and for all nNn\geq N, we have

sat(n,(Kr))=f(r2)(nf(r2))+βr.\operatorname{sat}(n,\mathcal{R}(K_{r}))=f(r-2)\left(n-f(r-2)\right)+\beta_{r}.
Proof.

For nf(r2)+2n\geq f(r-2)+2, the construction Γr,n\Gamma_{r,n} demonstrates that

sat(n,(Kr))f(r2)(nf(r2))+g(r2)f(r2)n.\operatorname{sat}(n,\mathcal{R}(K_{r}))\leq f(r-2)(n-f(r-2))+g(r-2)\leq f(r-2)n.

Hence, by 3.2 with ϵ=1\epsilon=1, there is some integer NN^{\prime} such that for nNn\geq N^{\prime} and any nn-vertex (Kr)\mathcal{R}(K_{r})-saturated edge-colored graph Γ\Gamma with sat(n,(Kr))\operatorname{sat}(n,\mathcal{R}(K_{r}))-edges, there is a set SV(Γ)S\subseteq V(\Gamma) of size f(r2)f(r-2) such that SS is complete to V(Γ)SV(\Gamma)\setminus S, and |E(Γ[S])|g(r2)|E(\Gamma[S])|\geq g^{\prime}(r-2). Thus, we already have

sat(n,(Kr))f(r2)(nf(r2))+g(r2).\operatorname{sat}(n,\mathcal{R}(K_{r}))\geq f(r-2)(n-f(r-2))+g^{\prime}(r-2).

To show the existence of βr\beta_{r}, we now show that there exists MM such that the function β^r:[M,){\hat{\beta}_{r}:[M,\infty)\cap\mathbb{N}\rightarrow\mathbb{N}} given by β^r(n)=sat(n,(Kr))f(r2)(nf(r2))\hat{\beta}_{r}(n)=\operatorname{sat}(n,\mathcal{R}(K_{r}))-f(r-2)(n-f(r-2)) is non-decreasing, and is therefore eventually equal to some constant βr\beta_{r} between g(r2)g^{\prime}(r-2) and g(r2)g(r-2).

As before, consider an nn-vertex (Kr)\mathcal{R}(K_{r})-saturated edge-colored graph Γ\Gamma with sat(n,(Kr))\operatorname{sat}(n,\mathcal{R}(K_{r})) edges, where nn is large enough to deduce the existence of the set SS as above. Note that there are at least n|S|2g(r2)n-|S|-2g(r-2) vertices vv such that N(v)=SN(v)=S. For each non-edge ee in (S2)\binom{S}{2} and each color cc, let Xc,eX_{c,e} be the vertex set of a copy of (Kr)\mathcal{R}(K_{r}) which is created when ee is added with color cc. Note that for an arbitrary fixed color cc^{\prime}, we may choose Xc,e=Xc,eX_{c,e}=X_{{c^{\prime}},e} for every color cc which does not appear in Γ[Xc,e]\Gamma[X_{{c^{\prime}},e}]. Thus we may assume that the union 𝒳\mathcal{X} of all sets Xc,eX_{c,e} over all colors cc and all e(S2)E(G)e\in\binom{S}{2}\setminus E(G) has size at most r(r2)(f(r2)2)r\binom{r}{2}\binom{f(r-2)}{2}. In particular, if nn is large enough, there is some vertex vV(Γ)𝒳v\in V(\Gamma)\setminus\mathcal{X} such that N(v)=SN(v)=S. Now since Γ\Gamma is (Kr)\mathcal{R}(K_{r})-saturated, so is Γv\Gamma-v, so sat(n1,(Kr))sat(n,(Kr))f(r2)\operatorname{sat}(n-1,\mathcal{R}(K_{r}))\leq\operatorname{sat}(n,\mathcal{R}(K_{r}))-f(r-2), as promised. This shows the existence of βr\beta_{r} with g(r2)βrg(r2)g^{\prime}(r-2)\leq\beta_{r}\leq g(r-2).

Finally, to show (2), under the assumption that

n>f(r2)+2g(r2)+2(f(r2)(f(r2)2))f(r2),n>f(r-2)+2g(r-2)+2\left(f(r-2)\binom{f(r-2)}{2}\right)^{f(r-2)},

suppose for contradiction that

|E(Γ)|=f(r2)(nf(r2))+g(r2)<f(r2)(nf(r2))+g(r2).|E(\Gamma)|=f(r-2)(n-f(r-2))+g^{\prime}(r-2)<f(r-2)(n-f(r-2))+g(r-2).

Note that there is an independent set XX of size 2(f(r2)(f(r2)2))f(r2)2(f(r-2)\binom{f(r-2)}{2})^{f(r-2)} such that N(v)=SN(v)=S for every vXv\in X. Hence, by Lemma 3.1, Γ[S]r2\Gamma[S]\in\mathcal{F}_{r-2}. Now since

|E(Γ[S])||E(Γ)|f(r2)(nf(r2))=g(r2),|E(\Gamma[S])|\leq|E(\Gamma)|-f(r-2)(n-f(r-2))=g^{\prime}(r-2),

we have that Γ[S]^r2\Gamma[S]\in\hat{\mathcal{F}}_{r-2} and so |E(Γ[S])|=g(r2)|E(\Gamma[S])|=g^{\prime}(r-2) by the definition of g(r2)g^{\prime}(r-2), and V(Γ)SV(\Gamma)\setminus S is an independent set. Since g(r2)<g(r2)g^{\prime}(r-2)<g(r-2), it follows that Γ[S]\Gamma[S] is not (Kr1)\mathcal{R}(K_{r-1})-saturated. Thus we can add some edge in some color to SS without creating (Kr1)\mathcal{R}(K_{r-1}) in Γ[S]\Gamma[S], and hence without creating (Kr)\mathcal{R}(K_{r}) in Γ\Gamma, a contradiction. Therefore, this shows that the constant βr\beta_{r} for which sat(n,(Kr))=f(r2)(nf(r2))+βr\operatorname{sat}(n,\mathcal{R}(K_{r}))=f(r-2)(n-f(r-2))+\beta_{r} is between min{g(r2),g(r2)+1}\min\{g(r-2),g^{\prime}(r-2)+1\} and g(r2)g(r-2), completing the proof. ∎

3.2 Upper bound constructions for 𝒇(𝒌)f(k) and calculation of small values

This subsection focuses on constructions that establish upper bounds on f(k)f(k). However, we start by proving the following lower bounds on f(k)f(k), which are equivalent to 1.4.

Proposition 3.4.

For every k1k\geq 1, we have

  1. 1.

    f(k)k+1f(k)\geq k+1 and

  2. 2.

    f(k)k+2f(k)\geq k+2 for every k3k\geq 3.

Proof.

Property 2 immediately implies f(k)k+1f(k)\geq k+1. We now show that for every k3k\geq 3, we have f(k)k+2f(k)\geq k+2. Suppose, for a contradiction, that there is some k3k\geq 3 such that f(k)=k+1f(k)=k+1. Thus, Λk\Lambda_{k} has k+1k+1 vertices. Since k3k\geq 3, Property 2 implies that Λk\Lambda_{k} has no missing edges. Hence by Property 1, there must be two edges e,eE(Λk)e,e^{\prime}\in E(\Lambda_{k}) with the same color cc. We split into two cases.

  • If ee and ee^{\prime} are not incident, then every copy of (Kk)\mathcal{R}(K_{k}) in Λk\Lambda_{k} uses either ee or ee^{\prime}, contradicting Property 3.

  • If ee and ee^{\prime} are incident, then there must be a vertex vv that is adjacent to neither ee nor ee^{\prime} (since k+14k+1\geq 4). The graph Λkv\Lambda_{k}-v contains both ee and ee^{\prime} and thus is (Kk)\mathcal{R}(K_{k})-free, contradicting Property 2.

In both cases, we reached a contradiction, completing the proof of 3.4. ∎

The constructions for f(1)f(1) and f(2)f(2) are very simple.

Lemma 3.5.

f(1)=2f(1)=2, g(1)=g(1)=0g^{\prime}(1)=g(1)=0, f(2)=3f(2)=3, and g(2)=g(2)=3g^{\prime}(2)=g(2)=3.

Proof.

Proposition 3.4 together with the construction Λ1=K2¯\Lambda_{1}=\overline{K_{2}} show that f(1)=2f(1)=2 and g(1)=g(1)=0g^{\prime}(1)=g(1)=0. Proposition 3.4 together with the construction of a triangle with exactly two blue edges and one differently colored edge shows that f(2)=3f(2)=3. Furthermore, if Λ\Lambda is an edge-colored graph in ^2\hat{\mathcal{F}}_{2} with V(Λ)={u,v,w}V(\Lambda)=\{u,v,w\} and uvE(Λ)uv\notin E(\Lambda), then vv violates Property 1, a contradiction. Hence g(2)=g(2)=3g^{\prime}(2)=g(2)=3. ∎

We next give a recursive construction for general kk.

Lemma 3.6.

For each positive integer kk, we have Γk+2,f(k)+2^k+1\Gamma_{k+2,f(k)+2}\in\hat{\mathcal{F}}_{k+1}. In particular we have f(k+1)f(k)+2{f(k+1)\leq f(k)+2}, and if equality holds then g(k+1)(f(k+1)2)1g(k+1)\leq\binom{f(k+1)}{2}-1.

Proof.

