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

\UseRawInputEncoding

Saturation Numbers for Berge Cliques

Sean English Dept. of Mathematics and Statistics, University of North Carolina Wilmington ([email protected])    Jürgen Kritschgau Dept. of Mathematics, Carnegie Mellon University ([email protected]). Research is supported by NSF grant DMS-1839918.    Mina Nahvi Dept. of Mathematics, University of Illinois Urbana-Champaign ([email protected])    Elizabeth Sprangel Dept. of Mathematics, Iowa State University ([email protected])
Abstract

Let FF be a graph and \mathcal{H} be a hypergraph, both embedded on the same vertex set. We say \mathcal{H} is a Berge-FF if there exists a bijection ϕ:E(F)E()\phi:E(F)\to E(\mathcal{H}) such that eϕ(e)e\subseteq\phi(e) for all eE(F)e\in E(F). We say \mathcal{H} is Berge-FF-saturated if \mathcal{H} does not contain any Berge-FF, but adding any missing edge to \mathcal{H} creates a copy of a Berge-FF. The saturation number satk(n,Berge-F)\mathrm{sat}_{k}(n,\text{Berge-}F) is the least number of edges in a Berge-FF-saturated kk-uniform hypergraph on nn vertices. We show

satk(n,Berge-K)2k1n,\mathrm{sat}_{k}(n,\text{Berge-}K_{\ell})\sim\frac{\ell-2}{k-1}n,

for all k,3k,\ell\geq 3. Furthermore, we provide some sufficient conditions to imply that satk(n,Berge-F)=O(n)\mathrm{sat}_{k}(n,\text{Berge-}F)=O(n) for general graphs FF.

1 Introduction

Extremal graph theory is concerned with maximizing or minimizing some parameter over a restricted class of graphs. Let 𝒢\mathcal{G} and \mathcal{F} be kk-uniform hypergraphs. We say that 𝒢\mathcal{G} is \mathcal{F}-saturated if 𝒢\mathcal{G} does not contain a copy of \mathcal{F} but 𝒢+e\mathcal{G}+e does for any eE(𝒢¯)e\in E(\overline{\mathcal{G}}). The most well-studied problem in extremal graph theory is the Turán problem, which asks for the maximum number of edges in a \mathcal{F}-free hypergraph 𝒢\mathcal{G} on nn vertices. This maximum is known as the extremal number or Turán number of \mathcal{F}, and is denoted exk(n,)\mathrm{ex}_{k}(n,\mathcal{F}). Any \mathcal{F}-free hypergraph 𝒢\mathcal{G} with exk(|V(𝒢)|,)\mathrm{ex}_{k}(|V(\mathcal{G})|,\mathcal{F}) edges must necessarily be \mathcal{F}-saturated, so we can write

exk(n,)=max{|E(𝒢)|:|V(𝒢)|=n,𝒢 is -saturated}.\mathrm{ex}_{k}(n,\mathcal{F})=\max\{|E(\mathcal{G})|:|V(\mathcal{G})|=n,\mathcal{G}\text{ is }\mathcal{F}\text{-saturated}\}.

On the flipside, the saturation number of \mathcal{F}, denoted satk(n,)\mathrm{sat}_{k}(n,\mathcal{F}), is the least number of edges in a \mathcal{F}-saturated graph on nn vertices, or

satk(n,)=min{|E(𝒢)|:|V(𝒢)|=n,𝒢 is -saturated}.\mathrm{sat}_{k}(n,\mathcal{F})=\min\{|E(\mathcal{G})|:|V(\mathcal{G})|=n,\mathcal{G}\text{ is }\mathcal{F}\text{-saturated}\}.

Saturation was first introduced by Erdős, Hajnal and Moon [7] for graphs, and then generalized for hypergraphs by Bollobás [3] who showed that

satk(n,𝒦(k))=(nk)(n+kk),\mathrm{sat}_{k}(n,\mathcal{K}^{(k)}_{\ell})=\binom{n}{k}-\binom{n-\ell+k}{k}, (1)

where 𝒦(k)\mathcal{K}^{(k)}_{\ell} denotes the complete kk-uniform hypergraph on \ell vertices. Since these seminal results, much work has been done on the saturation function and many generalizations have been studied. For a dynamic survey on saturation numbers, see [4].

In this work, we are interested in the saturation function for Berge hypergraphs, which are a generalization of Berge paths and Berge cycles introduced by Gerbner and Palmer [8]. Given a graph FF and a hypergraph \mathcal{H} embedded on the same vertex set, we say that \mathcal{H} is a Berge-FF if there is a way to embed FF and \mathcal{H} on the same vertex set such that there exists a bijection ϕ:E(F)E()\phi:E(F)\to E(\mathcal{H}) that has eϕ(e)e\subseteq\phi(e) for all eE(F)e\in E(F). We note that many non-isomorphic hypergraphs may be a Berge-FF and a hypergraph may be a Berge copy of many non-isomorphic graphs. We will write satk(n,Berge-F)\mathrm{sat}_{k}(n,\text{Berge-}F) for the least number of edges in a Berge-FF-saturated kk-uniform hypergraph on nn vertices.

Saturation numbers for Berge hypergraphs were first studied by the first author and others in [6], where some results on the saturation function for Berge paths, matchings, cycles, and cliques are given. Since the seminal work on saturation for Berge hypergraphs, the topic has gotten significant attention (see [1, 2, 9, 11] for some of the results on the topic). Prior to this work, the following result was the only known result on saturation for Berge cliques.

Theorem 1.1 ([6]).

For all k3k\geq 3 and nk+1n\geq k+1,

satk(n,Berge-K3)=n1k1.\mathrm{sat}_{k}(n,\text{Berge-}K_{3})=\left\lceil\frac{n-1}{k-1}\right\rceil.

Our main theorem determines the asymptotics of Berge-KK_{\ell} for all fixed clique sizes \ell and uniformities kk.

Theorem 1.2.

For 3\ell\geq 3 and k3k\geq 3,

satk(n,Berge-K)2k1n.\mathrm{sat}_{k}(n,\text{Berge-}K_{\ell})\sim\frac{\ell-2}{k-1}n.

The case =3\ell=3 is covered by Theorem 1.1. When 4\ell\geq 4, the lower bound in Theorem 1.2 follows from Theorem 2.1, while the upper bound follows from Theorem 3.9.

In addition to the main result, we also study the linearity of Berge saturation for general graphs. For (22-uniform) graphs FF, Kászonyi and Tuza [10] showed that sat2(n,F)=O(n)\mathrm{sat}_{2}(n,F)=O(n), while Pikhurko [12] showed that satk(n,)=O(nk1)\mathrm{sat}_{k}(n,\mathcal{F})=O(n^{k-1}) for kk-uniform hypergraphs \mathcal{F}, and this result is best-possible, as seen for example in equation (1) stating the result from [3]. In [6] it was conjectured that satk(n,Berge-F)=O(n)\mathrm{sat}_{k}(n,\text{Berge-}F)=O(n), suggesting that the saturation function for Berge hypergraphs should grow more like graph saturation than kk-uniform hypergraph saturation. This conjecture was confirmed for uniformities 3k53\leq k\leq 5 in [5], but is still open in general.

We prove two results which show that many graphs have Berge saturation numbers which grow at most linearly. The first theorem deals with graphs with large minimum degree.

Theorem 1.3.

If δ(F)>|V(F)|α(F)2\delta(F)>\frac{|V(F)|-\alpha(F)}{2} and k3k\geq 3, then

satk(n,Berge-F)=O(n).\mathrm{sat}_{k}(n,\text{Berge-}F)=O(n).

Our final result concerns graphs with large girth. Recall that the girth of a graph is the length of the shortest cycle (which we will denote by g(G)g(G)), and the vertex feedback number is the least number of vertices necessary to delete which leaves an acyclic graph (which we will denote by f(G)f(G)).

Theorem 1.4.

Let FF be a graph with girth gg and vertex feedback number ff. If g>fg>f and k3k\geq 3, then

satk(n,Berge-F)=O(n).\mathrm{sat}_{k}(n,\text{Berge-$F$})=O(n).

1.1 Definitions and organization

Let FF be a graph and \mathcal{H} be a kk-uniform Berge-FF embedded on the same vertex set, and let ϕ:E(F)E()\phi:E(F)\to E(\mathcal{H}) be a bijection such that eϕ(e)e\subseteq\phi(e) for all eE(F)e\in E(F). We call ϕ\phi the Berge edge map. When FF and \mathcal{H} are embedded in such a way that there exists a Berge edge map, we say that FF is a Berge-FF witness. When FF is a Berge-FF witness for \mathcal{H}, the vertices in V(F)V(F) are called core vertices of the Berge-FF hypergraph \mathcal{H}. Given a hypergraph \mathcal{H} and a set e2V()e\subseteq 2^{V(\mathcal{H})} such that eE()e\notin E(\mathcal{H}), we say +e\mathcal{H}+e contains a new Berge-FF if H+e\,H+e contains a Berge-FF that uses ee.

