Alphabeta Math
LemmaStatement: Literature-sourcedProof: AI-generatedprecheck passaudited 2026-09-05
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.

Rödl initialization upgrades generalized niceness to a restricted set, a complete or anticomplete blockade, or a polynomial clique or stable set

Statement

Let F be a generalized nice, leaf-reducible, wonderful finite family. Then there exist constants c1≥1 and c2>0 such that for every x∈(0,12) and every F‾-free graph G, at least one of the following holds:

  1. G has an x-restricted induced subgraph with at least xc1∣G∣ vertices;
  2. G has a complete or anticomplete (k,∣G∣/kc1)-blockade for some integer k≥2;
  3. G has a clique or stable set of size at least (xc1∣G∣)c2.

Facts & Assumptions

Given: A generalized nice, leaf-reducible, wonderful finite family F, a parameter x∈(0,12), and an F‾-free graph G.

[L1]

There exist constants c∈(0,12), a1≥1, and a2>0 such that every c2-restricted F‾-free graph satisfies the three-outcome conclusion with parameter x whenever x<c2 (Constant-scale restricted generalized niceness yields an x-scale restricted subgraph, a polynomial clique or stable set, or a blockade).

[L2]

For every graph H and every ξ∈(0,12), every nonempty H-free graph has a ξ-restricted induced subgraph of size at least δ∣G∣ for some constant δ>0 depending only on H and ξ (Rödl: for every H and every ϵ∈(0,12) there is δ>0 such that every nonempty H-free graph has an ϵ-restricted vertex set of size at least δ∣V(G)∣).

Proof

technique · use Rödl at the fixed scale $\xi=c^2$, then apply the constant-scale theorem unless $x$ is already above that scale
1.1L1L2choose

Let c∈(0,12), a1≥1, and a2>0 be the constants supplied by [L1], and set ξ:=c2. Choose δ>0 from [L2] for the forbidden family F‾ and the parameter ξ.

2.1step 1.1choose

Choose an integer c1≥1 so large that δ≥ξc1/2,δ≥2a1−c1,c1≥2a1, and set c2:=a2.

2.2step 1.1L2

By [L2], the graph G has a ξ-restricted induced subgraph F⊆G with ∣F∣≥δ∣G∣.

3.1step 2.1step 2.2givenalgebra

Suppose first that x≥ξ. Then F is also x-restricted, and ∣F∣≥δ∣G∣≥2a1−c1∣G∣≥xc1−a1∣G∣≥xc1∣G∣, because x≤12 and a1≥1. Hence outcome 1 holds.

3.2step 1.1step 2.2L1

Assume now that x<ξ=c2. Then [L1] applies to the c2-restricted graph F and yields one of three conclusions: an x-restricted induced subgraph S⊆F with ∣S∣≥xa1∣F∣, a clique or stable set of size at least (xa1∣F∣)a2, or a complete or anticomplete (k,∣F∣/ka1)-blockade in F for some integer k≥2.

4.1step 2.1step 3.2algebra

In the first branch, xa1∣F∣≥xa1δ∣G∣≥xa1ξc1/2∣G∣≥xa1+c1/2∣G∣≥xc1∣G∣, because x<ξ and c1≥2a1. So outcome 1 holds.

4.2step 2.1step 3.2algebra

In the third branch, ∣F∣ka1≥δ∣G∣ka1≥2a1−c1∣G∣ka1≥∣G∣kc1, because k≥2. Thus the same blocks give outcome 2 in G.

5.1step 2.1step 3.2step 4.1algebra

In the second branch, the same inequality from step 4.1 gives (xa1∣F∣)a2≥(xc1∣G∣)c2, so outcome 3 holds.

6.1step 3.1step 3.2step 4.1step 5.1step 4.2∎

Steps 3.1, 4.1, 4.2, and 5.1 cover all possibilities, so one of the three stated outcomes always holds.

Depends on

Used by

Dependency tree · two levels

14 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