Monotonicity conjecture for the multifurcating-tree growth constants

For each integer k⩾2k\geqslant 2, let γk\gamma_k be the constant in the asymptotic growth

Bn∼(k!)1k−1γk(kn)B_n\sim (k!)^{\frac{1}{k-1}}\gamma_k^{(k^n)}

of the maximal ranks of at-most-kk-furcating rooted trees with nn leaves. Monotonicity conjecture. For k⩾2k\geqslant 2, the constants decrease strictly with kk:

γk+1<γk.\gamma_{k+1}<\gamma_k.

The conjecture is motivated by numerical values for small kk; the paper establishes the analogous decrease of the strictly kk-furcating growth constants βk\beta_k, but does not establish the corresponding monotonicity for γk\gamma_k.

References

Primary source

Michael R. Doboli, Alessandra R. P. Maranca and Noah A. Rosenberg, “Extremal ranks of unlabeled multifurcating rooted trees in a bijective encoding by the positive integers”, arXiv:2606.28539 (2026).

Progress summary

Refreshed
Claimed solved

An unverified posted argument claims to prove the conjecture in every dimension, while the original paper proves only related inequalities.

The conjecture asks whether the growth constants for trees allowing at most kk children per branching point decrease strictly as kk increases. The 2026 paper by Michael R. Doboli, Alessandra R. P. Maranca, and Noah A. Rosenberg formulates this conjecture but does not prove it.

Known results

  • The strictly kk-furcating constants βk\beta_k decrease strictly with kk.
  • For k≥3k\geq 3, the at-most-kk constants satisfy γk>βk\gamma_k>\beta_k.
  • The paper derives the asymptotic growth involving γk\gamma_k, but leaves γk+1<γk\gamma_{k+1}<\gamma_k unresolved.

Posted attempt

A posted argument claims a complete proof: it derives logarithmic bounds from the recurrence for the maximal ranks, compares consecutive parameters for k≥4k\geq 4, and checks k=2,3k=2,3 separately. The argument has not been independently verified.

Current status (as of August 2026): The conjecture has a complete posted proof claim but remains unverified; the original paper's results on βk\beta_k and γk>βk\gamma_k>\beta_k are settled, while independent confirmation of γk+1<γk\gamma_{k+1}<\gamma_k is absent.

Sources

Solutions 1

ProofThis solution needs a summarySee full solutionHide full solution

We prove that γk+1<γk\gamma_{k+1}<\gamma_k for every integer k≥2k\ge2, as asserted in Doboli, Maranca and Rosenberg, Conjecture 4.8.

For fixed kk, let BnB_n be the maximal rank of an at-most-kk-furcating rooted tree with nn leaves, in the encoding used in that paper. Its equation (10) and Theorem 4.7 give

B1=1,Bn=2−Bn−1+(Bn−1+k−1k)(n≥2),\begin{aligned} B_1&=1,\\ B_n&=2-B_{n-1}\\ &\quad+\binom{B_{n-1}+k-1}{k}\quad(n\ge2), \end{aligned}

and

Bn∼(k!)1/(k−1)γk kn.B_n\sim(k!)^{1/(k-1)}\gamma_k^{\,k^n}.

The idea is to bound log⁡γk\log\gamma_k using just the fourth term of this recurrence. The remaining infinite tail is small enough that a coarse comparison of consecutive central binomial coefficients suffices.

1. A uniform bound for the logarithmic tail

Write Dn=Bn−1D_n=B_n-1. Then

Dn+1=Fk(Dn),Fk(x)=(x+kk)−x,D2=1,D3=k,D4=uk:=(2kk)−k.\begin{aligned} D_{n+1}&=F_k(D_n),\\ F_k(x)&=\binom{x+k}{k}-x,\\ D_2&=1,\qquad D_3=k,\\ D_4&=u_k:=\binom{2k}{k}-k. \end{aligned}

For x>0x>0, expansion of the product gives

k!Fk(x)=∏j=1k(x+j)−k!x=xk+Qk(x),k!F_k(x)=\prod_{j=1}^k(x+j)-k!x=x^k+Q_k(x),

where QkQ_k has positive coefficients. Indeed, subtraction changes only the linear coefficient, which becomes

k!(∑j=1k1j−1)>0.k!\left(\sum_{j=1}^k\frac1j-1\right)>0.

Consequently, with all logarithms natural, we may write

log⁡Fk(x)=klog⁡x−log⁡(k!)+εk(x),\log F_k(x)=k\log x-\log(k!)+\varepsilon_k(x),

where

0<εk(x)=log⁡k!Fk(x)xk≤∑j=1klog⁡(1+jx)≤k(k+1)2x.\begin{aligned} 0<\varepsilon_k(x) &=\log\frac{k!F_k(x)}{x^k}\\ &\le\sum_{j=1}^k\log\left(1+\frac jx\right)\\ &\le\frac{k(k+1)}{2x}. \end{aligned}

For every positive integer xx and every k≥2k\ge2,

Fk(x)≥F2(x)=x2+x+22>x.F_k(x)\ge F_2(x)=\frac{x^2+x+2}{2}>x.

Here the first inequality follows because (x+kk)\binom{x+k}{k} increases with kk. Thus Dn≥ukD_n\ge u_k for n≥4n\ge4.