Recall that Γk+2,f(k)+2\Gamma_{k+2,f(k)+2} is (Kk+2)\mathcal{R}(K_{k+2})-saturated, so in particular Property 1 holds. Let uu and vv be the two vertices in V(Γk+2,f(k)+2)V(Λk)V(\Gamma_{k+2,f(k)+2})\setminus V(\Lambda_{k}). We can extend any (Kk)\mathcal{R}(K_{k}) in Λk\Lambda_{k} to a copy of (Kk+1)\mathcal{R}(K_{k+1}) in Γk+2,f(k)+2\Gamma_{k+2,f(k)+2} by adding either uu (in which case vv and all colors of edges incident to vv are avoided) or vv (in which case vv and all colors of edges incident to vv are avoided). Thus Properties 2 and 3 are satisfied. Thus |V(Γk+2,f(k)+2)|=f(k)+2|V(\Gamma_{k+2,f(k)+2})|=f(k)+2 is an upper bound for f(k+1)f(k+1), and if this bound is tight then |E(Γk+2,f(k)+2)|(f(k)+22)1|E(\Gamma_{k+2,f(k)+2})|\leq\binom{f(k)+2}{2}-1 is an upper bound for g(k+1)g(k+1). ∎

We remark that based on the lower bound on f(k)f(k) which we obtain in the next subsection, we have f(k+1)=f(k)+2f(k+1)=f(k)+2 for infinitely many values of kk. This also allows us to push Lemma 3.5 one step further, as follows.

Lemma 3.7.

f(3)=5f(3)=5, g(3)=9g(3)=9, and g(3)=8g^{\prime}(3)=8.

Proof.

By 3.4, Lemma 3.5, and Lemma 3.6, we have f(3)=5f(3)=5 and g(3)9g(3)\leq 9. Suppose for contradiction that there are two pairs {v,w}\{v,w\} and {v,w}\{v^{\prime},w^{\prime}\} of non-adjacent vertices in Λ3\Lambda_{3}, with w{v,w}w^{\prime}\notin\{v,w\}. Since |V(Λ3)|=f(3)=5|V(\Lambda_{3})|=f(3)=5, there is some uV(Λ3){v,w,v,w}u\in V(\Lambda_{3})\setminus\{v,w,v^{\prime},w^{\prime}\}. Adding vwvw to Λ3\Lambda_{3} with the same color as vuvu if vuvu is an edge does not create a copy of (K4)\mathcal{R}(K_{4}), contradicting the definition of Λ3\Lambda_{3}. If vuvu is not an edge, adding vwvw with any color does not create a copy of (K4)\mathcal{R}(K_{4}), giving the same contradiction. Thus, g(3)=9g(3)=9.

We now present a 55-vertex graph in ^3\hat{\mathcal{F}}_{3} with exactly 88 edges. Let V(Λ3)={x,v1,v2,u1,u2}V(\Lambda^{\prime}_{3})=\{x,v_{1},v_{2},u_{1},u_{2}\}. The complement of Λ3\Lambda^{\prime}_{3} is exactly the edges {x,v1}\{x,v_{1}\} and {x,v2}\{x,v_{2}\}. The color of the edge {v1,u1}\{v_{1},u_{1}\} is the same as the color {v2,u2}\{v_{2},u_{2}\}, and all other colors are distinct (see Figure 2). It is straightforward to check that Λ3^3\Lambda^{\prime}_{3}\in\hat{\mathcal{F}}_{3}, and |E(Λ3)|=8|E(\Lambda^{\prime}_{3})|=8. Hence, g(3)8g^{\prime}(3)\leq 8.

To show that g(3)8g^{\prime}(3)\geq 8, let Λ′′\Lambda^{\prime\prime} be an edge-colored graph with 55 vertices and 77 edges; we will show that Λ′′^3\Lambda^{\prime\prime}\notin\hat{\mathcal{F}}_{3}. There are 44 distinct 33 edge graphs on 55 vertices; see Figure 1. Referring to the figure, if the complement of Λ′′\Lambda^{\prime\prime} is either G1G_{1} or G3G_{3}, then every K3K_{3} in Λ′′\Lambda^{\prime\prime} is incident to the right-most vertex; hence Λ′′^3\Lambda^{\prime\prime}\notin\hat{\mathcal{F}}_{3}. If the complement of Λ′′\Lambda^{\prime\prime} is either G2G_{2} or G4G_{4}, then the bottom vertex of Λ′′\Lambda^{\prime\prime} is not in any K3K_{3}. Hence, if Λ′′^3\Lambda^{\prime\prime}\in\hat{\mathcal{F}}_{3}, then the graph obtained by deleting this vertex is also in ^3\hat{\mathcal{F}}_{3}, contradicting the fact that f(3)=5f(3)=5. Thus Λ′′^3\Lambda^{\prime\prime}\notin\hat{\mathcal{F}}_{3}, so g(3)=8g^{\prime}(3)=8. ∎

(a) G1G_{1}
(b) G2G_{2}
(c) G3G_{3}
(d) G4G_{4}
Figure 1: Three edge graphs on five vertices
xxu2u_{2}u1u_{1}v1v_{1}v2v_{2}
Figure 2: The graphs Λ3\Lambda_{3} (left) and Λ3\Lambda^{\prime}_{3} (right). The dotted lines represent non-edges, and each gray edge has a unique color.

To recap, the proof of Lemma 3.5 gave an explicit construction for Λ2\Lambda_{2}: a triangle with two blue edges and one differently colored edge. Thus we have an explicit construction of Γ2,5\Gamma_{2,5}, which by Lemma 3.6 and Lemma 3.7 is an explicit construction for Λ3\Lambda_{3} (see Figure 2). In turn, this gives us an explicit construction for Γ3,n\Gamma_{3,n}. In this case, we know that for sufficiently large nn this construction achieves the rainbow saturation number sat(n,K5)\operatorname{sat}(n,K_{5}), based on Theorem 1.8 and Lemma 3.7. It is tempting to conjecture that the graphs Γr,n\Gamma_{r,n} are optimal for all r3r\geq 3 and nn sufficiently large (and thus that the constant βr\beta_{r} in Theorem 1.3 is always equal to g(r2)g(r-2)). To illustrate the difficulty in proving this, the graph Λ3\Lambda^{\prime}_{3} from Lemma 3.7 (see Figure 2) can be used in an alternate construction for sat(n,(K5))\operatorname{sat}(n,\mathcal{R}(K_{5})) as follows. First, add vertices z1z_{1} and z2z_{2}, complete to each other and V(Λ3)V(\Lambda^{\prime}_{3}), such that the color of z1v1z_{1}v_{1} is the same as that of z2v2z_{2}v_{2}, the color of z1u1z_{1}u_{1} is the same as that of z2u2z_{2}u_{2} (but different to the color of z1v1z_{1}v_{1}), and all other new edges get their own unique color. Then add n7n-7 further vertices, each with neighborhood V(Λ3)V(\Lambda^{\prime}_{3}), with all colors of edges incident to these vertices being unique in the entire construction.

We next give a construction that will be used to prove the upper bound in Theorem 1.3. The construction is easiest to describe for k=2(t2)+1k=2\binom{t}{2}+1 with t3t\geq 3. Let Γk\Gamma^{\prime}_{k} be a graph obtained by subdividing each edge of (Kt)\mathcal{R}(K_{t}) twice. Note that |V(Γk)|=2(t2)+t|V(\Gamma^{\prime}_{k})|=2\binom{t}{2}+t. Each edge in Γk\Gamma^{\prime}_{k} that is incident to a vertex of RR inherits the color of the subdivided edge of RR, and each edge between subdivision vertices gets a unique color. Add edges to Γk\Gamma^{\prime}_{k} to make a complete graph Γk\Gamma_{k}, giving each added edge a unique color. It is straightforward to verify that Γk^k\Gamma_{k}\in\hat{\mathcal{F}}_{k}, and a proof of this fact is given following the more general construction of Lemma 3.8. Hence, f(k)2(t2)+t=k+(4k31)/2f(k)\leq 2\binom{t}{2}+t=k+(\sqrt{4k-3}-1)/2.

The following lemma generalizes the above construction for arbitrary values of k4k\geq 4.

Lemma 3.8.

For any integer k4k\geq 4, we have

f(k)k+1+4k32.f(k)\leq k+\left\lceil\frac{-1+\sqrt{4k-3}}{2}\right\rceil.
Proof.

Let nk:=k+1+4k32n_{k}:=k+\left\lceil\frac{-1+\sqrt{4k-3}}{2}\right\rceil. Let t:=1+4k32t:=\left\lceil\frac{1+\sqrt{4k-3}}{2}\right\rceil. Note that

(t2)(4k3+1)(4k31)8=k12.{t\choose 2}\geq\frac{(\sqrt{4k-3}+1)(\sqrt{4k-3}-1)}{8}=\frac{k-1}{2}.

Since k4k\geq 4, we also have that t3t\geq 3 and

(t2)(3+4k3)(1+4k3)8k+4k32k+(k0.1)22=k1.{t\choose 2}\leq\left\lfloor\frac{(3+\sqrt{4k-3})(1+\sqrt{4k-3})}{8}\right\rfloor\leq\left\lfloor\frac{k+\sqrt{4k-3}}{2}\right\rfloor\leq\left\lfloor\frac{k+\sqrt{(k-0.1)^{2}}}{2}\right\rfloor=k-1.