Uniform hypergraphs are of primary concern in this paper, but in order to simplify proofs, we find it useful to occasionally deal with non-uniform hypergraphs, usually a hypergraph where all but one edge has kk vertices, and the one other edge has 22 vertices. We note that the definition of a Berge-FF does not depend on \mathcal{H} being uniform. In particular, we will say a pair uvV()uv\subseteq V(\mathcal{H}) is \ell-good if +uv\mathcal{H}+uv contains a new Berge-KK_{\ell}. Since we occasionally speak of non-uniform hypergraphs, we note here that if we refer to the complement ¯\overline{\mathcal{H}} of a kk-uniform hypergraph, this is assumed to be the kk-uniform complement.

In a kk-uniform hypergraph \mathcal{H}, a loose path of length 22 is a pair of edges that intersect in exactly one vertex. The single vertex of degree 22 in the loose path of length 22 will be called a hinge vertex. Given two vertices u,vV()u,v\in V(\mathcal{H}), we will write vuv\preceq u if {eE()ve}{eE()ue}\{e\in E(\mathcal{H})\mid v\in e\}\subseteq\{e\in E(\mathcal{H})\mid u\in e\}. We note that \preceq is reflexive and transitive, but in general \preceq may not be a partial order as it may not be anti-symmetric.

We note that if FF is a non-empty graph with isolated vertices and FF^{\prime} is the subgraph of FF induced by E(F)E(F), then for all nn large enough, satk(n,Berge-F)=satk(n,Berge-F)\mathrm{sat}_{k}(n,\text{Berge-}F)=\mathrm{sat}_{k}(n,\text{Berge-}F^{\prime}), so throughout the paper we will silently assume that no graphs have isolated vertices. All asymptotics are with respect to nn\to\infty, with all other parameters assumed to be constant unless specifically stated otherwise. All logarithms written as logn\log n are in base 22. The complete join of two 22-graphs, FF and GG, denoted FGF\vee G, is the graph whose vertex set is the disjoint union V(FG)=V(F)V(G)V(F\vee G)=V(F)\cup V(G), and the edge set

E(FE)=E(F)E(G){xyxV(F),yV(G)}.E(F\vee E)=E(F)\cup E(G)\cup\{xy\mid x\in V(F),y\in V(G)\}.

The rest of the paper is organized as follows. In Sections 2 and 3, we prove the lower bound and upper bound for Theorem 1.2, respectively. In Section 4, we prove Theorems 1.3 and 1.4. Finally, in Section 5, we briefly discuss the open problem of determining the exact values for the saturation numbers for Berge-K4K_{4}.

2 Lower bound for Berge-KK_{\ell} saturation

We present here an asymptotic lower bound for satk(n,Berge-K)\mathrm{sat}_{k}(n,\text{Berge-}K_{\ell}). Fortunately, the same argument works for all k2k\geq 2 and 3\ell\geq 3.

Theorem 2.1.

For any k2k\geq 2 and 3\ell\geq 3,

satk(n,Berge-K)(1+o(1))2k1n.\mathrm{sat}_{k}(n,\text{Berge-}K_{\ell})\geq(1+o(1))\frac{\ell-2}{k-1}n.
Proof.

Let \mathcal{H} be a kk-uniform Berge-KK_{\ell}-saturated hypergraph. Partition the vertex set V()=XABV(\mathcal{H})=X\cup A\cup B, where

X={vV()d(v)log2n},X=\{v\in V(\mathcal{H})\mid d(v)\geq\log^{2}n\},

AV()XA\subseteq V(\mathcal{H})\setminus X such that vAv\in A if and only if vv is contained in at least 2\ell-2 edges that intersect XX, and B=V()(XA)B=V(\mathcal{H})\setminus(X\cup A). Note that if |X|>n/logn|X|>n/\log n, then by counting degrees, |E()|>|X|log2nk=ω(n)(1+o(1))2k1n|E(\mathcal{H})|>\frac{|X|\log^{2}n}{k}=\omega(n)\geq(1+o(1))\frac{\ell-2}{k-1}n, so we are done unless |X|n/logn=o(n)|X|\leq n/\log n=o(n).

We will show that |B|=o(n)|B|=o(n) as well. Indeed, first note that every non-edge fBf\subseteq B contains a pair u,vfu,v\in f that is connected by 2\ell-2 Berge paths of length 22 since adding ff to \mathcal{H} creates a Berge-KK_{\ell}. Since uAu\not\in A, at least one of these Berge paths must contain a hinge vertex in ABA\cup B. Each vertex aABa\in A\cup B can play the role of this hinge vertex for at most (d(a)2)(k1)2(|B|k2)\binom{d(a)}{2}(k-1)^{2}\binom{|B|}{k-2} size kk non-edges fBf\subseteq B since we can choose two edges in the Berge path of length 22 in (d(a)2)\binom{d(a)}{2} and then the vertices uu and vv in at most (k1)(k-1) ways each, and finally the remaining k2k-2 vertices in ff in (|B|k2)\binom{|B|}{k-2} ways. So, if pp is the total number of kk-sets fBf\subseteq B that are not edges of \mathcal{H}, then

paAB(d(a)2)(k1)2(|B|k2)k2(|B|k2)aAB(log2n2)k2(|B|k2)nlog4n2.p\leq\sum_{a\in A\cup B}\binom{d(a)}{2}(k-1)^{2}\binom{|B|}{k-2}\leq k^{2}\binom{|B|}{k-2}\sum_{a\in A\cup B}\binom{\log^{2}n}{2}\leq k^{2}\binom{|B|}{k-2}\frac{n\log^{4}n}{2}. (2)

On the other hand, since every vertex bBb\in B has degree less than log2n\log^{2}n, by a degree count, BB contains at most |B|log2nk\frac{|B|\log^{2}n}{k} edges, and thus

(|B|k)|B|log2nkp.\binom{|B|}{k}-\frac{|B|\log^{2}n}{k}\leq p. (3)

If |B|n/logn|B|\geq n/\log n, then the left side of (3) is greater than 12(|B|k)\frac{1}{2}\binom{|B|}{k}. Comparing this to the right side of (2) with some rearranging, we get that

(|B|k+2)(|B|k+1)k3(k1)nlog4n,\frac{(|B|-k+2)(|B|-k+1)}{k^{3}(k-1)}\leq n\log^{4}n,

which is a contradiction for |B|n/logn|B|\geq n/\log n. Thus, |B|=o(n)|B|=o(n) as claimed.

Thus, since |X|,|B|=o(n)|X|,|B|=o(n), we must have |A|=(1+o(1))n|A|=(1+o(1))n. Now, let us count the number of edges of \mathcal{H} that contain at least one vertex in AA and at least one vertex in XX. Each such edge contains at most k1k-1 vertices in AA, and each vertex in AA is in at least 2\ell-2 such edges by definition of AA, so the total number of edges containing at least one vertex from XX and at least one from AA is at least

2k1|A||E()|.\frac{\ell-2}{k-1}|A|\leq|E(\mathcal{H})|.

Since |A|=(1+o(1))n|A|=(1+o(1))n, the theorem holds. ∎

3 Upper bound

In this section, we provide Berge-KK_{\ell}-saturated constructions for all uniformities k3k\geq 3 and all clique sizes 4\ell\geq 4. The work is divided into three subsections. In Section 3.1, we state and prove a few simple observations which will be useful in the later sections. In Section 3.2, we construct specific small kk-uniform Berge-KK_{\ell}-saturated hypergraphs which also have the properties that every pair is \ell-good, and that every set of 1\ell-1 vertices contains a Berge clique. Due to some technical constraints when =4\ell=4, we provide one construction for =4\ell=4 and one for 5\ell\geq 5. In Section 3.3, we use the small hypergraphs constructed in Section 3.2 to find a Berge-KK_{\ell} saturated hypergraph with few edges on nn vertices for all large nn.

3.1 Upper bound tools

We present here two simple observations which will help show that our constructions are Berge-KK_{\ell}-saturated.

Observation 3.1.

