arXiv++ Combinatorics

Core stability gives approval-based committee elections a strong form of coalitional proportionality, but deterministic existence is not known for an arbitrary number of seats. We prove that every finite election with nine seats has a deterministic Hare-quota core committee. Starting from an eight-seat committee that is both a global Proportional Approval Voting (PAV) maximizer and core stable, we suppose that all one-candidate extensions are blocked and extract an inclusion-minimal closed response system. Singleton responses are eliminated by exact equality rigidity. For the remaining responses, rational Farkas certificates bound every nonpositive PAV add-marginal drift below by $-n/189$ and force every successor drift above $n/126$. The uniform response chain is irreducible, so stationarity makes these bounds incompatible. The computer-assisted component comprises an exact pointwise check over 7,356 voter types, 36 one-blocker cells, and a symmetry-complete family of 19 two-blocker motifs. Exact certificate archives and standard-library verifiers support these checks. The theorem settles the nine-seat case but does not decide deterministic core existence for arbitrary committee size.

We study graph coloring with color preferences, in which each vertex ranks the available colors. In addition to assigning different colors to adjacent vertices, we require the coloring to be stable: no group of vertices can cyclically exchange their assigned colors so that each strictly prefers its new color to its original one. We define the stable chromatic number $χ_\mathrm{stable}(G)$ of a graph $G$ as the minimum integer $k$ such that every preference profile admits a stable $k$-coloring of $G$. We establish several upper and lower bounds. In particular, for any acyclic orientation of the edges of $G$, the largest number of vertices reachable from a vertex by directed paths, including the vertex itself, is an upper bound on $χ_\mathrm{stable}(G)$. This shows that $χ_\mathrm{stable}(G)$ is well-defined. We also show that $O(t \log (1+n/t))$ colors suffice for an $n$-vertex graph $G$ of treewidth $t$, and complement this with a lower bound in terms of the Grundy number. Turning to the problem of finding a minimum stable coloring for a given profile, we show that stable $2$-colorability is polynomial-time solvable, whereas stable $k$-colorability is NP-complete for every fixed $k\ge 3$. Using the treewidth bound, we give a fixed-parameter tractable algorithm parameterized by treewidth.

In this paper, we study fair division problems in which resources are structured as graphs and agents must receive connected bundles. This connectivity requirement fundamentally alters the problem, making it significantly more challenging than its classical counterpart. We focus on the fairness notion of $\mathrm{EF1}_{\mathrm{outer}}$, where envy can be eliminated by removing at most one vertex whose deletion does not disconnect the bundle -- a critical constraint for applications such as land division and network allocation. Our first result extends prior work by establishing the existence of $\mathrm{EF1}_{\mathrm{outer}}$ allocations for an infinite family of non-traceable graphs (that is, graphs that do not admit a Hamiltonian path), answering a central open question and generalizing Bilò et al.'s result for traceable graphs. We then make progress on a conjecture concerning the $\mathrm{EF1}_{\mathrm{outer}}$ spectrum of trees due to Chen and Zwicker. Finally, we complement our structural results with algorithmic insights, showing that deciding the existence of an $\mathrm{EF1}_{\mathrm{outer}}$ allocation is NP-complete even for binary additive valuations, thereby resolving an open complexity question. Taken together, our results deepen the connection between graph theory and fair division, and offer new tools for studying fairness in structured resource environments.

Condorcet's paradox is a foundational result in social choice theory, showing that no matter which candidate wins an election, a majority of voters may prefer some losing candidate. Worse still, even if the election can choose a committee of $k$ winners, some loser may beat every winner in a majority vote. Recent work showed that this obstruction can be sidestepped by relaxing the majority threshold. For all $\varepsilon > 0$, any election can select a committee of $O(1/\varepsilon^2)$ winners such that no loser is preferred to every winner by $\frac12 + \varepsilon$ fraction of voters. We present a simple construction, found by GPT-5.6 Sol Ultra, which proves that this result is tight up to a constant factor.