Let :=2(t2)(k1)\ell:=2{t\choose 2}-(k-1) and let m:=k12m:=\frac{k-1-\ell}{2}. Let Γk\Gamma^{\prime}_{k} be a subdivision of a copy of KtK_{t}, obtained by subdividing mm of its edges twice and subdividing the remaining \ell edges once. Let XX be the set of vertices in the original copy of KtK_{t}, and let YY be the set of subdivision vertices. Note that |V(Γk)|=t+(k1)=nk|V(\Gamma^{\prime}_{k})|=t+(k-1)=n_{k}. For each of the (t2){t\choose 2} paths PP of length 22 or 33 between vertices in XX, color the first and last edges of PP with some color cPc_{P} unique to PP. Now add edges to make Γk\Gamma^{\prime}_{k} complete and color all of the as yet uncolored edges with unique colors, so that the total number of colors used is (nk2)(t2){{n_{k}}\choose{2}}-{t\choose 2}. Call this newly constructed edge-colored complete graph Γk\Gamma_{k}. Now it is easy to verify that the minimum size of a hitting set for the paths of length two and three in Γk\Gamma^{\prime}_{k} with repeated colors is t1t-1, and that the complement of any hitting set of this size induces a copy of (Kk)\mathcal{R}(K_{k}) in Γk\Gamma_{k}. For any vertex vV(Γk)v\in V(\Gamma_{k}), let x1,x2Xx_{1},x_{2}\in X be such that vv is in an (x1,x2)(x_{1},x_{2})-path PP of length 22 or 33 in Γk\Gamma^{\prime}_{k}, and observe that Γk((XV(P)){v})\Gamma_{k}-((X\setminus V(P))\cup\{v\}) is a copy of (Kk)\mathcal{R}(K_{k}). This also shows that any color which appears on only one edge ee can be avoided, since we can take vv to be an endpoint of ee. If cc is a repeated color, let xx be a vertex of XX which is not incident to any edge of color cc, and observe that Γk(X{x})\Gamma_{k}-(X\setminus\{x\}) is a copy of (Kk)\mathcal{R}(K_{k}) avoiding cc. This choice of xx is possible since |X|=t3|X|=t\geq 3. ∎

As a simple corollary of 3.4 and Lemmas 3.3, 3.5, 3.6, 3.7, and 3.8, we can determine sat(n,(Kr))\operatorname{sat}(n,\mathcal{R}(K_{r})) for small values of rr as follows.

Theorem 3.9.

For sufficiently large nn, the following holds.

sat(n,(Kr))={2n4,if r=3,3n6,if r=4,5n16,if r=5, andr(nr)+βr,if r{6,7,8,9}, with βr as in Theorem 1.3.\operatorname{sat}(n,\mathcal{R}(K_{r}))=\begin{cases}2n-4,&\text{if $r=3$},\\ 3n-6,&\text{if $r=4$},\\ 5n-16,&\text{if $r=5$, and}\\ r(n-r)+\beta_{r},&\text{if $r\in\{6,7,8,9\}$, with $\beta_{r}$ as in \lx@cref{creftype~refnum}{thm1}}.\end{cases}

3.3 Lower bound of 𝒇(𝒌)f(k)

In this subsection, we prove the following lemma which shows the lower bound in Theorem 1.3.

Lemma 3.10.

For each positive integer kk, we have

f(k)k+(1/2)k1/31/2.f(k)\geq k+(1/2)k^{1/3}-1/2.
Proof.

Define the rainbow-clique number of an edge-colored graph Γ\Gamma as the number of vertices in a largest rainbow-clique in Γ\Gamma. Let Γ\Gamma be an edge-colored graph of minimum order such that the rainbow-clique number of Γ\Gamma is kk and, for every vertex vV(Γ)v\in V(\Gamma), the rainbow-clique number of Γv\Gamma-v is still kk. Note that f(k)|V(Γ)|>kf(k)\geq|V(\Gamma)|>k. Denote |V(Γ)|=n|V(\Gamma)|=n; we show that nk+(1/2)k1/31/2n\geq k+(1/2)k^{1/3}-1/2.

For any color cc, let EcE(Γ)E_{c}\subset E(\Gamma) be the set of edges having color cc. Let 𝒞2\mathcal{C}_{2} be the set of sets of edges with duplicate colors, together with pairs of vertices that are not edges in Γ\Gamma:

𝒞2={Ec:|Ec|2}{{{u,v}}:{u,v}E(Γ)}.\mathcal{C}_{2}=\{E_{c}:|E_{c}|\geq 2\}\cup\{\{\{u,v\}\}:\{u,v\}\notin E(\Gamma)\}.

With abuse of terminology, we refer to any set HH such that the edge-colored graph induced on V(Γ)HV(\Gamma)\setminus H is a (Kk)\mathcal{R}(K_{k}) as a hitting set.

For any set SV(Γ)S\subseteq V(\Gamma) of vertices, let

I(S)=E𝒞2eEvS𝟙(ve),I(S)=\sum_{E\in\mathcal{C}_{2}}\sum_{e\in E}\sum_{v\in S}\mathbbm{1}(v\in e),

where 𝟙(ve)\mathbbm{1}(v\in e) is the indicator function for the event that vv is incident to ee, be the number of incidences between vertices of SS and the pairs counted in 𝒞2\mathcal{C}_{2}. Note that I(H)I(H) and I(H)I(H^{\prime}) need not be equal for distinct hitting sets HH and HH^{\prime}.

The general plan is to give upper and lower bounds on I(H)I(H), where HH is an arbitrary hitting set, as follows:

2(nk)3+3(nk)2I(H)(1/4)n.2(n-k)^{3}+3(n-k)^{2}\geq I(H)\geq(1/4)n. (3)

It is straightforward to check that Eq. 3 is not satisfied for knk+(1/2)k1/31/2k\leq n\leq k+(1/2)k^{1/3}-1/2. Thus, it remains to prove the upper and lower bounds of Eq. 3.

Here comes the lower bound of Eq. 3. For each color cc that is used more than once, HH is incident to at least |Ec|1|E_{c}|-1 edges of EcE_{c}, since otherwise the graph induced on V(Γ)HV(\Gamma)\setminus H will have two edges of color cc. Hence, if there are at least two edges of color cc,

eEcvH𝟙(ve)|Ec|1|Ec|/2.\sum_{e\in E_{c}}\sum_{v\in H}\mathbbm{1}(v\in e)\geq|E_{c}|-1\geq|E_{c}|/2.

Similarly, if {u,v}E(Γ)\{u,v\}\notin E(\Gamma), then HH contains at least one of uu and vv.

Since the rainbow-clique number of Γ\Gamma is not changed when we remove a vertex, each vertex of Γ\Gamma is incident to an edge with a duplicated color, or to a missing edge. Hence,

|V|vVE𝒞2eE𝟙(ve)=E𝒞22|E|.|V|\leq\sum_{v\in V}\sum_{E\in\mathcal{C}_{2}}\sum_{e\in E}\mathbbm{1}(v\in e)=\sum_{E\in\mathcal{C}_{2}}2|E|.

Combining these observations,

I(H)=E𝒞2eEvH𝟙(ve)E𝒞2|E|/2(1/4)|V|,I(H)=\sum_{E\in\mathcal{C}_{2}}\sum_{e\in E}\sum_{v\in H}\mathbbm{1}(v\in e)\geq\sum_{E\in\mathcal{C}_{2}}|E|/2\geq(1/4)|V|,

which is the lower bound of Eq. 3.

For the upper bound of Eq. 3, we show that, for any fixed vertex vV(Γ)v\in V(\Gamma),

I({v})=E𝒞2eE𝟙(ve)3(nk)+2(nk)2.I(\{v\})=\sum_{E\in\mathcal{C}_{2}}\sum_{e\in E}\mathbbm{1}(v\in e)\leq 3(n-k)+2(n-k)^{2}. (4)

Since Γ\Gamma has minimum order, each vertex must be in some (Kk)\mathcal{R}(K_{k}). By definition, |H|=nk|H|=n-k for each hitting set HH. Since Eq. 4 holds for each vertex, taking the sum over the nkn-k vertices in an arbitrary hitting set yields the upper bound of Eq. 3.

Let

𝒞v,1\displaystyle\mathcal{C}_{v,1} ={Ec𝒞2:eEc𝟙(ve)2}{{{u,v}}:{u,v}E(V)}, and\displaystyle=\{E_{c}\in\mathcal{C}_{2}:\sum_{e\in E_{c}}\mathbbm{1}(v\in e)\geq 2\}\cup\{\{\{u,v\}\}:\{u,v\}\notin E(V)\},\text{ and}
𝒞v,2\displaystyle\mathcal{C}_{v,2} ={Ec𝒞2:|Ec|2,eEc𝟙(ve)=1}.\displaystyle=\{E_{c}\in\mathcal{C}_{2}:\lvert E_{c}\rvert\geq 2,\sum_{e\in E_{c}}\mathbbm{1}(v\in e)=1\}.

Note that

I({v})=E𝒞v,1eE𝟙(ve)+Ec𝒞v,2eEc𝟙(ve).I(\{v\})=\sum_{E\in\mathcal{C}_{v,1}}\sum_{e\in E}\mathbbm{1}(v\in e)+\sum_{E_{c}\in\mathcal{C}_{v,2}}\sum_{e\in E_{c}}\mathbbm{1}(v\in e). (5)

We separately bound each of the terms on the right side of Eq. 5.

If {u,v}E(Γ)\{u,v\}\notin E(\Gamma) and vHv\notin H for a hitting set HH, then uHu\in H. Let Ev,cEcE_{v,c}\subseteq E_{c} be those edges with color cc that are incident to vv. Since the graph induced on V(Γ)HV(\Gamma)\setminus H can contain at most one edge of color cc, all but one of the neighbors of vv via edges in Ev,cE_{v,c} must be in HH. Combining these observations, we have

E𝒞v,1eE𝟙(ve)2|H|=2(nk).\sum_{E\in\mathcal{C}_{v,1}}\sum_{e\in E}\mathbbm{1}(v\in e)\leq 2|H|=2(n-k).

