arxiv: v1 [math.co] 17 Nov 2014

Transcription

1 Maximizing proper coloring on graph Jie Ma Humberto Nave arxiv: v1 [math.co] 17 Nov 2014 Abtract The number of proper q-coloring of a graph G, denoted by P G q, i an important graph parameter that play fundamental role in graph theory, computational complexity theory and other related field. We tudy an old problem of Linial and Wilf to find the graph with n vertice and m edge which maximize thi parameter. Thi problem ha attracted much reearch interet in recent year, however little i known for general m, n, q. Uing analytic and combinatorial method, we characterize the aymptotic tructure of extremal graph for fixed edge denity and q. Moreover, we diprove a conjecture of Lazebnik, which tate that the Turán graph T n ha more q-coloring than any other graph with the ame number of vertice and edge. Indeed, we how that there are infinite many counterexample in the range q = O 2 /log. On the other hand, when q i larger than ome contant time 2 /log, we confirm that the Turán graph T n aymptotically i the extremal graph achieving the maximum number of q-coloring. Furthermore, other new and old reult on variou intance of the Linial-Wilf problem are alo etablihed. 1 Introduction A proper q-coloring of a graph G i an aignment mapping every vertex to one of the q color in uch a way that no two adjacent vertice receive the ame color. Let P G q denote the number of proper q- coloring in a graph G. Introduced by Birkhoff [2] in 1912, who proved that P G q i alway a polynomial in q, thi important graph parameter, a now commonly referred to a chromatic polynomial of G, ha been extenively invetigated over the pat century. A it i already NP-hard to determine whether thi number P G q i nonzero even for q = 3 and planar graph G, the focu of ubtantial reearch ha been to obtain good bound for P G q over variou familie of graph. The original motive for Birkhoff [2] to conider the chromatic polynomial wa the famou four-color conjecture now a theorem, which equivalently aert that the minimum P G 4 over all planar graph i at leat one. For every q 5, it wa obtained by Birkhoff in [3] that P G q qq 1q 2q 3 n 3 for every planar graph G with n vertice, which i alo harp. Motivated from computational complexity, Linial [11] arrived at the problem of minimizing the number of acyclic orientation of graph G, which equal P G 1 by a reult of Stanley [18], over the family F n,m of graph with n vertice and m edge. He gave a urpriing anwer that for any n,m, there exit a univeral graph minimizing P G q over the family F n,m for every integer q. Thi graph i obtained from a clique K k by adding n k 1 iolated vertice and an extra vertex adjacent to l vertice of the clique K k, where k > l 0 are the unique integer atifying k 2 +l = m. Linial [11] then aked for the counterpart of hi reult, that i, to maximize P G q over all graph with n vertice and m edge for integer q. Wilf ee [1, 20] independently raied the ame maximization Department of Mathematical Science, Carnegie Mellon Univerity, Pittburgh, PA 15213, USA. jiemath@andrew.cmu.edu. Intitute for Mathematic and it Application, Univerity of Minneota, Minneapoli, MN 55455, USA. hnave@ima.umn.edu. Thi reearch wa upported in part by the Intitute for Mathematic and it Application with fund provided by the National Science Foundation. 1

2 problem from a different point of view, the backtracking algorithm for finding a proper q-coloring. Since then, thi problem ha been the ubject of extenive reearch, and many upper bound on P G q over the familyf n,m havebeenobtained ee, forintance, [5,6,7, 12,15]. Thecaeq = 2for alln,m waolved by Lazebnik in [6] completely. In the ame paper, Lazebnik conjectured that in the range m n 2 /4, the graph with n vertice and m edge maximizing the number of 3-coloring mut be complete bipartite graph K a,b minu the edge of ome tar, plu iolated vertice. Thi wa confirmed in a breakthrough paper[13]of Loh, PikhurkoandSudakov, whofurtherdeterminedtheaymptotic value of a,b. For q 4, they alo howed that the ame graph achieve the maximum number of q-coloring, for all ufficiently large m < κ q n 2 where κ q 1/qlogq. In fact, Loh et al. [13] provided a general approach which enable to find the aymptotic olution of the Linial-Wilf problem by reducing it to a quadratically contrained linear problem, which we hall introduce in Section 2. Depite the effort by variou reearcher, till very little wa known for general m,n,q. Perhap part of the difficulty for general m,n,q tem from the fact that the maximal graph are ubtantially more complicated than the minimal graph that Linial found quoted from [13]. The firt contribution of our paper i a tructural theorem that allow u to ubtantially implify the quadratically contrained linear problem for general intance. Here we tate it in a graph theoretic fahion and direct reader to Theorem 3.1 for the pecific tatement linking to the optimization problem. Thi tructural theorem aert that extremal graph mut be aymptotically cloe to the one in ome family G k, where k > 1 i an integer only deponding on the edge denity of graph. To be precie, for fixed q, the family G k conit of complete multipartite graph with at leat k and at mot q part a well a graph obtained from a complete k-partite graph by adding ome additional vertice each of which adjacent to the vertice of all but two fixed part. To meaure the cloene, we define the edit ditance of two graph with the ame number of vertice to be the minimum number of edge that need to be added or deleted from one graph to make it iomorphic to the other. We ay G i d-cloe to H, if the edit ditance between graph G and H i at mot d. Theorem 1.1. For any real > 1, the following hold for all ufficiently large n. Let G be an n-vertex graph with 1 2 n2 + on 2 edge which maximize the number of q-coloring over graph with the ame number of vertice and edge. Then there exit an n-vertex graph in G which i on 2 -cloe to G. We point out that the proof of the following reult will heavily rely on the tructure given by Theorem 3.1, and we expect that it will alo provide ueful inight to other unolved range of the Linial-Wilf problem. Let T n denote the complete -partite n-vertex graph with nearly-equal part, i.e., the balanced Turán graph with n vertice and part. Unlike the complicated ituation in the general cae, Lazebnik conjectured ee [9] that the Turán graph T n are alway extremal whenever q. More pecifically, Conjecture 1.2 Lazebnik. For integer q > 1 and n diviible by, the Turán graph T n ha more proper q-coloring than any other graph with the ame number of vertice and edge. The cae when q = immediately follow from the well-known Turán theorem. Lazebnik [8] confirmed thi when q = Ωn 6, and proved with Pikhurko and Woldar [9] that T 2 2n i extremal when q = 3 and i aymptotically extremal when q = 4. Loh, Pikhurko and Sudakov [13] howed that when q = +1 4, T n i the unique extremal graph for ufficiently large n, which wa improved to all n by Lazebnik and Toft in [10]. And Norine [15] partially confirmed thi conjecture for ufficiently large n, provided that divide q. Very recently, Toft [19] proved that when q = 4 and = 2, T 2 n i the unique extremal graph for all n. Surpriingly, depite thee poitive reult, we diprove Conjecture 1.2 by the following. Theorem 1.3. For all integer and q 0 uch that 20 q log, there exit an integer q, within ditance at mot from q 0, uch that Conjecture 1.2 i fale for,q. 2