Let \mathcal{H} be a hypergraph and let u,vV()u,v\in V(\mathcal{H}) be such that vuv\preceq u. Let e2V()e\in 2^{V(\mathcal{H})} be such that vev\in e. Let

e={e if ue,(e{v}){u} if ue.e^{\prime}=\begin{cases}e&\text{ if }u\in e,\\ (e\setminus\{v\})\cup\{u\}&\text{ if }u\not\in e.\end{cases}

For any graph FF, if +e\mathcal{H}+e contains a new Berge-FF in which uu is not core, then +e\mathcal{H}+e^{\prime} contains a new Berge-FF. Furthermore, there is a new Berge-FF in +e\mathcal{H}+e and a new Berge-FF in +e\mathcal{H}+e^{\prime} such that the two Berge-FF’s have the same core vertices except possibly with uu as a core vertex instead of vv.

Proof.

Assume H+eH+e contains a Berge-FF, call it \mathcal{F}, that uses the edge ee and in which uu is not core. If vv is not core in \mathcal{F}, then (e)+e(\mathcal{F}-e)+e^{\prime} is a Berge-FF with the same witness as \mathcal{F}. If vv is core, then since every edge containing vv also contains uu, (e)+e(\mathcal{F}-e)+e^{\prime} is a Berge-FF with the same core vertices as \mathcal{F}, except with uu in place of vv. ∎

Observation 3.2.

Let \mathcal{H} be a hypergraph and let u,vV(H)u,v\in V(H) be such that vuv\preceq u. If \mathcal{H} contains a Berge-FF whose core vertices include vv and not uu, then \mathcal{H} also contains a Berge-FF with the same core vertices, except with uu in place of vv.

Proof.

This follows immediately from the fact that every edge that contains vv also contains uu. ∎

3.2 Small hypergraphs saturated with respect to pairs

Our first construction is for a small hypergraph that is Berge-K4K_{4}-saturated with some nice extra properties.

Construction 3.3.

Fix k3k\geq 3. Let D={d1,d2,,dk3}D=\{d_{1},d_{2},\dots,d_{k-3}\} (when k=3k=3 we allow D=D=\emptyset) and C={c1,c2,c3,c4,c5}C=\{c_{1},c_{2},c_{3},c_{4},c_{5}\} be disjoint sets of vertices. Let 𝒞(k,4)\mathcal{C}(k,4) be the kk-uniform hypergraph with V(𝒞(k,4))=CDV(\mathcal{C}(k,4))=C\cup D, and

E(𝒞(k,4))={{ci,ci+1,ci+2}Di[5]},E(\mathcal{C}(k,4))=\{\{c_{i},c_{i+1},c_{i+2}\}\cup D\mid i\in[5]\},

where the indices ii are taken modulo 55.

It is worth noting that 𝒞(3,4)\mathcal{C}(3,4) is the 33-uniform tight cycle on 55 vertices. We now show that 𝒞(k,4)\mathcal{C}(k,4) has the property that every pair is 44-good and every three vertices form a Berge clique. It is also easy to see that 𝒞(k,4)\mathcal{C}(k,4) is Berge-K4K_{4}-saturated, but we do not explicitly prove this until Section 3.3.

Lemma 3.4.

Let k3k\geq 3 and let 𝒞:=𝒞(k,4)\mathcal{C}:=\mathcal{C}(k,4). Then

  1. 1.

    Every pair in V(𝒞)V(\mathcal{C}) is 44-good, and

  2. 2.

    Every set of three vertices in V(𝒞)V(\mathcal{C}) are the core vertices of a Berge-K3K_{3}.

Proof.

First, we prove (1). Let xyV(𝒞)xy\subseteq V(\mathcal{C}). First, let us consider the case where xy=cicjxy=c_{i}c_{j} for some i,j[5]i,j\in[5]. We may assume without loss of generality that j{i+1,i+2}j\in\{i+1,i+2\} (modulo 55). In either case, 𝒞+cicj\mathcal{C}+c_{i}c_{j} contains a Berge-K4K_{4} with core vertices ci1,ci,ci+1c_{i-1},c_{i},c_{i+1} and ci+2c_{i+2} with Berge edge map

ci1ci\displaystyle c_{i-1}c_{i} ci2ci1ciD,\displaystyle\mapsto c_{i-2}c_{i-1}c_{i}\cup D,
ci1ci+1\displaystyle c_{i-1}c_{i+1} ci1cici+1D,\displaystyle\mapsto c_{i-1}c_{i}c_{i+1}\cup D,
ci1ci+2\displaystyle c_{i-1}c_{i+2} ci+2ci+3ci1D\displaystyle\mapsto c_{i+2}c_{i+3}c_{i-1}\cup D
ci+1ci+2\displaystyle c_{i+1}c_{i+2} ci+1ci+2ci2D,\displaystyle\mapsto c_{i+1}c_{i+2}c_{i-2}\cup D,
cici+1\displaystyle c_{i}c_{i+1} {cici+1 if j=i+1,cici+1ci+2D if j=i+2,\displaystyle\mapsto\begin{cases}c_{i}c_{i+1}&\text{ if }j=i+1,\\ c_{i}c_{i+1}c_{i+2}\cup D&\text{ if }j=i+2,\end{cases}
cici+2\displaystyle c_{i}c_{i+2} {cici+1ci+2D if j=i+1,cici+2 if j=i+2.\displaystyle\mapsto\begin{cases}c_{i}c_{i+1}c_{i+2}\cup D&\text{ if }j=i+1,\\ c_{i}c_{i+2}&\text{ if }j=i+2.\\ \end{cases}

Now, if exactly one of xx or yy is in DD, say xDx\in D, y=ciy=c_{i}, then note that ci+1xc_{i+1}\preceq x, so by Observation 3.1, since 𝒞+cici+1\mathcal{C}+c_{i}c_{i+1} contains a Berge-K4K_{4} with core vertices ci1,ci,ci+1c_{i-1},c_{i},c_{i+1} and ci+2c_{i+2}, H+xyH+xy contains a Berge-K4K_{4} as well.

Finally, if both x,yDx,y\in D, then we note that c1xc_{1}\preceq x and c2yc_{2}\preceq y, so applying Observation 3.1 twice, we first note that since 𝒞+c1c2\mathcal{C}+c_{1}c_{2} contains a Berge-K4K_{4} with core vertices c5c_{5}, c1c_{1}, c2c_{2} and c3c_{3}, 𝒞+c1y\mathcal{C}+c_{1}y contains a Berge-K4K_{4} with core vertices c5c_{5}, c1c_{1}, yy and c3c_{3}, and then 𝒞+xy\mathcal{C}+xy contains a Berge-K4K_{4}.

Now let us focus on (2). Let xyzV(𝒞)xyz\subseteq V(\mathcal{C}). First, we will consider the case when xyzCxyz\subseteq C. Due to symmetry, we may assume that xyz=c1c2c3xyz=c_{1}c_{2}c_{3} or xyz=c1c2c4xyz=c_{1}c_{2}c_{4}. If xyz=c1c2c3xyz=c_{1}c_{2}c_{3}, then

c1c2\displaystyle c_{1}c_{2} c5c1c2,\displaystyle\mapsto c_{5}c_{1}c_{2},
c1c3\displaystyle c_{1}c_{3} c1c2c3,\displaystyle\mapsto c_{1}c_{2}c_{3},
c2c3\displaystyle c_{2}c_{3} c2c3c4,\displaystyle\mapsto c_{2}c_{3}c_{4},

is a Berge edge map for a Berge-K3K_{3} with core vertices x,y,zx,y,z. If xyz=c1c2c4xyz=c_{1}c_{2}c_{4}, then

c1c2\displaystyle c_{1}c_{2} c5c1c2,\displaystyle\mapsto c_{5}c_{1}c_{2},
c1c4\displaystyle c_{1}c_{4} c4c5c1,\displaystyle\mapsto c_{4}c_{5}c_{1},
c2c4\displaystyle c_{2}c_{4} c2c3c4,\displaystyle\mapsto c_{2}c_{3}c_{4},

again gives us a Berge-K3K_{3}.

If xyzCxyz\not\subseteq C, since cidjc_{i}\preceq d_{j} for all i[5]i\in[5], j[k3]j\in[k-3], by repeated application of Observation 3.2, starting with any triple contained in CC (that also contains any elements of xyzxyz that are in CC), we can replace vertices in CC with the vertices of xyzxyz that are in DD, each step retaining the property that the triple is the core of a Berge-K3K_{3}, resulting in a Berge-K3K_{3} with core vertices xyzxyz. ∎

The following construction and lemma are analogous to Construction 3.3 and Lemma 3.4, but for the case 5\ell\geq 5.

Construction 3.5.