Assume that, for each color cc with |Ec|2|E_{c}|\geq 2, and each edge eEce\in E_{c}, it is not possible to give ee a new color (not present anywhere else in the graph) without increasing the rainbow-clique number of Γ\Gamma. If this assumption does not hold for some edge ee, then recolor ee to a new color. This does not increase the order of Γ\Gamma, so it is sufficient to bound the order of the modified graph. Since this recoloring strictly increases the number of colors and the number of colors cannot exceed the number of edges, the procedure will terminate.

It follows from this assumption that, for any Ec𝒞v,2E_{c}\in\mathcal{C}_{v,2}, there is an edge ec={x,y}Ece_{c}=\{x,y\}\in E_{c} with x,yvx,y\neq v and vv is not adjacent to yy through an edge of color cc, and a hitting set HcH_{c} such that v,yHcv,y\notin H_{c}. Indeed, the assumption implies that there is a Kk+1K_{k+1} that includes {v,w}Ec\{v,w\}\in E_{c} and is rainbow except for having two edges of color cc. We take ece_{c} to be the other edge of color cc in this Kk+1K_{k+1}, and HcH_{c} to be the complement of this Kk+1K_{k+1} together with ww.

Fix a hitting set HH with vHv\notin H; this is possible since vv is contained in some (Kk)\mathcal{R}(K_{k}). Partition 𝒞v,2\mathcal{C}_{v,2} into 𝒜\mathcal{A} and \mathcal{B}, as follows. If Ec𝒞v,2E_{c}\in\mathcal{C}_{v,2} and there is a vertex of HH adjacent to vv through an edge of color cc, then put Ec𝒜E_{c}\in\mathcal{A}. Otherwise, put EcE_{c}\in\mathcal{B}. For EcE_{c}\in\mathcal{B}, HH does not contain a vertex incident to the edge of color cc that is incident to vv. Hence, HH must contain a vertex incident to ece_{c}.

For each set Ec𝒜E_{c}\in\mathcal{A}, there is a vertex wcHw_{c}\in H such that {v,wc}Ec\{v,w_{c}\}\in E_{c}, and wcwcw_{c}\neq w_{c^{\prime}} for distinct colors ccc\neq c^{\prime}. Hence, |𝒜||H|=nk|\mathcal{A}|\leq|H|=n-k.

For each set EcE_{c}\in\mathcal{B}, there is a vertex yHy\in H such that yecy\in e_{c}. For any vertex yvy\neq v, let By={ec:Ec and yec}B_{y}=\{e_{c}:E_{c}\in\mathcal{B}\text{ and }y\in e_{c}\}. Since {ec:Ec}=yHBy\{e_{c}:E_{c}\in\mathcal{B}\}=\bigcup_{y\in H}B_{y} and ||=|{ec:Ec}||\mathcal{B}|=|\{e_{c}:E_{c}\in\mathcal{B}\}|, we have |||H|maxy|By|=(nk)maxy|By||\mathcal{B}|\leq|H|\cdot\max_{y}|B_{y}|=(n-k)\cdot\max_{y}|B_{y}|.

Fix a vertex yHy\in H and a color cc such that ecBye_{c}\in B_{y}. By the definition of ByB_{y}, we have yecy\in e_{c} and v,yHcv,y\notin H_{c}. Note that HcH_{c} is incident to at least |Ec|1|E_{c^{\prime}}|-1 edges of color cc^{\prime} for each color cc^{\prime}. Hence, for each edge ecBye_{c^{\prime}}\in B_{y}, it follows that HcH_{c} contains at least one of the vertex xcx_{c^{\prime}} where ec={y,xc}e_{c^{\prime}}=\{y,x_{c^{\prime}}\} and the vertex wcw_{c^{\prime}} where {v,wc}\{v,w_{c^{\prime}}\} is the edge of color cc^{\prime} incident to vv. Furthermore, each vertex in HcH_{c} is adjacent to vv by at most 11 edge and adjacent to yy by at most one edge. Combining these observations,

|By|EcBy𝟙(xcHc)+EcBy𝟙(wcHc)2|Hc|=2(nk).|B_{y}|\leq\sum_{E_{c^{\prime}}\in B_{y}}\mathbbm{1}(x_{c^{\prime}}\in H_{c})+\sum_{E_{c^{\prime}}\in B_{y}}\mathbbm{1}(w_{c^{\prime}}\in H_{c})\leq 2|H_{c}|=2(n-k).

Hence, ||2(nk)2|\mathcal{B}|\leq 2(n-k)^{2}.

Taken together,

Ec𝒞v,2eEc𝟙(ve)=|𝒞v,2|=|𝒜|+||nk+2(nk)2.\sum_{E_{c}\in\mathcal{C}_{v,2}}\sum_{e\in E_{c}}\mathbbm{1}(v\in e)=|\mathcal{C}_{v,2}|=|\mathcal{A}|+|\mathcal{B}|\leq n-k+2(n-k)^{2}.

Combining this with Eq. 5 and the previously obtained bound on E𝒞v,1eE𝟙(ve)\sum_{E\in\mathcal{C}_{v,1}}\sum_{e\in E}\mathbbm{1}(v\in e), we have

I({v})3|H|+2|H|2=3(nk)+2(nk)2.I(\{v\})\leq 3|H|+2|H|^{2}=3(n-k)+2(n-k)^{2}.

This finishes the proof of Lemma 3.10. ∎

Improving the preceding proof to give a bound on \mathcal{B} of the form ||O(n)|\mathcal{B}|\leq O(n) would lead to a bound of the form f(k)k+O(k1/2)f(k)\geq k+O(k^{1/2}), which would determine the value of f(k)kf(k)-k up to a constant factor.

3.4 Non-stability for rainbow saturation

In this subsection, we aim to show that there is an abundance of constructions for (Kr)\mathcal{R}(K_{r})-saturated graphs. To motivate this, we start by mentioning the following result for ordinary saturation which shows that there is a linear gap between the smallest and the second smallest number of edges in an nn-vertex KrK_{r}-saturated graph.

Theorem 3.11 ([3]).

For every r3r\geq 3, if GG is an nn-vertex KrK_{r}-saturated graph other than Kr2+Knr+2¯K_{r-2}+\overline{K_{n-r+2}}, then |E(G)|(r1)n(r2)2|E(G)|\geq(r-1)n-\binom{r}{2}-2.

Contrary to the above, for sufficiently large nn, there is an nn-vertex (Kr)\mathcal{R}(K_{r})-saturated construction for any given number of edges between the saturation number and (n2)\binom{n}{2}.

Figure 3: A (K3)\mathcal{R}(K_{3})-saturated graph with exactly one missing (dotted) edge, denoted Λ3\Lambda^{\prime}_{3}
Theorem 3.12.

For every r3r\geq 3, there exists NN^{\prime} such that for all nNn\geq N^{\prime} and every integer mm satisfying sat(n,(Kr))m(n2)\operatorname{sat}(n,\mathcal{R}(K_{r}))\leq m\leq\binom{n}{2}, there is a (Kr)\mathcal{R}(K_{r})-saturated graph with exactly nn vertices and mm edges.

Proof.

First choose Nf(r2)+2βr+5N\geq f(r-2)+2\beta_{r}+5 to be sufficiently large in the sense of both 3.2 (with ϵ=1\epsilon=1) and Lemma 3.3, and let Er:=(N2)f(r2)(Nf(r2))βrE_{r}:=\binom{N}{2}-f(r-2)(N-f(r-2))-\beta_{r}. Let C:=4(Nf(r2))+10C^{*}:=4(N-f(r-2))+10. We will take N:=max{N,(2r1)(Er+C(Nf(r2))+(C2))}N^{\prime}:=\max\{N,(2r-1)(E_{r}+C^{*}(N-f(r-2))+\binom{C^{*}}{2})\}. Let M=(n2)mM=\binom{n}{2}-m (the target number of missing edges). Note that if n=N+Cn=N+C for C0C\geq 0, then

M(n2)f(r2)(N+Cf(r2))βr=Er+C(Nf(r2))+(C2).M\leq\binom{n}{2}-f(r-2)(N+C-f(r-2))-\beta_{r}=E_{r}+C(N-f(r-2))+\binom{C}{2}.

We split into two cases depending on MM. In each case, we leave it to the readers to verify that the constructions are, in fact, (Kr)\mathcal{R}(K_{r})-saturated with the desired number of edges.

Case 1: MEr+C(Nf(r2))+(C2)M\geq E_{r}+C^{*}(N-f(r-2))+\binom{C^{*}}{2}. Let aa be the minimum positive integer such that MEr+a(Nf(r2))+(a2)M\leq E_{r}+a(N-f(r-2))+\binom{a}{2}, and let bb be such that M=Er+a(Nf(r2))+(a2)bM=E_{r}+a(N-f(r-2))+\binom{a}{2}-b. Note that nN+an\geq N+a by our previous observation. Observe that 0b(Nf(r2))+a10\leq b\leq(N-f(r-2))+a-1 by our choice of aa, and aC=4(Nf(r2))+10a\geq C^{*}=4(N-f(r-2))+10 by assumption. Now we can write bb as 6x+y6x+y for some non-negative integers xx and yy with y5y\leq 5. Now if xNf(r2)x\geq N-f(r-2), then x5yx\geq 5\geq y and 4x+2ybxa4x+2y\leq b-x\leq a. Otherwise, 4x+2yCa4x+2y\leq C^{*}\leq a.

