Asymptotic normality of embedding distributions of some families of graphs

Jinlian Zhang; Wenjie Fang; Yichao Chen; Zhicheng Gao

REVIEW 3 major objections 5 minor 45 references

Asymptotic normality of embedding distributions of some families of graphs

T0 review · 3 major / 5 minor · reviewed 2026-08-06 · deepseek-v4-flash

Challenge this review Re-run · record.json Download PDF Read on arXiv ↗ Review JSON

Pith's one-line read The paper tries to establish that the genus and Euler-genus of uniformly random cellular embeddings become asymptotically normal for several graph families built by repeated gluing, with rational generating functions making such limits…

desk verdict Theorem 4.6 is false as stated: the all-ones signature makes the star-ladder a cycle, so the main perturbative claim needs reworking, though the group algebra framework and double-edge cycle results are genuine contributions. read the letter →

arxiv 2507.15751 v1 pith:WI2XKK6R submitted 2025-07-21 math.CO

Yichao Chen , Wenjie Fang , Zhicheng Gao , Jinlian Zhang This is my paper · ORCID

classification math.CO MSC 05A1505A1605C10

keywords embeddingdistributiongenusEuler-genusasymptoticnormalitytopologicalgraphtheorybar-ringgraphsstar-laddersH-linearfamilies

verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal

The pith

A machine-rendered reading of the paper's core claim, the machinery that carries it, and where it could break.

The reading

The paper tries to establish a general phenomenon: when a family of graphs is built by repeated gluing of bounded pieces, the genus or Euler-genus of a uniformly random cellular embedding becomes asymptotically normal as the graph grows. It proves this for tree-like graphs obtained by bar-amalgamation, for bar-rings such as star-ladders, for strictly monotone sequences formed by serial ear attachment, and for double-edge cycle graphs, whose Gaussian limits are given explicitly. It also proves that H-linear and H-circular families have rational genus and Euler-genus generating functions, implemented with group-algebra tools, so the same normality analysis can be automated. The stated motivation is that these are reusable tools: once the dominant term of a generating function is identified, established coefficient-limit theorems supply the Gaussian law.

What carries the argument

The machinery has two parts. The first is the bar-ring factorization $\Gamma_{G^\circ}(x)=x\prod_i \Gamma_{G_i}(x)+(1-x)\prod_i S_{G_i}(x)$, with an analogous Euler-genus formula, where $S_{G_i}$ counts embeddings of a two-pendant graph in which the two marked vertices touch the same face; the normalized product term is a convolution of independent component laws, and the correction is discarded by a perturbation lemma when its coefficient-sum is $o$ of the main term. The second is the transfer from rational generating functions to Gaussian limits via a central and local limit theorem for coefficient sequences, with the dominant simple pole supplying the mean, variance, and local estimates. Group-algebra partial rotation systems provide the proof that H-linear and H-circular families admit such rational generating functions.

What would settle it

Count the embeddings of $SL_{\alpha|k}$ for $\alpha_i=1$ for all $i$: the graph is the cycle $C_{4k}$, whose orientable genus distribution is a point mass at genus $0$ and whose Euler-genus distribution has two atoms, so no rescaling converges to a normal distribution; this contradicts Theorem 4.6.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

On the paper's own terms, the central discovery is that asymptotic normality follows from a split of the normalized genus or Euler-genus polynomial into a dominant factorizing term and a negligible correction. For star-ladders, Theorem 4.6 states that for every infinite sequence $\alpha$ of strictly positive integers, the genus and Euler-genus distributions of $SL_{\alpha|k}$ are asymptotically normal as $k\to\infty$. For strictly monotone sequences with bounded maximum genus, Theorems 4.10 and 4.11 give asymptotic normality of Euler-genus distributions, and for double-edge cycles Theorems 5.1 and 5.2 give explicit means and variances. The rationality results for H-linear and H-circular families (Theorems 6.6 and 6.7) are shown through partial rotation systems in the group algebra of symmetric groups, with type-B analogues for Euler-genus, turning the framework into an algorithm that reproduces the genus generating functions of fixed-height grid graphs.