The Kemeny rule aggregates rankings by minimizing their total Kendall-tau distance from an aggregate order. We prove that Kemeny Score is NP-complete for exactly three unweighted rankings, even when every candidate pair is split $2$-to-$1$. On the same profiles, the winner, unique-winner, and possible- and necessary-precedence problems are $Θ_2^p$-complete, while recognizing a Kemeny-optimal or uniquely Kemeny-optimal aggregate is coNP-complete. The hard instances induce tournaments of majority dimension exactly $3$. The reduction also determines the exact maximum-cut value from the optimal Kemeny score and recovers a maximum cut from any Kemeny-optimal aggregate. For every fixed $q\geq3$ and $\lceil q/2\rceil\leq s\leq q$, minimum pairwise support $s$ yields a sharp dichotomy: the score problem is NP-complete, the winner and precedence problems are $Θ_2^p$-complete, and the recognition problems are coNP-complete when $3s\leq2q$; for $3s>2q$, the majority tournament is transitive and its unique topological order is the unique Kemeny-optimal aggregate. Exact support $s$ suffices in the hard case when $s>q/2$, and supports in ${s,s+1}$ suffice when $s=q/2$. These results give complete fixed-profile-size classifications and transfer to Slater orders, permutation medians, and maximum-likelihood central rankings in the Mallows model. Finally, a six-copy construction proves NP-completeness of both Kemeny Score and Kendall--Tau Center for three pairwise-equidistant rankings that still split every pair $2$-to-$1$. For $N$ output candidates, their common distance is $\frac23\binom N2$, the largest possible for an equidistant triple. The construction gives affine formulas for both optimal values, characterizes all Kemeny-optimal output orders, and shows that the output has a unique Kemeny-optimal order and a unique center exactly when the input has a unique Kemeny-optimal order.

We investigate a remarkable probability distribution on the symmetric group, due to Steck from the early 1970's, arising from a natural process that intertwines continuous and discrete selections for the values and positions, respectively, of a permutation. Steck used a matrix determinant to express his distribution, whereas we contribute new combinatorial formulas for it in terms of "bottom-to-top maxima" (that are simply the left-to-right maxima of the inverse) permutation statistics. These formulas specialize, in the case of the identity permutation, to a result of Pitman--Stanley from the late 1990's. We then use the Steck distribution to define a game of best choice (secretary problem variation) that incorporates a filtering process for the pool of candidates over time. We solve the model for the case where there is a single filtering step. It turns out that the probability of winning the game under optimal play is similar to the classical model ($1/e$, asymptotically), but that the interviewer must employ a different (non-positional) strategy in order to attain it. The optimal strategy depends on the relationship between interview position and the next bottom-to-top maximum value after the filtering step. Among other results, we prove that the optimal strategy always transitions from rejection to acceptance between positions $(1/e)$ and $(1/e) + (1 - 1/e)y$ as a proportion of the total candidates considered, where $y$ is the proportion of unfiltered candidates.

We attach to a finite group $G$ and a structured payoff probe $φ$ an integer \emph{payoff-difference lattice} $M_φ(G)$ and its \emph{conductor} $C_φ(G)$: the primes at which $M_φ(G)$ loses rank modulo $p$. Our main result is an exact computation: for any CA-group the commuting conductor is rad$(b-1)$, where $b$ is the number of maximal abelian subgroups. In particular, conductor primes need not divide $|G|$: the prime $3$ occurs for a $2$-group of order $64$ with $b=7$. The commuting Smith spectrum is an invariant of the isoclinism class and obeys an exact direct-product law, giving ${\rm C_{comm}}(G\times H) = {\rm C_{comm}}(G) \cup {\rm C_{comm}}(H)$ unconditionally. A Galois-orbit-trace character probe reads a complementary layer: an index-$2$ subgroup forces $2\in {\rm C_{char}}(G)$ while no odd prime is forced, and ${\rm C_{comm}}(D_{2q}) = \{q\}$, ${\rm C_{char}}(D_{2q}) = \{2\}$ for all odd primes $q$. Certified exhaustive computation ($|G|\le128$ commuting, $|G|\le64$ character) and a deformation-family analysis support the general program: classify the Smith torsion of the compressed centralizer-type incidence matrix $B_G$.

In the fair allocation problem under conflict constraints, the goal is to partition the vertices of a graph among agents in a fair manner, such that no two adjacent vertices are assigned to the same agent. We study this problem for agents with common preferences through the lens of three fairness criteria: stochastic-dominance envy-freeness up to one item for preference orders (SD-EF1), envy-freeness up to one item for monotone additive valuations (EF1), and envy-freeness up to one item from each side for general additive valuations (EF[1,1]). To do so, we introduce a hierarchy of variants of the strong chromatic number, a graph quantity introduced independently by Alon and Fellows in the early nineties. Our results reveal a close connection between fair allocation under conflict constraints and the first two levels of this hierarchy, providing a unified route to both existential and algorithmic results. For SD-EF1, we fully characterize the number of agents needed to guarantee a fair allocation of a given graph for every common preference order. For EF1 and EF[1,1], we provide analogous sufficient conditions, extending a result on path graphs due to Equbal, Gurjar, Igarashi, Kumar, Manurangsi, Nath, Saxena, Vaish, and Yoneda. We also show that, unlike in the SD-EF1 setting, the sufficient conditions for EF1 and EF[1,1] are not necessary in general. Our framework yields existential and algorithmic consequences in terms of the maximum degree. We obtain that every graph with maximum degree $Δ$ admits SD-EF1, EF1, and EF[1,1] allocations for common preferences whenever the number of agents is at least $3Δ-1$. We further provide, for any $\varepsilon>0$, deterministic polynomial-time algorithms that find such allocations whenever the number of agents is at least $(3+\varepsilon)Δ$. These guarantees strengthen earlier work by Barman and Viswanathan on equitable colorings.