We now describe the construction for this case. Let n:=N+a3xyn^{\prime}:=N+a-3x-y and let GG^{\prime} be an edge-colored graph with nn^{\prime} vertices and sat(n,(Kr))\operatorname{sat}(n^{\prime},\mathcal{R}(K_{r})) edges which is (Kr)\mathcal{R}(K_{r}) saturated. There is a set SV(G)S\subset V(G^{\prime}) of size f(r2)f(r-2) which is complete to V(G)SV(G^{\prime})\setminus S, and at most βr\beta_{r} edges of GG^{\prime} have both endpoints in V(G)SV(G^{\prime})\setminus S. Since N>f(r2)+2βrN>f(r-2)+2\beta_{r}, there are disjoint subsets AA, XX, and YY of V(G)V(G^{\prime}) of sizes a4x2ya-4x-2y, xx, and yy respectively such that AXYA\cup X\cup Y is independent in GG^{\prime} and N(v)=SN(v)=S for all vAXYv\in A\cup X\cup Y. For each vertex vXv\in X, we add three new vertices uv,1,uv,2u_{v,1},u_{v,2}, and uv,3u_{v,3}, such that for each i[3]i\in[3], we have N[uv,i]=N[v]{uv,1,uv,2,uv,3}N[u_{v,i}]=N[v]\cup\{u_{v,1},u_{v,2},u_{v,3}\}, and the color of uv,iwu_{v,i}w is the color of vwvw for all wNG(v)w\in N_{G^{\prime}}(v), and all edges in the graph induced on {v,uv,1,uv,2,uv,3}\{v,u_{v,1},u_{v,2},u_{v,3}\} are red (an arbitrarily chosen color which may appear elsewhere in the construction). For each vertex vYv\in Y, we add one new vertex uvu^{\prime}_{v}, such that for each N(uv)=N[v]N(u^{\prime}_{v})=N[v], and the color of uvwu^{\prime}_{v}w is the color of vwvw for all wNG(v)w\in N_{G^{\prime}}(v), and the edge vuvvu^{\prime}_{v} is red. Since the graph GG^{\prime} is (Kr)\mathcal{R}(K_{r})-saturated, so is the newly constructed graph. The number of missing edges is Er+a(Nf(r2))+(a2)6xy=ME_{r}+a(N-f(r-2))+\binom{a}{2}-6x-y=M. We complete the construction by adding nNan-N-a dominant vertices, so that all edges incident to them are red.

Case 2: MEr+C(Nf(r2))+(C2)M\leq E_{r}+C^{*}(N-f(r-2))+\binom{C^{*}}{2}. We first construct a (Kr)\mathcal{R}(K_{r})-saturated graph with at most (2r1)M(2r-1)M vertices and MM missing edges as follows. If r4r\geq 4, let HrH_{r} be the 2r22r-2 vertex graph K2¯+2Kr2\overline{K_{2}}+2K_{r-2}. Observe that (Hr)\mathcal{R}(H_{r}) has a unique non-edge which cannot be added without creating (Kr)\mathcal{R}(K_{r}). Add all other non-edges in color red, and call this edge-colored graph Λr\Lambda^{\prime}_{r}. If r=3r=3, instead let Λr\Lambda^{\prime}_{r} be the edge-colored graph depicted in Figure 3. We take MM disjoint copies of Λr\Lambda^{\prime}_{r}, and make them complete to each other with red edges to obtain a (Kr)\mathcal{R}(K_{r})-saturated graph with exactly MM missing edges. We then add n|V(Λr)|Mn-|V(\Lambda^{\prime}_{r})|M dominant vertices so that all edges incident to them are red. ∎

4 (𝑯,𝟏)(H,1)-saturation and -semisaturation, with applications to rainbow saturation problems

In this section, for each r3r\geq 3 and all sufficiently large nn, we determine sat1(n,Kr)\operatorname{sat}_{1}(n,K_{r}), ssat1(n,Kr)\operatorname{ssat}_{1}(n,K_{r}), sat((Kn),(Kr))\operatorname{sat}(\mathcal{R}(K_{n}),\mathcal{R}(K_{r})), and ssat(n,(Kr))\operatorname{ssat}(n,\mathcal{R}(K_{r})). The first ingredient we will need is 1.9, which we now prove.

Proof of 1.9.

Consider removing an edge ee from GG and then adding edges e1e_{1} and e2e_{2} to GG. We aim to show that this creates a new copy of HH in GG. Without loss of generality, we assume that e1ee_{1}\neq e. Now, in (G)\mathcal{R}(G), we add the edge e1e_{1} with the same color as ee. This must create a new copy of (H)\mathcal{R}(H) and moreover this copy does not use the edge ee. Thus, removing ee and adding e1e_{1} in GG creates a new copy of HH, which completes the proof. If we additionally assume that (G)\mathcal{R}(G) is (H)\mathcal{R}(H)-saturated, then GG is also HH-free, and thus (H,1)(H,1)-saturated. ∎

Our strategy to prove the results of this section is to apply Lemma 2.1 with an appropriately chosen kk, \ell, and \mathcal{F} to obtain a lower bound which matches the upper bounds given by our constructions. In order to do this, the following lemma is essential for determining the constant kk and the family \mathcal{F}. In this way, it is analogous to Lemma 3.10 in the previous section.

Lemma 4.1.

If GG is a graph such that ω(Gv)=ω(G)\omega(G-v)=\omega(G) for each for each vertex vv of GG, then the complement G¯\overline{G} of GG contains a matching of size ω(G)\omega(G). In particular, |V(G)|2ω(G)|V(G)|\geq 2\omega(G).

Proof.

Let HH be a clique of order ω(G)\omega(G) in GG and let M={xiyi:i[t]}M=\{x_{i}y_{i}:i\in[t]\} be a matching in G¯\overline{G} of maximum possible size subject to the condition that X:={xi:i[t]}V(H)X:=\{x_{i}:i\in[t]\}\subseteq V(H) and V(H)XV(H)\setminus X is complete to {yi:i[t]}\{y_{i}:i\in[t]\} in GG. Suppose for contradiction that V(H)XV(H)\setminus X contains some vertex vv, and let HH^{\prime} be clique of order ω(G)\omega(G) in GvG-v. Let A:=V(H)V(H)A:=V(H)\setminus V(H^{\prime}), let B:=V(H)V(H)B:=V(H^{\prime})\setminus V(H), and note that G:=G¯[AB]G^{\prime}:=\overline{G}[A\cup B] is bipartite with bipartition (A,B)(A,B). If for some SAS\subseteq A we have |NG(S)|<|S||N_{G^{\prime}}(S)|<|S|, then (V(H)NG(S))S(V(H^{\prime})\setminus N_{G^{\prime}}(S))\cup S induces a clique in GG of order greater than nn, a contradiction. Hence, by Hall’s marriage theorem, there is a perfect matching MM^{\prime} from AA to BB in GG^{\prime}. Let {vi:i[t]}:=AX\{v_{i}:i\in[t^{\prime}]\}:=A\setminus X, and for each i[t]i\in[t^{\prime}] let wiw_{i} be the vertex in BB which is matched to viv_{i} in MM^{\prime}. Note that t1t^{\prime}\geq 1, since vAXv\in A\setminus X. Also, since V(H)XV(H)\setminus X is complete to {yi:i[t]}\{y_{i}:i\in[t]\} in GG, the set {wi:i[t]}\{w_{i}:i\in[t^{\prime}]\} is disjoint from {yi:i[t]}\{y_{i}:i\in[t]\}, and so MMM^{\prime}\cup M is a matching in G¯\overline{G} which is strictly larger than MM. Finally, observe that V(H)(X{vi:i[t]})V(H)\setminus(X\cup\{v_{i}:i\in[t^{\prime}]\}) is complete to {yi:i[t]}\{y_{i}:i\in[t]\} in GG by the definition of MM, and that V(H)(X{vi:i[t]})V(H)\setminus(X\cup\{v_{i}:i\in[t^{\prime}]\}) is complete to {wi:i[t]}\{w_{i}:i\in[t^{\prime}]\} in GG since HH^{\prime} is a clique containing both sets. Hence MMM\cup M^{\prime} contradicts our choice of MM. Therefore V(H)XV(H)\setminus X is empty, and so MM is the desired matching of size ω(G)\omega(G) in G¯\overline{G}. ∎

4.1 (𝑲𝒓,𝟏)(K_{r},1)-semisaturation and 𝓡(𝑲𝒓)\mathcal{R}(K_{r})-semisaturation

In this subsection, we prove Theorems 1.6 and 1.10 simultaneously. For an integer n3n\geq 3, we define G3,nG_{3,n} to be the complete bipartite graph K2,n2K_{2,n-2}. For integers r4r\geq 4 and nrn\geq r, we define Gr,nG_{r,n} to be the complete rr-partite graph Kr1+Kn+1r¯K_{r-1}+\overline{K_{n+1-r}}.

Theorem 4.2.

For every integer r3r\geq 3 and real number ϵ(0,1]\epsilon\in(0,1], there exists Nr+1N\geq r+1 such that for all nNn\geq N and every nn-vertex graph GG with at most (rϵ)n(r-\epsilon)n edges, the following are equivalent:

  1. 1.

    GG is (Kr,1)(K_{r},1)-semisaturated;

  2. 2.

    Gr,nGG_{r,n}\subseteq G;

  3. 3.

    (G)\mathcal{R}(G) is (Kr)\mathcal{R}(K_{r})-semisaturated.

In particular,

ssat(n,(Kr))=ssat1(n,Kr)={2(n2),if r=3.(r1)(nr+1)+(r12),otherwise.\operatorname{ssat}(n,\mathcal{R}(K_{r}))=\operatorname{ssat}_{1}(n,K_{r})=\begin{cases}2(n-2),&\text{if $r=3$}.\\ (r-1)(n-r+1)+\binom{r-1}{2},&\text{otherwise}.\end{cases}

In view of the graph Knr¯+K2¯+Kr2\overline{K_{n-r}}+\overline{K_{2}}+K_{r-2}, the above theorem does not hold with ϵ=0\epsilon=0. We define 3\mathcal{F}^{\prime}_{3} to be the class of all 22-vertex graphs, and for r4r\geq 4, we define r:={Kr1}\mathcal{F}^{\prime}_{r}:=\{K_{r-1}\}.

