arXiv++ Combinatorics

We show a birthday paradox for random non-backtracking walk on regular graphs of degree at least $3$: such a walk of length $k$ has high probability of self-intersecting when $k$ is significantly greater than $\sqrt n$, where $n$ is the number of vertices of the graph. This resolves a conjecture of Noga Alon and Yuval Peres for the fixed degree case.

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.

Kemeny's constant is used as a measure of the average travel time on a graph. Braess' paradox for graphs is the observation that in some graphs, when an edge is added, Kemeny's constant increases. We introduce the notion of a Braess clique $K_\ell$, a clique that when inserted into a graph on an independent set of $\ell$ vertices, will create an increase in Kemeny's constant. In this context, a Braess edge is a Braess $K_2$. We provide examples of graphs that have a Braess $K_\ell$ for $\ell\geq 3$. We observe that almost every connected planar labelled graph has a Braess $K_\ell$ for each $\ell\geq 3$. We also explore the relationship between Braess edges and Braess cliques in graphs.

We study poker hand rankings in the partially generalised setting of a deck with $r$ ranks, rather than the typical 13 ranks. We provide the hand rankings for all $r$ and observe some interesting phenomena such as the smallest $r$ such that flushes rank below one-pair hands. Perhaps surprisingly, as $r$ grows without bound, the hand ranking is not stable until $r=761$ (a 3044 card deck). We consider showdown frequency, which is the frequency that a given type of hand is declared by a player at showdown, and make note of counterintuitive instances in which a hand with lower absolute frequency than some other hand nonetheless has a higher showdown frequency. This can be interpreted as a form of Gadbois paradox but in the typical setting of poker without wild cards. Conveniently, the standard deck with 13 ranks turns out to be the smallest deck that avoids a discrepancy between absolute frequency and showdown frequency for all hand types other than having a high card.

Condorcet domains are subsets of permutations arising in voting theory: regarding their permutations as preference orders on a list of candidates, one avoids Condorcet's paradox when aggregating the preferences via a simple majority relation. We use poset theory to show that, for the subclass of Condorcet domains of tiling type, the majority rule has stronger properties. We then develop techniques to predict the majority rule explicitly for the uniform vote tally on Condorcet domains of tiling type, and apply this to several well-known examples.

A Condorcet winning set addresses the Condorcet paradox by selecting a few candidates--rather than a single winner--such that no unselected alternative is preferred to all of them by a majority of voters. This idea extends to $α$-undominated sets, which ensure the same property for any $α$-fraction of voters and are guaranteed to exist in constant size for any $α$. However, the requirement that an outsider be preferred to every member of the set can be overly restrictive and difficult to justify in many applications. Motivated by this, we introduce a more flexible notion: $(t, α)$-undominated sets. Here, each voter compares an outsider to their $t$-th most preferred member of the set, and the set is undominated if no outsider is preferred by more than an $α$-fraction of voters. This framework subsumes prior definitions, recovering Condorcet winning sets when $(t = 1, α= 1/2)$ and $α$-undominated sets when $t = 1$, and introduces a new, tunable notion of collective acceptability for $t > 1$. We establish three main results: 1. We prove that a $(t, α)$-undominated set of size $O(t/α)$ exists for all values of $t$ and $α$. 2. We show that as $t$ becomes large, the minimum size of such a set approaches $t/α$, which is asymptotically optimal. 3. In the special case $t = 1$, we improve the bound on the size of an $α$-undominated set given by Charikar, Lassota, Ramakrishnan, Vetta, and Wang (STOC 2025). As a consequence, we show that a Condorcet winning set of five candidates exists, improving their bound of six.

Condorcet's paradox is a fundamental result in social choice theory which states that there exist elections in which, no matter which candidate wins, a majority of voters prefer a different candidate. In fact, even if we can select any $k$ winners, there still may exist another candidate that would beat each of the winners in a majority vote. That is, elections may require arbitrarily large dominating sets. We show that approximately dominating sets of constant size always exist. In particular, for every $\varepsilon > 0$, every election (irrespective of the number of voters or candidates) can select $O(\frac{1}{\varepsilon ^2})$ winners such that no other candidate beats each of the winners by a margin of more than $\varepsilon$ fraction of voters. Our proof uses a simple probabilistic construction using samples from a maximal lottery, a well-studied distribution over candidates derived from the Nash equilibrium of a two-player game. In stark contrast to general approximate equilibria, which may require support logarithmic in the number of pure strategies, we show that maximal lotteries can be approximated with constant support size. These approximate maximal lotteries may be of independent interest.

We continue our analysis of Yablo's coding of the liar paradox by infinite acyclic graphs. The present notes are based on and continue the author's previous results on the problem. In particular, our approach is often more systematic than before.

