arXiv++ Combinatorics

The acyclic chromatic index (or acyclic edge-chromatic number) of a graph is the least number of colors needed to properly color its edges so that none of its cycles has only two colors. We show that for a graph of max degree $Δ$, the acyclic chromatic index is at most $3.142(Δ-1)+1$, improving on the (best to date) bound of Fialho et al. (2020). Our improvement is made possible by considering unordered (non-plane) trees, instead of ordered (plane) ones, as witness structures for the Lovász Local Lemma, a key combinatorial tool often used in related works. The counting of these witness structures entails methods of Analytic Combinatorics.

The {\em acyclic chromatic number} of a graph is the least number of colors needed to properly color its vertices so that none of its cycles has only two colors. The {\em acyclic chromatic index} is the analogous graph parameter for edge colorings. We first show that the acyclic chromatic index is at most $2Δ-1$, where $Δ$ is the maximum degree of the graph. We then show that for all $ε>0$ and for $Δ$ large enough (depending on $ε$), the acyclic chromatic number of the graph is at most $\lceil(4^{-1/3} +ε) Δ^{4/3} \rceil +Δ+ 1$. Both results improve long chains of previous successive advances. Both are algorithmic, in the sense that the colorings are generated by randomized algorithms. Previous randomized algorithms assume the availability of enough colors to guarantee properness deterministically and use additional colors in dealing with the bichromatic cycles in a randomized fashion. In contrast, our algorithm initially generates colorings that are not necessarily proper; it only aims at avoiding cycles where all pairs of edges, or vertices, that are one edge, or vertex, apart in a traversal of the cycle are homochromatic (of the same color). When this goal is reached, the algorithm checks for properness and if necessary it repeats until properness is attained. Thus savings in the number of colors is attained.

The acyclic chromatic number of a graph is the least number of colors needed to properly color its vertices so that none of its cycles has only two colors. We show that for all $α>2^{-1/3}$ there exists an integer $Δ_α$ such that if the maximum degree $Δ$ of a graph is at least $Δ_α$, then the acyclic chromatic number of the graph is at most $\lceilαΔ^{4/3} \rceil +Δ+ 1$. The previous best bound, due to Gonçalves et al (2020), was $(3/2) Δ^{4/3} + O(Δ)$.

The acyclic chromatic index of a graph $G$ is the least number of colors needed to properly color its edges so that none of its cycles is bichromatic. In this work, we show that $2Δ-1$ colors are sufficient to produce such a coloring, where $Δ$ is the maximum degree of the graph. In contrast with most extant randomized algorithmic approaches to the chromatic index, where the algorithms presuppose enough colors to guarantee properness deterministically and use randomness only to deal with the bichromatic cycles, our randomized, Moser-type algorithm produces a not necessarily proper random coloring, in a structured way, trying to avoid cycles whose edges of the same parity are homochromatic, and only when this goal is reached it checks for properness. It repeats until properness is attained.

We investigate when non-dictatorial aggregation is possible from an algorithmic perspective, where non-dictatorial aggregation means that the votes cast by the members of a society can be aggregated in such a way that there is no single member of the society that always dictates the collective outcome. We consider the setting in which the members of a society take a position on a fixed collection of issues, where for each issue several different alternatives are possible, but the combination of choices must belong to a given set X of allowable voting patterns. Such a set X is called a possibility domain if there is an aggregator that is non-dictatorial, operates separately on each issue, and returns values among those cast by the society on each issue. We design a polynomial-time algorithm that decides, given a set X of voting patterns, whether or not X is a possibility domain. Furthermore, if X is a possibility domain, then the algorithm constructs in polynomial time a non-dictatorial aggregator for X. Furthermore, we show that the question of whether a Boolean domain X is a possibility domain is in NLOGSPACE. We also design a polynomial-time algorithm that decides whether X is a uniform possibility domain, that is, whether X admits an aggregator that is non-dictatorial even when restricted to any two positions for each issue. As in the case of possibility domains, the algorithm also constructs in polynomial time a uniform non-dictatorial aggregator, if one exists. Then, we turn our attention to the case where X is given implicitly, either as the set of assignments satisfying a propositional formula, or as a set of consistent evaluations of a sequence of propositional formulas. In both cases, we provide bounds to the complexity of deciding if X is a (uniform) possibility domain.