Lemma 4.3.

For r3r\geq 3, given an nn-vertex (Kr,1)(K_{r},1)-semisaturated graph GG, there is no set SV(G)S\subseteq V(G) of size r1r-1 for which there is an independent set XX in GSG-S of size r+1r+1 such that for some vXv\in X and every wX{v}w\in X\setminus\{v\}, we have that N(v)N(w)SN(v)\cap N(w)\subseteq S and G[N(v)N(w)]G[N(v)\cap N(w)] is not isomorphic to a graph in r\mathcal{F}^{\prime}_{r}.

Proof.

Suppose for contradiction that such an SS, XX, and vv exist. Now for every wX{v}w\in X\setminus\{v\}, we have that ω(G[N(v)N(w)])r2\omega(G[N(v)\cap N(w)])\leq r-2 and |N(v)N(w)|<2(r2)|N(v)\cap N(w)|<2(r-2). Hence by Lemma 4.1, there is a vertex swSs_{w}\in S such that there is no copy of Kr2K_{r-2} in G[(N(v)N(w)){sw}]G[(N(v)\cap N(w))\setminus\{s_{w}\}] (where sws_{w} can be chosen arbitrarily if N(v)N(w)=N(v)\cap N(w)=\emptyset). Now by the pigeonhole principle, there are distinct vertices ww and ww^{\prime} in XX such that sw=sws_{w}=s_{w^{\prime}}. By our choice of sws_{w} and the fact that ww and ww^{\prime} are not adjacent, we can subtract the edge vswvs_{w} from GG and then add the edges vwvw and vwvw^{\prime} without creating a new copy of KrK_{r}. This contradicts that GG is (Kr,1)(K_{r},1)-semisaturated, completing the proof. ∎

Proof of Theorem 4.2.

Pick NN according to Lemma 2.1 with k:=r1k:=r-1 and :=r+1\ell:=r+1. Let \mathcal{F} be the class of all 22-vertex graphs if r=3r=3, and otherwise :={Kr1}\mathcal{F}:=\{K_{r-1}\}. Now Lemma 2.1 and Lemma 4.3 together show that (1) implies (2). Assuming (2), adding any edge to GG creates r1r-1 new copies of KrK_{r}, such that no edge of GG is in their common intersection other than the newly added edge. Since each color appears at most once in (G)\mathcal{R}(G), it follows that one of these copies avoids the color of the newly added edge. Thus (2) implies (3). Finally, it follows from 1.9 that (3) implies (1). ∎

4.2 (𝑲𝒓,𝟏)(K_{r},1)-saturation and (𝓡(𝑲𝒏),𝓡(𝑲𝒓))(\mathcal{R}(K_{n}),\mathcal{R}(K_{r}))-saturation

In this subsection, we prove Theorems 1.8 and 1.11 simultaneously. Given positive integers r3r\geq 3 and n2r3n\geq 2r-3, we define Gr,nG^{\prime}_{r,n} to be the complete join of (r2)K2¯\overline{(r-2)K_{2}} with an independent set of size n2(r2)n-2(r-2).

Theorem 4.4.

For every integer r3r\geq 3 and real number ϵ(0,1]\epsilon\in(0,1], there exists N2(r2)+2N\geq 2(r-2)+2 such that for all nNn\geq N and every nn-vertex graph GG with at most (2(r2)+1ϵ)n(2(r-2)+1-\epsilon)n edges, the following are equivalent:

  1. 1.

    GG is (Kr,1)(K_{r},1)-saturated;

  2. 2.

    GGr,nG\cong G^{\prime}_{r,n};

  3. 3.

    (G)\mathcal{R}(G) is (Kr)\mathcal{R}(K_{r})-saturated.

In particular,

sat((Kn),(Kr))=sat1(n,Kr)=2(r2)(nr+1).\operatorname{sat}(\mathcal{R}(K_{n}),\mathcal{R}(K_{r}))=\operatorname{sat}_{1}(n,K_{r})=2(r-2)(n-r+1).

In view of the graph Kn+32r¯+K3¯+(r3)K2¯\overline{K_{n+3-2r}}+\overline{K_{3}}+\overline{(r-3)K_{2}}, the above theorem does not hold with ϵ=0\epsilon=0. Given an integer r3r\geq 3, we define r′′\mathcal{F}^{\prime\prime}_{r} to be the family of 2(r2)2(r-2)-vertex graphs GG such that ω(G)=r2\omega(G)=r-2 and G¯\overline{G} has a perfect matching.

Lemma 4.5.

Given positive integers nr3n\geq r\geq 3 and an nn-vertex (Kr,1)(K_{r},1)-saturated graph GG, there is no set SV(G)S\subseteq V(G) of size 2(r2)2(r-2) for which there is an independent set XX in GSG-S of size 2r22r-2 and a vertex vXv\in X, such that for every wX{v}w\in X\setminus\{v\} we have that N(v)N(w)SN(v)\cap N(w)\subseteq S and G[N(v)N(w)]G[N(v)\cap N(w)] is not isomorphic to a graph in r′′\mathcal{F}^{\prime\prime}_{r}.

Proof.

Suppose for contradiction that such an SS, XX, and vv exist. Consider an arbitrary vertex wX{v}w\in X\setminus\{v\}. Since (Kr,1)(K_{r},1)-saturation implies KrK_{r}-saturation, we have ω(G[N(v)N(w)])=r2\omega(G[N(v)\cap N(w)])=r-2. Hence, by Lemma 4.1 there is some swSs_{w}\in S such that ω(G[N(v)N(w)]sw)<r2\omega(G[N(v)\cap N(w)]-s_{w})<r-2 (where sws_{w} can be chosen arbitrarily if N(v)N(w)=N(v)\cap N(w)=\emptyset). By the pigeonhole principle, there are distinct vertices ww and ww^{\prime} in X{v}X\setminus\{v\} such that sw=sws_{w}=s_{w^{\prime}}. Now, adding the edges vwvw and vwvw^{\prime} to GG and subtracting the edge vswvs_{w} does not create a copy of KrK_{r}, a contradiction. ∎

Proof of Theorem 4.4.

We pick NN according to Lemma 2.1 with k:=2(r2)k:=2(r-2), :=2r2\ell:=2r-2.

First suppose (1) holds. By Lemma 2.1 together with Lemma 4.5, there is a subset SS of GG of size 2(r2)2(r-2) such that SS is complete to V(G)SV(G)\setminus S, and G[S]r′′G[S]\in\mathcal{F}^{\prime\prime}_{r}. Since GG is KrK_{r}-free, it follows that there is no edge in GSG-S. Thus GG is a subgraph of Gr,nG^{\prime}_{r,n}, and since Gr,nG^{\prime}_{r,n} is KrK_{r}-free and GG is KrK_{r}-saturated, we have GGr,nG\cong G^{\prime}_{r,n}. Thus (1) implies (2).

Since N2(r2)+2N\geq 2(r-2)+2, it is easy to check that adding any edge to Gr,nG^{\prime}_{r,n} creates two copies of KrK_{r} which share no edge other than the newly added edge. Thus adding any edge with any color to (Gr,n)\mathcal{R}(G^{\prime}_{r,n}) creates a copy of (Kr)\mathcal{R}(K_{r}), so (2) implies (3).

Finally, by 1.9 we have that (3) implies (1). ∎

5 Concluding remarks

It would be interesting to close the gaps between the lower and upper bounds of sat(n,(Kr))\operatorname{sat}(n,\mathcal{R}(K_{r})) obtained in Theorem 1.3. By Lemma 3.3, this is equivalent to finding better bounds on f(k)f(k).

Conjecture 5.1.

For every k4k\geq 4, αk+2=f(k)=k+1+4k32\alpha_{k+2}=f(k)=k+\left\lceil\frac{-1+\sqrt{4k-3}}{2}\right\rceil.

More strongly, we conjecture that, for kk of the form 2(t2)+12\binom{t}{2}+1 where t3t\geq 3, the construction given in Lemma 3.8 is the unique graph in ^k\hat{\mathcal{F}}_{k} with f(k)f(k) vertices.

1.7 shows a linear gap between sat(n,(Kr))\operatorname{sat}(n,\mathcal{R}(K_{r})) and ssat(n,(Kr))\operatorname{ssat}(n,\mathcal{R}(K_{r})) for r5r\geq 5. By 1.7, 1.10 and 1.1, for every r3r\geq 3, we have

(r1)n+O(1)=ssat(n,(Kr))wsat(n,(Kr))wsat(n,Kr)=(r2)n+O(1).(r-1)n+O(1)=\operatorname{ssat}(n,\mathcal{R}(K_{r}))\geq\operatorname{wsat}(n,\mathcal{R}(K_{r}))\geq\operatorname{wsat}(n,K_{r})=(r-2)n+O(1).

Thus it would be interesting to determine the gap between ssat(n,(Kr))\operatorname{ssat}(n,\mathcal{R}(K_{r})) and wsat(n,(Kr))\operatorname{wsat}(n,\mathcal{R}(K_{r})). For ordinary saturation, the known proofs to determine wsat(n,Kr)\operatorname{wsat}(n,K_{r}) use algebraic techniques, see, e.g. [2, 15], but it is unclear whether such methods can be generalized to the rainbow setting. In a similar vein to Question 6.2 of [5], we ask the following.

Question 5.2.