A cornerstone of social choice theory is Condorcet's paradox which says that in an election where $n$ voters rank $m$ candidates it is possible that, no matter which candidate is declared the winner, a majority of voters would have preferred an alternative candidate. Instead, can we always choose a small committee of winning candidates that is preferred to any alternative candidate by a majority of voters? Elkind, Lang, and Saffidine raised this question and called such a committee a Condorcet winning set. They showed that winning sets of size $2$ may not exist, but sets of size logarithmic in the number of candidates always do. In this work, we show that Condorcet winning sets of size $6$ always exist, regardless of the number of candidates or the number of voters. More generally, we show that if $\fracα{1 - \ln α} \geq \frac{2}{k + 1}$, then there always exists a committee of size $k$ such that less than an $α$ fraction of the voters prefer an alternate candidate. These are the first nontrivial positive results that apply for all $k \geq 2$. Our proof uses the probabilistic method and the minimax theorem, inspired by recent work on approximately stable committee selection. We construct a distribution over committees that performs sufficiently well (when compared against any candidate on any small subset of the voters) so that this distribution must contain a committee with the desired property in its support.

We study the Factorization Paradox from the bottom up by adapting methods from perturbative renormalization. Just as quantum field theories are plagued with loop divergences that need to be cancelled systematically by introducing counterterms, gravitational path integrals are plagued by wormhole contributions that spoil the factorization of the holographic dual. These wormholes must be cancelled by some stringy effects in a UV complete, holographic theory of quantum gravity. In a simple model of two-dimensional topological gravity, we outline a gravitational analog of the recursive BPHZ procedure in order to systematically introduce ``counter-wormholes" which parametrize the unknown stringy effects that lead to factorization. Underlying this procedure is a Hopf algebra of symmetries which is analogous to the Connes--Kreimer Hopf algebra underlying perturbative renormalization. The group dual to this Hopf algebra acts to reorganize contributions from spacetimes with distinct topology, and can be seen as a gauge group relating various equivalent ways of constructing a factorizing gravitational path integral.

The Friendship Paradox is a simple and powerful statement about node degrees in a graph (Feld 1991). However, it only applies to undirected graphs with no edge weights, and the only node characteristic it concerns is degree. Since many social networks are more complex than that, it is useful to generalize this phenomenon, if possible, and a number of papers have proposed different generalizations. Here, we unify these generalizations in a common framework, retaining the focus on undirected graphs and allowing for weighted edges and for numeric node attributes other than degree to be considered, since this extension allows for a clean characterization and links to the original concepts most naturally. While the original Friendship Paradox and the Weighted Friendship Paradox hold for all graphs, considering non-degree attributes actually makes the extensions fail around 50% of the time, given random attribute assignment. We provide simple correlation-based rules to see whether an attribute-based version of the paradox holds. In addition to theory, our simulation and data results show how all the concepts can be applied to synthetic and real networks. Where applicable, we draw connections to prior work to make this an accessible and comprehensive paper that lets one understand the math behind the Friendship Paradox and its basic extensions.

Metastability thresholds lie at the heart of bootstrap percolation theory. Yet proving precise lower bounds is notoriously hard. We show that for two of the most classical models, two-neighbour and Froböse, upper bounds are sharp to essentially arbitrary precision, by linking them to their local counterparts. In Froböse bootstrap percolation, iteratively, any vertex of the square lattice that is the only healthy vertex of a $1\times1$ square becomes infected and infections never heal. We prove that if vertices are initially infected independently with probability $p\to0$, then with high probability the origin becomes infected after \[\exp\left(\frac{π^2}{6p}-\frac{π\sqrt{2+\sqrt2}}{\sqrt p}+\frac{O(\log^2(1/p))}{\sqrt[3]p}\right)\] time steps. We achieve this by proposing a new paradigmatic view on bootstrap percolation based on locality. Namely, we show that studying the Froböse model is equivalent in an extremely strong sense to studying its local version. As a result, we completely bypass Holroyd's classical but technical hierarchy method, yielding the first term above and systematically used throughout bootstrap percolation for the last two decades. Instead, the proof features novel links to large deviation theory, eigenvalue perturbations and others. We also use the locality viewpoint to resolve the so-called bootstrap percolation paradox. Indeed, we propose and implement an exact (deterministic) algorithm which exponentially outperforms previous Monte Carlo approaches. This allows us to clearly showcase and quantify the slow convergence we prove rigorously. The same approach applies, with more extensive computations, to the two-neighbour model, in which vertices are infected when they have at least two infected neighbours and do not recover. We expect it to be applicable to a wider range of models and correspondingly conclude with a number of open problems.