Fix k3k\geq 3, 5\ell\geq 5. Let D={d1,d2,,dk3}D=\{d_{1},d_{2},\dots,d_{k-3}\} and C={c1,c2,c3,,c}C=\{c_{1},c_{2},c_{3},\dots,c_{\ell}\}. Start with a copy of the (22-uniform) graph K:=Kc1c2K:=K_{\ell}-c_{1}c_{2} on the vertex set CC, and extend the edges of KK to kk-uniform hyperedges in the following way. Let eE(K)e\in E(K).

  1. 1.

    If c1e,c2ec_{1}\in e,c_{2}\notin e, then extend ee to e{c2}De\cup\{c_{2}\}\cup D.

  2. 2.

    If e={c2,c3}e=\{c_{2},c_{3}\}, then extend ee to e{c4}De\cup\{c_{4}\}\cup D.

  3. 3.

    If e={c2,c4}e=\{c_{2},c_{4}\}, then extend ee to e{c5}De\cup\{c_{5}\}\cup D.

  4. 4.

    If c1e,c2ec_{1}\notin e,c_{2}\in e, and c3,c4ec_{3},c_{4}\notin e, then extend ee to e{c3}De\cup\{c_{3}\}\cup D.

  5. 5.

    If c1,c2ec_{1},c_{2}\notin e, then extend ee to e{c1}De\cup\{c_{1}\}\cup D.

Let 𝒞(k,)\mathcal{C}(k,\ell) be the resulting kk-uniform hypergraph.

Lemma 3.6.

Let k3k\geq 3, 5\ell\geq 5 and let 𝒞:=𝒞(k,)\mathcal{C}:=\mathcal{C}(k,\ell). Then

  1. 1.

    Every pair in V(𝒞)V(\mathcal{C}) is \ell-good, and

  2. 2.

    Every set of 1\ell-1 vertices in V(𝒞)V(\mathcal{C}) are the core vertices of a Berge-K1K_{\ell-1}.

Proof.

Let KK, CC and DD be defined as in Construction 3.5. Notice that the extension of the edges in E(K)E(K) to edges in E(𝒞)E(\mathcal{C}) gives a bijection ϕ:E(𝒞)E(K)\phi:E(\mathcal{C})\to E(K). In order to show that every pair xyxy in 𝒞\mathcal{C} is \ell-good, we show that there is a modification of ϕ\phi that witnesses a Berge-KK_{\ell} using the edge xyxy.

Case 1: xyCxy\subseteq C. Let KK^{*} be the copy of KK_{\ell} with vertex set CC. In this case, we will show that KK^{*} is a witness to a Berge-KK_{\ell} in 𝒞+xy\mathcal{C}+xy. Notice that if xy=c1c2xy=c_{1}c_{2}, then ϕ\phi in addition to xyc1c2xy\mapsto c_{1}c_{2} gives a Berge-KK_{\ell}.

Case 1.1: c1xyc_{1}\in xy, c2xyc_{2}\not\in xy, say x=c1x=c_{1}. Then by Construction 3.5 (1), ϕ1(xy)=c1yc2D\phi^{-1}(xy)=c_{1}yc_{2}\cup D, so we let ϕxy:E(𝒞){xy}E(K)\phi_{xy}:E(\mathcal{C})\cup\{xy\}\to E(K^{*}) be given by

ϕxy(e)={xy=c1yif e=xy,c1c2if e=c1c2yD,ϕ(e)otherwise..\phi_{xy}(e)=\begin{cases}xy=c_{1}y&\text{if }e=xy,\\ c_{1}c_{2}&\text{if }e=c_{1}c_{2}y\cup D,\\ \phi(e)&\text{otherwise}.\end{cases}.

Case 1.2: c2c3=xyc_{2}c_{3}=xy, say c2=xc_{2}=x and c3=yc_{3}=y. We have that ϕ1(xy)=c2c3c4D\phi^{-1}(xy)=c_{2}c_{3}c_{4}\cup D, while ϕ1(c3c4)=c1c3c4D\phi^{-1}(c_{3}c_{4})=c_{1}c_{3}c_{4}\cup D, and finally ϕ1(c1c3)=c1c2c3D\phi^{-1}(c_{1}c_{3})=c_{1}c_{2}c_{3}\cup D. Thus, we let ϕxy:E(𝒞){xy}E(K)\phi_{xy}:E(\mathcal{C})\cup\{xy\}\to E(K^{*}) be given by

ϕxy(e)={xy=c2c3if e=xy,c3c4if e=c2c3c4D,c1c3if e=c1c3c4D,c1c2if e=c1c2c3D,ϕ(e)otherwise.\phi_{xy}(e)=\begin{cases}xy=c_{2}c_{3}&\text{if }e=xy,\\ c_{3}c_{4}&\text{if }e=c_{2}c_{3}c_{4}\cup D,\\ c_{1}c_{3}&\text{if }e=c_{1}c_{3}c_{4}\cup D,\\ c_{1}c_{2}&\text{if }e=c_{1}c_{2}c_{3}\cup D,\\ \phi(e)&\text{otherwise}.\end{cases}

Case 1.3: c2c4=xyc_{2}c_{4}=xy, say c2=xc_{2}=x and c4=yc_{4}=y. We have that ϕ1(xy)=c2c4c5D\phi^{-1}(xy)=c_{2}c_{4}c_{5}\cup D, while ϕ1(c4c5)=c1c4c5D\phi^{-1}(c_{4}c_{5})=c_{1}c_{4}c_{5}\cup D, and finally ϕ1(c1c4)=c1c2c4D\phi^{-1}(c_{1}c_{4})=c_{1}c_{2}c_{4}\cup D. Thus, we let ϕxy:E(𝒞){xy}E(K)\phi_{xy}:E(\mathcal{C})\cup\{xy\}\to E(K^{*}) be given by

ϕxy(e)={xy=c2c4if e=xy,c4c5if e=c2c4c5D,c1c4if e=c1c4c5D,c1c2if e=c1c2c4D,ϕ(e)otherwise.\phi_{xy}(e)=\begin{cases}xy=c_{2}c_{4}&\text{if }e=xy,\\ c_{4}c_{5}&\text{if }e=c_{2}c_{4}c_{5}\cup D,\\ c_{1}c_{4}&\text{if }e=c_{1}c_{4}c_{5}\cup D,\\ c_{1}c_{2}&\text{if }e=c_{1}c_{2}c_{4}\cup D,\\ \phi(e)&\text{otherwise}.\end{cases}

Case 1.4: c2xyc_{2}\in xy, c1,c3,c4xyc_{1},c_{3},c_{4}\not\in xy, say c2=xc_{2}=x. Note that ϕ1(xy)=c2yc3D\phi^{-1}(xy)=c_{2}yc_{3}\cup D, while ϕ1(c3y)=c3yc1D\phi^{-1}(c_{3}y)=c_{3}yc_{1}\cup D, and ϕ1(c1y)=c1yc2D\phi^{-1}(c_{1}y)=c_{1}yc_{2}\cup D. This leads us to ϕxy:E(𝒞){xy}E(K)\phi_{xy}:E(\mathcal{C})\cup\{xy\}\to E(K^{*}) given by

ϕxy(e)={xy=c2yif e=xyc3yif e=c2yc3Dc1yif e=c3yc1Dc1c2if e=c1yc2Dϕ(e)otherwise.\phi_{xy}(e)=\begin{cases}xy=c_{2}y&\text{if }e=xy\\ c_{3}y&\text{if }e=c_{2}yc_{3}\cup D\\ c_{1}y&\text{if }e=c_{3}yc_{1}\cup D\\ c_{1}c_{2}&\text{if }e=c_{1}yc_{2}\cup D\\ \phi(e)&\text{otherwise}\end{cases}.

Case 1.5: c1c2xy=c_{1}c_{2}\cap xy=\emptyset. Then ϕ1(xy)=c1xyD\phi^{-1}(xy)=c_{1}xy\cup D, and ϕ1(c1x)=c1xc2D\phi^{-1}(c_{1}x)=c_{1}xc_{2}\cup D. Let ϕxy:E(𝒞){xy}E(K)\phi_{xy}:E(\mathcal{C})\cup\{xy\}\to E(K^{*}) be given by

ϕxy(e)={xyif e=xy,c1xif e=c1xyD,c1c2if e=c1xc2D,ϕ(e)otherwise.\phi_{xy}(e)=\begin{cases}xy&\text{if }e=xy,\\ c_{1}x&\text{if }e=c_{1}xy\cup D,\\ c_{1}c_{2}&\text{if }e=c_{1}xc_{2}\cup D,\\ \phi(e)&\text{otherwise}.\end{cases}

In all subcases, ϕxy\phi_{xy} gives a Berge-KK_{\ell}.