Given r3r\geq 3, is the following true?

ssat(n,(Kr))=wsat(n,(Kr))+o(n).\operatorname{ssat}(n,\mathcal{R}(K_{r}))=\operatorname{wsat}(n,\mathcal{R}(K_{r}))+o(n).

It is possible to generalize the notion of (H,1)(H,1)-saturation in the following manner. For any k0k\geq 0, a graph GG is called (H,k)(H,k)-saturated if GG is HH-free, but removing any kk edges and then adding any k+1k+1 edges (possibly including removed edges) creates a copy of HH. Thus, ordinary HH-saturation is the same as (H,0)(H,0)-saturation. Let satk(n,H)\operatorname{sat}_{k}(n,H) denote the minimum number of edges in an nn-vertex (H,k)(H,k)-saturated graph. Note that for every 0lk0\leq l\leq k, if GG is (H,k)(H,k)-saturated, then it is (H,l)(H,l)-saturated; thus, satl(n,H)satk(n,H)\operatorname{sat}_{l}(n,H)\leq\operatorname{sat}_{k}(n,H). The upper bound construction for (Kr,1)(K_{r},1)-saturation can be extended to obtain an upper bound for satk(n,Kr)\operatorname{sat}_{k}(n,K_{r}).

Proposition 5.3.

For every r3r\geq 3, k0k\geq 0, and n(k+1)(r2)n\geq(k+1)(r-2), the saturation number satk(n,Kr)(k+1)(r2)(n(k+1)(r2))+(k+1)2(r22)\operatorname{sat}_{k}(n,K_{r})\leq(k+1)(r-2)\left(n-(k+1)(r-2)\right)+(k+1)^{2}\binom{r-2}{2}.

The above upper bound is achieved by the construction Kn(k+1)(r2)¯+(r2)Kk+1¯\overline{K_{n-(k+1)(r-2)}}+\overline{(r-2)K_{k+1}}. However, the lower bound argument for Theorem 1.11 does not seem to generalize to arbitrary kk. A natural generalization of Lemma 4.1 for this purpose would be that, if GG is a graph such that ω(G)=ω(GS)\omega(G)=\omega(G-S) for every SV(G)S\subseteq V(G) of size at most tt, then |V(G)|(t+1)ω(G)|V(G)|\geq(t+1)\omega(G). However, this is not true. For example, if GG is the complement of the Petersen graph, then ω(GS)=4\omega(G-S)=4 for every SV(G)S\subset V(G) with |S|2|S|\leq 2, and |V(G)|=10<12|V(G)|=10<12.

Question 5.4.

Given integers r2r\geq 2 and t2t\geq 2, what is the minimum integer nn such that some nn-vertex graph GG satisfies ω(G)=ω(GS)=r\omega(G)=\omega(G-S)=r for every SV(G)S\subseteq V(G) of size at most tt?

It is known that the ordinary saturation numbers sat(n,H)\operatorname{sat}(n,H) are always at most linear in nn, see, e.g., [15, 27]. It would be thus interesting to investigate whether the other variants of saturation numbers also behave in the same way. Indeed, Behague, Johnston, Letzter, Morrison, and Ogden proved the following (which was originally conjectured by Girão, Lewis, and Popielarz).

Theorem 5.5 ([5, 22]).

For every graph HH, we have sat(n,(H))=O(n)\operatorname{sat}(n,\mathcal{R}(H))=O(n).

Remember that sat((Kn),(H))\operatorname{sat}(\mathcal{R}(K_{n}),\mathcal{R}(H)) can be infinite (for example, when H=K1,4H=K_{1,4} and odd n5n\geq 5). However we suspect that sat((Kn),(H))\operatorname{sat}(\mathcal{R}(K_{n}),\mathcal{R}(H)) is finite for infinitely many HH. Indeed, it may be true that for every HH there exists a constant C(H)C(H) such that sat((Kn),(H))C(H)n{\operatorname{sat}(\mathcal{R}(K_{n}),\mathcal{R}(H))\leq C(H)n} for infinitely many nn (note that sat((Kn),(K1,4))=3n/2\operatorname{sat}(\mathcal{R}(K_{n}),\mathcal{R}(K_{1,4}))=3n/2 for all even n4n\geq 4). Instead of considering this problem directly, we may instead consider the closely related 11-saturation number sat1(n,H)\operatorname{sat}_{1}(n,H), which has the advantage of always being finite (indeed it is bounded above by the extremal number ex(n,H)\mathrm{ex}(n,H)). Here, we ask the following.

Question 5.6.

Given a graph HH, does there exist a constant c(H)c(H) such that sat1(n,H)c(H)n\operatorname{sat}_{1}(n,H)\leq c(H)n for infinitely many nn (or indeed for all positive integers nn)?

It is natural to consider the analogous question for saturation numbers satk(n,H)\operatorname{sat}_{k}(n,H) with k2k\geq 2. However we make the following preliminary observation, answering this question in the negative for k3k\geq 3.

Theorem 5.7.

The saturation number sat3(n,C4)\operatorname{sat}_{3}(n,C_{4}) is superlinear. In particular, we have

sat3(n,C4)=Ω(n20/19).\operatorname{sat}_{3}(n,C_{4})=\Omega(n^{20/19}).
Proof.

Let GG be an nn-vertex graph which is (C4,3)(C_{4},3)-saturated. Given a pair of non-adjacent vertices vv and ww in GG, we say that {v,w}\{v,w\} is guarded by xyE(G)xy\in E(G) if xyxy is the central edge of a path of length 33 from vv to ww in GG (note that such a path must exist in a C4C_{4}-saturated graph). Let vv be a vertex of maximum degree in GG, and consider Gv:=G[N(v)]G_{v}:=G[N(v)]. Since GG has no C4C_{4}, every component of GvG_{v} has size at most 22.

Claim 5.8.

For every four distinct components X1,X2,X3X_{1},X_{2},X_{3}, and X4X_{4} of GvG_{v} there exist distinct i,j[4]i,j\in[4] and xXi,yXjx\in X_{i},y\in X_{j} such that the pair {x,y}\{x,y\} is guarded by an edge in E(GN[v])E(G-N[v]).

Proof.

Since GG is C4C_{4}-saturated, for every distinct i,j[4]i,j\in[4] and xXi,yXjx\in X_{i},y\in X_{j}, we have that {x,y}\{x,y\} is guarded by an edge ee in E(G)E(G). If |Xi|=|Xj|=1|X_{i}|=|X_{j}|=1, then there is no such path of length 33 in GG containing x,yx,y, and vv. Let PP be an (x,y)(x,y)-path of length 33 in GG. Since every neighbor of xx or yy in GvG-v is in V(G)N[v]V(G)\setminus N[v], the edge of PP which guards {x,y}\{x,y\} is in E(GN[v])E(G-N[v]) as required. Hence, we may assume |X1|=2|X_{1}|=2. Let X1={a1,b1}X_{1}=\{a_{1},b_{1}\} and for each i[4]i\in[4], let XiX_{i} contains a vertex aia_{i}. Consider the graph GG^{\prime} with V(G):=V(G)V(G^{\prime}):=V(G) and E(G):=(E(G){va1,vb1,va2}){a1a2,b1a2,a1a3,b1a4}E(G^{\prime}):=(E(G)\setminus\{va_{1},vb_{1},va_{2}\})\cup\{a_{1}a_{2},b_{1}a_{2},a_{1}a_{3},b_{1}a_{4}\}. Now GG^{\prime} contains a subgraph HC4H\cong C_{4}, since GG is (C4,3)(C_{4},3)-saturated. However, it is quick to check that C4C_{4} is not a subgraph of G[NG[v]]G^{\prime}[N_{G}[v]]. Hence, HH contains some vertex wV(G)NG[v]w\in V(G)\setminus N_{G}[v] and some edge xy{a1a2,b1a2,a1a3,b1a4}xy\in\{a_{1}a_{2},b_{1}a_{2},a_{1}a_{3},b_{1}a_{4}\}. Since GG has no C4C_{4} subgraph, ww has at most one neighbor in NG(v)N_{G}(v), so some neighbor ww^{\prime} of ww in HH is in V(G)NG[v]V(G)\setminus N_{G}[v]. Now wwww^{\prime} guards {x,y}\{x,y\}, as required. ∎

Claim 5.9.

The maximum degree Δ\Delta of GG satisfies Δ<24|E(G)|\Delta<\sqrt{24|E(G)|}

Proof.

Let SS be the set of pairs of vertices {x,y}N(v)\{x,y\}\subseteq N(v) such that xyE(G)xy\notin E(G) and {x,y}\{x,y\} is guarded by an edge in E(GN[v])E(G-N[v]). Note that every edge uwE(GN[v])uw\in E(G-N[v]) guards at most one pair in SS, since otherwise either uu or ww is adjacent to two neighbors of vv, contradicting the fact the GG does not contain C4C_{4}.

Hence |S||E(GN[v])||S|\leq|E(G-N[v])|. Let GG^{\prime} be the graph whose vertices are the components of GvG_{v} where two vertices XiX_{i} and XjX_{j} are adjacent whenever there exist xXix\in X_{i} and yXjy\in X_{j} with {x,y}S\{x,y\}\in S. Now |V(G)|Δ/2|V(G^{\prime})|\geq\Delta/2 and |S||E(G)||S|\geq|E(G^{\prime})|. By Claim 5.8 and Turan’s Theorem [37] for K4K_{4}, we have

|E(G)|Δ+|E(GN[v])|Δ+|E(G)|Δ+3(|V(G)|/32)>Δ224.|E(G)|\geq\Delta+|E(G-N[v])|\geq\Delta+|E(G^{\prime})|\geq\Delta+3{{\lfloor|V(G^{\prime})|/3\rfloor}\choose{2}}>\frac{\Delta^{2}}{24}.\qed

First, Δn10/192\Delta\leq\frac{n^{10/19}}{2} because otherwise Theorem 5.7 follows from Claim 5.9. Now, let CC be the set of vertices of degree at least n8/19n^{8/19} in GG. Clearly, |C|n12/19|C|\leq n^{12/19} because otherwise the number of edges in GG is at least n20/192\frac{n^{20/19}}{2}. Let A=E(G[C])A=E(G[C]). Then, we have |A|n18/19|A|\leq n^{18/19} by the known result on the extremal number of C4C_{4} (i.e., ex(n,C4)12n3/2+o(n3/2)\mathrm{ex}(n,C_{4})\leq\frac{1}{2}n^{3/2}+o(n^{3/2}), see [18, 32] for references).