3 On the other hand, we how that Conjecture 1.2 aymptotically hold for all large and q 1002 log. Theorem 1.4. For ufficiently large integer and q uch that q 1002 log, the following hold for all ufficiently large n. Every extremal graph which maximize the number of proper q-coloring over graph with n vertice and 1 2 n2 +on 2 edge i on 2 -cloe to the Turán graph T n. The above two reult together how that for fixed integer, the order of magnitude 2 log i the threhold for the number of color q up to a contant factor: there are many counterexample to Conjecture 1.2 when q i maller than 2 200log, while the Turán graph T n aymptotically become optimal once q exceed 1002 log. We will dicu related iue about the precie tructure of extremal graph in Section 7. In the next reult, we conider Conjecture 1.2 for integer, where q i not far from. Theorem 1.5. i. If q +2, then for all integer > 1 and ufficiently large integer n, every extremal graph which maximize the number of q-coloring over graph with n vertice and 1 2 n2 +on 2 edge i on 2 -cloe to the Turán graph T n. ii. If +3 q 2 7, where 10 i an integer, then Conjecture 1.2 i fale for,q. 1.1 Notation A graph G = V,E i given by a pair of it finite vertex et VG and edge et EG, which doe not contain loop or multi-edge. For a ubet X of vertice, we ue G[X] to denote the ubgraph of G induced by X, and write e G X to denote the number of edge in G[X] when it i clear from the context, we will drop the ubcript for brevity. We will make the convention that the et of color ued in a proper q-coloring i [q] := {1,2,...,q}, and for the remainder of the paper, we conider q a a fixed integer parameter. We alo adopt the typographic convention for repreenting a vector uing boldface type, a in v for a vector whoe coordinate are v i. To implify the preentation, we often omit floor and ceiling ign whenever thee are not crucial and make no attempt to optimize the abolute contant involved. All our aymptotic notation ymbol O, o, Ω, ω, Θ are relative to the number of vertice n, unle otherwie pecified with a ubcript. Finally, the function log refer to the natural logarithm. 1.2 Organization In Section 2 we introduce the optimization problem of [13], which aymptotically reduce the Linial-Wilf quetion to a quadratically contrained linear problem, ome tool ued in mathematical optimization, and ome related reult concerning the tability. We then tudy the tructure of olution to the optimization problem for general intance and finih the proof of Theorem 1.1 in Section 3. In Section 4, we preent ome prompt application of the tructural reult obtained in the previou ection, and we find the olution for certain intance including Theorem 1.5 i. The counterexample to Conjecture 1.2 will be given in Section 5, which prove Theorem 1.3 and Theorem 1.5 ii. In Section 6 we work on the optimization for integer by conidering certain continuou relaxation, which lead to a complete proof of Theorem 1.4. The final ection contain ome concluding remark and open problem. 2 The optimization problem The problem of maximizing the number of proper q-coloring can be aymptotically reduced to a quadratically contrained linear program, a hown by Loh et al in [13]. In thi ection, we decribe thi optimization problem. Following the notation of [13], we define the objective and contraint function OBJ q α := α A log A, V q α := α A, and E q α := α A α B, A A A B= 3

4 where the vector α ha 2 q 1 coordinate α A R indexed by nonempty ubet A [q] of color, and the um in E q α run over all unordered pair of dijoint nonempty et {A,B}. We hall ometime write A in place of A, when it i clear from the context that the empty et i excluded. Let FEAS q be the feaible et of vector defined by the contraint α 0, V q α = 1, and E q α 1 2, where 1 < q i a real parameter not necearily integer. Main Optimization Problem. Determine OPT q := max α FEASqOBJ q α. The maximum value OPT q exit ince FEAS q i compact. We remark that our notation i lightly different from the notation in [13], a we replaced the parameter γ ued in [13] correponding to the edge denity of the target graph with the 1 2 intead. Our choice of parameter wa motivated by fact that the balanced Turán graph T n ha approximately 1 2 n2 edge, where 1 < q i an integer number. We are ready to tate the main theorem from [13], which aymptotically reduce the original problem of maximizing q-coloring to the previou optimization problem. Theorem 2.1. For any ε > 0, the following hold for any ufficiently large n, and any 1 < q. i Every n-vertex graph with at leat 1 2 n2 edge ha fewer than e OPTq+εn proper q-coloring. ii Any α which olve OPT q yield a graph G α n which ha at leat 1 2 n2 2 q n edge and more than e OPTq εn proper q-coloring. The contruction of G α n in [13] i a follow. Partition the vertex et of G α n into cluter V A uch that V A differ from α A n by le than 1, and for every dijoint pair A,B [q], join every vertex in V A to every vertex of V B by an edge. Aume that α olve OPT q, it i eay to how that the number of proper q-coloring of G α n i roughly e OPTq+o1n, and if m denote the number of edge of G α n then m 1 2 n2 2 q n. To prove the tability of our reult, we need to following tatement from [13]. Theorem 2.2. For any real ε > 0 and > 1, the following hold for all ufficiently large n. Let G be an n-vertex graph with m 1 2 n2 edge which maximize the number of q-coloring. Then G i εn 2 -cloe to G α n, for an α which olve OPT q for ome 1 2 m < ε with. n 2 Uing Theorem 2.2 together with the continuity of OBJ q, V q, E q and OPT q for the continuity of OPT q we refer the intereted reader to [13, Claim 5, p.661], one can derive a more convenient tatement whoe proof we defer to the appendix ee Section A. Corollary 2.3. For any real > 1, the following hold for all ufficiently large n. Let G be an n-vertex graph with m = 1 2 n2 +on 2 edge which maximize the number of q-coloring. Then G i on 2 -cloe to G α n for ome α which olve OPT q. 2.1 Some preliminarie about mathematical optimization One commonly ued tool in mathematical optimization i the method of Lagrange multiplier, which i ued to find the extrema of a multivariate function fx ubject to the contraint g i x = 0 for i = 1,...,m, where the objective function f : R n R and contraint function g i : R n R are continuouly differentiable. Thi method aert that if x 0 i a regular local extremum for f, then there exit contant λ i the Lagrange multiplier uch that fx 0 = m λ i g i x 0, 1 i=1 4

