Perfect matching in random bipartite graph - with fixed probability
$begingroup$
as a follow up from this question :
Suppose that we have a simpler problem, where the probability $p$ is fixed. Of course we could use the above result to proove that almost every graph in the model $mathcal{G}_{n,n,p}$ contains a perfect matching, saying for instance that $$ p > frac{sqrt{n} + log{n}}{n}$$ for big enough $n$.
However, couldn't we find a more direct result?
I've been looking at the probability of findind a set $S$ (size $k$) giving a contradiction for Hall's mariage theorem. With $q=1-p$, we need each element of $S$ not connected to the $n-k-1$ elements not in $N(S)$, therefore :
$$ Pr[ |N(S)|<|S| ] leq q^{nk-k(k-1)}$$
And
$$Pr[nexists text{ a perfect matching}] leq sum_{k=1}^n binom{n}{k}q^{nk-k(k-1)}$$
But from there, trying to proove that this sum tends to 0, simple binomial approximation $sim n^k/k!$ gives too large a bound. Would you recommand any other calculation?
Thanks
graph-theory random-graphs matching-theory
$endgroup$
add a comment |
$begingroup$
as a follow up from this question :
Suppose that we have a simpler problem, where the probability $p$ is fixed. Of course we could use the above result to proove that almost every graph in the model $mathcal{G}_{n,n,p}$ contains a perfect matching, saying for instance that $$ p > frac{sqrt{n} + log{n}}{n}$$ for big enough $n$.
However, couldn't we find a more direct result?
I've been looking at the probability of findind a set $S$ (size $k$) giving a contradiction for Hall's mariage theorem. With $q=1-p$, we need each element of $S$ not connected to the $n-k-1$ elements not in $N(S)$, therefore :
$$ Pr[ |N(S)|<|S| ] leq q^{nk-k(k-1)}$$
And
$$Pr[nexists text{ a perfect matching}] leq sum_{k=1}^n binom{n}{k}q^{nk-k(k-1)}$$
But from there, trying to proove that this sum tends to 0, simple binomial approximation $sim n^k/k!$ gives too large a bound. Would you recommand any other calculation?
Thanks
graph-theory random-graphs matching-theory
$endgroup$
add a comment |
$begingroup$
as a follow up from this question :
Suppose that we have a simpler problem, where the probability $p$ is fixed. Of course we could use the above result to proove that almost every graph in the model $mathcal{G}_{n,n,p}$ contains a perfect matching, saying for instance that $$ p > frac{sqrt{n} + log{n}}{n}$$ for big enough $n$.
However, couldn't we find a more direct result?
I've been looking at the probability of findind a set $S$ (size $k$) giving a contradiction for Hall's mariage theorem. With $q=1-p$, we need each element of $S$ not connected to the $n-k-1$ elements not in $N(S)$, therefore :
$$ Pr[ |N(S)|<|S| ] leq q^{nk-k(k-1)}$$
And
$$Pr[nexists text{ a perfect matching}] leq sum_{k=1}^n binom{n}{k}q^{nk-k(k-1)}$$
But from there, trying to proove that this sum tends to 0, simple binomial approximation $sim n^k/k!$ gives too large a bound. Would you recommand any other calculation?
Thanks
graph-theory random-graphs matching-theory
$endgroup$
as a follow up from this question :
Suppose that we have a simpler problem, where the probability $p$ is fixed. Of course we could use the above result to proove that almost every graph in the model $mathcal{G}_{n,n,p}$ contains a perfect matching, saying for instance that $$ p > frac{sqrt{n} + log{n}}{n}$$ for big enough $n$.
However, couldn't we find a more direct result?
I've been looking at the probability of findind a set $S$ (size $k$) giving a contradiction for Hall's mariage theorem. With $q=1-p$, we need each element of $S$ not connected to the $n-k-1$ elements not in $N(S)$, therefore :
$$ Pr[ |N(S)|<|S| ] leq q^{nk-k(k-1)}$$
And
$$Pr[nexists text{ a perfect matching}] leq sum_{k=1}^n binom{n}{k}q^{nk-k(k-1)}$$
But from there, trying to proove that this sum tends to 0, simple binomial approximation $sim n^k/k!$ gives too large a bound. Would you recommand any other calculation?
Thanks
graph-theory random-graphs matching-theory
graph-theory random-graphs matching-theory
asked Dec 11 '18 at 10:03
Thomas LesgourguesThomas Lesgourgues
53516
53516
add a comment |
add a comment |
1 Answer
1
active
oldest
votes
$begingroup$
Many approximations to the binomial $binom nk$ are not symmetric in $k$ and $n-k$, so they perform badly when $k$ is close to $n$. (For example, $frac{n^k}{k!}$ is somewhere around $e^n$ when $k=n$, even though actually $binom nn = 1$.)
Here, the sum is almost but not quite symmetric: we can write the power of $q$ as $q^{k(n+1-k)} < q^{k(n-k)}$, and the latter is symmetric. So we can bound the sum by
$$
2 sum_{k=1}^{n/2} binom nk q^{k(n-k)}
$$
and avoid the problematic values of $k$, getting a sum that's easy to bound using your approximation. It's even enough to write $binom nk le n^k$ and get $binom nk q^{k(n-k)} le (n cdot q^{n-k})^k le (n cdot q^{n/2})^k$.
