Alphabeta Math
CorollaryStatement: AI-adaptedProof: AI-adaptedPipeline-generatedjudge pass (gpt-5.6-terra)audited 2026-09-09
How statement and proof provenance work

The first chip identifies the source of the statement or construction; the second identifies the source of its local proof or verification.

  • Literature-sourced: the exact statement appears in a cited source; only wording and notation differ.
  • AI-adapted: a semantically identical restatement of literature-sourced material, modulo indexing, notation, and boundary cases adopted by the library.
  • AI-generated: a genuinely novel statement formulated by AI, with no source for the claim itself.

These labels describe origin, not correctness: citations and verification chips remain separate evidence.

Fox sudakov quantitative induced density bound

Statement

For every nonempty finite graph H there is CH>0 such that for 0<x<1/2, δ=2−CH(log⁡2(1/x))2, and any nonempty finite graph G with ind⁡H(G)≤(δ∣G∣)∣H∣, there is a nonempty S⊆V(G) with ∣S∣≥δ∣G∣ and at most x(∣S∣2) edges in G[S] or G‾[S]. In particular this holds for H-free G. The version with a strict copy inequality covers the null pattern vacuously.

The constant is allowed to depend on H; this assertion does not specify an absolute constant times ∣H∣.

Facts & Assumptions

Given: Nonempty H,G, 0<x<1/2, and the copy hypothesis with the displayed fraction after CH is chosen.

[F1]

From Qid logarithmic and constant divisibility: Every nonempty finite graph H is ℓ-divisive for each of ℓ(x)=log⁡2(1/x) and ℓ(x)=2. Both functions are subreciprocal on (0,1/2).

[F2]

For nonempty ℓ-divisive H and subreciprocal ℓ, some CH,ℓ>0 gives the fraction δ=2−CH,ℓlog⁡2(1/ϵ)2/log⁡2ℓ(ϵ) on 0<ϵ<1/2; a nonempty host with at most (δ∣G∣)∣H∣ embeddings has the asserted nonempty sparse-or-dense set of size at least δ∣G∣. (Quantitative density theorem for ell divisive graphs).

Proof

1.1F1F2

Choose ℓ(x)=2. By [F1] this is subreciprocal and the given nonempty H is ℓ-divisive, so [F2] applies. Its denominator is log⁡2ℓ(x)=log⁡22=1. With CH=CH,ℓ, its fraction is exactly 2−CH(log⁡2(1/x))2 and its conclusion is the claimed set and edge bound.

2.1step 1.1algebra∎

If G is H-free, its labelled induced-embedding count is zero, which satisfies the non-strict premise. For the null pattern the unique empty embedding gives count 1, while (δ∣G∣)0=1; the strict premise would read 1<1 and is impossible. These observations establish both additional clauses.

Source notes

Proof/convention locator: Bucic, Nguyen, Scott and Seymour, Induced subgraph density I, 5.2 at ell=2; 1.7 (comparison of constant dependence).

Depends on

Used by

Dependency tree · two levels

13 results within two dependency steps of this one, each drawn at its shortest distance from it. An arrow runs from a result to what uses it, so the chart reads left to right and ends at this result, which carries a heavier outline. Every node is a link to that result. Click elsewhere on the chart to enlarge it.

Sources