Case 2:|xyC|=1|xy\cap C|=1. Assume without loss of generality that xCx\in C and yDy\in D. let cC{x}c\in C\setminus\{x\} be any vertex, and note cyc\preceq y. By Case 1, 𝒞+xc\mathcal{C}+xc contains a Berge-KK_{\ell} with all core vertices in CC (in particular, yy is not core). Then by Observation 3.1, 𝒞+xy\mathcal{C}+xy contains a Berge-KK_{\ell}.

Case 3: xyDxy\subseteq D. Note that c1xc_{1}\preceq x and c2yc_{2}\preceq y. By Case 1, 𝒞+c1c2\mathcal{C}+c_{1}c_{2} contains a Berge-KK_{\ell} with all core vertices in CC. Then by Observation 3.1, 𝒞+xc2\mathcal{C}+xc_{2} contains a Berge-KK_{\ell} with all core vertices in C{x}C\cup\{x\}, and so by Observation 3.1 again, 𝒞+xy\mathcal{C}+xy contains a Berge-KK_{\ell}.

Now let us prove statement 2. of the Lemma 3.6. First, let XCX\subseteq C be a set of 1\ell-1 vertices, and let cCXc\in C\setminus X and xXx\in X. By Case 1 of statement 1. of Lemma 3.6, 𝒞+cx\mathcal{C}+cx contains a Berge-KK_{\ell} with all core vertices in CC. In particular, every vertex in XX is core, and cxXcx\not\subseteq X, so 𝒞\mathcal{C} must contain a Berge-K1K_{\ell-1} on XX.

Now assume XV(𝒞)X\subseteq V(\mathcal{C}), |X|=1|X|=\ell-1, but with XCX\not\subseteq C. Recall cidjc_{i}\preceq d_{j} for all i[]i\in[\ell], j[k3]j\in[k-3]. Therefore, starting with any set XX^{\prime} of 1\ell-1 vertices with XCXCX\cap C\subseteq X^{\prime}\subseteq C, we can replace the vertices in XXX^{\prime}\setminus X with vertices in XDX\cap D one at a time by repeated application of Observation 3.2. At each step, we retain the property that the current set of 1\ell-1 vertices is the core of a Berge-K1K_{\ell-1}, resulting in a Berge-K1K_{\ell-1} on XX. ∎

3.3 Saturated construction for large nn

Here we provide the final construction which will provide the desired upper bound in Theorem 1.2.

Construction 3.7.

Fix k3k\geq 3 and 4\ell\geq 4, and let n10k2n\geq 10k^{2}\ell. Let 𝒞:=𝒞(k,)\mathcal{C}:=\mathcal{C}(k,\ell), and let c1,c2,,c2c_{1},c_{2},\dots,c_{\ell-2} be 2\ell-2 distinct vertices from 𝒞\mathcal{C}. Let a,b0a,b\in\mathbb{Z}_{\geq 0} be such that

a(k1)+b(k2)=n|V(𝒞)|1a(k-1)+b(k-2)=n-|V(\mathcal{C})|-1 (4)

and 1bk11\leq b\leq k-1. We then construct the hypergraph 𝒮:=𝒮(n,k,)\mathcal{S}:=\mathcal{S}(n,k,\ell) with vertex set

V(𝒮)=V(𝒞)i=1aAii=1bBi{v}V(\mathcal{S})=V(\mathcal{C})\cup\bigcup_{i=1}^{a}A_{i}\cup\bigcup_{i=1}^{b}B_{i}\cup\{v\}

where |Ai|=k1|A_{i}|=k-1 for all i[a]i\in[a] and |Bi|=k2|B_{i}|=k-2 for all i[b]i\in[b], noting that |V(𝒮)|=|V(𝒞)|+a(k1)+b(k2)+1=n|V(\mathcal{S})|=|V(\mathcal{C})|+a(k-1)+b(k-2)+1=n. Let

E(𝒮)=E(𝒞){Ai{cj}i[a],j[2]}{Bi{v,cj}i[b],j[2]}.E(\mathcal{S})=E(\mathcal{C})\cup\{A_{i}\cup\{c_{j}\}\mid i\in[a],j\in[\ell-2]\}\cup\{B_{i}\cup\{v,c_{j}\}\mid i\in[b],j\in[\ell-2]\}. (5)

See Figure 1 for a drawing of 𝒮(n,k,4)\mathcal{S}(n,k,4).

Refer to caption
Figure 1: The construction 𝒮(n,k,4)\mathcal{S}(n,k,4)

The bound n10k2n\geq 10k^{2}\ell is not the best possible, it is simply an easy-to-state bound that is large enough to guarantee that a choice of integers a,ba,b in Construction 3.7 exists.

We now show that 𝒮(n,k,)\mathcal{S}(n,k,\ell) is Berge-KK_{\ell}-saturated, which will provide the desired upper bound in Theorem 1.2.

Lemma 3.8.

The hypergraph 𝒮:=𝒮(n,k,)\mathcal{S}:=\mathcal{S}(n,k,\ell) is Berge-KK_{\ell}-saturated for all k3k\geq 3, 4\ell\geq 4 and n10k2n\geq 10k^{2}\ell.

Proof.

First let us show that 𝒮\mathcal{S} is Berge-KK_{\ell}-free. Indeed, the only vertices that have degree at least 1\ell-1 are in V(𝒞){v}V(\mathcal{C})\cup\{v\}. The vertex vv only has 2\ell-2 neighbors with degree at least 1\ell-1, so vv cannot be a core vertex of any Berge-KK_{\ell}, so any Berge-KK_{\ell} would be contained in V(𝒞)V(\mathcal{C}), but only (2)1\binom{\ell}{2}-1 edges of 𝒮\mathcal{S} have at least two vertices in V(𝒞)V(\mathcal{C}), so no Berge-KK_{\ell} exists in 𝒮\mathcal{S}.

Now, let eE(𝒮¯)e\in E(\overline{\mathcal{S}}). By Lemmas 3.4 (1) and 3.6 (1), every pair in V(𝒞)V(\mathcal{C}) is \ell-good, so we may assume |eV(𝒞)|1|e\cap V(\mathcal{C})|\leq 1.

Case 1: Suppose there exists a pair X,Y{Aii[a]}{Bii[b]}X,Y\in\{A_{i}\mid i\in[a]\}\cup\{B_{i}\mid i\in[b]\} with XYX\neq Y such that XeX\cap e\neq\emptyset and YeY\cap e\neq\emptyset. For simplicity let us assume X,Y{Aii[a]}X,Y\in\{A_{i}\mid i\in[a]\}, as the case where one or more of XX or YY are in {Bii[b]}\{B_{i}\mid i\in[b]\} is nearly identical. Let xXex\in X\cap e and yYey\in Y\cap e. We claim there is a Berge-KK_{\ell} with core vertices {x,y,c1,c2,,c2}\{x,y,c_{1},c_{2},\dots,c_{\ell-2}\}. Indeed, by Lemma 3.4 (2) and Lemma 3.6 (2), there is a Berge-K2K_{\ell-2} with core vertices {c1,c2,,c2}\{c_{1},c_{2},\dots,c_{\ell-2}\} using edges from 𝒞\mathcal{C} only. Then the edges X{ci}X\cup\{c_{i}\} and Y{ci}Y\cup\{c_{i}\} can play the role of xcixc_{i} and yciyc_{i} respectively for each i[2]i\in[\ell-2] (in the case where X{Bii[b]}X\in\{B_{i}\mid i\in[b]\}, we use the edges X{v,ci}X\cup\{v,c_{i}\}), and finally ee can play the role of xyxy, completing the Berge-KK_{\ell}.

Case 2: Suppose that e(V(𝒞){c1,c2,,c2})e\,\cap(V(\mathcal{C})\setminus\{c_{1},c_{2},\dots,c_{\ell-2}\})\neq\emptyset. Let ce(V(𝒞){c1,c2,,c2})c\in e\,\cap(V(\mathcal{C})\setminus\{c_{1},c_{2},\dots,c_{\ell-2}\}) and let xe{c}x\in e\setminus\{c\}. Note that xV(𝒞)x\not\in V(\mathcal{C}) since |eV(𝒞)|1|e\cap V(\mathcal{C})|\leq 1. We will assume xA1x\in A_{1} since if xAix\in A_{i} for i[a]{1}i\in[a]\setminus\{1\}, xBix\in B_{i} for i[b]i\in[b] or x=vx=v, the case is nearly identical. We claim there is a Berge-KK_{\ell} with core vertices in {x,c,c1,c2,,c2}\{x,c,c_{1},c_{2},\dots,c_{\ell-2}\}. Indeed, by Lemma 3.4 (2) and Lemma 3.6 (2), there exists a Berge-K1K_{\ell-1} with core vertices in {c,c1,c2,,c2}\{c,c_{1},c_{2},\dots,c_{\ell-2}\} and only using edges from 𝒞\mathcal{C}. Then the edge A1{ci}A_{1}\cup\{c_{i}\} can play the role of xcixc_{i} for i[2]i\in[\ell-2], while the edge ee plays the role of xcxc, completing the Berge-KK_{\ell}.