We establish the exact exponential growth rate of the $ρ$-th moment of the constrained guesswork $G_{\mathrm{coset}}$ -- the rank of the true noise vector within its syndrome coset of a random binary linear code under i.i.d.\ Bernoulli$(p)$ noise: \( \lim_{n\to\infty} \frac{1}{n}\log_2\Eb\!\left[G_{\mathrm{coset}}^ρ\right] = ρ\,h_{\frac{1}{1+ρ}}(p)\;+\;ρ(R-1), \, ρ>0, \) where $h_α(p)$ is the binary Rényi entropy and $R=k/n$ is the code rate. The exponent shifts down by exactly $ρ(1-R)$ relative to the unconstrained Arıkan--Merhav exponent, with each of the $n(1-R)$ parity checks contributing equally. Finite-length simulations confirm convergence from below. We further establish: (i)~a transfer theorem expressing the partition-function exponent in terms of an arbitrary weight-enumerator growth rate $g(δ)$; (ii)~the exact exponent for $L_n$-list (``$k$-th'') constrained guesswork; and (iii)~a sharp second-order refinement of order $ρ\log_2 n$. Beyond the binary i.i.d.\ setting, we prove a universality theorem: for any code ensemble $\mathcal{E}$ whose weight enumerator concentrates at rate $g_{\mathcal{E}}(δ)$, the guesswork exponent equals $(1+ρ)ψ_{1/(1+ρ)}(g_{\mathcal{E}})-ρ\,ψ_1(g_{\mathcal{E}})$, where $ψ_α(g)=\sup_δ[g(δ)+α\ell(δ)]$. As concrete applications, we instantiate this theorem for the $q$-ary extension, $Λ_q(ρ)=ρ\,h^{(q)}_{1/(1+ρ)}(P)+ρ(R-1)\log_2 q$, and for Gallager's regular LDPC ensemble, obtaining a closed-form guesswork exponent via an exact finite-length identity for the ensemble-average weight enumerator.

The classical existence result of Nash guarantees that every finite noncooperative game admits an equilibrium in mixed strategies, but it leaves open the question of when pure strategy equilibria exist. This paper develops a structural approach to that question by exploiting properties of the best-response correspondence on finite strategy sets. Building on recent work, we derive new sufficient conditions for the existence of pure strategy Nash equilibria in finite games. We introduce several broad classes of finite games for which pure equilibria are guaranteed, including a class that generalizes unilaterally competitive games and a class characterized by the existence of an aggregate-payoff maximizer over an ordered set. Our results clarify the role of acyclicity, and aggregation in producing pure equilibria and connect disparate sufficient-condition results in the literature into a unified framework.

We give a brief exposition of a result of Song, Nguyen, and Lin (2026) that every election (with ranked preferences) has a Condorcet winning set of at most five candidates.

A group of individuals wishes to classify $m$ objects into $n$ categories in such a way that no class is left empty, a condition known as surjectivity. The opinions of the individuals are aggregated separately for each object using an aggregation function that can depend on the object. Maniquet and Mongin showed that if the aggregation functions are unanimous and the outcome must always be surjective, then the aggregation mechanism is dictatorial. Cailloux et al. showed that the same holds even if unanimity is relaxed to citizen sovereignty (each object can be classified into any category). We show that similar results hold even if we only require the outcome to be surjective with probability $1-ε$ (with respect to an arbitrary symmetric i.i.d. distribution), provided that the aggregation functions are far from being constant. On the way, we characterize all aggregation mechanisms whose outcome is always surjective without any assumptions on the aggregation functions. Our approach uses a general result of Alekseev and Filmus which has wider applicability. We illustrate this by proving a similar impossibility result for aggregating equivalence relations.