Load-bearing premise

The star-ladder result rests on the assumption that the dominant product term in the genus law is asymptotically normal for every strictly positive signature; for the all-ones signature the star-ladder is a cycle graph, whose genus law is a point mass, so that assumption fails.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

Tree-like graphs formed by bar-amalgamating bounded pieces have asymptotically normal genus laws whenever infinitely many pieces have non-degenerate genus spread; the mean and variance are the sums of the component means and variances.
Bar-rings of uniformly bounded components with non-degenerate genus spread have asymptotically normal embedding distributions, because the non-factorizing term is exponentially negligible.
Double-edge cycle graphs have explicit Gaussian limits: genus with mean $n/4$ and variance $3n/32$, and Euler-genus with mean $5n/7$ and variance $78/343$.
Every H-linear and H-circular family has rational genus and Euler-genus generating functions, so asymptotic normality can in principle be decided algorithmically for each fixed gluing, including capped families such as fixed-height grids.

Reading between the lines

Editorial extensions of the paper, not claims the author makes directly.

A natural generalization, left implicit by the paper, is a single sufficient condition: if a graph family's embedding polynomial factors into a convolution of bounded independent summands plus a perturbation whose coefficient sum is exponentially smaller, then asymptotic normality follows; this would unify the tree-like, bar-ring, and monotone cases.
The all-ones signature counterexample shows the star-ladder statement needs an extra variance condition; a corrected version would require the total variance of the major product term to diverge, in the spirit of standard central-limit-theorem conditions.
For fixed-height grid graphs, the computed rational generating functions satisfy the hypotheses of the coefficient-limit theorem, suggesting their genus distributions are asymptotically normal as $n$ grows; the paper stops short of extracting the explicit mean and variance.

Share X Bluesky LinkedIn Reddit HN

Signed reviews

No signed human review yet.

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

Desk editor's note, referee report, and a circularity audit.

Desk Editor's Note

read the letter

Here's the short version: Theorem 4.6 is false as stated, and the error is not a matter of interpretation. Take α_i = 1 for all i. Each HL_1 is a path of length 3, so the bar-ring SL_{α|k} is the cycle C_{4k}. A cycle has only orientable genus 0 and Euler-genus in {0,1}, so neither distribution is asymptotically normal. The paper's own Remark 3.5—cactus graphs have unique genus—is exactly the mechanism. The proof of Theorem 4.6 tries to apply Lemma 4.3 with the major term x ∏ Γ_{HL_{α_i}}(x), but for α_i = 1 that term has zero variance after normalization; the perturbative term is not smaller by an o(1) factor, so Lemma 4.3 cannot fire. A corrected statement would need to exclude signatures where the total variance doesn't diverge, e.g. require infinitely many α_i ≥ 2.

What the paper does well: the group algebra framework in Section 6 is a real contribution. It gives a clean proof that H-linear and H-circular families have rational genus/Euler-genus generating functions, and the Sagemath implementation (with the 3×n and 4×n grid examples) makes the transfer-matrix computation automatic. The double-edge cycle analysis in Section 5 produces explicit normal limits with mean/variance (n/4, 3n/32) and (5n/7, 78n/343), and the local limit formula is a useful addition. Lemma 4.3, the perturbation lemma for probability generating functions, is a nice standalone tool. The tree-like CLT theorems (3.4 and 3.6) look sound, though they are straightforward applications of known CLT results.

The soft spots beyond Theorem 4.6: Proposition 4.4 gives closed forms for D_{HL_n} and S_{HL_n} that do not match the derivation in its proof (there is a factor-of-4 discrepancy already for n=1). Since Theorem 4.6 leans on those formulas, the star-ladder section needs to be redone, not just patched. The paper also asserts in several places that certain perturbative terms are o(P_n(1)) on the strength of a ratio bound that fails for degenerate components.

Who should read this: topological graph theorists and anyone using transfer matrices for embedding distributions will want the group algebra machinery and the explicit generating functions. But the star-ladder results cannot be trusted until the signatures are handled correctly.

My recommendation: send it to a serious referee. The framework and the double-edge cycle results warrant careful review, and the false theorem is a concrete, fixable error (or removable claim) rather than a symptom of a worthless approach. The authors should be asked to fix Theorem 4.6, verify Proposition 4.4, and re-check the other ring-like applications. I would not cite it in its current form.

Referee Report

3 major / 5 minor

Summary. The paper studies asymptotic normality of the orientable genus and Euler-genus distributions of several families of graphs. The main tools are a central-limit-theorem argument for tree-like bar-amalgamations, a perturbation lemma for bar-ring and star-ladder families, an analytic-combinatorics treatment of double-edge cycle graphs with explicit mean and variance, and a group-algebra framework proving rationality of genus and Euler-genus generating functions for H-linear and H-circular families, with an accompanying SageMath implementation and computations for grid and multi-edge cycle graphs.

