Polynomiality conjecture for low-degree coefficients of colored-triangle polynomials

About 10 years old · traced to

For each nn, write

Pn(q)=∑kak(n)qk,P_n(q)=\sum_k a_k(n)q^k,

where Pn(q)P_n(q) is the normalized polynomial associated with colored interlacing triangles. Polynomiality conjecture. For each fixed k≥0k\geq 0, there is an n0(k)n_0(k) such that, for all n≥n0(k)n\geq n_0(k), ak(n)a_k(n) is a polynomial in nn of degree kk. The source further conjectures

a2(n)=25n2−49n−1162,n≥5,a_2(n)=\frac{25n^2-49n-116}{2},\qquad n\geq 5, a3(n)=125n3+15n2−3104n+19806,n≥7,a_3(n)=\frac{125n^3+15n^2-3104n+1980}{6},\qquad n\geq 7, a4(n)=625n4+2650n3−36877n2−31390n+24472824,n≥9,a_4(n)=\frac{625n^4+2650n^3-36877n^2-31390n+244728}{24},\qquad n\geq 9, a5(n)=3125n5+32500n4−290925n3−1585240n2+7120060n+5588400120,n≥11.a_5(n)=\frac{3125n^5+32500n^4-290925n^3-1585240n^2+7120060n+5588400}{120},\qquad n\geq 11.

These formulas are based on computed coefficients through n=15n=15; the general statement and the displayed formulas remain conjectural in the source.

References

Primary source

Natasha Blitvic and Leonid Petrov, “Colored interlacing triangles and Genocchi medians”, arXiv:2602.04390 (2026).

Additional references

6 papers in this index state this conjecture (2016–2026). The statement above is taken from the most recent of them; the others are arXiv:2502.06908, arXiv:2310.01270, arXiv:2209.03436, arXiv:1807.05501, arXiv:1605.03524.

Progress summary

Refreshed
Claimed solved

The conjecture has no verified proof, although a posted argument claims to prove it and its four explicit formulas.

Blitvić and Petrov formulate the conjecture in 2026: each fixed low-degree coefficient should eventually become a polynomial in the number of colors, with the displayed formulas for a2(n)a_2(n) through a5(n)a_5(n) based on computation through n=15n=15.

Known results

Blitvić and Petrov (2026) establish the underlying colored-triangle/Genocchi-median correspondence and give computational evidence for the qq-deformation, but leave the polynomiality statement and displayed formulas conjectural.

Posted attempt

A posted argument claims a complete proof: it proposes a generating-function decomposition, bounds irreducible sizes at fixed energy, enumerates energies through 55, and derives the four stated formulas and eventual degree exactly kk. The argument has not been independently verified.

Current status (as of August 2026): the all-order polynomiality conjecture and the formulas for a2(n), a3(n), a4(n), a5(n)a_2(n),\ a_3(n),\ a_4(n),\ a_5(n) remain unverified; a posted complete-proof claim is the only reported progress.

Sources

Solutions 1

ProofThis solution needs a summarySee full solutionHide full solution

Proof of both the all-order polynomiality statement and all four exact formulas. Put

Pn(q)=21−nT2(n;q)=∑r≥0ar(n)qr.P_n(q)=2^{1-n}T_2(n;q)=\sum_{r\ge0}a_r(n)q^r.

The source's free, energy-preserving interface involutions identify Pn(q)P_n(q) with the generating polynomial of canonical quotient triangles. Their unique ordered direct-sum decomposition gives

F(z,q):=∑n≥0Pn(q)zn=11−C(z,q),(1)F(z,q):=\sum_{n\ge0}P_n(q)z^n =\frac1{1-C(z,q)}, \tag{1}

where CC counts nonempty irreducible canonical triangles.

Let bjb_j be the jj-th bottom color and AjA_j its active set. Then

∣Aj∣=j,ej=#{c∈Aj:c>bj},E=∑jej.|A_j|=j,\qquad e_j=\#\{c\in A_j:c>b_j\}, \qquad E=\sum_je_j.

Set

D=∑j(j−bj)+=∑j(bj−j)+=∑ihi,hi=#{j≤i:bj>i},rj=#(Aj∖[j]).D=\sum_j(j-b_j)_+ =\sum_j(b_j-j)_+ =\sum_i h_i, \quad h_i=\#\{j\le i:b_j>i\}, \quad r_j=\#(A_j\setminus[j]).

Then

D≤E,rj≤ej+(bj−j)+,∑jrj≤2E.D\le E,\qquad r_j\le e_j+(b_j-j)_+,\qquad \sum_jr_j\le2E.

If hi=ri=ri+1=0h_i=r_i=r_{i+1}=0, the canonical interface is an ordered direct-sum cut. Therefore every noncut is counted by a positive hih_i or is adjacent to a positive rjr_j, giving

#{noncuts}≤D+2∑jrj≤5E.\#\{\text{noncuts}\} \le D+2\sum_jr_j \le5E.

An irreducible size-ss configuration has s−1s-1 noncuts. Thus

C(z,q)=z+∑r≥1cr(z)qr,cr(z)∈Z[z],deg⁡cr≤5r+1.(2)C(z,q)=z+\sum_{r\ge1}c_r(z)q^r, \qquad c_r(z)\in\mathbb Z[z], \qquad \deg c_r\le5r+1. \tag{2}

This proves a genuine finite cutoff, rather than an extrapolation from observed data.

For completeness, all irreducibles through energy five can now be enumerated by an exact finite-state transfer. A state before bottom position jj consists of (U,A,e,d)(U,A,e,d), where UU is the used bottom-color set, AA the active set, ee accumulated energy, and dd accumulated positive displacement. Choose b∈A∖Ub\in A\setminus U and set

U′=U∪{b},e′=e+#{c∈A:c>b},d′=d+(j−b)+.U'=U\cup\{b\}, \qquad e'=e+\#\{c\in A:c>b\}, \qquad d'=d+(j-b)_+.