5 where a point x 0 R n i called regular if the gradient g 1 x 0, g 2 x 0,..., g m x 0 are linearly independent over R. An extenion of the method of Lagrange multiplier i the method of Karuh-Kuhn-Tucker ee, e.g., [4], or KKT for hort. Conider the following optimization problem: Maximize fx, ubject to g i x 0 and h j x = 0, 2 where f i the objective function, g i i = 1,2,...,m are the inequality contraint function and h j j = 1,2,...,l are the equality contraint function. If f : R n R, g i : R n R, h j : R n R are continuouly differentiable at a point x 0, and x 0 i a local extremum for f that atifie ome regularity condition ee below, then there exit contant µ i i = 1,...,m and λ j j = 1,...,l, named KKT multiplier, uch that the following hold fx 0 = m µ i g i x 0 + i=1 l λ j h j x 0 j=1 µ i g i x 0 = 0 for i = 1,2,...,m µ i 0 for i = 1,2,...,m. 3 A point x 0 i regular for the KKT optimization if it atifie ome contraint qualification, uch a: Linear independence contraint qualification LICQ: the gradient of the active inequality contraint the et of all contraint g i x 0 0 for which the equality hold and the gradient of the equality contraint are linearly independent at x 0 ; Slater condition: If the equality contraint are given by linear function h j, and the inequality contraint are given by convex function g i, and there exit a point x 1 uch that h j x 1 = 0 for all j and g i x 1 < 0 for all i, then any point x 0 i regular. 2.2 Baic propertie of the olution In thi ection we prove ome baic reult that will be ued later in the paper. We begin with a propoition aerting that E q α hould be leat poible for the optimal feaible α. We remark that the next tatement appear implicitly in [13]. Propoition 2.4. Let α FEAS q be a local maximum point for OBJ q. Then E q α = 1 2. Proof. Aume, toward contradiction, that there exit a local maximum point α to OBJ q uch that E q α > 1 2. Since E qα > 0, there exit a nonempty et A [q] uch that α A B A= α B > 0. In particular A [q] and α A > 0. Let α be obtained from α by etting α A := α A ε, α [q] := α [q] +ε and keeping all the other entrie unchanged, where ε > 0 i mall. We have V q α = V q α = 1, E q α = E q α B A= ε α B and OBJ q α = OBJ q α+ε log q A, and by taking ε ufficiently mall, we can obtain α FEAS q uch that OBJ q α > OBJ q α, which contradict the local maximality of α, concluding the proof of thi propoition. Since FEAS q i alway a ubet of FEAS q for, we have Obervation 2.5. OPT q i trictly decreaing with repect to the parameter. 5

6 We finih the ection with two fairly traightforward propoition about the et in the upport of a olution. The firt one i a follow. Propoition 2.6. For any olution α of OPT q, we have {A : α A > 0} = [q]. Proof. Aume, for contradiction, that {A : α A > 0} [q] and let B = [q] \ {A : α A > 0}. Let A be any et in the upport of α. If we replace A by A B, i.e., if we let α be the vector obtained from α uch that α A B = α A, α A = 0 and α X = α X for all X {A B,A}, then V q α = V q α, E q α = E q α and OBJ q α > OBJ q α, a contradiction. The lat propoition give u ome information about the upport whenever it contain an interecting pair. Propoition 2.7. Let α be a olution to OPT q, and uppoe there exit two et A,B [q] in the upport of α uch that A B. Then either A B or for every c A\B there exit a et C in the upport of α which i dijoint from B and contain c. Proof. Suppoe, toward contradiction, that there exit c A\B uch that no et C in the upport of α i dijoint from B and contain c. Let α be the vector obtained from α by replacing B with B {c}, i.e., α B := 0, α B {c} = α B {c} +α B, and α X = α X for all X {B,B {c}}. Clearly V q α = V q α = 1. Moreover E q α = E q α, a every et in the upport of α that interect B {c} mut alo interect B. But OBJ q α = OBJ q α+α B log B +1 B > OBJ q α, a contradiction. 3 The tructure of the upport graph Letα FEAS q. Theupport graph of α, denoted bysupp q α, i thegraph definedover theupport of α that i, thoe et A for which α A > 0 whoe edge are formed by connecting pair of dijoint et. We will invetigate the tructure of SUPP q α for all olution α to OPT q in thi ection. We define two clae of upport graph a follow. Let P k be the cla of all SUPP q α for which the upport of α form a k-partition of [q]. Let Q k be the cla of all SUPP q α for which the upport of α conit of a k-partition A 1,...,A k 1,A k of [q] together with the et A 1 A 2. We write P := k P k and Q := k Q k. In thi ection, we how Theorem 3.1. For integer q and real 1 < q, all olution α to OPT q are uch that SUPP q α i in either k q P k or Q. And when < q, we have SUPP q α / P q. Thi reult tell u about the tructure of the upport graph for a olution to OPT q and will play critical role in olving the relevant intance of OPT q. One can check that Theorem 3.1 together with Corollary 2.3 readily implie our main tructural reult Theorem 1.1. The proof of Theorem 3.1 will be divided into even tep, outlined below. Step 1: There exit a olution α to OPT q uch that none of the graph 3K 1, C 4 and C 5 appear a induced ubgraph of SUPP q α ee Figure 1; Step 2: For any olution α to OPT q, if SUPP q α doe not contain an induced copy of 3K 1, then it alo doe not contain an induced matching of ize 2; Step 3: For any olution α to OPT q, there exit no four ubet A,B,C and D in the upport of α uch that they induce a path A B C D in SUPP q α and A > C, D > B ; Step 4: For any olution α to OPT q, if SUPP q α can be obtained from a clique by removing a tar a collection of edge haring a common endpoint, then the tar mut have exactly two edge, and SUPP q α Q; 6

7 3K 1 C 4 C5 Figure 1: Forbidden graph. Step 5: For any olution α to OPT q, if SUPP q α Q then in fact SUPP q α Q ; Step 6: For any α from Step 1, it i true that SUPP q α k P k Q. Step 7: All olution to OPT q are uch that SUPP q α i in either k q P k or Q. We will how the proof of the above tep in the forthcoming ubection. 3.1 Step 1: excluding graph with 3 nonnegative eigenvalue We firt prove the following propoition which hall be frequently ued throughout the ection. Propoition 3.2. Let α be a olution to OPT q and let A 1,A 2,...,A k [q] be vertice in SUPP q α. Let 1,g,β R k be defined a 1 i := 1, β i := X A i = α X, and g i := log A i, for i = 1,2,...,k. Then the vector 1,g,β are linearly dependent over R. Proof. Suppoe, toward contradiction, that 1, g, and β are linearly independent over R. Then there exit a vector γ R k uch that 1 γ = 0, while g γ = β γ = 1, where denote the tandard inner product in R k. Let α be obtained from α by replacing α A i := α Ai +ε γ i for i = 1,...,k, where ε > 0 i ufficiently mall. Clearly α 0 when ε i ufficiently mall and V q α = 1, a 1 γ = 0. We alo have E q α = E q α+ε+oε 2 and OBJ q α = OBJ q α+ε, therefore when ε i ufficiently mall, α FEAS q and OBJ q α > OBJ q α, a contradiction that etablihe the propoition. We ay λ i an eigenvalue of a graph G when λ i an eigenvalue of it adjacency matrix. The following propoition i the main ingredient in the proof of Step 1. Propoition 3.3. Let α be a olution to OPT q, let A 1,A 2,...,A k [q] be vertice in SUPP q α, and let H be the ubgraph of SUPP q α induced by thee vertice. Then H ha at mot two poitive eigenvalue. Moreover, if H ha at leat three nonnegative eigenvalue, then there exit another olution α to OPT q uch that SUPP q α i a trictly maller induced ubgraph of SUPP q α. Furthermore α and α differ only in the coordinate A 1,A 2,...,A k and the egment that join α and α i entirely contained in FEAS q. Proof. Let 1, g, and β be a uch a in Propoition 3.2 for the vertice A 1,...,A k. Becaue 1, g, and β are linearly dependent, we have dimpan{1,g,β} 2. Let M denote the k k adjacency matrix of H. Let W R k be the ubpace panned by the eigenvector of M aociated with nonnegative eigenvalue. Becaue M i ymmetric, if H ha at leat 3 nonnegative eigenvalue, then dimw 3, o there exit a vector γ W perpendicular to the vector 1, g, and β. Since γ W, we mut have γ T M γ 0. Let α be obtained from α by replacing α A i := α Ai + ε γ i, where ε > 0 will be choen later. If ε i ufficiently mall, we have α 0. Moreover, Vα = 1, and E q α = E q α+ε 2 γ T M γ E q α and OBJ q α = OBJ q α. 7