Moser and Tardos (2010) gave an algorithmic proof of the lopsided Lovász local lemma (LLL) in the variable framework, where each of the undesirable events is assumed to depend on a subset of a collection of independent random variables. For the proof, they define a notion of a lopsided dependency between the events suitable for this framework. In this work, we strengthen this notion, defining a novel directed notion of dependency and prove LLL for the corresponding graph. We show that this graph can be strictly sparser (thus the sufficient condition for LLL weaker) compared with graphs that correspond to other extant lopsided versions of dependency. Thus, in a sense, we address the problem "find other simple local conditions for the constraints (in the variable framework) that advantageously translate to some abstract lopsided condition" posed by Szegedy (2013). We also give an example where our notion of dependency graph gives better results than the classical Shearer lemma. Finally, we prove Shearer's lemma for the dependency graph we define. For the proofs, we perform a direct probabilistic analysis that yields an exponentially small upper bound for the probability of the algorithm that searches for the desired assignment to the variables not to return a correct answer within $n$ steps. In contrast, the method of proof that became known as the entropic method, gives an estimate of only the expectation of the number of steps until the algorithm returns a correct answer, unless the probabilities are tinkered with.

We present an alternative proof to the Touchard-Kaplansky formula for the problème des ménages, which, we believe, is simpler than the extant ones and is in the spirit of the elegant original proof by Kaplansky (1943). About the latter proof, Bogart and Doyle (1986) argued that despite its cleverness, suffered from opting to give precedence to one of the genders for the couples involved (Bogart and Doyle supplied an elegant proof that avoided such gender-dependent bias).

We consider the problem of aggregating votes cast by a society on a fixed set of issues, where each member of the society may vote for one of several positions on each issue, but the combination of votes on the various issues is restricted to a set of feasible voting patterns. We require the aggregation to be supportive, i.e. for every issue $j$ the corresponding component $f_j$ of every aggregator on every issue should satisfy $f_j(x_1, ,\ldots, x_n) \in \{x_1, ,\ldots, x_n\}$. We prove that, in such a set-up, non-dictatorial aggregation of votes in a society of some size is possible if and only if either non-dictatorial aggregation is possible in a society of only two members or a ternary aggregator exists that either on every issue $j$ is a majority operation, i.e. the corresponding component satisfies $f_j(x,x,y) = f_j(x,y,x) = f_j(y,x,x) =x, \forall x,y$, or on every issue is a minority operation, i.e. the corresponding component satisfies $f_j(x,x,y) = f_j(x,y,x) = f_j(y,x,x) =y, \forall x,y.$ We then introduce a notion of uniformly non-dictatorial aggregator, which is defined to be an aggregator that on every issue, and when restricted to an arbitrary two-element subset of the votes for that issue, differs from all projection functions. We first give a characterization of sets of feasible voting patterns that admit a uniformly non-dictatorial aggregator. Then making use of Bulatov's dichotomy theorem for conservative constraint satisfaction problems, we connect social choice theory with combinatorial complexity by proving that if a set of feasible voting patterns $X$ has a uniformly non-dictatorial aggregator of some arity then the multi-sorted conservative constraint satisfaction problem on $X$, in the sense introduced by Bulatov and Jeavons, with each issue representing a sort, is tractable; otherwise it is NP-complete.

We provide an alternative constructive proof of the Asymmetric Lovász Local Lemma. Our proof uses the classic algorithmic framework of Moser and the analysis introduced by Giotis, Kirousis, Psaromiligkos, and Thilikos in "On the algorithmic Lovász Local Lemma and acyclic edge coloring", combined with the work of Bender and Richmond on the multivariable Lagrange Inversion formula.

We give a probabilistic analysis of a Moser-type algorithm for the Lovász Local Lemma (LLL), adjusted to search for acyclic edge colorings of a graph. We thus improve the best known upper bound to acyclic chromatic index, also obtained by analyzing a similar algorithm, but through the entropic method (basically counting argument). Specifically we show that a graph with maximum degree $Δ$ has an acyclic proper edge coloring with at most $\lceil 3.74(Δ-1)\rceil+1 $ colors, whereas, previously, the best bound was $4(Δ-1)$. The main contribution of this work is that it comprises a probabilistic analysis of a Moser-type algorithm applied to events pertaining to dependent variables.