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.
The restricted spectral estimate needed above the connectivity threshold
Statement
For every fixed and all sufficiently large integers , put and let be the adjacency matrix of the loop-free simple graph on , whose distinct possible edges occur independently with probability . Write for the all-ones matrix. For a matrix on , use the Euclidean operator norm , where . All probabilities below use this graph law. Then The cutoff may depend on . This restricted result does not assert the refuted bound for every positive .
Facts & Assumptions
Put , let be the identity matrix, and set . Then , and has the independent mean-zero upper-triangular entries and variance and entry bounds supplied by the normalization lemma; also and eventually (Normalize the logarithmic random graph for nonbacktracking estimates).
Write for the maximum vertex degree. The event has probability at most (A maximum-degree tail with an explicit logarithmic exponent).
For the matrix in [F1], let be its nonbacktracking matrix indexed by all ordered vertex pairs in , with , where each indicator is when its subscript condition holds and otherwise. Write . When , , and , we have (Transfer two nonbacktracking good events to the required norm bound).
For the same and as in [F1] and [F3], the event has probability at most eventually (A nonbacktracking tail smaller than the required polynomial).
For two events in the same probability space, (The finite union bound).
Proof
Given: The objects and hypotheses in the Statement.
Goal: Prove its conclusions.
Increase the cutoff so that all four suppliers apply and . On the complement of the two exceptional events in [F2] and [F4], [F3] makes the event in the Statement impossible.
Therefore that event is contained in their union. By [F5], summing the two probability bounds proves the claimed estimate. Its proof uses the independently imported nonbacktracking inequalities, not the refuted all- Corollary 6.6.
Depends on
Dependency tree · 2 levels
Each result is drawn at its shortest distance from this item. Arrows run from prerequisites to the items that use them; this item has a heavier outline. External source nodes link directly to the cited text. The view shows up to two dependency steps; open a prerequisite to continue.