8 Thu we mut conclude that γ T M γ = 0, otherwie we would get a olution α to OPT q with E q α > 1 2, contradicting Propoition 2.4. In particular, H doe not have 3 poitive eigenvalue we could jut repeat the ame argument replacing W with the ubpace panned by the eigenvector of M aociated with the 3 poitive eigenvalue. Clearly the egment joining α and α i entirely contained in FEAS q, and by chooing ε appropriately, we can make one extra coordinate of α to be zero, thereby reducing the ize of the upport of the olution, and concluding the proof. From the proof of Propoition 3.3, we remark the following. Obervation 3.4. Let H, 1, g, and β be uch a in Propoition 3.3 and it proof. If H ha at leat three nonnegative eigenvalue, then there exit a vector γ in the kernel of the adjacency matrix of H uch that γ i perpendicular to the vector 1, g, and β. Let C + 5 be the 5-vertex graph obtained from C 5 by adding an edge. It i eay to verify that the eigenvalue of 3K 1 are 0,0, and 0; the eigenvalue of C 4 are 2, 0, 0, and 2; the eigenvalue of C 5 are 2, 2co 2π 5, 2co 2π 5, 2co 4π 5, and 2co 4π 5 ; and the eigenvalue of C+ 5 are λ 1,λ 2,0,λ 3, and 2, where λ , λ , λ are the root to the equation λ 3 2λ 2 2λ+2 = 0. We remark that thee graph have three nonnegative eigenvalue each, and that C + 5 contain C 4 a an induced ubgraph. The following propoition finihe the proof of Step 1. Propoition 3.5. No olution α to OPT q ha C 5 a induced ubgraph of SUPP q α. Furthermore, there exit a olution α to OPT q uch that SUPP q α doe not contain induced copie of 3K 1, C + 5 and C 4. Proof. Let α be an arbitrary olution to OPT q. Propoition 3.3 aert that SUPP q α doe not contain induced copie of C 5, ince C 5 ha three poitive eigenvalue. If SUPP q α contain either 3K 1, C + 5 or C 4 a induced ubgraph, we jut repeatedly apply Propoition 3.3 with H = 3K 1,C + 5 or C 4 to find a new olution α with trictly maller upport, until there are no more induced copie of thee graph in SUPP q α. Thi i poible becaue each of 3K 1,C + 5,C 4 ha three nonnegative eigenvalue. It i important to remark here that i whenever there are copie of 3K 1 appearing a induced ubgraph of SUPP q α, we alway chooe to apply Propoition 3.3 to remove induced copie of 3K 1 firt, and ii when 3K 1 do not appear but there i a copy of C + 5 in SUPP qα, we apply Propoition 3.3 to remove the induced copie of C + 5 rather than removing induced copie of C 4; iii finally, when there are no induced copie of 3K 1 or C 5 +, we apply Propoition 3.3 to remove the remaining induced copie of C 4. Thi priority namely 3K 1 > C + 5 > C 4 will play an important role in the proof of Step 7. The proce decribed above ha to end eventually, becaue the upport alway reduce in ize at each application of Propoition 3.3. At the end, we obtain a olution α to OPT q uch that SUPP q α ha no induced copie of 3K 1, C + 5 and C 4, and α and α are connected in FEAS q by a piecewie linear path. At lat, we tate a ueful obervation that will be needed in the ubequent tep. Obervation 3.6. For any α, if SUPP q α doe not contain an induced copy of 3K 1 then any color i [q] i contained in at mot two ubet of the upport of α. 8

9 3.2 Step 2: excluding matching of ize two Propoition 3.7. Let α be a olution of OPT q uch that SUPP q α doe not contain induced copie of 3K 1. Then SUPP q α doe not contain induced matching of ize two. Proof. Suppoe for a contradiction that ome α violate the propoition. We know there exit four vertice A,B,C,D of SUPP q α uch that A C = B D = and all other interection A B,B C,C D,D A are nonempty. Without loing generality, we aume that the interection A B i of the mallet ize among all pairwie nonempty interection of the et in {A,B,C,D}. There exit a ubet S of C D uch that S = A B. Clearly A S = B S =. We defineb = B\A B S, and D = D\S A B. By Obervation 3.6, if X i in theupportof α and X A B then either X = A or X = B. Similarly, if X S, then either X = C or X = D. In particular, α B = α D = 0. Let α be a vector obtained from α by defining α B = α B, α D = α D, α B = 0, α D = 0, and letting α X = α X for all X {B,B,D,D }. It i eay to ee that B = B and D = D, therefore OBJ q α = OBJ q α = OPT q. The edge between B,D and another ubet X {A,B,B,C,D,D } in SUPP q α are the ame a the edge between B,D and X in SUPP q α, a thi color-wapping doe not affect thoe adjacencie. We alo have B D =, while A B = A B. Therefore, E q α E q α+α A α B > E q α. Note that OBJ q α = OBJ q α = OPT q, o α and α are both global maximum point for OBJ q and by Propoition 2.4, E q α = E q α = 1, a contradiction. Thi complete the proof of thi propoition, thereby proving Step Step 3: excluding path with four vertice Propoition 3.8. For any olution α to OPT q, there exit no four ubet A,B,C and D in the upport of α uch that they induce a path A B C D in SUPP q α and A > C, D > B. Proof. Suppoe that for ome olution α to OPT q there exit four ubet A, B, C and D in the upport of α uch that they induce a path A B C D in SUPP q α and A > C, D > B. By ymmetry, we aume that D A. Let M = be the adjacency matrix of the induced path A B C D, where it row/column are arranged according to the order B, D, A, C. Let λ = It can be verified that M ha four eigenvalue λ, λ,λ 1, λ+1 and their correponding eigenvector λ λ v 1 = 1,v 1 2 = 1,v λ 3 = λ,v λ 4 = λ. λ λ 1 1 Note that the above four eigenvector are orthogonal. Let 1, g, and β be uch a in Propoition 3.2 for the vertice B,D,A,C. We have g = x 1,x 2,x 3,x 4 T, where x 1 = log B, x 2 = log D, x 3 = log A and x 4 = log C. We remark that x 2 > x 1, x 3 > x 4 and x 2 x 3. We claim that there exit a vector v := av 1 + bv 2 + cv 3 + dv 4 uch that v 1 = 0, v g = 0 and v T Mv = 2λ 2 +1 [λa 2 b 2 +λ 1c 2 d 2 ] > 0. We firtrewritev 1 = 0a a1+λ+d1 λ = 0, 9