Significance. If the main results were correct, the paper would make a useful contribution: the perturbation lemma offers a general mechanism for deriving asymptotic normality from explicit generating functions, the double-edge cycle results give sharp quantitative asymptotics with explicit constants, and the group-algebra transfer-matrix formalism appears to be a genuine advance for computing generating functions of H-linear and H-circular families. The availability of an implementation and concrete computations for 3×n and 4×n grids and for triple- and quadruple-edge cycles is a strength. However, the central theorem on star-ladders, Theorem 4.6, is false as stated, and the proof omits a load-bearing verification of the normality of the unperturbed term; this undermines the paper's headline claim.

major comments (3)

[§4.1, Theorem 4.6] Theorem 4.6 is false as stated. Take α_i = 1 for all i. As the paper itself notes, HL_1 is a path of length 3, so the bar-ring construction makes SL_{(1,...,1)} the cycle graph C_{4k}. For a cycle, v = e, so Euler's formula gives f = 2 - γ_E; hence the orientable genus is always 0 and the Euler-genus is either 0 or 1. The genus law is therefore a point mass at 0 and the Euler-genus law is a two-point distribution, and neither can be asymptotically normal under any rescaling. This example satisfies the hypotheses of Theorem 4.6, so the theorem cannot be correct without an additional non-degeneracy condition such as divergence of the total variance.
[§4.1, proof of Theorem 4.6] The proof of Theorem 4.6 never verifies the normality hypothesis required by Lemma 4.3 for the major term x ∏ Γ_HL_{α_i}(x). The ratio bound S_HL(1)/Γ_HL(1) ≤ 3/4 from Proposition 4.4 only controls the perturbation Q_n, not the unperturbed law. For an arbitrary positive signature α, the total variance of the major term can fail to diverge; the all-ones signature gives a degenerate major term. A correct proof would need a lower bound on the variance that is uniform in the relevant range of α_i, and the theorem itself must exclude signatures for which the accumulated variance does not tend to infinity.
[§3, Theorem 3.4 and §4.1, Theorem 4.7] The proofs of Theorems 3.4 and 4.7 begin by extracting an infinite subsequence on which the non-degeneracy condition γ_max > γ_min holds for every index. Asymptotic normality of a subsequence does not imply asymptotic normality of the original sequence. In these two theorems the gap is repairable, because the full sequence still has B_n^2 = Θ(n) when infinitely many bounded-size components have positive variance, but the subsequence reduction as written is not a valid proof of the stated full-sequence conclusion.

minor comments (5)

[§4, Lemma 4.3] In the last line of the proof, 'Σ(Q_n(1)) = o(P_n(1))' should read 'Σ(Q_n) = o(P_n(1))'.
[§4.1, Proposition 4.5] The displayed inequality '7 D̃_HL_n(1) ≥ S̃_HL_n(x)' should have the right-hand side evaluated at x = 1.
[§5, Problems 5.3 and 5.4] Given Proposition A.1 and the preceding discussion, Problem 5.3 appears to have the word 'primitive' reversed; the natural question is whether there exists an H-linear family whose stochastic matrix is not primitive, not whether a primitive one exists.
[§4.2, proof of Theorem 4.11] The symbol t_{e,n} is used in 'r_{e,n} + s_{e,n} + t_{e,n} → ∞' but is never defined; the intended quantity is presumably t_n introduced earlier in the proof.
[§3, Theorem 3.6] The hypothesis that H_n 'has o(n^{1/2}) edges for each n' should be stated as an asymptotic condition as n → ∞, rather than as a pointwise property for each n.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 0.0 of 10

No significant circularity: the derivations rest on published recurrences, explicit generating-function computations, and standard central-limit theorems; the serious flaw in Theorem 4.6 is a correctness gap, not a reduction of the conclusion to its inputs.

