Bounded spinal concentration for local invariants of the partition graph

From papers

Let GnG_n be the partition graph, let Axn\mathrm{Ax}_n and Spn\mathrm{Sp}_n denote its axial and spinal vertex sets, and let Iloc={deg,ωloc,dimloc}\mathcal I_{\mathrm{loc}}=\{\deg,\omega_{\mathrm{loc}},\dim_{\mathrm{loc}}\} be the specified family of local vertex invariants. For IIlocI\in\mathcal I_{\mathrm{loc}}, write ρIsp(n)\rho_I^{\mathrm{sp}}(n) for the spinal concentration radius of the maximizers of II. Spinal concentration conjecture. For each invariant IIlocI\in\mathcal I_{\mathrm{loc}}, there exists a constant sIs_I such that

ρIsp(n)sI\rho_I^{\mathrm{sp}}(n)\le s_I

for all sufficiently large axial nn. This conjecture proposes uniform boundedness of spinal concentration for the local invariants, extending the computational bounds verified for axial nn with 1n301\le n\le 30; its asymptotic validity is not established in the supplied text.

Progress summary

Open

The conjecture remains unproved: computations support bounded concentration in small cases, but no asymptotic result or verified counterexample has appeared.

A March 2026 paper formulates the conjecture for the three local invariants deg\deg, ωloc\omega_{\mathrm{loc}}, and dimloc\dim_{\mathrm{loc}}, asserting that each maximizing set stays within a bounded spinal distance for all sufficiently large nn. The paper explicitly leaves asymptotic validity open.

Known results

  • Computation for axial nn with 1n301\le n\le 30 gives ρdegsp(n)2\rho_{\deg}^{\mathrm{sp}}(n)\le 2.
  • The same computation gives ρωlocsp(n)4\rho_{\omega_{\mathrm{loc}}}^{\mathrm{sp}}(n)\le 4 and ρdimlocsp(n)4\rho_{\dim_{\mathrm{loc}}}^{\mathrm{sp}}(n)\le 4.
  • For every vertex invariant, ρIsp(n)ρIax(n)ρIsp(n)+1\rho_I^{\mathrm{sp}}(n)\le\rho_I^{\mathrm{ax}}(n)\le\rho_I^{\mathrm{sp}}(n)+1. These are finite-range computations and comparison inequalities, not proofs of uniform boundedness.

Current status (as of August 2026): The conjecture is open for all three invariants; only finite computations and general comparison bounds are established, with no corroborated proof or counterexample.

Sources
Sources & referencesView supporting material

Primary source

Fedor B. Lyudogovskiy, “Axial Morphology of the Partition Graph: Self-Conjugate Axis, Spine, and Concentration”, arXiv:2603.22546 (2026).

Solutions 1

Counterexample

The axial and spinal concentration conjectures fail for local cliques

Precise source. In Axial Morphology of the Partition Graph: Self-Conjugate Axis, Spine, and Concentration, Fedor B. Lyudogovskiy conjectures that, for each of the three invariants

I{deg,ωloc,dimloc},I\in\{\deg,\omega_{\mathrm{loc}},\dim_{\mathrm{loc}}\},

the axial concentration radius is bounded independently of the partition size (Conjecture 5.4), and that the spinal concentration radius is likewise bounded (Conjecture 5.5). We disprove both conjectures for

I=ωlocandI=dimloc.I=\omega_{\mathrm{loc}} \qquad\text{and}\qquad I=\dim_{\mathrm{loc}}.

The separate claim for the degree invariant is not addressed.

We explicitly credit the star/top classification of partition-graph cliques to the author's earlier paper The homotopy type of the clique complex of the partition graph, Theorems 3.4 and 3.6. The sharp global triangular clique threshold is also already established in the separate MathDB problem #373810, associated with Simplex Stratification and Phase Boundaries in the Partition Graph. We repeat the short relevant bound only to certify that our explicit vertices are genuine global maximizers. The new result is that those maximizers have unbounded axial and spinal distance, which also answers negatively Problem 9.5 in the author's later paper Simplicial shells and thickness in the partition graph.

1. The source definitions

Let GnG_n be the partition graph: its vertices are the Ferrers diagrams of partitions of nn, and two vertices are adjacent precisely when one diagram is obtained from the other by moving a single box.