10 which together with λ 2 = λ+1 implie that d = λ+1 λ 1 a = λ3 a. Subtituting d = λ 3 a, the econd equation v g = 0 become a1+3λx 1 x 2 x 3 +x 4 +b λx 1 x 2 +x 3 +λx 4 +cx 1 λx 2 +λx 3 x 4 = 0. If x 1 λx 2 +λx 3 x 4 = 0, then we may chooe a,b uch that a1+3λx 1 x 2 x 3 +x 4 +b λx 1 x 2 + x 3 + λx 4 = 0 and chooe c ufficiently large uch that v T Mv > 0, thereby the claim follow. If x 1 λx 2 +λx 3 x 4 0, then we chooe a = b = 1, d = λ 3 and c = 3λ+2x 2 +3λx 3 2λ+1x 1 4λ+1x 4 x 1 λx 2 +λx 3 x 4 uch that the econd equation v g = 0 i atified. We will how c > λ 3, which implie v T Mv > 0 and hencetheclaim. Note thatx 2 > x 1,x 3 > x 4 andx 2 x 3, o3λ+2x 2 +3λx 3 2λ+1x 1 4λ+1x 4 > 0, thu it uffice to how that 3λ+2x 2 +3λx 3 2λ+1x 1 4λ+1x 4 > λ 3 x 1 λx 2 +λx 3 x 4 and 3λ+2x 2 +3λx 3 2λ+1x 1 4λ+1x 4 > λ 3 x 1 λx 2 +λx 3 x 4. To ee thi, uing λ 3 = 2λ+1 and λ 4 = 3λ+2, the above two inequalitie can beimplified a 6λ+4x 2 > 2x 3 +4λ+2x 1 +2λx 4 and x 3 > x 4, which are obviouly true, thereby etablihing the claim. Rewrite thi vector v a v 1,v 2,v 3,v 4 T. A in the proof of Propoition 3.3, we let α be a vector obtained from α by replacing α B := α B +ε v 1, α D := α D +ε v 2 α A := α A +ε v 3, α C := α C +ε v 4 while keeping the other entrie unchanged, where ε > 0 i ufficiently mall. We have α 0, V q α = 1, and OBJ q α = OBJ q α; becaue 1, g and β are linearly dependent thi implie v β = 0, we alo have E q α = E q α+ε 2 v T Mv > E q α, which contradict Propoition 2.4. Thi finihe the proof. 3.4 Step 4: the tar ha two petal Propoition 3.9. For any olution α to OPT q, if SUPP q α can be obtained from a clique by removing a tar a collection of edge haring a common endpoint, then the tar mut have exactly two edge and SUPP q α Q. Proof. Let α be a olution to OPT q uch that SUPP q α i a graph obtained from a clique by removing the edge of a tar. Aume that the upport of α conit of et B 1,...,B t,a 1,...,A k,c for ome t 0 and k 1 uch that et B 1,...,B t,a 1,...,A k are dijoint, C B i = and C A j for all i,j. Since α i a olution to OPT q, Propoition 2.7 implie that every color in C A 1... A k i covered at leat twice by thi union. Thi i only poible when C = A 1 A 2... A k, and thu k 2. Moreover, Propoition 2.6 implie that B 1,...,B t,a 1,...,A k form a partition of [q]. To prove that SUPP q α Q, we need to how that k = 2. Aume, toward contradiction, that k 3. Without lo of generality, we aume that C = [p] for ome integer p q. Intead of working on [q] and it OPT q, we will turn to the tudy of the maller ground et [p] and a new optimization which can be viewed a a retriction of OPT on [p]. Let γ = k i=1 α A i +α C and α be the vector with 2 p 1 10

11 coordinate uch that it upport conit of A 1,...,A k,c and α Ai = α A i γ, α C = α C γ. Chooe real o that 1 2 = E p α. Now we conider the new optimization problem OPT p retricted to the ground et [p]. Since α olve OPT q, by our definition, it i clear that α olve OPT p a well. Wehaveeenthat αmaximizeobj p αubjecttoα A 0forallnonemptyA [p], E p α andv p α = 1. WewillapplythemethodofKaruh-Kuhn-Tuckerto αandobj p recall thesection2.1. Before proceeding, wepoint out that α iaregular point forobj p, a onecan eaily verify that αatifie the LICQ condition. For convenience, write α i := α Ai, T := k i=1 α i and P := k i=1 A i. Let π A denote the projection on the coordinate A, i.e., π A α = α A. By 3, there exit contant µ A 0,µ and λ 0 uch that OBJ p α = A [p]µ A π A +µ V p α+λ E p α. For ubet A with α A = 0, we have log A = µ A +µ+λ For C and A i, we have µ C = µ Ai = 0, o B A= α B µ+λ B A= α B. 4 log C = µ and log A i = µ+λ T α i. 5 By 5 and umming log A i from i = 1 to k, we get that λ T = 1 k 1 log P λ α i = 1 k 1 log P A i k 1 C. C k and thereby A k 3, by ubtituting A := C \A i in 4, we obtain log C A i log C +λ α i, thu A i k 1 C A i k 1 P C k 2 for all i = 1,2,...,k. Let x i := A i C and aume x := x 1 x 2... x k > 0, then 1 > x 1 k a k i=1 x i = 1. In addition, the previou inequality implie that x k 1 1 x k 1 x k x j. 6 For k 3, one can check that x k 2 1 k k 2 > 1 k 1 k 1. Thi inequality, toghether with the AM-GM inequality, implie k x k 1 1 x k 1 > x 1 xk 1 k 1 k 1 x x j, contradicting 6 and finihing the proof of Step Step 5: computing the ize of the upport when the olution i in Q We introduce retricted verion of the Main Optimization Problem. Fix an integer k 1 and a collection {A 1,...,A k 1,A k,a 1 A 2 } of [q] uch that A 1,...,A k form a k-partition of [q]. We conider the following optimization: Maximize k i=1 α ilog A i +βlog A 1 + A 2 Subject to k i=1 α i +β = 1, k i=1 α2 i +β2 +2βα 1 +α 2 1, 7 α i 0,β 0 for i = 1,...,k. 11 j=2 j=2

