Discriminant magnitude homology conjecture for trees
Discriminant magnitude homology conjecture for trees
Let be a tree, and let , , and denote its magnitude, Eulerian magnitude, and discriminant magnitude homology groups, respectively.
Tree discriminant magnitude homology conjecture. For ,
For and ,
while for all . This conjecture is based on computations for star trees and proposes a general pattern for discriminant magnitude homology of trees.
Progress summary
No public source found that proves or disproves the conjecture, so its proposed description of these tree invariants remains open.
The conjecture predicts that discriminant magnitude homology of every tree is concentrated on the diagonal, with specified rank corrections in degrees and agreement with ordinary magnitude homology for and .
Known results
- Leinster–Shulman (2015) established that ordinary magnitude homology of trees is diagonal.
- For trees, later work gives the same diagonal ordinary-homology pattern, including explicit ranks in higher degrees.
- Giusti–Menara (2024) constructed the long exact sequence relating , , and , and stressed that it need not split.
- Their theorem gives for under additional vanishing hypotheses, not proved here for all trees.
2025 structural results
A later paper proves vanishing of for graphs without cycles of lengths and and records useful consequences of the long exact sequence, but the retrieved text does not verify the hypotheses needed for every tree or claim a resolution of this conjecture.
Current status (as of August 2026): The diagonal behavior of ordinary magnitude homology for trees and several conditional structural results are settled, but the stated discriminant magnitude homology formulas for all trees remain unproved and undisproved in the retrieved sources.
Sources
Sources & referencesView supporting material
Primary source
Patrick Martin and Radmila Sazdanovic, “Torsion in Magnitude homology theories”, arXiv:2503.11976 (2025).
Solutions 1
Sign in to submit a solution.
Counterexample, with a complete classification of trees.
In Martin–Sazdanović, arXiv:2503.11976, Conjecture 8.1 asserts that for and every tree . In fact,
The source’s own short exact sequence induces
Ordinary magnitude homology of every tree is diagonal. Therefore, for every , both ordinary groups surrounding the connecting map vanish, giving the canonical integral isomorphism
The source’s Lemma 7.6 incorrectly concludes that surjectivity of forces ; this overlooks the connecting morphism into . Giusti–Menara, arXiv:2403.09248, had already warned that the long exact sequence need not split.
Now let have vertices, and let
where ranges over vertex orderings. In a uniformly random ordering, each unordered pair is consecutive with probability . Since has edges, the expected number of consecutive nonedges equals
Thus some ordering contains at least two consecutive nonedges, and consequently .
An injective -chain of length exists by definition. There is no injective -chain, and there is no injective -chain of length , since appending its omitted vertex would contradict maximality. Hence both adjacent Eulerian differentials vanish and
Because , the connecting isomorphism yields
Therefore every tree with at least four vertices contradicts the conjecture. Conversely, trees on at most two vertices are complete, and the unique three-vertex tree has only an Eulerian off-diagonal group whose shifted discriminant group lies on the diagonal. This proves the stated classification.
More explicitly, the source’s valid Theorem 7.11 for the star , combined with the connecting isomorphism, gives two infinite families omitted by its Corollary 7.12:
and
The smallest counterexample is the four-vertex star:
A direct computation from the defining discriminant chain complex at length five gives
with and ; hence
The connecting isomorphism identifies this group integrally with . Thus the conjecture fails universally beyond three vertices, and the precise error is the omitted connecting homomorphism.