Pith. sign in

REVIEW

Stability results for random discrete structures

Not yet reviewed by Pith; the record is open.

This paper has not been read by Pith yet. Machine review is queued; the pith claim, tier, and objections will appear here once it completes.

SPECIMEN: schema-true, not a live event

T0 review · schema-true

One-sentence machine reading of the paper's core claim.

pith:XXXXXXXX · record.json · timestamp

arxiv 1111.6885 v3 pith:5TMAELQE submitted 2011-11-29 math.CO

Stability results for random discrete structures

classification math.CO
keywords resultstheoremgeneralrandomstabilityconlongowersprobabilistic
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal T4 reserved
0 comments
Share X Bluesky LinkedIn Reddit HN
read the original abstract

Two years ago, Conlon and Gowers, and Schacht proved general theorems that allow one to transfer a large class of extremal combinatorial results from the deterministic to the probabilistic setting. Even though the two papers solve the same set of long-standing open problems in probabilistic combinatorics, the methods used in them vary significantly and therefore yield results that are not comparable in certain aspects. The theorem of Schacht can be applied in a more general setting and yields stronger probability estimates, whereas the one of Conlon and Gowers also implies random versions of some structural statements such as the famous stability theorem of Erdos and Simonovits. In this paper, we bridge the gap between these two transference theorems. Building on the approach of Schacht, we prove a general theorem that allows one to transfer deterministic stability results to the probabilistic setting that is somewhat more general and stronger than the one obtained by Conlon and Gowers. We then use this theorem to derive several new results, among them a random version of the Erdos-Simonovits stability theorem for arbitrary graphs. The main new idea, a refined approach to multiple exposure when considering subsets of binomial random sets, may be of independent interest.

discussion (0)

Sign in with ORCID, Apple, or X to comment. Anyone can read and Pith papers without signing in.