$endgroup$
add a comment |
Your Answer
StackExchange.ifUsing("editor", function () {
return StackExchange.using("mathjaxEditing", function () {
StackExchange.MarkdownEditor.creationCallbacks.add(function (editor, postfix) {
StackExchange.mathjaxEditing.prepareWmdForMathJax(editor, postfix, [["$", "$"], ["\\(","\\)"]]);
});
});
}, "mathjax-editing");
StackExchange.ready(function() {
var channelOptions = {
tags: "".split(" "),
id: "69"
};
initTagRenderer("".split(" "), "".split(" "), channelOptions);
StackExchange.using("externalEditor", function() {
// Have to fire editor after snippets, if snippets enabled
if (StackExchange.settings.snippets.snippetsEnabled) {
StackExchange.using("snippets", function() {
createEditor();
});
}
else {
createEditor();
}
});
function createEditor() {
StackExchange.prepareEditor({
heartbeatType: 'answer',
autoActivateHeartbeat: false,
convertImagesToLinks: true,
noModals: true,
showLowRepImageUploadWarning: true,
reputationToPostImages: 10,
bindNavPrevention: true,
postfix: "",
imageUploader: {
brandingHtml: "Powered by u003ca class="icon-imgur-white" href="https://imgur.com/"u003eu003c/au003e",
contentPolicyHtml: "User contributions licensed under u003ca href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"u003ecc by-sa 3.0 with attribution requiredu003c/au003e u003ca href="https://stackoverflow.com/legal/content-policy"u003e(content policy)u003c/au003e",
allowUrls: true
},
noCode: true, onDemand: true,
discardSelector: ".discard-answer"
,immediatelyShowMarkdownHelp:true
});
}
});
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
StackExchange.ready(
function () {
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fmath.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f3035133%2fperfect-matching-in-random-bipartite-graph-with-fixed-probability%23new-answer', 'question_page');
}
);
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
1 Answer
1
active
oldest
votes
1 Answer
1
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
$begingroup$
Many approximations to the binomial $binom nk$ are not symmetric in $k$ and $n-k$, so they perform badly when $k$ is close to $n$. (For example, $frac{n^k}{k!}$ is somewhere around $e^n$ when $k=n$, even though actually $binom nn = 1$.)
Here, the sum is almost but not quite symmetric: we can write the power of $q$ as $q^{k(n+1-k)} < q^{k(n-k)}$, and the latter is symmetric. So we can bound the sum by
$$
2 sum_{k=1}^{n/2} binom nk q^{k(n-k)}
$$
and avoid the problematic values of $k$, getting a sum that's easy to bound using your approximation. It's even enough to write $binom nk le n^k$ and get $binom nk q^{k(n-k)} le (n cdot q^{n-k})^k le (n cdot q^{n/2})^k$.
$endgroup$
add a comment |
$begingroup$
Many approximations to the binomial $binom nk$ are not symmetric in $k$ and $n-k$, so they perform badly when $k$ is close to $n$. (For example, $frac{n^k}{k!}$ is somewhere around $e^n$ when $k=n$, even though actually $binom nn = 1$.)
Here, the sum is almost but not quite symmetric: we can write the power of $q$ as $q^{k(n+1-k)} < q^{k(n-k)}$, and the latter is symmetric. So we can bound the sum by
$$
2 sum_{k=1}^{n/2} binom nk q^{k(n-k)}
$$
and avoid the problematic values of $k$, getting a sum that's easy to bound using your approximation. It's even enough to write $binom nk le n^k$ and get $binom nk q^{k(n-k)} le (n cdot q^{n-k})^k le (n cdot q^{n/2})^k$.
$endgroup$
add a comment |
$begingroup$
Many approximations to the binomial $binom nk$ are not symmetric in $k$ and $n-k$, so they perform badly when $k$ is close to $n$. (For example, $frac{n^k}{k!}$ is somewhere around $e^n$ when $k=n$, even though actually $binom nn = 1$.)
Here, the sum is almost but not quite symmetric: we can write the power of $q$ as $q^{k(n+1-k)} < q^{k(n-k)}$, and the latter is symmetric. So we can bound the sum by
$$
2 sum_{k=1}^{n/2} binom nk q^{k(n-k)}
$$
and avoid the problematic values of $k$, getting a sum that's easy to bound using your approximation. It's even enough to write $binom nk le n^k$ and get $binom nk q^{k(n-k)} le (n cdot q^{n-k})^k le (n cdot q^{n/2})^k$.
$endgroup$
Many approximations to the binomial $binom nk$ are not symmetric in $k$ and $n-k$, so they perform badly when $k$ is close to $n$. (For example, $frac{n^k}{k!}$ is somewhere around $e^n$ when $k=n$, even though actually $binom nn = 1$.)
Here, the sum is almost but not quite symmetric: we can write the power of $q$ as $q^{k(n+1-k)} < q^{k(n-k)}$, and the latter is symmetric. So we can bound the sum by
$$
2 sum_{k=1}^{n/2} binom nk q^{k(n-k)}
$$
and avoid the problematic values of $k$, getting a sum that's easy to bound using your approximation. It's even enough to write $binom nk le n^k$ and get $binom nk q^{k(n-k)} le (n cdot q^{n-k})^k le (n cdot q^{n/2})^k$.
edited Dec 11 '18 at 22:28
answered Dec 11 '18 at 22:22
Misha LavrovMisha Lavrov
45.9k656107
45.9k656107
add a comment |
add a comment |
Thanks for contributing an answer to Mathematics Stack Exchange!
- Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!
But avoid …
- Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.
- Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.
Use MathJax to format equations. MathJax reference.
To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
StackExchange.ready(
function () {
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fmath.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f3035133%2fperfect-matching-in-random-bipartite-graph-with-fixed-probability%23new-answer', 'question_page');
}
);
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown