The universal golden-ratio threshold for decorated unicyclic graphs

From papers

Let GG be a decorated unicyclic graph with cycle length parameter gg, let RGR_G be its curvature operator, and let ww^\ast denote the Perron metric. Write

λ:=limgλmax(RG),\lambda_\infty:=\lim_{g\to\infty}\lambda_{\max}(R_G),

and let φ\varphi be the golden ratio, so that φ2=φ+1\varphi^2=\varphi+1. Universal golden-ratio threshold conjecture. The sufficient direction of the threshold proposition holds for every decoration: if

λ<φ32,\lambda_\infty<\varphi-\tfrac32,

then the graph is balanced—and ww^\ast is Einstein—for all sufficiently large gg. This concerns balance and whether the Perron metric computes the Einstein metric, rather than existence of an Einstein metric itself; the surrounding discussion indicates that above the threshold the Perron metric may fail to be balanced even when an anisotropic Einstein metric exists.

Progress summary

Open

The conjecture is formally stated but remains unproved, with only a restricted one-defect case established.

A July 2026 preprint conjectures that every fixed decoration of a sufficiently long cycle becomes balanced when λ<φ32\lambda_\infty<\varphi-\tfrac{3}{2}, with the Perron metric then giving the Einstein metric. The claim concerns this metric construction, not the existence of other Einstein metrics.

Known results

  • Proposition 5.8 proves the corresponding threshold for a decoration localized at a single cycle vertex; arbitrary decorations remain untreated.

July 2026 preprint status

The preprint presents the universal statement as Conjecture 5.10 rather than a theorem and reports no proof or resolution for general decorations. The scan found no independently reported counterexample, proof, or verification.

Current status (as of August 2026): The single-localized-defect case is proved, but the universal threshold for arbitrary decorations remains an open conjecture.

Sources
Sources & referencesView supporting material

Primary source

Shuliang Bai, “Discrete Einstein metrics on unicyclic graphs”, arXiv:2607.14748 (2026).

Solutions 1

Counterexample

Two adjacent pendant stars violate the golden-ratio balance threshold

Conjecture 5.10 of Bai, Discrete Einstein metrics on unicyclic graphs asserts that a fixed decoration of a long cycle is eventually balanced whenever its limiting largest Ricci-matrix eigenvalue is less than (52)/2(\sqrt5-2)/2. The following fixed decoration is a counterexample: attach 198 pendant leaves to each of two adjacent cycle vertices.

Bai's Proposition 5.8 establishes the threshold for decorations at a single cycle vertex. Here the decoration occupies two adjacent vertices.

The large stars make the coupling across their common cycle edge weak. That edge nevertheless carries a large fraction of the cycle perimeter. The calculation below constructs the positive eigenvector directly and proves both failure of balance and convergence of the eigenvalue. It does not concern whether a different, unbalanced Einstein metric exists.

1. The graph and the balance condition

For every integer g9g\ge9, start with the simple cycle CgC_g and choose an edge e0={v0,v1}e_0=\{v_0,v_1\}. Attach 198 new leaves to v0v_0 and another 198 new leaves to v1v_1. Call the resulting graph GgG_g.

Thus v0v_0 and v1v_1 have degree 200, the other cycle vertices have degree two, and all new vertices have degree one. The graph is finite, simple, connected and unicyclic. Its decoration is independent of gg.

Write dvd_v for the degree of vertex vv, and let Id\mathrm{Id} denote the identity matrix on the edge-coordinate space. We use the source's symmetric matrix RGR_G, indexed by edges. For e={x,y}e=\{x,y\},

(RG)e,e=(1dx+1dy).(R_G)_{e,e}=-\left(\frac1{d_x}+\frac1{d_y}\right).

For distinct edges e,ee,e' meeting at zz, its entry is 1/dz1/d_z; for disjoint edges it is zero. The matrix RG+2IdR_G+2\mathrm{Id} is nonnegative and irreducible. Therefore a strictly positive eigenvector of RGR_G must be its Perron eigenvector.

If the cycle-edge weights have total LL, balance requires the sum of every three consecutive cycle-edge weights to be at most L/2L/2. We will violate this at e0e_0 for every g9g\ge9.

2. An explicit positive eigenvector

Put n=g1n=g-1. List the edges of the other arc from v1v_1 to v0v_0 as e1,,ene_1,\ldots,e_n. For a parameter μ>1\mu>1, define

r=μ1,λ=(μ1)22μ.r=\mu^{-1},\qquad \lambda=\frac{(\mu-1)^2}{2\mu}.

Give the arc edges the positive weights

zj=rj1+rnj1+rn1,1jn.\begin{gathered} z_j=\frac{r^{j-1}+r^{n-j}}{1+r^{n-1}},\\ 1\le j\le n. \end{gathered}

In particular z1=zn=1z_1=z_n=1. At every edge whose endpoints both have degree two, the eigenvector equation is

λzj=zj+zj1+zj+12.\lambda z_j=-z_j+\frac{z_{j-1}+z_{j+1}}2.

Our weights satisfy it because r+r1=2(1+λ)r+r^{-1}=2(1+\lambda).

Let bb be the weight of e0e_0, and give every pendant edge the weight

y=b+1200λ+4.y=\frac{b+1}{200\lambda+4}.

This is exactly its eigenvector equation: at a pendant edge the other edges incident to its degree-200 endpoint have weights bb, 11, and 197 copies of yy. Consequently that row reduces to

(200λ+4)y=b+1.(200\lambda+4)y=b+1.

Introduce

P=200λ+202200(200λ+4),T=200λ194200(200λ+4),D=λ+2T.\begin{aligned} P&=\frac{200\lambda+202}{200(200\lambda+4)},\\ T&=\frac{200\lambda-194}{200(200\lambda+4)},\\ D&=\lambda+2T. \end{aligned}

Substituting the pendant weights into the remaining three cycle-edge equations gives

Db=2P,Pb=λ+12+Tz22.\begin{aligned} Db&=2P,\\ Pb&=\lambda+\frac12+T-\frac{z_2}{2}. \end{aligned}

The second equation serves for both e1e_1 and ene_n, by reflection. Define

Hn(μ)=λ+12+Tr+rn22(1+rn1),Fn(μ)=Hn(μ)D2P2.\begin{aligned} H_n(\mu) &=\lambda+\frac12+T\\ &\quad-\frac{r+r^{n-2}}{2(1+r^{n-1})},\\ F_n(\mu)&=H_n(\mu)D-2P^2. \end{aligned}

Whenever D>0D>0 and Fn(μ)=0F_n(\mu)=0, taking b=2P/Db=2P/D makes every row of the original matrix equation hold. All weights are then strictly positive, so this is the Perron eigenvector and its eigenvalue is λ\lambda.

3. A root in a fixed rational interval

Set

α=7750,β=3120,I=[α,β].\alpha=\frac{77}{50},\qquad \beta=\frac{31}{20},\qquad I=[\alpha,\beta].

Let

H(μ)=μ12+T,F(μ)=H(μ)D2P2.\begin{aligned} H(\mu)&=\frac{\mu-1}{2}+T,\\ F(\mu)&=H(\mu)D-2P^2. \end{aligned}

The relation between the finite-arc and limiting equations is

Fn(μ)=F(μ)D2rn2(1r2)1+rn1.\begin{aligned} F_n(\mu)&=F(\mu)\\ &\quad-\frac{D}{2}\, \frac{r^{n-2}(1-r^2)}{1+r^{n-1}}. \end{aligned}

All these functions are continuous on II. Direct rational substitution gives

D(α)=1247276799100>0,H(α)=2047188300>0,F(α)=2391361810000<0,F(β)=94278370000>0.\begin{aligned} D(\alpha)&=\frac{124727}{6799100}>0,\\ H(\alpha)&=\frac{20471}{88300}>0,\\ F(\alpha)&=-\frac{23913}{61810000}<0,\\ F(\beta)&=\frac{9427}{8370000}>0. \end{aligned}

The function λ(μ)\lambda(\mu) is strictly increasing for μ>1\mu>1. As functions of λ\lambda,

dPdλ=198(200λ+4)2,dTdλ=198(200λ+4)2.\begin{aligned} \frac{dP}{d\lambda} &=-\frac{198}{(200\lambda+4)^2},\\ \frac{dT}{d\lambda} &=\frac{198}{(200\lambda+4)^2}. \end{aligned}

Hence PP is positive and decreasing on II, while HH and DD are positive and strictly increasing. In particular FF is strictly increasing there.

For n8n\ge8, the correction at β\beta, where r=20/31r=20/31, satisfies

0<F(β)Fn(β)D(β)2(2031)6.\begin{gathered} 0<F(\beta)-F_n(\beta)\\ \le\frac{D(\beta)}2\left(\frac{20}{31}\right)^6. \end{gathered}

The remaining margin is positive:

F(β)D(β)2(2031)6=631069160236122285217429910000>0.\begin{aligned} &F(\beta) -\frac{D(\beta)}2\left(\frac{20}{31}\right)^6\\ &\qquad=\frac{6310691602361}{22285217429910000}>0. \end{aligned}

Thus Fn(α)<0<Fn(β)F_n(\alpha)<0<F_n(\beta) for every n8n\ge8. The intermediate value theorem supplies a root μn(α,β)\mu_n\in(\alpha,\beta). The construction in Section 2 gives a positive eigenvector, and therefore

λmax(RGn+1)=(μn1)22μn.\lambda_{\max}(R_{G_{n+1}}) =\frac{(\mu_n-1)^2}{2\mu_n}.

4. Failure of balance for every g9g\ge9

Since PP decreases and DD increases while both remain positive, the central-edge weight satisfies

b=2P(μn)D(μn)2P(β)D(β)=4730611743>4.\begin{aligned} b&=\frac{2P(\mu_n)}{D(\mu_n)}\\ &\ge\frac{2P(\beta)}{D(\beta)}\\ &=\frac{47306}{11743}>4. \end{aligned}

The total weight on the other arc is

Sn:=j=1nzj=2(1rn)(1r)(1+rn1)<21r15427<8.\begin{aligned} S_n:=\sum_{j=1}^n z_j &=\frac{2(1-r^n)}{(1-r)(1+r^{n-1})}\\ &<\frac2{1-r} \le\frac{154}{27}<8. \end{aligned}

Here r=1/μn50/77r=1/\mu_n\le50/77. The three consecutive edges en,e0,e1e_n,e_0,e_1 have weight b+2b+2, and the cycle perimeter is L=b+SnL=b+S_n. Since b+4>8>Snb+4>8>S_n,

2(b+2)>b+Sn=L.2(b+2)>b+S_n=L.

The Perron metric is therefore unbalanced for every g9g\ge9.

5. Every edge is geodesic

The source excludes degenerate cycle weightings in which one edge exceeds half the perimeter. The counterexample also satisfies this additional convention: every cycle edge is strictly shorter than its complementary cycle arc.

To see this, let γ=37/24\gamma=37/24, so α<γ<β\alpha<\gamma<\beta. A further exact evaluation gives

F(γ)=37321961272420640000<0.F(\gamma)=-\frac{37321961}{272420640000}<0.

Thus Fn(γ)<0<Fn(β)F_n(\gamma)<0<F_n(\beta) for every n8n\ge8. Applying the intermediate value theorem on (γ,β)(\gamma,\beta) gives a positive eigenvector by Section 2. Its eigenvalue must be the same Perron eigenvalue constructed in Section 3. Since λ(μ)\lambda(\mu) is strictly increasing, its parameter is the same μn\mu_n. Consequently μn>γ\mu_n>\gamma, and monotonicity of 2P/D2P/D gives

b<2P(γ)D(γ)=217866364356133<5110.\begin{aligned} b&<\frac{2P(\gamma)}{D(\gamma)}\\ &=\frac{21786636}{4356133} <\frac{51}{10}. \end{aligned}

On the other hand, 20/31<r<2/320/31<r<2/3 and n8n\ge8. The exact arc-sum formula therefore yields

Sn>2(1(2/3)8)(11/31)(1+(2/3)7)=7818215279>5110.\begin{aligned} S_n &>\frac{2\bigl(1-(2/3)^8\bigr)} {(11/31)\bigl(1+(2/3)^7\bigr)}\\ &=\frac{78182}{15279} >\frac{51}{10}. \end{aligned}

In particular b<Snb<S_n, so the central edge has b<L/2b<L/2. Every other cycle-edge weight satisfies zj1z_j\le1, since

1+rn1rj1rnj=(1rj1)(1rnj)0.\begin{aligned} &1+r^{n-1}-r^{j-1}-r^{n-j}\\ &\qquad=(1-r^{j-1})(1-r^{n-j})\ge0. \end{aligned}

As L>b>4L>b>4, these edges also have zj<L/2z_j<L/2. Pendant edges are bridges and therefore automatically geodesic. The entire positive weighting is thus geodesic, despite its failure of the stronger three-edge balance condition.

6. The limiting eigenvalue is below the threshold

On II, the finite equations converge uniformly to the limiting equation, because

0F(μ)Fn(μ)D(β)2(5077)n2.\begin{gathered} 0\le F(\mu)-F_n(\mu)\\ \le\frac{D(\beta)}2 \left(\frac{50}{77}\right)^{n-2}. \end{gathered}

The strictly increasing function FF has a unique zero μ(α,β)\mu_\infty\in(\alpha,\beta). Every convergent subsequence of μn\mu_n has to converge to that zero, by uniform convergence and Fn(μn)=0F_n(\mu_n)=0. Compactness of II then gives μnμ\mu_n\to\mu_\infty.

Consequently the limit required in the conjecture exists and satisfies

λ=(μ1)22μ<1211240<110<522.\begin{aligned} \lambda_\infty &=\frac{(\mu_\infty-1)^2}{2\mu_\infty}\\ &<\frac{121}{1240} <\frac1{10} <\frac{\sqrt5-2}{2}. \end{aligned}

The last inequality follows from 5>(11/5)25>(11/5)^2. Thus a fixed decoration has limiting Perron eigenvalue strictly below the proposed golden-ratio threshold while failing balance for every sufficiently large cycle length. This disproves Conjecture 5.10.

0 endorsements
Shivam Patel ·