The self-conjugate axis is

Axn={αn:α=α}.(1)\mathrm{Ax}_n = \{\alpha\vdash n:\alpha=\alpha'\}. \tag{1}

The source's thin spine satisfies

AxnSpn{γn:dGn(γ,Axn)1}.(2)\mathrm{Ax}_n \subseteq \mathrm{Sp}_n \subseteq \{\gamma\vdash n:d_{G_n}(\gamma,\mathrm{Ax}_n)\leq1\}. \tag{2}

For a vertex γ\gamma, the local clique number and local dimension are

ωloc(γ)=max{Q:Q is a clique in Gn, γQ},dimloc(γ)=ωloc(γ)1.(3)\begin{aligned} \omega_{\mathrm{loc}}(\gamma) &= \max\{|Q|:Q\text{ is a clique in }G_n,\ \gamma\in Q\}, \\ \dim_{\mathrm{loc}}(\gamma) &= \omega_{\mathrm{loc}}(\gamma)-1. \end{aligned} \tag{3}

The concentration radii measure the furthest, rather than the nearest, global maximizer:

ρIax(n)=maxγArgmax(I)dGn(γ,Axn),ρIsp(n)=maxγArgmax(I)dGn(γ,Spn).(4)\begin{aligned} \rho_I^{\mathrm{ax}}(n) &= \max_{\gamma\in\operatorname{Argmax}(I)} d_{G_n}(\gamma,\mathrm{Ax}_n), \\ \rho_I^{\mathrm{sp}}(n) &= \max_{\gamma\in\operatorname{Argmax}(I)} d_{G_n}(\gamma,\mathrm{Sp}_n). \end{aligned} \tag{4}

These formulas are equivalent to Definitions 2.15 and 2.16 of the source because the graph is finite.

2. A triangular upper bound for all cliques

Write

Tr=(r+12)=r(r+1)2.(5)T_r=\binom{r+1}{2}=\frac{r(r+1)}2. \tag{5}

A partition with dd distinct positive part sizes has exactly dd removable corners and d+1d+1 addable corners. Moreover, its size is at least

1+2++d=Td.(6)1+2+\cdots+d=T_d. \tag{6}

For completeness, the relevant consequence of the previously known star/top classification can also be seen directly. Regard Ferrers diagrams of size nn as sets of nn boxes. If distinct diagrams A,BA,B are adjacent, then

J=AB,U=AB,J=n1,U=n+1.(7)J=A\cap B, \qquad U=A\cup B, \qquad |J|=n-1, \qquad |U|=n+1. \tag{7}

Every diagram adjacent to both AA and BB either contains JJ or is contained in UU. A diagram of the first kind which is not contained in UU cannot be adjacent to a diagram of the second kind which does not contain JJ: the two diagrams then differ in at least two boxes on each side. Consequently every clique belongs entirely to one of the following types:

  1. A star, whose diagrams all contain a common partition μn1\mu\vdash n-1 and are obtained by adding distinct corners to μ\mu.
  2. A top, whose diagrams are all contained in a common partition νn+1\nu\vdash n+1 and are obtained by removing distinct corners from ν\nu.

Hence, if a star has ss vertices, its base has at least s1s-1 distinct part sizes, and therefore

n1Ts1.(8)n-1\geq T_{s-1}. \tag{8}

If a top has ss vertices, its base has at least ss distinct part sizes, and therefore

n+1Ts.(9)n+1\geq T_s. \tag{9}

Now specialize to

n=Tr,r2.(10)n=T_r, \qquad r\geq2. \tag{10}

A star with at least r+1r+1 vertices would violate (8), since

n1=Tr1<Tr.(11)n-1=T_r-1<T_r. \tag{11}

A top with at least r+1r+1 vertices would violate (9), since

n+1=Tr+1<Tr+1(r2).(12)n+1=T_r+1<T_{r+1} \qquad(r\geq2). \tag{12}

Thus every clique in GTrG_{T_r} has at most rr vertices.