Case 3: Suppose vev\in e and neither Case 1 nor Case 2 happen. We claim that there exists a set X{Aii[a]}X\in\{A_{i}\mid i\in[a]\} such that eXe\cap X\neq\emptyset. Indeed, for the sake of contradiction, suppose there does not exist a set X{Aii[a]}X\in\{A_{i}\mid i\in[a]\} such that eXe\cap X\neq\emptyset. Recall that ee can contain at most one vertex in 𝒞\mathcal{C}. Since we are not in Case 2, any vertex in e𝒞e\cap\mathcal{C} would need to be cic_{i} for some i[2]i\in[\ell-2]. Since we are not in Case 1, ee cannot contain vertices from two BjB_{j}’s, so all the other vertices in ee must come from a single BjB_{j}, j[b]j\in[b], however then e={ci,v}BjE(H)e=\{c_{i},v\}\cup B_{j}\in E(H), a contradiction. We may assume, without loss of generality, that A1eA_{1}\cap e\neq\emptyset, say aA1ea\in A_{1}\cap e. Then, similar to Case 1, we can find a Berge-KK_{\ell} with core vertices in {a,v,c1,c2,,c2}\{a,v,c_{1},c_{2},\dots,c_{\ell-2}\}. Indeed, by Lemma 3.4 (2) and Lemma 3.6 (2), there is a Berge-K2K_{\ell-2} with core vertices {c1,c2,,c2}\{c_{1},c_{2},\dots,c_{\ell-2}\} using only edges from 𝒞\mathcal{C}. Then the edges A1{ci}A_{1}\cup\{c_{i}\} and B1{v,ci}B_{1}\cup\{v,c_{i}\} can play the role of aciac_{i} and vcivc_{i}, respectively for each i[2]i\in[\ell-2]. Finally, ee can play the role of avav, completing the Berge-KK_{\ell}.

Case 4: None of the cases 1, 2 or 3 happen. We claim that this does not occur. Indeed, vev\not\in e since we are not in Case 3. Furthermore, at most one vertex in 𝒞\mathcal{C} is in ee, and if any are, that vertex must be from {c1,c2,,c2}\{c_{1},c_{2},\dots,c_{\ell-2}\} since we are not in Case 2. Since we are not in Case 1, ee intersects at most one set X{Aii[a]}{Bii[b]}X\in\{A_{i}\mid i\in[a]\}\cup\{B_{i}\mid i\in[b]\}. Thus, the only way ee has kk vertices is if e=X{cj}e=X\cup\{c_{j}\} for some X{Aii[a]}{Bii[b]}X\in\{A_{i}\mid i\in[a]\}\cup\{B_{i}\mid i\in[b]\} and j[2]j\in[\ell-2]. Furthermore, XX must be one of the AiA_{i}’s since the BiB_{i}’s only have k2k-2 vertices, but Ai{cj}E(𝒮)A_{i}\cup\{c_{j}\}\in E(\mathcal{S}) for all i[a]i\in[a], j[2]j\in[\ell-2], contradicting the assumption that eE(𝒮¯)e\in E(\overline{\mathcal{S}}). ∎

The following theorem summarizes the results of Section 3. Our results could imply a slightly stronger bound than provided below, but we did not attempt to fight for lower-order terms, so this bound suffices for our purposes.

Theorem 3.9.

Fix k3k\geq 3, 4\ell\geq 4 and let n10k2n\geq 10k^{2}\ell. Then

sat(n,Berge-K)2k1n+(2)1\mathrm{sat}(n,\text{Berge-}K_{\ell})\leq\frac{\ell-2}{k-1}n+\binom{\ell}{2}-1 (6)
Proof.

By Lemma 3.8, 𝒮:=𝒮(n,k,)\mathcal{S}:=\mathcal{S}(n,k,\ell) is Berge-KK_{\ell}-saturated. Let 𝒞:=𝒞(k,)\mathcal{C}:=\mathcal{C}(k,\ell). By (5), we can see that

|E(𝒮)|=|E(𝒞)|+(a+b)(2),|E(\mathcal{S})|=|E(\mathcal{C})|+(a+b)(\ell-2), (7)

where aa and bb are the integers defined in (4). Recall that |E(𝒞)|=(2)1|E(\mathcal{C})|=\binom{\ell}{2}-1. From (4), we have that

a+b=n|V(𝒞)|1+bk1nk1,a+b=\frac{n-|V(\mathcal{C})|-1+b}{k-1}\leq\frac{n}{k-1}, (8)

where the inequality follows from the fact that bk1b\leq k-1 and the fact that

|V(𝒞)|={k+2if =4,k+3 if 5.|V(\mathcal{C})|=\begin{cases}k+2&\text{if }\ell=4,\\ k+\ell-3&\text{ if }\ell\geq 5.\end{cases}

Combining (7) and (8) gives us (6). ∎

4 Results on linearity for Berge-FF saturation

In this section, we prove Theorems 1.3 and 1.4. We start with a construction which will help us prove Theorem 1.3.

Construction 4.1.

Fix k3k\geq 3, let FF be a (22-uniform) graph with |V(F)|α(F)+2|V(F)|\geq\alpha(F)+2, and let n10k|V(F)|3n\geq 10k|V(F)|^{3}. Set ν:=|V(F)|α(F)1\nu:=|V(F)|-\alpha(F)-1 for convenience. Assume that k>νk>\nu, and let a,t0a,t\in\mathbb{Z}_{\geq 0} be such that

a(kν+1)+t=nνa(k-\nu+1)+t=n-\nu (9)

and 0t<kν+10\leq t<k-\nu+1. We then construct the hypergraph :=(n,k,F)\mathcal{H}:=\mathcal{H}(n,k,F) with vertex set

V()=V1i=1aAiT,V(\mathcal{H})=V_{1}\cup\bigcup_{i=1}^{a}A_{i}\cup T,

where |V1|=ν|V_{1}|=\nu, |Ai|=kν+1|A_{i}|=k-\nu+1 for all i[a]i\in[a], and |T|=t|T|=t. Let V1={v1,v2,,vν}V_{1}=\{v_{1},v_{2},\dots,v_{\nu}\}. Let

E()={(V1Ai){vj}i[a],j[ν]}.E(\mathcal{H})=\{(V_{1}\cup A_{i})\setminus\{v_{j}\}\mid i\in[a],j\in[\nu]\}.

We do not always expect (n,k,F)\mathcal{H}(n,k,F) to be Berge-FF-free, but the following lemma shows that if it is Berge-FF-free, the saturation numbers for Berge-FF grow linearly.

Lemma 4.2.

Let FF be a graph with |V(F)|α(F)+2|V(F)|\geq\alpha(F)+2, k>|V(F)|α(F)1=:νk>|V(F)|-\alpha(F)-1=:\nu and n10k|V(F)|3n\geq 10k|V(F)|^{3}. If :=(n,k,F)\mathcal{H}:=\mathcal{H}(n,k,F) is Berge-FF-free, then

satk(n,Berge-F)=O(n).\mathrm{sat}_{k}(n,\text{Berge-}F)=O(n).
Proof.

Let α:=α(F)\alpha:=\alpha(F) and A:=i=1aAiA:=\bigcup_{i=1}^{a}A_{i}.

First, we claim that for any set {a1,a2,,aα+1}A\{a_{1},a_{2},\dots,a_{\alpha+1}\}\subset A in which aia_{i} and aja_{j} are from different AkA_{k}’s, there exists a Berge-(KνKα+1¯)(K_{\nu}\vee\overline{K_{\alpha+1}}) in \mathcal{H} with core vertices {v1,v2,,vν}{a1,a2,,aα+1}\{v_{1},v_{2},\dots,v_{\nu}\}\cup\{a_{1},a_{2},\dots,a_{\alpha+1}\} and in which the viv_{i}’s correspond to the KνK_{\nu}. Indeed, let us assume without loss of generality that aiAia_{i}\in A_{i}. Now, for each i[α+1]i\in[\alpha+1] and j[ν]j\in[\nu], we can use the edge (V1Ai){vj1}(V_{1}\cup A_{i})\setminus\{v_{j-1}\} to connect aia_{i} to vjv_{j} (indices of the vjv_{j}’s taken modulo ν\nu), giving us a Berge Kν,α+1K_{\nu,\alpha+1}. Then, from (9), we can see that

a=nνtkν+1nkk>ν2+α+1,a=\frac{n-\nu-t}{k-\nu+1}\geq\frac{n-k}{k}>\nu^{2}+\alpha+1,

where in the last inequality, we use our bound on nn and that ν2+α+2<10|V(F)|3\nu^{2}+\alpha+2<10|V(F)|^{3}. In particular, this implies that we have at least ν2>(ν2)\nu^{2}>\binom{\nu}{2} sets AiA_{i} with i>α+1i>\alpha+1. Therefore, there are plenty of edges of the form (V1Ai){vj}(V_{1}\cup A_{i})\setminus\{v_{j}\} for i[a][α+1]i\in[a]\setminus[\alpha+1] and j[ν]j\in[\nu] to create the Berge-KνK_{\nu} on V1V_{1}. This completes the proof of the claim.