Quantile shares, introduced by Babichenko, Feldman, Holzman, and Narayan [STOC 2024], offer an ordinal, self-maximizing, and interpretable benchmark for fair division of indivisible goods, but their universal feasibility is known only conditional on the rainbow Erdős matching conjecture (EMC). Specifically, Babichenko et al. showed that assuming the rainbow EMC in the near-perfect matching regime, the $(1/2e)$-quantile share is universally feasible. In contrast, a simple argument shows that the $q$-quantile share can be infeasible for any $q > 1/e$. We introduce a one-parameter refinement of quantile shares, the $c$-thinned quantile share, obtained by thinning the inclusion probability in the random benchmark bundle by a factor of $c$ for a fixed constant $c\in(0,1]$. Our main result is that there exists a universal constant $c >0$ for which the $c$-thinned $e^{-c}$-quantile share is unconditionally universally feasible; this is best possible in the sense that for any $c \in (0,1]$, the $c$-thinned $q$-quantile share can be infeasible for any $q > e^{-c}$. Prior to this work, the only nontrivial share known to be universally feasible was Feige's residual maximin share. The thinning viewpoint also lets us remove the factor-two loss in the conditional result for the original quantile share: assuming the rainbow EMC, the $(1/e)$-quantile share is universally feasible.

The holiday gift exchange game is a familiar social institution with nontrivial strategic structure. We provide a formal treatment of the game's mechanics, defining the state space, action sets, and the recursive structure of stealing chains; we prove termination and derive an algorithm for counting distinct game trajectories, which grow far faster than the space of possible final allocations. Beyond the base mechanics, we introduce a decorated model incorporating partial information, social costs, and adaptive strategies grounded in discrete choice theory and the frustration-aggression literature. A full factorial simulation of 240,000 games yields three findings of note: implicit social costs are the dominant regulator of aggression, reducing stealing by 27--48\% and outweighing both uncertainty and strategic sophistication; partial information, contrary to expectation, slightly increases stealing through asymmetric uncertainty; correlated valuations amplify every behavioral effect, so that consensus about gift quality, rather than the features themselves, is what intensifies competition. The first-player advantage is robust across all conditions.

Online contention resolution schemes (OCRSs) are a central tool in Bayesian online selection and resource allocation: they convert fractional ex-ante relaxations into feasible online policies while preserving each marginal probability up to a constant factor. Despite their importance, designing (near) optimal OCRSs is often technically challenging, and many existing constructions rely on indirect reductions to prophet inequalities and LP duality, resulting in algorithms that are difficult to interpret or implement. In this paper, we introduce "stationary online contention resolution schemes (S-OCRSs)," a permutation-invariant class of OCRSs in which the distribution of the selected feasible set is independent of arrival order. We show that S-OCRSs admit an exact distributional characterization together with a universal online implementation. We then develop a general `maximum-entropy' approach to construct and analyze S-OCRSs, reducing the design of online policies to constructing suitable distributions over feasible sets. This yields a new technical framework for designing simple and possibly improved OCRSs. We demonstrate the power of this framework across several canonical feasibility environments. In particular, we obtain an improved $(3-\sqrt{5})/2$-selectable OCRS for bipartite matchings, attaining the independence benchmark conjectured to be optimal and yielding the best known prophet inequality for this setting. We also obtain a $1-\sqrt{2/(πk)} + O(1/k)$-selectable OCRS for $k$-uniform matroids and a simple, explicit $1/2$-selectable OCRS for weakly Rayleigh matroids (including all $\mathbb{C}$-representable matroids such as graphic and laminar). While these guarantees match the best known bounds, our framework also yields concrete and systematic constructions, providing transparent algorithms in settings where previous OCRSs were implicit or technically involved.

In the paper it is proven that the two-players turn-based stochastic game "Risk or Safety" has a unique solution. Both players need to play the same strategy if they want to maximize their winning chances. An analytical method based on the transition equations depending on the players decisions at each game situation is presented. However, the method requires the solution of many large linear equation systems, which makes the problem practically unsolvable for more than 6 coins. Hence, an iterative method is used to determine the optimal strategy for up to 20 coins. A look-up table gives the number of coins a player should toss at each possible game situation.

There is a set of n indivisible items (or chores), and a set of n players. Each day, a single item should be assigned to each player. We want to ensure that all players feel that they have been treated fairly, not only after the last day, but after every single day. We present two 'balance' conditions on sequences of permutations. One condition can always be satisfied, but is arguably too weak; a second condition is strong, and can be satisfied for all n <= 11, but cannot be satisfied for some larger values of n, including all n>61. We then relate the 'balance' condition to the requirement that the cumulative assignment is proportional up to one item (PROP1), where proportionality holds in a strong ordinal sense -- for every valuations that are consistent with the item ranking. We present a third balance condition that implies ordinal PROP1. We show that a sequence guaranteeing this balance condition exists for all n <= 12, but might not exist when n=6k for any k >= 19. Finally, we present a fourth, weaker balance condition on a sequence, that guarantees ordinal proportionality up to two items (PROP2). Whether or not this condition can be satisfied for all n remains an open question.