12 The condition of 7 are conitent with the condition of the Main Optimization Problem, when retricted to vector with upport in P k Q k. By compactne, the maximum of 7 exit, which i achieved either in the boundary or interior of it domain, where the vector in the interior have trict poitive coordinate. By Cauchy-Schwarz, we have 1 β2 +2βα 1 +α 2 + k α 2 i β +α i=1 k α 2 i 1 β + k i=2 2 k α i = 1 k, 8 which implie k, and ince k i an integer we mut alo have k. We alo remark that if α 1 +α 2,β > 0 then the inequality i trict, i.e. k >. We derive a neceary condition for the maximum to be attained in the interior of the domain of 7. Let S 1 := 1 k 1 S 2 := 1 k 1 [ [ log A 1 + A 2 + ] k log A i, and i=3 log 2 A1 A 2 + A 1 + A 2 ] k log 2 A i. Lemma If α = α 1,...,α k,β > 0 i a local maximum point for 7, then α 1 = 1 λ log A1 + A 2, α 2 = 1 A 2 λ log A1 + A 2 A 1 i=1 i=1, β = 1 λ log A1 A 2 A 1 + A 2 µ λ, for each i = 3,...,k, we have α i = log A i µ λ, and the value of the objective function of 7 i βlog A 1 + A 2 + where λ = k 1 k 1 log > µ, and log A i > µ for each i 3. A1 A 2 A 1 + A 2 k α i log A i = µ+ λ, i=1 S2 S1 2 > 0 and µ = S1 λ k 1. In particular, we have k + 1, Proof. By the ame proof of Propoition 2.4, the local maximality of 7 implie k i=1 α2 i +β2 +2βα 1 + α 2 = 1. We can apply the KKT method a a traightforward calculation how that the local extremum α atifie the LICQ condition. Therefore there exit contant λ 0 and µ uch that for each i 3, log A i = µ+λα i, log A 1 = µ+λα 1 +β, log A 2 = µ+λα 2 +βandlog A 1 + A 2 = µ+λα 1 +α 2 +β. If λ = 0, then log A 1 + A 2 = µ = log A 1, a contradiction, thu λ > 0. We can rewrite the above equation a α i = 1 λ log A i µ for each i 3, α 1 = 1 λ log A1 + A 2 A 2, α 2 = 1 λ log A1 + A 2 A 1 and β = 1 λ log A1 A 2 A 1 + A 2 µ. Now olving the ytem k i=1 α i + β = 1 and α 1 +β 2 +α 2 +β 2 β 2 + k i=3 α2 i = 1, we obtain the deired expreion of λ and µ. Thi finihe the proof. For completion, we turn to the cae β = 0. Let S 1 := 1 k k i=1 log A i and S 2 := 1 k k i=1 log2 A i. We have the following Lemma If k > and α = α 1,...,α k,0 i a local maximum point of 7 atifying α i > 0 for all i = 1,...,k, then λ α i = log A i µ for each i = 1,...,k and the value of the objective function i k i=1 α i log A i = µ + λ, 12

13 where λ = k k S 2 S and µ = S 1 λ k. In particular, log A i µ for all i = 1,...,k. Proof. The proof i very imilar to the proof of Lemma The only difference i that, in order to apply KKT, we ue Slater condition intead when β = 0, the nonlinear contraint become a convex contraint. We alo remark that, when k =, we mut have α 1 = α 2 =... = α k = 1 k, and the value of the objective function i S 1. Remark. In Lemma 3.11 it i poible that λ = 0 for intance, when all the A i have the ame ize. We now are ready to preent the proof of Step 5. With light abue of notation, we ue α to expre the ub-vector induced by the nonzero coordinate of vector α. Propoition For any olution α to OPT q uch that SUPP q α Q, we have SUPP q α Q. In particular, Z. Proof. Letαbeaolution toopt q uchthat SUPP q α Q. We will how that infact SUPP q α Q. Suppoe, toward contradiction, that SUPP q α Q k+1 for ome k. Let the upport of α be a collection {A 1,...,A k,a k+1,a 1 A 2 } uch that A 1,...,A k+1 form a k + 1-partition of [q] and rewrite α = α 1,...,α k+1,β > 0. Fixed the collection {A 1,...,A k+1,a 1 A 2 }, we conider 7 the retricted verion of the Main Optimization Problem. Obviouly, the vector α alo achieve the maximum of 7. Since α > 0, we may apply Lemma Note that λ = k k S2 S1 2 and µ = S1 λ k, where [ ] S 1 = 1 k+1 log A 1 + A 2 + log A i, and k i=3 [ S 2 = 1 ] log 2 A1 + A 2 A1 + A 2 k+1 A 1 + A 2 2log log + log 2 A i. k A 1 A 2 FromLemma3.10, wealoeethatk > becauek+1 +1, log A i µ > 0fori 3, log A1 A 2 A 1 + A 2 µ > 0 and OBJ q α = µ+ λ 1 = S λ. k We let S 1 = S 1 and [ ] S 2 = 1 k+1 log 2 A 1 + A 2 + log 2 A i. k Clearly S 2 > S 2. We contruct a vector α FEAS q uch that SUPP q α P k and OBJ q α > OBJ q α, which i a contradiction to OBJ q α = OPT q. We let α = α 1,...,α k 1,α k with upport being the k-partition {A 1 A 2,A 3...,A k,a k+1 } of [q]. The coordinate of α are defined by α i = log A i+1 µ λ for 2 i k and α 1 = log A 1 + A 2 µ λ, where λ = k k S 2 S 1 2 and µ = S 1 λ k. Note that k >, S 1 = S 1 and S 2 > S 2. So λ > λ and µ < µ, then log A i+1 µ > log A i+1 µ > 0 for 2 i k and log A 1 + A 2 µ > log µ > 0, which implie that α > 0. It i alo A1 A 2 A 1 + A 2 i=3 i=3 13