Put

ck=log⁡(k!)k−1,ak=log⁡uk−ck,ek=k(k+1)2(k−1)uk.\begin{aligned} c_k&=\frac{\log(k!)}{k-1},\\ a_k&=\log u_k-c_k,\\ e_k&=\frac{k(k+1)}{2(k-1)u_k}. \end{aligned}

Iterating the logarithmic recurrence from D4=ukD_4=u_k and dividing by knk^n yields

log⁡γk=akk4+∑j=4∞εk(Dj)kj+1.\log\gamma_k =\frac{a_k}{k^4} +\sum_{j=4}^{\infty}\frac{\varepsilon_k(D_j)}{k^{j+1}}.

The limit on the left is exactly the one in the source normalization: log⁡Dn/kn→log⁡γk\log D_n/k^n\to\log\gamma_k. The series converges by the bound on εk\varepsilon_k and Dj≥ukD_j\ge u_k. Summing the geometric upper bound proves

akk4<log⁡γk≤ak+ekk4.\boxed{\frac{a_k}{k^4}<\log\gamma_k \le\frac{a_k+e_k}{k^4}.}

2. Comparing consecutive parameters for k≥4k\ge4

Let Ck=(2kk)C_k=\binom{2k}{k}, so uk=Ck−ku_k=C_k-k. The exact ratio is

Ck+1Ck=4−2k+1.\frac{C_{k+1}}{C_k}=4-\frac2{k+1}.

For k≥2k\ge2 this ratio exceeds 33, and hence

uk+1>3Ck−(k+1)=3uk+2k−1>3uk.u_{k+1}>3C_k-(k+1)=3u_k+2k-1>3u_k.

Since u4=66≥4⋅24u_4=66\ge4\cdot2^4, induction gives

uk≥k2k(k≥4).u_k\ge k2^k\qquad(k\ge4).

Indeed, 3k≥2(k+1)3k\ge2(k+1) for k≥2k\ge2, so the induction step follows from uk+1>3uku_{k+1}>3u_k.

Also k!≤kk−1k!\le k^{k-1}, so ck≤log⁡kc_k\le\log k and

ak≥klog⁡2(k≥4).a_k\ge k\log2\qquad(k\ge4).

The sequence ckc_k is strictly increasing, because

ck+1−ck=log⁡(k+1)−ckk>0.c_{k+1}-c_k=\frac{\log(k+1)-c_k}{k}>0.

Using the upper bound Ck+1<4CkC_{k+1}<4C_k, we obtain, for k≥4k\ge4,

uk+1<4(uk+k)≤4uk(1+2−k)<8uk.\begin{aligned} u_{k+1}&<4(u_k+k)\\ &\le4u_k(1+2^{-k})<8u_k. \end{aligned}

It follows that

ak+1−ak<log⁡8=3log⁡2.a_{k+1}-a_k<\log8=3\log2.

For every j≥4j\ge4, the lower bound on uju_j gives

ej≤j+12(j−1)2j≤2−j.e_j\le\frac{j+1}{2(j-1)2^j}\le2^{-j}.

In particular ek+1<log⁡2e_{k+1}<\log2; for example, log⁡2=∫12dx/x>1/2\log2=\int_1^2 dx/x>1/2. Combining the preceding inequalities,

ak+1+ek+1<ak+4log⁡2≤ak(1+4k)<ak(1+1k)4.\begin{aligned} a_{k+1}+e_{k+1} &<a_k+4\log2\\ &\le a_k\left(1+\frac4k\right)\\ &<a_k\left(1+\frac1k\right)^4. \end{aligned}

The last inequality uses ak>0a_k>0 and the binomial expansion. Dividing by (k+1)4(k+1)^4 and applying the boxed tail bound proves

log⁡γk+1<log⁡γk(k≥4).\log\gamma_{k+1}<\log\gamma_k\qquad(k\ge4).

3. The two remaining comparisons

The relevant exact values are

u2=4,c2=log⁡2,u3=17,c3=12log⁡6,e3=317,u4=66,c4=13log⁡24,e4=599.\begin{aligned} u_2&=4,&c_2&=\log2,\\ u_3&=17,&c_3&=\tfrac12\log6,&e_3&=\tfrac3{17},\\ u_4&=66,&c_4&=\tfrac13\log24,&e_4&=\tfrac5{99}. \end{aligned}

Since log⁡2>1/2\log2>1/2, we have

e3<14<c3,e4<16<c4.e_3<\frac14<c_3,\qquad e_4<\frac16<c_4.

Thus the upper tail bounds simplify to log⁡γ3<log⁡17/81\log\gamma_3<\log17/81 and log⁡γ4<log⁡66/256\log\gamma_4<\log66/256.

For k=2k=2, use 17<2517<2^5 and 80<8180<81:

log⁡γ3<log⁡1781<5log⁡281<log⁡216<log⁡γ2.\begin{aligned} \log\gamma_3 &<\frac{\log17}{81} <\frac{5\log2}{81}\\ &<\frac{\log2}{16} <\log\gamma_2. \end{aligned}

For k=3k=3, the inequality 17/6>517/\sqrt6>5 gives a3>log⁡5a_3>\log5. Since 66<5366<5^3 and 243<256243<256,

log⁡γ4<log⁡66256<3log⁡5256<log⁡581<log⁡γ3.\begin{aligned} \log\gamma_4 &<\frac{\log66}{256} <\frac{3\log5}{256}\\ &<\frac{\log5}{81} <\log\gamma_3. \end{aligned}

All cases are now covered. Exponentiation yields γk+1<γk\gamma_{k+1}<\gamma_k for every integer k≥2k\ge2, proving Conjecture 4.8.