Now, arbitrarily add edges to \mathcal{H} that do not create a Berge-FF until the hypergraph is Berge-FF-saturated, and call the resulting hypergraph \mathcal{H}^{\prime}. Let xAx\in A be a vertex. For the sake of contradiction, assume that

d(x)d(x)>(|V1|+t+(α1)k2k1).d_{\mathcal{H}^{\prime}}(x)-d_{\mathcal{H}}(x)>\binom{|V_{1}|+t+(\alpha-1)k^{2}}{k-1}.

This implies that xx has α\alpha neighbors, which we will denote by x1,,xαAx_{1},\dots,x_{\alpha}\in A such that

  1. 1.

    xix_{i} and xix_{i^{\prime}} are not contained in the same AjA_{j} for iii\neq i^{\prime}, j[a]j\in[a], and

  2. 2.

    there exists an injection ϕ\phi from {x1,,xα}\{x_{1},\dots,x_{\alpha}\} into {eE()E()xe}\{e\in E(\mathcal{H}^{\prime})\setminus E(\mathcal{H})\mid x\in e\} such that xiϕ(xi)x_{i}\in\phi(x_{i}) for i[α]i\in[\alpha].

Indeed, since d(x)d(x)>(|V1|+tk1)d_{\mathcal{H}^{\prime}}(x)-d_{\mathcal{H}}(x)>\binom{|V_{1}|+t}{k-1}, xx must have a neighbor outside of V1TV_{1}\cup T, say x1x_{1}, with an edge e1E()E()e_{1}\in E(\mathcal{H}^{\prime})\setminus E(\mathcal{H}) such that x,x1e1x,x_{1}\in e_{1}. The edge e1e_{1} intersects at most kk of the AiA_{i}’s. Let B1B_{1} denote the union of all the AiA_{i}’s which intersect e1e_{1}, and note that |B1|k|A1|k2|B_{1}|\leq k|A_{1}|\leq k^{2}. Since d(x1)d(x1)>(|V1|+t+k2k1)d_{\mathcal{H}^{\prime}}(x_{1})-d_{\mathcal{H}}(x_{1})>\binom{|V_{1}|+t+k^{2}}{k-1}, xx must have a second neighbor, say x2x_{2}, not in V1TB1V_{1}\cup T\cup B_{1}, and let e2E()E()e_{2}\in E(\mathcal{H}^{\prime})\setminus E(\mathcal{H}) be such that x,x2e2x,x_{2}\in e_{2}, noting that e2e1e_{2}\neq e_{1}. Then we can define B2B_{2} to be the union of all the AiA_{i}’s that intersect e1e_{1} or e2e_{2}, and note that |B2|2k|A1|2k2|B_{2}|\leq 2k|A_{1}|\leq 2k^{2}. Continuing inductively, we can find x3,,xαx_{3},\dots,x_{\alpha}, as claimed.

These edges in E()E()E(\mathcal{H}^{\prime})\setminus E(\mathcal{H}), along with the Berge-(KνKα+1¯)(K_{\nu}\vee\overline{K_{\alpha+1}}) in \mathcal{H} with core vertices {v1,v2,,vν,x1,x2,,xα,x}\{v_{1},v_{2},\dots,v_{\nu},x_{1},x_{2},\dots,x_{\alpha},x\} give us a Berge-(Kν+1Kα¯)(K_{\nu+1}\vee\overline{K_{\alpha}}), which contains a Berge-FF, a contradiction. Thus, d(x)d(x)(|V1|+t+(α1)k2k1)d_{\mathcal{H}^{\prime}}(x)-d_{\mathcal{H}}(x)\leq\binom{|V_{1}|+t+(\alpha-1)k^{2}}{k-1} for every vertex xAx\in A.

We can now wastefully bound |E()||E(\mathcal{H}^{\prime})|. Indeed, we have that |E()|=νaνn=O(n)|E(\mathcal{H})|=\nu a\leq\nu n=O(n), and

|E()E()|\displaystyle|E(\mathcal{H}^{\prime})\setminus E(\mathcal{H})| |{eV1T}|+|{eE()E()eA}|\displaystyle\leq|\{e\in V_{1}\cup T\}|+|\{e\in E(\mathcal{H}^{\prime})\setminus E(\mathcal{H})\mid e\cap A\neq\emptyset\}|
(|V1|+tk)+ak(|V1|+t+(α1)k2k1)\displaystyle\leq\binom{|V_{1}|+t}{k}+ak\binom{|V_{1}|+t+(\alpha-1)k^{2}}{k-1}
k(|V1|+t+(α1)k2k1)n=O(n).\displaystyle\leq k\binom{|V_{1}|+t+(\alpha-1)k^{2}}{k-1}n=O(n).

Thus,

satk(n,Berge-F)|E()|=|E()|+|E()E()|=O(n).\mathrm{sat}_{k}(n,\text{Berge-}F)\leq|E(\mathcal{H}^{\prime})|=|E(\mathcal{H})|+|E(\mathcal{H}^{\prime})\setminus E(\mathcal{H})|=O(n).

We will need a result from [1] to deal with an edge case in Theorem 1.3. The result below is significantly weaker than the result in [1], but it suffices for our purposes.

Theorem 4.3 ([1]).

For any k3k\geq 3, 1\ell\geq 1,

satk(n,Berge-K1,)=O(n).\mathrm{sat}_{k}(n,\text{Berge-}K_{1,\ell})=O(n).

We also need a result that handles the case when kνk\leq\nu. Let β(F)\beta(F) denote the vertex cover number of FF.

Theorem 4.4 ([5]).

Fix k3k\geq 3. If FF is a graph with β(F)k+1\beta(F)\geq k+1, then satk(n,Berge-F)=O(n)\mathrm{sat}_{k}(n,\text{Berge-}F)=O(n).

We can now prove the first of our two results on linearity.

Proof of Theorem 1.3.

First note that if α(F)=|V(F)|\alpha(F)=|V(F)|, then FF contains no edges and the saturation function is not defined. Furthermore, if α(F)=|V(F)|1\alpha(F)=|V(F)|-1, then FF is a star, and by Theorem 4.3, the result follows. Thus, we may assume |V(F)|α(F)+2|V(F)|\geq\alpha(F)+2. Suppose that |V(F)|α(F)1=:νk|V(F)|-\alpha(F)-1=:\nu\geq k. Then using the fact that |V(F)|=α(F)+β(F)|V(F)|=\alpha(F)+\beta(F), we get β(F)1k\beta(F)-1\geq k. In this case, Theorem 4.4 shows that satk(n,Berge-F)=O(n)\mathrm{sat}_{k}(n,\text{Berge-}F)=O(n). Thus, we will assume that k>νk>\nu.

Let :=(n,k,F)\mathcal{H}:=\mathcal{H}(n,k,F) as in Construction 4.1. We claim that \mathcal{H} is Berge-FF-free. Assume to the contrary that there is a copy of FF which witnesses Berge-FF in \mathcal{H}. We have that |V(F)A||V(F)|ν=α(F)+1|V(F)\cap A|\geq|V(F)|-\nu=\alpha(F)+1, and further there must exist an i[a]i\in[a] such that |V(F)Ai|2|V(F)\cap A_{i}|\geq 2 since otherwise the α(F)+1\alpha(F)+1 vertices in V(F)AV(F)\cap A would form an independent set in FF which is too large. Say x,yAix,y\in A_{i}. We must have dF(x)+dF(y)1νd_{F}(x)+d_{F}(y)-1\leq\nu since there are only ν\nu edges of \mathcal{H} that intersect AiA_{i} and only one can play the role of xyxy, contributing to the degree of both vertices, but dF(x)+dF(y)12δ(F)1>|V(F)|α(F)1=νd_{F}(x)+d_{F}(y)-1\geq 2\delta(F)-1>|V(F)|-\alpha(F)-1=\nu, a contradiction.