14 not hard to verify that α α k = 1 and α α k 2 = 1, therefore indeed α FEAS q. Simplifying the expreion of OBJ q α, we get OBJ q α = µ + λ 1 = S λ, k which i trictly larger than OBJ q α = OPT q. Thi contradiction prove that SUPP q α Q. To complete the proof of the propoition, it remain to how that Z. Since α 1 + α 2,β > 0, by the remark in 8 we mut have = k >, hence i not an integer and we finih the proof. 3.6 Step 6: etablihing the tructure of a olution We quote ome reult in [16] that characterize graph having at mot two nonnegative eigenvalue. Let B 2l be the cla of graph G atifying the following condition: VG = X Y with X Y =, where X i a union of l dijoint et X 1,...,X l of vertice and Y i a union of l dijoint et Y 1,...,Y l of vertice; G[X] and G[Y] are two complete ubgraph of G; for each i,j 2, every vertex of X i i adjacent to every vertex of Y l... Y l i+2 and every vertex of Y j i adjacent to every vertex of X l... X l j+2. Let B 1 be the cla of complete graph. For l 1, let B 2l+1 be the cla of graph G for which VG = X Y Z, G[X Y] B 2l and every vertex of Z i adjacent to all other vertice of G. See Figure 2. Lemma 3.13 Lemma 4 in [16]. If a graph G doe not contain any of 3K 1, C 4, C 5 a induced ubgraph then G t 1 B t. p 1 p 1 r p 2 q 3 p 2 q 3 p = Complete graph K p. p 3 q 2 p 3 q 2 p q = Complete graph K p+q. q 1 q 1 B 6 B 7 We now preent the proof of Step 6. Figure 2: Some example of graph in B 6 B 7. Propoition For any olution α to OPT q not having induced copie of 3K 1 and C 4 in it upport graph SUPP q α, it i true that SUPP q α k P k Q. Proof. Let α be an olution to OPT q uch that SUPP q α contain neither 3K 1 nor C 4 a an induced ubgraph. We know, by Propoition 3.5 Step 1, that SUPP q α doe not contain C 5 a induced ubgraph a well. By Lemma 3.13, SUPP q α t 1 B t. We will how that SUPP q α P Q. 14

15 Firt we how that t 5. Suppoe not. Then l := t/2 3 and there exit an induced ubgraph G of SUPP q α uch that G B 2l. Recall the definition of B 2l. We chooe four vertice x 1,x 2,y 1,y 2 of G uch that x 1 X 1, x 2 X 2, y 1 Y 1, y 2 Y 2, then {x 1,x 2,y 1,y 2 } induce a matching of ize two in SUPP q α, contradicting Propoition 3.7 Step 2. We claim that 1 t 3. Suppoe not, then either t = 4 or t = 5. There exit an induced ubgraph G of SUPP q α uch that G B 4. So VG = X 1 X 2 Y 1 Y 2. If there exit two vertice x 1,x 2 in X 1, then {x 1,x 2,y 1,y 2 } induce a matching of ize two in SUPP q α for any y 1 Y 1,y 2 Y 2, contradicting Propoition 3.7 again. Therefore, we may aume that X 1 = {A} and by ymmetry Y 1 = {B} for A,B [q]. Let X 2 = {C 1,...,C l } and Y 2 = {D 1,...,D m }, where C i,d j [q]. Since X 2 Y 2 induce a clique, the et l i=1 C i and m j=1 D l j are dijoint. By imilar reaon, A i=1 C m i = and B j=1 D j =. Propoition 2.7 implie that A C 1... C l = B D 1... D m. Then clearly C 1 B \A B and D 1 A\B A. Now, {A,C 1,D 1,B} induce a path A C 1 D 1 B in SUPP q α with A > D 1 and B > C 1, contradicting Propoition 3.8 Step 3. If t = 1 then it i eay to ee that SUPP q α P and by 8 we mut have SUPP q α k P k. Otherwie, we may aume that SUPP q α B 2 B 3. The upport of α can be expreed a a union X Y Z poibly with Z = uch that each of X Z and Y Z induce a clique in SUPP q α and there i no edge between X and Y. If X 2 and Y 2, then SUPP q α ha an induced matching of ize two, which cannot happen by Propoition 3.7 Step 2. Thu, we may aume that Y = 1 and thereby SUPP q α can be viewed a a graph obtained from a clique by removing a tar. Now Propoition 3.9 Step 4 and Propoition 3.12 Step 5 together imply that SUPP q α Q. Thi finihe the proof of Step 6. Corollary There exit a olution α to OPT q uch that SUPP q α k P k Q. 3.7 Step 7: the tructure of all olution In thi ubection we characterize all olution to the Main Optimization Problem. Namely, we prove that not only we can find a olution α for which SUPP q α P Q a Corollary 3.15 aert, but in fact, all olution to OPT q necearily atify SUPP q α P Q. Among the firt ix tep in the proof of Theorem 3.1, Step 1 i the only tep that fail to aert a property that all olution necearily enjoy, a it doe not prevent the exitence of a olution α uch that SUPP q α contain either 3K 1 or C 4 a induced ubgraph. To remedy thi ituation, we prove the following three propoition. Propoition If α i a olution to OPT q and α i another olution to OPT q obtained from α by an application of Propoition 3.3 with H being iomorphic to 3K 1, then SUPP q α P Q. Proof. Suppoe, toward contradiction, that SUPP q α P Q. Let A, B and C be the vertice of H. Clearly A, B, C pairwie interect, becaue they induce an independent et of ize three. Moreover, we have SUPP q α {A,B,C} SUPP q α SUPP q α. Since SUPP q α P Q, we know that ome of the et in SUPP q α form partition of [q]. Let R be uch a partition with maximum number of et. Becaue R can contain at mot one element from {A,B,C} and α A +α B +α C = α A+α B +α C > 0, we may aume, without lo of generality, that B,C R and A i in the upport of α. We remark that we do not necearily have A R. Since B C, there exit a et A R uch that A B C. We claim that X B for any ubet X R interecting B. To prove thi, we ue Propoition 2.7. If X B, then there exit a et Y in the upport of α which i dijoint from B and interect X. The et Y mut be in the upport of α a well, ince Y {A,B,C}. Becaue X Y, we mut have that SUPP q α Q, which implie X Y recall X R. Thi i a contradiction, becaue Y mut 15

16 be dijoint from B, thereby proving the claim. Therefore, there exit a ubfamily R 1 R uch that B = X R1 X. By witching the role of B and C in the previou argument, we conclude that there exit R 2 R uch that C = X R2 X. A B,C / R, we ee that R 1 2 and R 2 2; a A B C, we mut have A B C. We aume, from now on, that B C. We have two cae to conider: i - C B. In thi cae, we have B C and C B, o there exit two et D,E R\{A } uch that D B, E C, and D C = E B = ; or ii - C B. Since R 2 2, there exit a et D R\{A } uch that D B C. In the firt cae i, the et B,C,D,E in the upport of α induce a path C D E B atifying C > E and B > D. But thi i forbidden by Propoition 3.8 Step 3. In the econd cae ii, if H i the ubgraph induced by the et A,B,C,D, then the adjacency matrix of H with repect to the et A,B,C,D in that order i M = The matrix M ha three nonnegative eigenvalue and it kernel i panned by the vector 0,1,0,0 and 0,0,1,0. However, there i no vector v in the kernel of M uch that v i perpendicular to both 1,1,1,1 and log A,log B,log C,log D, ince log B > log C in ii. Hence, by Obervation 3.4, α cannot be an optimal olution to OPT q, finihing the proof of the propoition. Propoition If α i a olution to OPT q and α i another olution to OPT q obtained from α by an application of Propoition 3.3 with H being iomorphic to C + 5, then SUPP qα P Q. Proof. Suppoe, toward contradiction, that SUPP q α P Q. Let et A, B, C, D and E induce the ubgraph H ee Figure 3, whoe adjacency matrix with repect to the order of A,B,C,D,E i M = The matrix M ha three nonnegative eigenvalue and ha kernel panned by the vector 1,1,1, 1,0. Therefore, the vector γ yielded by the proof of Propoition 3.3 for H ha the form γ = γ A,γ B,γ C,γ D,0, where γ A = γ D = γ B = γ C. Then either C or D i in the upport of α ince either γ C 0 or γ D 0; by the ymmetry between C and D, we may aume that C SUPP q α. We point out that E SUPP q α, a the coordinate α E i not changed. In addition, we have C E. Thi implie that SUPP q α Q; and moreover, either C E or E C. If C E, together with the fact that A E =, we get that A C =, contradicting our definition of C 5 +. If E C, plu C D =, we get that E D =, again contradicting the definition of C 5 +. Thi finihe the proof. 16