3. An explicit maximum clique far from the axis

Consider the partitions

μr=(2r2,r2,r3,,2,1),λr=(2r1,r2,r3,,2,1).(13)\begin{aligned} \mu_r &=(2r-2,r-2,r-3,\ldots,2,1), \\ \lambda_r &=(2r-1,r-2,r-3,\ldots,2,1). \end{aligned} \tag{13}

The trailing list is empty when r=2r=2. Their sizes are

μr=2r2+(r2)(r1)2=Tr1,λr=2r1+(r2)(r1)2=Tr.(14)\begin{aligned} |\mu_r| &= 2r-2+\frac{(r-2)(r-1)}2 =T_r-1, \\ |\lambda_r| &= 2r-1+\frac{(r-2)(r-1)}2 =T_r. \end{aligned} \tag{14}

The partition μr\mu_r has exactly r1r-1 distinct part sizes. It therefore has exactly rr addable corners. Adding one box at each of these corners produces rr different partitions of TrT_r, and any two differ by moving one box. Hence they form an rr-vertex clique in GTrG_{T_r}. One member of this clique is λr\lambda_r, obtained by adding a box to the first row.

Together with the upper bound in Section 2, this proves

ω(GTr)=ωloc(λr)=r.(15)\omega(G_{T_r}) = \omega_{\mathrm{loc}}(\lambda_r) =r. \tag{15}

Consequently,

λrArgmax(ωloc)=Argmax(dimloc).(16)\lambda_r \in \operatorname{Argmax}(\omega_{\mathrm{loc}}) = \operatorname{Argmax}(\dim_{\mathrm{loc}}). \tag{16}

The integer TrT_r is axial: the staircase partition

δr=(r,r1,,2,1)(17)\delta_r=(r,r-1,\ldots,2,1) \tag{17}

is self-conjugate and has size TrT_r.

4. Diverging distances and failure of both conjectures

For any nonempty partition γ\gamma, define its width-height imbalance by

b(γ)=γ1(γ),(18)b(\gamma)=\gamma_1-\ell(\gamma), \tag{18}

where (γ)\ell(\gamma) is its number of nonzero parts. Every self-conjugate partition has equal width and height, and therefore

b(α)=0(αAxn).(19)b(\alpha)=0 \qquad(\alpha\in\mathrm{Ax}_n). \tag{19}

Moving one Ferrers box changes the width by at most one and the height by at most one. Thus adjacent vertices γ,η\gamma,\eta satisfy

b(γ)b(η)2.(20)|b(\gamma)-b(\eta)|\leq2. \tag{20}

For the maximizer in (13),

λr,1=2r1,(λr)=r1,b(λr)=r.(21)\lambda_{r,1}=2r-1, \qquad \ell(\lambda_r)=r-1, \qquad b(\lambda_r)=r. \tag{21}

Equations (19) and (20) give

dGTr(λr,AxTr)r2.(22)d_{G_{T_r}}(\lambda_r,\mathrm{Ax}_{T_r}) \geq \left\lceil\frac r2\right\rceil. \tag{22}

Since every spinal vertex has distance at most one from the axis by (2), the triangle inequality also gives

dGTr(λr,SpTr)r21.(23)d_{G_{T_r}}(\lambda_r,\mathrm{Sp}_{T_r}) \geq \left\lceil\frac r2\right\rceil-1. \tag{23}

Finally, λr\lambda_r is a global maximizer of both local invariants by (16). Hence, for

I{ωloc,dimloc},I\in\{\omega_{\mathrm{loc}},\dim_{\mathrm{loc}}\},

the exact source-defined radii satisfy

ρIax(Tr)r2,ρIsp(Tr)r21.(24)\boxed{ \begin{aligned} \rho_I^{\mathrm{ax}}(T_r) &\geq \left\lceil\frac r2\right\rceil, \\ \rho_I^{\mathrm{sp}}(T_r) &\geq \left\lceil\frac r2\right\rceil-1. \end{aligned} } \tag{24}

Both lower bounds tend to infinity. Since

r=8Tr+112,(25)r=\frac{\sqrt{8T_r+1}-1}{2}, \tag{25}

the concentration radii grow at least on the order of n\sqrt n along the infinite axial subsequence n=Trn=T_r. Therefore the source's Conjectures 5.4 and 5.5 are both false for the local clique number and local simplex dimension. No conclusion is asserted for the degree invariant.

0 endorsements
Shivam Patel ·