Let B=E(G)AB=E(G)\setminus A. Now every pair {x,y}\{x,y\} in (V(G)2)E(G){{V(G)}\choose{2}}\setminus E(G) is guarded by some edge in E(G)E(G), and every edge uwE(G)uw\in E(G) guards at most deg(u)deg(w)\deg(u)\deg(w) edges in (V(G)2)E(G){{V(G)}\choose{2}}\setminus E(G). Hence we obtain by the bounds on Δ\Delta and |A||A|

(n2)|A||B||B|Δn8/19+|A|Δ2|B|n18/192+n24.{{n}\choose{2}}-|A|-|B|\leq|B|\Delta n^{8/19}+|A|\Delta^{2}\leq|B|\frac{n^{18/19}}{2}+\frac{n^{2}}{4}.

Hence, we obtain |B|n20/192|B|\geq\frac{n^{20/19}}{2}, thus the number of edges in GG is Ω(n20/19)\Omega(n^{20/19}). ∎

We finish by suggesting a couple of other directions for future research. There are studies of generalized rainbow Turán problems, see, e.g., [20, 25]. There are also studies on generalized saturation problems (where the objective is to minimize the number of copies of a fixed graph instead of edges) see, e.g., [11, 33]. It might be worth studying the generalized saturation problems in rainbow settings.

In another direction, graph saturation has been extended to the setting where the addition of the edges is restricted to some host graph other than the complete graph KnK_{n}. There are studies with several several different host graphs such as complete bipartite graphs [9, 19], complete multipartite graphs [16, 21, 36], hypercubes [12, 26, 35] and random graphs [13, 31]. Rainbow saturation problems can be studied on such host graphs.

Acknowledgment

We are grateful to the Discrete Mathematics Group of the Institute for Basic Science for organizing the 2021 DIMAG Internal Workshop at Gangneung, where the authors initiated this project, and to the participants of this workshop for stimulating discussions. We are also thankful to the anonymous referee for their careful reading, and in particular for pointing out a small error in the proof of Theorem 3.12 in a previous version of this paper and observing that our argument for Lemma 3.10 yields a better second-order term than we had previously claimed.

References

  • [1] R. Aharoni, M. DeVos, S. González Hermosillo de la Maza, A. Montejano, and R. Šámal. A rainbow version of Mantel’s theorem. Adv. Comb., pages Paper No. 2, 12, 2020.
  • [2] N. Alon. An extremal problem for sets with applications to graph theory. J. Combin. Theory Ser. A, 40(1):82–89, 1985.
  • [3] K. Amin, J. Faudree, R. J. Gould, and E. Sidorowicz. On the non-(p1)(p-1)-partite KpK_{p}-free graphs. Discuss. Math. Graph Theory, 33(1):9–23, 2013.
  • [4] M. D. Barrus, M. Ferrara, J. Vandenbussche, and P. S. Wenger. Colored saturation parameters for rainbow subgraphs. J. Graph Theory, 86(4):375–386, 2017.
  • [5] N. Behague, T. Johnston, S. Letzter, N. Morrison, and S. Ogden. The rainbow saturation number is linear. arXiv:2211.08589, 2022.
  • [6] B. Bollobás. On generalized graphs. Acta Math. Acad. Sci. Hungar., 16:447–452, 1965.
  • [7] B. Bollobás. Weakly kk-saturated graphs. In Beiträge zur Graphentheorie (Kolloquium, Manebach, 1967), pages 25–31. Teubner, Leipzig, 1968.
  • [8] S. Cao, Y. Ma, and Z. Taoqiu. A note on rainbow saturation number of paths. Appl. Math. Comput., 378:125204, 4, 2020.
  • [9] D. Chakraborti, D. Q. Chen, and M. Hasabnis. Minimizing the number of edges in Ks,tK_{s,t}-saturated bipartite graphs. SIAM J. Discrete Math., 35(2):1165–1181, 2021.
  • [10] D. Chakraborti, J. Kim, H. Lee, H. Liu, and J. Seo. On a rainbow extremal problem for color-critical graphs. arXiv:2204.02575, 2022.
  • [11] D. Chakraborti and P.-S. Loh. Minimizing the numbers of cliques and cycles of fixed size in an FF-saturated graph. European J. Combin., 90:103185, 20, 2020.
  • [12] S. Choi and P. Guan. Minimum critical squarefree subgraph of a hypercube. In Proceedings of the Thirty-Ninth Southeastern International Conference on Combinatorics, Graph Theory and Computing, volume 189, pages 57–64, 2008.
  • [13] Y. Demidovich, A. Skorkin, and M. Zhukovskii. Cycle saturation in random graphs. arXiv:2109.05758, 2022.
  • [14] P. Erdős, A. Hajnal, and J. W. Moon. A problem in graph theory. Amer. Math. Monthly, 71:1107–1110, 1964.
  • [15] J. R. Faudree, R. J. Faudree, and J. R. Schmitt. A survey of minimum saturated graphs. Electron. J. Combin., DS19(Dynamic Surveys):36, 2011.
  • [16] M. Ferrara, M. S. Jacobson, F. Pfender, and P. S. Wenger. Graph saturation in multipartite graphs. J. Comb., 7(1):1–19, 2016.
  • [17] M. Ferrara, D. Johnston, S. Loeb, F. Pfender, A. Schulte, H. C. Smith, E. Sullivan, M. Tait, and C. Tompkins. On edge-colored saturation problems. J. Comb., 11(4):639–655, 2020.
  • [18] Z. Füredi and M. Simonovits. The history of degenerate (bipartite) extremal graph problems. In Erdös centennial, volume 25 of Bolyai Soc. Math. Stud., pages 169–264. János Bolyai Math. Soc., Budapest, 2013.
  • [19] W. Gan, D. Korándi, and B. Sudakov. Ks,tK_{s,t}-saturated bipartite graphs. European J. Combin., 45:12–20, 2015.
  • [20] D. Gerbner, T. Mészáros, A. Methuku, and C. Palmer. Generalized rainbow Turán numbers. Electron. J. Combin., 29(2):Paper No. 2.44, 20, 2022.
  • [21] A. Girão, T. Kittipassorn, and K. Popielarz. Partite saturation of complete graphs. SIAM J. Discrete Math., 33(4):2346–2359, 2019.
  • [22] A. Girão, D. Lewis, and K. Popielarz. Rainbow saturation of graphs. J. Graph Theory, 94(3):421–444, 2020.
  • [23] W. T. Gowers and B. Janzer. Generalizations of the Ruzsa-Szemerédi and rainbow Turán problems for cliques. Combin. Probab. Comput., 30(4):591–608, 2021.
  • [24] D. Hanson and B. Toft. Edge-colored saturated graphs. J. Graph Theory, 11(2):191–196, 1987.
  • [25] B. Janzer. The generalized rainbow Turán problem for cycles. SIAM J. Discrete Math., 36(1):436–448, 2022.
  • [26] J. R. Johnson and T. Pinto. Saturated subgraphs of the hypercube. Combin. Probab. Comput., 26(1):52–67, 2017.
  • [27] L. Kászonyi and Z. Tuza. Saturated graphs with minimal number of edges. J. Graph Theory, 10(2):203–210, 1986.
  • [28] P. Keevash, D. Mubayi, B. Sudakov, and J. Verstraëte. Rainbow Turán problems. Combin. Probab. Comput., 16(1):109–126, 2007.
  • [29] P. Keevash, M. Saks, B. Sudakov, and J. Verstraëte. Multicolour Turán problems. Adv. in Appl. Math., 33(2):238–262, 2004.
  • [30] D. Korándi. Rainbow saturation and graph capacities. SIAM J. Discrete Math., 32(2):1261–1264, 2018.
  • [31] D. Korándi and B. Sudakov. Saturation in random graphs. Random Structures Algorithms, 51(1):169–181, 2017.
  • [32] T. Kövari, V. T. Sós, and P. Turán. On a problem of K. Zarankiewicz. Colloq. Math., 3:50–57, 1954.
  • [33] J. Kritschgau, A. Methuku, M. Tait, and C. Timmons. Few HH copies in FF-saturated graphs. J. Graph Theory, 94(3):320–348, 2020.
  • [34] L. Lovász. Flats in matroids and geometric graphs. In Combinatorial surveys (Proc. Sixth British Combinatorial Conf., Royal Holloway Coll., Egham, 1977), pages 45–86. Academic Press, London, 1977.
  • [35] N. Morrison, J. A. Noel, and A. Scott. Saturation in the hypercube and bootstrap percolation. Combin. Probab. Comput., 26(1):78–98, 2017.
  • [36] B. Roberts. Partite saturation problems. J. Graph Theory, 85(2):429–445, 2017.
  • [37] P. Turán. Eine Extremalaufgabe aus der Graphentheorie. Mat. Fiz. Lapok, 48:436–452, 1941.
  • [38] A. A. Zykov. On some properties of linear complexes. Mat. Sbornik N.S., 24(66):163–188, 1949.