We use three kinds of computations: simulation, numeric, and symbolic, to guide risk-averse gamblers in general, and offer particular advice on how to resolve the famous St. Petersburg paradox.

We identify a choiceless variation of the box game paradox, in which players predict unknown real numbers with near-perfect accuracy despite lacking any useful information. We also verify that choice is necessary in the solution of the original problem and consider some further variations of the game.

We define "paradoxical colouring rule", show its relation to measure theoretic paradoxes, and demonstrate that proper vertex colouring can be a paradoxical colouring rule.

This thesis presents the strong and weak forms of the Banach-Tarski paradox based on the Hausdorff paradox. It provides modernized proofs of the paradoxes and necessary properties of equidecomposable and paradoxical sets. The historical significance of the paradox for measure theory is covered, along with its incorrect attribution to Banach and Tarski. Finally, the necessity of the axiom of choice is discussed and contrasted with other axiomatic and topological assumptions that enable the paradoxes.

Given a probability space $(X, {\cal B}, m)$, measure preserving transformations $g_1, \dots , g_k$ of $X$, and a colour set $C$, a colouring rule is a way to colour the space with $C$ such that the colours allowed for apoint $x$ are determined by that point's location and the colours of the finitely $g_1 (x), \dots , g_k(x)$ with $g_i(x) \not= x$ for all $i$ and almost all $x$. We represent a colouring rule as a correspondence $F$ defined on $X\times C^k$ with values in $C$. A function $f: X\rightarrow C$ satisfies the rule at $x$ if $f(x) \in F( x, f(g_1 x), \dots , f(g_k x))$. A colouring rule is paradoxical if it can be satisfied in some way almost everywhere with respect to $m$, but not in {\bf any} way that is measurable with respect to a finitely additive measure that extends the probability measure $m$ defined on ${\cal B}$ and for which the finitely many transformations $g_1, \dots , g_k$ remain measure preserving. Can a colouring rule be paradoxical if both $X$ and the colour set $C$ are convex and compact sets and the colouring rule says if $c: X\rightarrow C$ is the colouring function then the colour $c(x)$ must lie ($m$ a.e.) in $F(x, c(g_1(x) ), \dots , c(g_k(x)))$ for a non-empty upper-semi-continuous convex-valued correspondence $F$ defined on $X\times C^k$? The answer is yes, and we present such an example. We show that this result is robust, including that any colouring that approximates the correspondence by $ε$ for small enough positive $ε$ also cannot be measurable in the same finitely additive way. Because non-empty upper-semi-continuous convex-valued correspondences on Euclidean space can be approximated by continuous functions, there are paradoxical colouring rules that are defined by continuous functions.

The Friendship Paradox--the principle that "your friends have more friends than you do"--is a combinatorial fact about degrees in a graph; but given that many web-based social activities are correlated with a user's degree, this fact has been taken more broadly to suggest the empirical principle that "your friends are also more active than you are." This Generalized Friendship Paradox, the notion that any attribute positively correlated with degree obeys the Friendship Paradox, has been established mathematically in a network-level version that essentially aggregates uniformly over all the edges of a network. Here we show, however, that the natural node-based version of the Generalized Friendship Paradox--which aggregates over nodes, not edges--may fail, even for degree-attribute correlations approaching 1. Whether this version holds depends not only on degree-attribute correlations, but also on the underlying network structure and thus can't be said to be a universal phenomenon. We establish both positive and negative results for this node-based version of the Generalized Friendship Paradox and consider its implications for social-network data.

We describe several analytical results obtained in five candidates social choice elections under the assumption of the Impartial Anonymous Culture. These include the Condorcet and Borda paradoxes, as well as the Condorcet efficiency of plurality, negative plurality and Borda voting, including their runoff versions. The computations are done by Normaliz. It finds precise probabilities as volumes of polytopes in dimension 119, using its recent implementation of the Lawrence algorithm.

Homophily -- the tendency of nodes to connect to others of the same type -- is a central issue in the study of networks. Here we take a local view of homophily, defining notions of first-order homophily of a node (its individual tendency to link to similar others) and second-order homophily of a node (the aggregate first-order homophily of its neighbors). Through this view, we find a surprising result for homophily values that applies with only minimal assumptions on the graph topology. It can be phrased most simply as "in a graph of red and blue nodes, red friends of red nodes are on average more homophilous than red friends of blue nodes." This gap in averages defies simple intuitive explanations, applies to globally heterophilous and homophilous networks and is reminiscent of but structurally distinct from the Friendship Paradox. The existence of this gap suggests intrinsic biases in homophily measurements between groups, and hence is relevant to empirical studies of homophily in networks.