full rationale

The paper's derivation chain is not circular. Section 3 obtains the embedding distribution of bar-amalgamations as a sum of independent component laws via the published factorization Gamma_{G⊕H} = d_u d_v Gamma_G Gamma_H (Theorem 3.1, cited to [18,7]) and then applies a Lindeberg-type central limit theorem (Proposition 3.3); no parameter is fitted to the target distribution. Section 4's perturbation Lemma 4.3 is a general total-variation argument, and the bounds such as S_HL_n(1)/Gamma_HL_n(1) <= 3/4 and Sigma(Q) = o(P(1)) are derived from explicit recurrences rather than from the normality conclusions they support. Section 5 derives rational generating functions from recurrences (2) and (8) and applies Bender's central limit theorem; the recurrences are external computational results that are also reproduced in the appendix. Section 6 proves rationality of genus and Euler-genus generating functions via a group-algebra transfer operator; this is a constructive proof, and the authors' remark that it is 'essentially a reformulation and a generalization of the transfer matrix approach' is an acknowledgment of prior technique, not a disguised input. No step defines its target quantity in terms of itself, and no 'prediction' is a fitted input renamed as a finding. The most serious defect, the false Theorem 4.6 under the all-ones signature (the star-ladder degenerates to a cycle and the variance of the major term does not grow), is a mathematical correctness and proof gap, not circular reasoning: the proof fails to establish normality of the major term, but it does not assume the theorem it is proving. Passages acknowledging planar H-linear families and non-primitive transfer matrices are limitations, not circular moves. Under the rubric, no circular step can be documented, so the score is 0.

Assumptions & free parameters 0 free parameters · 6 assumptions · 0 invented entities

No new particles, forces, or hypothetical entities are introduced. All objects are standard graphs, surfaces, and generating functions. There are no free parameters fitted to data.

assumptions (6)

standard math Lindeberg central limit theorem (Proposition 3.3)
Used to prove asymptotic normality for tree-like and bar-ring families.
standard math Bender's central and local limit theorems [2]
Used in Section 5 to convert dominant singularity of rational generating functions into normality of coefficients.
standard math Transfer theorems of analytic combinatorics [14, Theorem IX.9]
Cited in Section 6 as the framework for extracting asymptotic normality from rational generating functions.
domain assumption Known classifications of graphs with bounded maximum genus [11, 4]
Used in Theorems 4.10 and 4.11 to claim that strictly monotone sequences decompose into ear additions and cacti.
domain assumption Rotation system representation of cellular embeddings and signed rotation systems
Underlies all genus and Euler-genus polynomial definitions and the face-tracing proofs in Section 4 and Appendix A.
standard math Euler's formula and surface classification
Used throughout to relate face counts, genus, and Euler-genus.

how reviews work

0 comments

Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Asymptotic normality of embedding distributions of some families of graphs." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/WI2XKK6R

@misc{pith2026250715751,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Asymptotic normality of embedding distributions of some families of graphs},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/WI2XKK6R}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2507.15751}
}

read the original abstract

Computing the embedding distribution of a given graph is a fundamental question in topological graph theory. In this article, we extend our viewpoint to a sequence of graphs and consider their asymptotic embedding distributions, which are often the normal distribution. We establish the asymptotic normality of several families of graphs by developing adapted tools and frameworks. We expect that these tools and frameworks can be used on other families of graphs to establish the asymptotic normality of their embedding distributions. Several open questions and conjectures are also raised in our investigation.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2507.15751 by the authors.

**Figure 1.** The graph (HLni , ui , vi) As Sn(x) = 2xDn−1(x), we also have Sn(x) = ⌊(nX−1)/2⌋ k=0 n − k − 1 k 2 n+kx k+1 . We observe that the n-rung half-open ladder HLn can be obtained by connect two isolated vertices u and v to the two degree 2 vertices x and y of an end-rung of Ln respectively (see Figure 1). By face-tracing [26], the two partial genus polynomials for the structure (HLn, ui , vi) are expressed DHLn (x) … view at source ↗

**Figure 2.** Attaching two open ears and two closed ears to [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p014_2.png] view at source ↗

**Figure 4.** Example of H-linear and H-circular graphs. serving as material for explicit computations for asymptotic normality of the associated embedding distributions as in Section 5. Given two graphs H1 and H2, with U1 (resp. U2) a non-empty subset of vertices in H1 (resp. H2), for any bijection φ : U1 → U2, which is called a gluing, the vertex-amalgamation (or simply amalgamation) of H1 and H2 along φ, denoted by H1 ⊛φ H2 (o… view at source ↗

Figures from the paper (1 more)

**Figure 5.** Figure 5: Type 1 (left) and Type 0 (right). Let G be an embedded graph with two vertices u, v. The following edge adding rules are fundamental principles in topological graph theory, some of which have been previously discussed in [34]. We categorize them into three cases for th…