Thus, \mathcal{H} is Berge-FF-free, so by Lemma 4.2, the result holds. ∎

We state here a construction from [5] for a kk-uniform hypergraph on a vertex set VV of size nn (where nn is sufficiently large), which will be used to prove our final result. We will let f(G)f(G) denote the vertex feedback number of the graph GG.

Construction 4.5 ([5]).

Let GG be any graph and let nn be sufficiently large. If f(G)=0f(G)=0, then for any aa, let Hk(n,a,G,)H_{k}(n,a,G,\emptyset) denote the empty graph on vertex set VV. If f(G)1f(G)\geq 1, let SS be a minimum vertex feedback set of GG, and let |E(G[S])|=|E(G[S])|=\ell. Let the (initially empty) vertex set VV be partitioned into three sets V=V1V2V3V=V_{1}\cup V_{2}\cup V_{3}, where |V1|=f(G)|V_{1}|=f(G), and |V2|=(k2)|V_{2}|=(k-2)\ell. We first add \ell edges between V1V_{1} and V2V_{2} to create a Berge-G[S]G[S] with core vertices in V1V_{1}. Indeed, arbitrarily label the vertices in V1V_{1} with labels from the vertex set of G[S]G[S], and then for each 22-edge uvuv of G[S]G[S], add a kk-edge that contains the vertices labeled uu and vv in V1V_{1}, and k2k-2 vertices in V2V_{2} so that after all \ell edges are added, each vertex in V2V_{2} has degree 11.

Now, choose some integer 1ak11\leq a\leq k-1 such that a+f(G)ka+f(G)\geq k. If aa does not divide |V3||V_{3}|, arbitrarily choose (|V3|moda)(|V_{3}|\mod a) vertices, and remove them to form the set V3V3V_{3}^{\prime}\subset V_{3}, with |V3|=ra|V_{3}^{\prime}|=ra for some rr\in\mathbb{Z}. Partition V3V_{3}^{\prime} into rr sets of size aa, and let \mathcal{M} be the collection of these aa-sets. For each aa-set AA in \mathcal{M}, add the (|V1|ka)\binom{|V_{1}|}{k-a} edges that contain AA and kak-a vertices from V1V_{1}. Call this construction k(n,a,G,S)\mathcal{H}_{k}(n,a,G,S).

Our poof of Theorem 1.4 will use a=kf(G)+1a=k-f(G)+1 or a=k1a=k-1. However, the original statement of the construction of k(n,a,G,S)\mathcal{H}_{k}(n,a,G,S) in [5] takes aa as a more general parameter and facilitates the statement of their theorem.

Theorem 4.6 ([5]).

Let FF be a graph with vertex feedback set SS, |S|=f(F)|S|=f(F). Let 1ak11\leq a\leq k-1 be such that a+f(F)>ka+f(F)>k. If (n,a,F,S)\mathcal{H}(n,a,F,S) does not contain a Berge-FF, then

satk(n,Berge-F)=O(n).\mathrm{sat}_{k}(n,\text{Berge-}F)=O(n).

We are now ready to prove Theorem 1.4

Proof of Theorem 1.4.

Let SS be a minimum vertex feedback set of FF. First, consider the case when fkf\leq k so that 1a=kf+1k1\leq a=k-f+1\leq k. Let H:=Hk(n,kf+1,F,S)H:=H_{k}(n,k-f+1,F,S). We claim that HH is Berge-FF-free. Indeed, suppose for the sake of contradiction, that HH contains a Berge-FF, and let FF be a witness to this Berge-FF. For any AA\in\mathcal{M}, only (|V1|ka)=(ff1)=f<g\binom{|V_{1}|}{k-a}=\binom{f}{f-1}=f<g edges of HH are incident with vertices in AA, so no cycle of FF can be contained in a set AA. This implies that V1V_{1} is a vertex feedback set of FF, and since |V1|=f|V_{1}|=f, V1V_{1} is a minimum vertex feedback set of FF.

Similarly, if f>kf>k, then we choose a=k1a=k-1 and let H:=Hk(n,kf+1,F,S)H:=H_{k}(n,k-f+1,F,S). We claim that HH is Berge-FF-free. Indeed, suppose for the sake of contradiction, that HH contains a Berge-FF, and let FF be a witness to this Berge-FF. For any AA\in\mathcal{M}, only (|V1|ka)=(f1)=f<g\binom{|V_{1}|}{k-a}=\binom{f}{1}=f<g edges of HH are incident with vertices in AA, so no cycle of FF can be contained in a set AA. This implies that V1V_{1} is a vertex feedback set of FF, and since |V1|=f|V_{1}|=f, V1V_{1} is a minimum vertex feedback set of FF.

In either case, we proceed with the following argument. For any vV1v\in V_{1}, vv must be in a cycle CC in FF that does not contain any other vertices in V1V_{1}, since otherwise V1{v}V_{1}\setminus\{v\} would be a smaller vertex feedback set. However, this implies that CC is contained in {v}A\{v\}\cup A for some AA\in\mathcal{M}, but there are only f<gf<g hyperedges of HH that intersect AA, so there are not enough hyperedges to create a Berge copy of the cycle CC, and we arrive at a contradiction.

Thus HH is Berge-FF-free, and by Theorem 4.6, the result follows. ∎

5 Concluding remarks

The saturation number for Berge-K3K_{3} is known exactly, whereas here we were only able to determine the asymptotics of the saturation number for larger cliques. It would be nice to be able to find the exact value, at least in some small cases. The most tractable case is sat3(n,Berge-K4)\mathrm{sat}_{3}(n,\text{Berge-}K_{4}). By counting edges in 𝒮(n,3,4)\mathcal{S}(n,3,4) from Construction 3.7 more carefully than is done in Theorem 3.9, we can get the following:

Remark 5.1.

For all n10n\geq 10,

sat3(n,Berge-K4){n if n is odd,n+1 if n is even.\mathrm{sat}_{3}(n,\text{Berge-}K_{4})\leq\begin{cases}n&\text{ if }n\text{ is odd,}\\ n+1&\text{ if }n\text{ is even.}\end{cases}

It seems difficult to push the lower bound to match this, but it would be quite interesting to see work in this direction.

Problem 5.2.

Determine sat3(n,Berge-K4)\mathrm{sat}_{3}(n,\text{Berge-}K_{4}) exactly. In particular, is sat3(n,Berge-K4)=n\mathrm{sat}_{3}(n,\text{Berge-}K_{4})=n when nn is odd?

References

  • [1] B. Austhof and S. English, Nearly-regular hypergraphs and saturation of Berge stars, Electron. J. Combin. 26 (2019), no. 4, Paper No. 4.49, 11.
  • [2] M. Axenovich and C. Winter, A note on saturation for Berge-GG hypergraphs, Graphs Combin. 35 (2019), no. 4, 933–939.
  • [3] B. Bollobás, On generalized graphs, Acta Math. Acad. Sci. Hungar. 16 (1965), 447–452.
  • [4] B. Currie, J. Faudree, R. Faudree, and J. Schmitt, A survey of minimum saturated graphs, Electron. J. Combin. (2021), DS19: Oct 11, 2021.
  • [5] S. English, D. Gerbner, A. Methuku, and M. Tait, Linearity of saturation for Berge hypergraphs, European J. Combin. 78 (2019), 205–213.
  • [6] S. English, P. Gordon, N. Graber, A. Methuku, and E. Sullivan, Saturation of Berge hypergraphs, Discrete Math. 342 (2019), no. 6, 1738–1761.
  • [7] P. Erdős, A. Hajnal, and J. Moon, A Problem in Graph Theory, The American Mathematical Monthly 71 (1964), no. 10, 1107–1110.
  • [8] D. Gerbner and C. Palmer, Extremal results for Berge hypergraphs, SIAM J. Discrete Math. 31 (2017), no. 4, 2314–2327.
  • [9] D. Gerbner, B. Patkós, Zs. Tuza, and M. Vizer, On saturation of Berge hypergraphs, European J. Combin. 102 (2022), Paper No. 103477, 7.
  • [10] L. Kászonyi and Z. Tuza, Saturated graphs with minimal number of edges, J. Graph Theory 10 (1986), no. 2, 203–210.
  • [11] L. Liu, C. He, and L. Kang, Saturation number of Berge stars in random hypergraphs, Electron. J. Combin. 27 (2020), no. 4, Paper No. 4.45, 10.
  • [12] O. Pikhurko, The minimum size of saturated hypergraphs, Combin. Probab. Comput. 8 (1999), no. 5, 483–492.