For j<nj<n, choose an increasing interface pair u<vu<v outside A−=A∖{b}A^-=A\setminus\{b\} and set

A′=A−∪{u,v}.A'=A^-\cup\{u,v\}.

Reject precisely those interfaces satisfying

U′=[j],A−∪{u}=[j],U'=[j], \qquad A^-\cup\{u\}=[j],

since these and only these are direct-sum cuts. Discard e′>5e'>5 or d′>5d'>5, which is rigorously safe because D≤ED\le E. By (2), only sizes n≤26n\le26 can contribute.

The complete resulting coefficient table, with columns [q]C,[q2]C,[q3]C,[q4]C,[q5]C[q]C,[q^2]C,[q^3]C,[q^4]C,[q^5]C, is

n1234521000033510041365047105036414923115260107105171170967014331143674462800120111151740579001754142246811000115161613301100025369927120002419596130001362814000043515000031160000117≤n≤2600000.(3)\begin{array}{c|rrrrr} n&1&2&3&4&5\\\hline 2&1&0&0&0&0\\ 3&3&5&1&0&0\\ 4&1&36&50&47&10\\ 5&0&36&414&923&1152\\ 6&0&10&710&5171&17096\\ 7&0&1&433&11436&74462\\ 8&0&0&120&11115&174057\\ 9&0&0&17&5414&224681\\ 10&0&0&1&1516&161330\\ 11&0&0&0&253&69927\\ 12&0&0&0&24&19596\\ 13&0&0&0&1&3628\\ 14&0&0&0&0&435\\ 15&0&0&0&0&31\\ 16&0&0&0&0&1\\ 17\le n\le26&0&0&0&0&0. \end{array} \tag{3}

Vanishing for all larger sizes follows from the proved bound (2).

Write

[qk]F(z,q)=Nk(z)(1−z)k+1,N0(z)=1.[q^k]F(z,q)=\frac{N_k(z)}{(1-z)^{k+1}}, \qquad N_0(z)=1.

Equation (1) yields the exact integer-polynomial recurrence

Nk(z)=∑j=1kcj(z)Nk−j(z)(1−z)j−1.(4)N_k(z)= \sum_{j=1}^k c_j(z)N_{k-j}(z)(1-z)^{j-1}. \tag{4}

Using the complete table (3),

N2=5z3+32z4+6z5−15z6−3z7,N3=z3+48z4+325z5+25z6−368z7+4z8+81z9+9z10,N4=47z4+784z5+2670z6−110z7−5608z8+757z9+2928z10−456z11−360z12−27z13,N5=10z4+1112z5+12652z6+15341z7−9578z8−56080z9+6607z10+64728z11−21569z12−15849z13+4239z14+1431z15+81z16.\begin{aligned} N_2&=5z^3+32z^4+6z^5-15z^6-3z^7,\\ N_3&=z^3+48z^4+325z^5+25z^6-368z^7 +4z^8+81z^9+9z^{10},\\ N_4&=47z^4+784z^5+2670z^6-110z^7-5608z^8 +757z^9+2928z^{10}-456z^{11}-360z^{12}-27z^{13},\\ N_5&=10z^4+1112z^5+12652z^6+15341z^7-9578z^8 -56080z^9+6607z^{10}+64728z^{11}\\ &\quad-21569z^{12}-15849z^{13} +4239z^{14}+1431z^{15}+81z^{16}. \end{aligned}

Since deg⁡Nk=3k+1\deg N_k=3k+1, coefficient extraction gives, for n≥2k+1n\ge2k+1,

k!ak(n)=∑s[zs]Nk(z)∏j=1k(n−s+j).k!a_k(n) = \sum_s[z^s]N_k(z) \prod_{j=1}^k(n-s+j).

Expanding gives exactly

a2(n)=25n2−49n−1162,n≥5,a3(n)=125n3+15n2−3104n+19806,n≥7,a4(n)=625n4+2650n3−36877n2−31390n+24472824,n≥9,a5(n)=3125n5+32500n4−290925n3−1585240n2+7120060n+5588400120,n≥11.\boxed{ \begin{aligned} a_2(n)&=\frac{25n^2-49n-116}{2},&&n\ge5,\\ a_3(n)&=\frac{125n^3+15n^2-3104n+1980}{6},&&n\ge7,\\ a_4(n)&=\frac{625n^4+2650n^3-36877n^2-31390n+244728}{24}, &&n\ge9,\\ a_5(n)&=\frac{3125n^5+32500n^4-290925n^3-1585240n^2 +7120060n+5588400}{120}, &&n\ge11. \end{aligned} }

Each threshold is sharp: at n=4,6,8,10n=4,6,8,10, respectively, the actual values are 47,1825,64622,220708147,1825,64622,2207081, whereas the extended polynomials give 44,1816,64595,220700044,1816,64595,2207000.

Finally, (2) and (4) prove that every fixed ak(n)a_k(n) is eventually polynomial of degree at most kk. Source Proposition 3.5 gives c1(z)=z2+3z3+z4c_1(z)=z^2+3z^3+z^4; the maximal pole in (1) therefore has numerator value

Nk(1)=c1(1)k=5k≠0.N_k(1)=c_1(1)^k=5^k\ne0.

Hence its degree is exactly kk, with leading coefficient 5k/k!5^k/k!, for every k≥0k\ge0. This proves the complete conjecture, including all four separate formulas and their exact onset thresholds.

Source: Blitvić and Petrov, Colored interlacing triangles and Genocchi medians, Conjecture 4.2, https://arxiv.org/abs/2602.04390.