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

45 extracted references · 44 canonical work pages

[1]

Genus polynomials of cycles with double edges

E. Baek and J. Park. “Genus polynomials of cycles with double edges”. Acta Mathe- matica Sinica, English Series 27(3) (2011), pp. 595–606. doi

work page 2011
[2]

Central and local limit theorems applied to asymptotic enumeration

E. A. Bender. “Central and local limit theorems applied to asymptotic enumeration”. Journal of Combinatorial Theory, Series A 15(1) (1973), pp. 91–111. doi

work page 1973
[3]

Genus polynomials of cubic graphs with non-real roots

M. Carr, V. Dhaliwal, and B. Mohar. “Genus polynomials of cubic graphs with non-real roots”. Annals of Combinatorics (2025). to appear. doi

work page 2025
[4]

A linear-time algorithm for isomorphism of graphs of bounded average genus

J. Chen. “A linear-time algorithm for isomorphism of graphs of bounded average genus”. SIAM Journal on Discrete Mathematics 7(4) (1994), pp. 614–631. doi

work page 1994
[5]

Limit points for average genus II. 2-connected non-simplicial graphs

J. Chen and J. L. Gross. “Limit points for average genus II. 2-connected non-simplicial graphs”. Journal of Combinatorial Theory, Series B 56(1) (1992), pp. 108–129. doi

work page 1992
[6]

Lower bounds for the average genus of a CF-graph

Y. Chen. “Lower bounds for the average genus of a CF-graph”. Electronic Journal of Combinatorics 17(1) (Nov. 2010), R150. doi

work page 2010
[7]

An Euler-genus approach to the calculation of the crosscap- number polynomial

Y. Chen and J. L. Gross. “An Euler-genus approach to the calculation of the crosscap- number polynomial”. Journal of Graph Theory 88(1) (2018), pp. 80–100. doi

work page 2018
[8]

Genus polynomials and crosscap-number polynomials for ring-like graphs

Y. Chen and J. L. Gross. “Genus polynomials and crosscap-number polynomials for ring-like graphs”. Mathematische Nachrichten 292(4) (2019), pp. 760–776. doi. 30

work page 2019

Show all 45 references

[9]

Recurrences for the genus poly- nomials of linear sequences of graphs

Y. Chen, J. L. Gross, T. Mansour, and T. W. Tucker. “Recurrences for the genus poly- nomials of linear sequences of graphs”. Mathematica Slovaca 70(3) (2020), pp. 505–

2020
[10]

Genus distributions of star-ladders

Y. Chen, J. L. Gross, and T. Mansour. “Genus distributions of star-ladders”. Discrete Mathematics 312(20) (2012), pp. 3059–3067. doi

2012
[11]

A note on lower bounds for maximum genus

Y. Chen and Y. Liu. “A note on lower bounds for maximum genus”. Utilitas Mathe- matica 73 (2007), pp. 23–31

2007
[12]

On a Conjecture of S. Stahl

Y. Chen and Y. Liu. “On a Conjecture of S. Stahl”. Canadian Journal of Mathematics 62(5) (2010), pp. 1058–1059. doi

2010
[13]

W. Fang. genus-poly-h-family. Github Repository. 2025. url: https://github.com/ fwjmath/genus-poly-h-family

2025
[14]

Flajolet and R

P. Flajolet and R. Sedgewick. Analytic combinatorics. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 2009, pp. xiv+810. doi

2009
[15]

Genus distributions for two classes of graphs

M. L. Furst, J. L. Gross, and R. Statman. “Genus distributions for two classes of graphs”. Journal of Combinatorial Theory, Series B 46(1) (1989), pp. 22–36. doi

1989
[16]

V. F´ eray. On the combinatorial local log-concavity conjecture and a result of Stanley
[17]

Genus distribution of graph amalgamations: self-pasting at root-vertices

J. L. Gross. “Genus distribution of graph amalgamations: self-pasting at root-vertices”. Australasian Journal of Combinatorics 49 (2011), pp. 19–38

2011
[18]

Hierarchy for imbedding-distribution invariants of a graph

J. L. Gross and M. L. Furst. “Hierarchy for imbedding-distribution invariants of a graph”. Journal of Graph Theory 11(2) (1987), pp. 205–220. doi

1987
[19]

