Bounded spinal concentration for local invariants of the partition graph
Bounded spinal concentration for local invariants of the partition graph
Let be the partition graph, let and denote its axial and spinal vertex sets, and let be the specified family of local vertex invariants. For , write for the spinal concentration radius of the maximizers of . Spinal concentration conjecture. For each invariant , there exists a constant such that
for all sufficiently large axial . This conjecture proposes uniform boundedness of spinal concentration for the local invariants, extending the computational bounds verified for axial with ; its asymptotic validity is not established in the supplied text.
Progress summary
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 , , and , asserting that each maximizing set stays within a bounded spinal distance for all sufficiently large . The paper explicitly leaves asymptotic validity open.
Known results
- Computation for axial with gives .
- The same computation gives and .
- For every vertex invariant, . 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
Sign in to submit a solution.
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
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
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 be the partition graph: its vertices are the Ferrers diagrams of partitions of , and two vertices are adjacent precisely when one diagram is obtained from the other by moving a single box.
The self-conjugate axis is
The source's thin spine satisfies
For a vertex , the local clique number and local dimension are
The concentration radii measure the furthest, rather than the nearest, global maximizer:
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
A partition with distinct positive part sizes has exactly removable corners and addable corners. Moreover, its size is at least
For completeness, the relevant consequence of the previously known star/top classification can also be seen directly. Regard Ferrers diagrams of size as sets of boxes. If distinct diagrams are adjacent, then
Every diagram adjacent to both and either contains or is contained in . A diagram of the first kind which is not contained in cannot be adjacent to a diagram of the second kind which does not contain : the two diagrams then differ in at least two boxes on each side. Consequently every clique belongs entirely to one of the following types:
- A star, whose diagrams all contain a common partition and are obtained by adding distinct corners to .
- A top, whose diagrams are all contained in a common partition and are obtained by removing distinct corners from .
Hence, if a star has vertices, its base has at least distinct part sizes, and therefore
If a top has vertices, its base has at least distinct part sizes, and therefore
Now specialize to
A star with at least vertices would violate (8), since
A top with at least vertices would violate (9), since
Thus every clique in has at most vertices.
3. An explicit maximum clique far from the axis
Consider the partitions
The trailing list is empty when . Their sizes are
The partition has exactly distinct part sizes. It therefore has exactly addable corners. Adding one box at each of these corners produces different partitions of , and any two differ by moving one box. Hence they form an -vertex clique in . One member of this clique is , obtained by adding a box to the first row.
Together with the upper bound in Section 2, this proves
Consequently,
The integer is axial: the staircase partition
is self-conjugate and has size .
4. Diverging distances and failure of both conjectures
For any nonempty partition , define its width-height imbalance by
where is its number of nonzero parts. Every self-conjugate partition has equal width and height, and therefore
Moving one Ferrers box changes the width by at most one and the height by at most one. Thus adjacent vertices satisfy
For the maximizer in (13),
Equations (19) and (20) give
Since every spinal vertex has distance at most one from the axis by (2), the triangle inequality also gives
Finally, is a global maximizer of both local invariants by (16). Hence, for
the exact source-defined radii satisfy
Both lower bounds tend to infinity. Since
the concentration radii grow at least on the order of along the infinite axial subsequence . 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.