17 A D E C B Figure 3: graph C + 5 Propoition Let α be a olution to OPT q and α be another olution to OPT q obtained from α by an application of Propoition 3.3 with H being iomorphic to C 4. If SUPP q α doe not contain an induced copy of 3K 1 or C + 5, then SUPP qα P Q. Proof. Suppoe, toward contradiction, that SUPP q α P Q. Let A, B, C and D be the vertice of H, where we aume the pair {A,B}, {B,C}, {C,D} and {D,A} induce edge in SUPP q α, or equivalently, thee are the pair of dijoint et. Let γ R 4 bethe vector that the proof of Propoition 3.3 yield for H. By Obervation 3.4, we have M γ = 0, where M = i the adjacency matrix of H, o γ A +γ C = γ B +γ D = 0. A in the proof of Propoition 3.16, denote by R the partition of [q] in SUPP q α with maximum number of et. We remark that among the vertice of VH, at leat one but at mot two belong to R. Thi i becaue the element of R induce a clique in SUPP q α. We may then aume, without lo of generality, that A R and C,D R. We claim that B R. If not, then becaue B D, there exit a et B R uch that B B D. But if that i the cae, the et B,B,D would induce a copy of 3K 1 in SUPP q α, which i clearly a contradiction. Thu, we mut have B R. We point out that there i no et E R uch that E C and E D, a, otherwie, the et A,B,E,C,D would induce a ubgraph of SUPP q α iomorphic to C 5 +, which i forbidden. We now claim that C \ A and D \ B are nonempty. Aume, for contradiction, that C A. By Propoition 2.7, ince A i not a ubet of C, there exit X in the upport of α which interect A but i dijoint from C. Since X / {A,B,C,D}, X mut belong to SUPP q α a well. But X interect A, and A R, hence we conclude that SUPP q α Q and A X. Since X i dijoint from C, we ee A i alo dijoint from C, which i a contradiction to the definition of H. Therefore C i not a proper ubet of A, and imilarly, D i not a proper ubet of B. The previou proved fact imply that there exit two et A,B R\{A,B} uch that A,A,B,B are dijoint, A C = B D =, while A D and B C are both nonempty. For intance, take A R which interect D \ B and B R which interect C \ A. The adjacency matrix of the ubgraph of SUPP q α induced by A,B,A,B,C,D in that order i given by M = But M ha three poitive eigenvalue, which i forbidden by Propoition 3.3. Thi final contradiction etablihe the propoition. 17

18 Propoition 3.16, 3.17, and 3.18 together with Step 1 through 6 imply Theorem 3.1. Proof of Theorem 3.1. Suppoetowardcontradiction thatthereexit aolutionβ toopt q forwhich the upport SUPP q β belong to neither P nor Q. From the proof of Step 1, by repeatedly applying Propoition 3.3, we can find a olution α uch that SUPP q α ha no induced 3K 1 and C 4 and β and α are connected by a piecewie linear path in FEAS q. From Step 6, we have SUPP q α P Q. Let α be the lat node in the piecewie linear path from β to α before reaching the endpoint α. Clearly α wa obtained from α by an application of Propoition 3.3 with H being iomorphic to one of 3K 1, C 5 + or C 4. A remarked in the proof of Propoition 3.5, if H i iomorphic to C 4, we may further aume that SUPP q α ha no induced copy of 3K 1 or C 5 +. From Propoition 3.16, 3.17 and 3.18, we conclude that SUPP q α P Q, a contradiction. If SUPP q β P, ince the ize of all et in the upport of β are at leat one and add up to q, it i clear that SUPP q β k q P k. In the cae that < q, we have SUPP q β / P q, a otherwie OBJ q β = 0 which can not be the optimal objective value. Thi etablihe Theorem Firt application from the tructure In thi ection, we provide hort proof to two reult with the aid of Theorem 3.1. We firt conider the tructure of extremal graph with n vertice and m n 2 /4 edge which maximize the number of 3-coloring. Such extremal graph were conjectured to be cloe to complete bipartite graph plu ome iolated vertice by Lazebnik [6], and thi wa later confirmed in [13]. Here we preent an aymptotic verion by a rather imple proof. Theorem 4.1. For any ε > 0, the following hold for all ufficiently large n. Let G be an n-vertex with m n 2 /4 edge which maximize the number of 3-coloring. Then there exit an n-vertex graph G 0, which i a complete bipartite graph plu ome iolated vertice, uch that G i εn 2 -cloe to G 0. Proof. Apply Corollary 2.3 to G and = n2 n 2 2m. Then G i εn2 -cloe to ome G α n, where α olve OPT 3. By Theorem 3.1 and = 2, we get SUPP 3 α Q 2 P 2. Thi implie that G α n i a complete bipartite graph plu ome iolated vertice, finihing the proof. Next, we prove Theorem 1.5 i. A mentioned in Section 1, the cae q = +1 wa firt proved in [13] and then extended to all n in [10]. We need the following convenient definition. When 1 i integer, we define the -balanced vector for q to be a vector α uch that α Ai = 1 and A 1,...,A form a balanced -partition of [q]. Proof of Theorem 1.5 i. Let u only conider when + 1 q + 2. In view of Corollary 2.3, it uffice to how that for every 2, the -balanced vector α for q i the unique olution to OPT q. By Theorem 3.1 and Propoition 3.12, we ee thi indeed i the cae for q = +1. Now aume q = + 2. It i eay to compute that OBJ q α = 2 log2. Suppoe that there exit a olution β to OPT q, which i not α. By Theorem 3.1 and Propoition 3.12, SUPP q β P +1. Then we may aume that the et A 1,A 2,...,A in the upport of β are of ize 1, except A +1, which i of ize 2. Uing Lemma 3.11, we compute that λ = log2 and µ = 1 +1 log2, which implie that OBJ q β = 2 +1 log2 < OBJ qα, a contradiction. Thi complete the proof. 5 The counterexample to Lazebnik conjecture In thi ection, we how variou counterexample to Conjecture 1.2. Firt, we prove Theorem 1.5 ii. 18