Calculating genus polynomials via string operations and matrices

J. L. Gross, I. F. Khan, T. Mansour, and T. W. Tucker. “Calculating genus polynomials via string operations and matrices”. Ars Mathematica Contemporanea 15(2) (2018), pp. 267–295. doi

2018
[20]

Log-concavity of genus distributions of ring-like families of graphs

J. L. Gross, T. Mansour, and T. W. Tucker. “Log-concavity of genus distributions of ring-like families of graphs”. European Journal of Combinatorics 42 (2014), pp. 74–91. doi

2014
[21]

Iterated claws have real- rooted genus polynomials

J. L. Gross, T. Mansour, T. W. Tucker, and D. G. L. Wang. “Iterated claws have real- rooted genus polynomials”. Ars Mathematica Contemporanea 10(2) (2015), pp. 255–

2015
[22]

Combinatorial conjectures that imply local log-concavity of graph genus polynomials

J. L. Gross, T. Mansour, T. W. Tucker, and D. G. Wang. “Combinatorial conjectures that imply local log-concavity of graph genus polynomials”. European Journal of Combinatorics 52 (2016), pp. 207–222. doi

2016
[23]

Root geometry of polynomial sequences I: Type (0, 1)

J. L. Gross, T. Mansour, T. W. Tucker, and D. G. Wang. “Root geometry of polynomial sequences I: Type (0, 1)”. Journal of Mathematical Analysis and Applications 433(2) (2016), pp. 1261–1289. doi. 31

2016
[24]

Root geometry of polynomial sequences II: Type (1,0)

J. L. Gross, T. Mansour, T. W. Tucker, and D. G. Wang. “Root geometry of polynomial sequences II: Type (1,0)”. Journal of Mathematical Analysis and Applications 441(2) (2016), pp. 499–528. doi

2016
[25]

Genus distributions for bouquets of circles

J. L. Gross, D. P. Robbins, and T. W. Tucker. “Genus distributions for bouquets of circles”. Journal of Combinatorial Theory, Series B 47(3) (1989), pp. 292–306. doi

1989
[26]

J. L. Gross and T. W. Tucker. Topological graph theory. Wiley-Interscience Series in Discrete Mathematics and Optimization. John Wiley & Sons, Inc., New York, 1987, pp. xvi+351

1987
[27]

Genus distribution of P3□Pn

I. F. Khan, M. I. Poshni, and J. L. Gross. “Genus distribution of P3□Pn”. Discrete Mathematics 312(19) (2012), pp. 2863–2871. doi

2012
[28]

A unified approach to polynomial sequences with only real zeros

L. L. Liu and Y. Wang. “A unified approach to polynomial sequences with only real zeros”. Advances in Applied Mathematics 38(4) (2007), pp. 542–560. doi

2007
[29]

Mohar and C

B. Mohar and C. Thomassen. Graphs on surfaces . Johns Hopkins Univ. Press, 2001

2001
[30]

B. Mohar. Strong log-convexity of genus sequences. 2024. arXiv: 2405.10854 [math.CO]. url: https://arxiv.org/abs/2405.10854

2024
[31]

Even embeddings of the complete graphs and their cycle parities

K. Noguchi. “Even embeddings of the complete graphs and their cycle parities”. Jour- nal of Graph Theory 85(1) (2016), pp. 187–206. doi

2016
[32]

A Kuratowski- type theorem for the maximum genus of a graph

E. A. Nordhaus, R. D. Ringeisen, B. M. Stewart, and A. T. White. “A Kuratowski- type theorem for the maximum genus of a graph”. Journal of Combinatorial Theory, Series B 12(3) (1972), pp. 260–267. doi

1972
[33]

V. V. Petrov. Limit theorems of probability theory: sequences of independent random variables. Vol. 4. Oxford Studies in Probability. The Clarendon Press, Oxford Univer- sity Press, New York, 1995, pp. xii+292

1995
[34]

The combinatorial map color theorem

G. Ringel. “The combinatorial map color theorem”. Journal of Graph Theory 1(2) (June 1977), pp. 141–155. doi

1977
[35]

Graph minors. V. Excluding a planar graph

N. Robertson and P. D. Seymour. “Graph minors. V. Excluding a planar graph”. Journal of Combinatorial Theory, Series B 41(1) (1986), pp. 92–114. doi

1986
[36]

A. N. Shiryaev. Probability. Vol. 95. Graduate Texts in Mathematics. Springer-Verlag, New York, 1996, pp. xvi+623. doi

1996
[37]

On the zeros of some genus polynomials

S. Stahl. “On the zeros of some genus polynomials”. Canadian Journal of Mathematics 49(3) (1997), pp. 617–640. doi

1997
[38]

Permutation-partition pairs. III. Embedding distributions of linear families of graphs

S. Stahl. “Permutation-partition pairs. III. Embedding distributions of linear families of graphs”. Journal of Combinatorial Theory, Series B 52(2) (1991), pp. 191–218. doi

1991
[39]

S. Stahl. Private communication. 2007

2007
[40]

Two enumerative results on cycles of permutations

R. P. Stanley. “Two enumerative results on cycles of permutations”. European Journal of Combinatorics 32(6) (2011), pp. 937–943. doi. 32

2011
[41]

W. T. Tutte. Graph theory. Vol. 21. Encyclopedia of Mathematics and its Applications. With a foreword by Crispin St. J. A. Nash-Williams, Reprint of the 1984 original. Cambridge University Press, 2001, pp. xxii+335

1984
[42]

Geometry of limits of zeros of polynomial sequences of type (1,1)

D. G. L. Wang and J. J. R. Zhang. “Geometry of limits of zeros of polynomial sequences of type (1,1)”. Bulletin of the Malaysian Mathematical Sciences Society 44(2) (2020), pp. 785–803. doi

2020
[43]

Limits for embedding distributions

J. Zhang, X. Peng, and Y. Chen. “Limits for embedding distributions”. Advances in Applied Mathematics 127 (2021), p. 102175. doi

2021
[44]

Characterization of signed graphs which are cellularly embeddable in no more than one surface

J. ˇSir´ aˇ n. “Characterization of signed graphs which are cellularly embeddable in no more than one surface”. Discrete Mathematics 94(1) (1991), pp. 39–44. doi. 33 A Appendix A.1 Recurrence relations Let G(s, t) denote a connected graph with two vertices s and t, each having...

1991
[2015]

url: https://arxiv.org/abs/1512.00342

arXiv: 1512.00342 [math.CO]. url: https://arxiv.org/abs/1512.00342

arXiv

Pith tools

Reviewed August 6, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.

[1] [1]

Genus polynomials of cycles with double edges

E. Baek and J. Park. “Genus polynomials of cycles with double edges”. Acta Mathe- matica Sinica, English Series 27(3) (2011), pp. 595–606. doi

work page 2011

[2] [2]

Central and local limit theorems applied to asymptotic enumeration

E. A. Bender. “Central and local limit theorems applied to asymptotic enumeration”. Journal of Combinatorial Theory, Series A 15(1) (1973), pp. 91–111. doi

work page 1973

[3] [3]

Genus polynomials of cubic graphs with non-real roots

M. Carr, V. Dhaliwal, and B. Mohar. “Genus polynomials of cubic graphs with non-real roots”. Annals of Combinatorics (2025). to appear. doi

work page 2025

[4] [4]

A linear-time algorithm for isomorphism of graphs of bounded average genus

J. Chen. “A linear-time algorithm for isomorphism of graphs of bounded average genus”. SIAM Journal on Discrete Mathematics 7(4) (1994), pp. 614–631. doi

work page 1994

[5] [5]

Limit points for average genus II. 2-connected non-simplicial graphs

J. Chen and J. L. Gross. “Limit points for average genus II. 2-connected non-simplicial graphs”. Journal of Combinatorial Theory, Series B 56(1) (1992), pp. 108–129. doi

work page 1992

[6] [6]

Lower bounds for the average genus of a CF-graph

Y. Chen. “Lower bounds for the average genus of a CF-graph”. Electronic Journal of Combinatorics 17(1) (Nov. 2010), R150. doi

work page 2010

[7] [7]

An Euler-genus approach to the calculation of the crosscap- number polynomial

Y. Chen and J. L. Gross. “An Euler-genus approach to the calculation of the crosscap- number polynomial”. Journal of Graph Theory 88(1) (2018), pp. 80–100. doi

work page 2018

[8] [8]

Genus polynomials and crosscap-number polynomials for ring-like graphs

Y. Chen and J. L. Gross. “Genus polynomials and crosscap-number polynomials for ring-like graphs”. Mathematische Nachrichten 292(4) (2019), pp. 760–776. doi. 30

work page 2019