arxiv: v1 [math.co] 24 Oct 2017

Transcription

1 The Erdős-Hajnal conjecture for caterpillars and their complements Anita Lieenau Marcin Pilipczu arxiv: v1 [math.co] 24 Oct 2017 Astract The celerated Erdős-Hajnal conjecture states that for every proper hereditary graph class G there exists a constant ε = ε(g) > 0 such that every graph G G contains a clique or an independent set of size V (G) ε. Recently, there has een a growing interest in the symmetrized variant of this conjecture, where one additionally requires G to e closed under complementation. We show that any hereditary graph class that is closed under complementation and excludes a fixed caterpillar as an induced sugraph satisfies the Erdős-Hajnal conjecture. Here, a caterpillar is a tree whose vertices of degree at least three lie on a single path (i.e., our caterpillars may have aritrarily long legs). In fact, we prove a stronger property of such graph classes, called in the literature the strong Erdős-Hajnal property: for every such graph class G, there exists a constant δ = δ(g) > 0 such that every graph G G contains two disjoint sets A, B V (G) of size at least δ V (G) each so that either all edges etween A and B are present in G, or none of them. This result significantly extends the family of graph classes for which we now that the strong Erdős-Hajnal property holds; for graph classes excluding a graph H and its complement it was previously nown only for paths [3] and hoos (i.e., paths with an additional pendant vertex at third vertex of the path) [4]. 1 Introduction Classical ounds on the Ramsey numers due to Erdős and Szeeres [8] and Erdős [7] imply that every graph on n vertices contains a clique or an independent set of size Ω(log n), and this ound is tight up to the constant factor. A long-standing conjecture y Erdős and Hajnal [9] states that this relation drastically changes if attention is restricted to a fixed hereditary graph class G. A graph class G is called hereditary if it is closed under taing induced sugraphs. We say that a graph class G has the Erdős-Hajnal property if there exists a constant ε = ε(g) > 0 such that every n-vertex graph G G contains a clique or an independent set of size at least n ε. In 1989, Erdős and Hajnal [10] proved a weaer ound of 2 Ω( log n) and conjectured that every proper hereditary graph class has the Erdős-Hajnal property. Up to today, this conjecture remains widely open, and the Erdős-Hajnal property remains proved only for a limited numer of graph classes G. We say a graph G is H-free if G does not contain the graph H as an induced sugraph. It is nown, for example, that the class of ull-free graphs has the Erdős-Hajnal property [6]. Yet, it is unnown whether the class of P 5 -free graphs or the class of C 5 -free graphs has the Erdős-Hajnal property. The sustitution procedure y Alon, Pach, and Solymosi [1] provides more examples of graph classes with the Erdős-Hajnal property. For a full overview, we refer to a survey of Chudnovsy [5]. Sustantial progress has een otained y considering a weaer variant of the conjecture that asserts the Erdős-Hajnal property for every proper hereditary graph class that is additionally closed under complementation. In this line of direction, a reathrough paper of Bousquet, Lagoutte, and Thomassé [3] proved the Erdős-Hajnal property for graph classes excluding a fixed path and its complement. Bonamy, Bousquet, and Thomassé extended this result to graph classes closed under complementation that exclude long holes [2], School of Mathematical Sciences, Monash University VIC 3800, Australia. anita.lieenau@monash.edu. Research supported y a DECRA Fellowship from the Australian Research Council. The author would lie to than the Institute of Informatics, University of Warsaw, for its hospitality where this wor was carried out. Institute of Informatics, University of Warsaw, Poland. marcin.pilipczu@mimuw.edu.pl. The research of Marcin Pilipczu is a part of projects that have received funding from the European Research Council (ERC) under the European Union s Horizon 2020 research and innovation programme under grant agreement No

2 Figure 1: The smallest, and the only 10-vertex tree, that is not a caterpillar, and thus is not covered y Theorem 1.2. while Choromansi, Fali, Patel and the two authors extended the aove result to hoos: paths with an additional pendant edge attached to the third vertex of the path [4]. Note that oth the class of ull-free graphs and the class of C 5 -free graphs are closed under complementation. In fact, all the aforementioned results, except for the result for ull-free graphs, prove a much stronger property of a graph class in question, called the strong Erdős-Hajnal property. A graph class G has the strong Erdős-Hajnal property if there exists a constant δ = δ(g) > 0 such that every n-vertex graph G G contains two disjoint sets A, B V (G) of size at least δn each, such that A and B are fully adjacent (there are all possile edges etween them) or anti-adjacent (there are no edges etween them). A simple inductive argument shows that a hereditary graph class with the strong Erdős-Hajnal property has also the (standard) Erdős-Hajnal property (cf. [12]). Further graph classes nown to oey the strong Erdős-Hajnal property include line graphs [4] and certain suclasses of perfect graphs [4, 15]. Not all proper hereditary graph classes have the strong Erdős-Hajnal property: a certain poset construction shows that this property is false for comparaility graphs (and hence also for perfect graphs) [11], and a simple randomized construction of [4] shows that if one considers the class of F-free graphs for a finite set F (i.e., graphs that do not contain any graph in F as an induced sugraph), then the strong Erdős-Hajnal property is false unless F contains a forest and a complement of a forest. This, together with the positive results of [3, 4], motivates the following conjecture: Conjecture 1.1. For every tree T, the class of graphs excluding T and its complement as induced sugraphs has the strong Erdős-Hajnal property. In this wor we prove this conjecture for T eing a caterpillar which is a tree in which all vertices of degree at least three lie on a single path (i.e., our caterpillars may have long legs). Theorem 1.2. For every caterpillar T, the class of graphs excluding T and the complement of T as induced sugraphs has the strong Erdős-Hajnal property. In particular, Theorem 1.2 resolves Conjecture 1.1 for every tree on at most 9 vertices, a tree not covered y Theorem 1.2 is depicted on Figure 1. The paper is organized as follows. After some preliminaries in Section 2, we provide the main proof in Section 3. In Section 4 we outline some directions for future research. 2 Preliminaries We use standard graph theoretic notation. All graphs in this paper are finite and simple. Let G e a graph, let A, B V (G) such that A B =. By G[A] we denote the sugraph in G induced y the suset A. The set of vertices that have a neighour in A is denoted y N(A), and N[A] = N(A) A denotes the closed neighourhood of A. If A = {v} we areviate and write N(v) and N[v], respectively. We also write deg(v, B) for N(v) B. The set of edges with one endpoint in A and one endpoint in B is denoted y E(A, B). If E(A, B) =, we say that A and B are anti-adjacent, and if E(A, B) = A B, then A and B are fully adjacent. For a constant ε > 0, an ε-pair in a graph G is a pair of two disjoint anti-adjacent sets A, B V (G) with A, B ε V (G). Recall that a caterpillar is a tree in which all vertices of degree at least three lie on a single path. For integers h, d, t 1 or (h, d, t) = (1, 0, 0) we define a caterpillar T h,d,t as follows. Let P e a path of 2

3 length h, say on vertex set {v 1,..., v h }, and let {P i,j : i [h], j [d]} e a collection of pairwise vertex-disjoint paths and such that V (P ) V (P i,j ) = for all i, j. The graph T h,d,t is formed y taing the disjoint union of P and the hd paths P i,j, and y adding the edges v i w ij, for all i [h], j [d], where w ij is one of the two endpoints of P i,j. The graph T 1,0,0, for example, is the graph consisting of a single vertex, while T 1,1,t is a path on t + 1 vertices. Note that every caterpillar is an induced sugraph of T h,d,t for sufficiently large parameters h, d, t. We need the following two auxiliary results. The first one y Fox and Sudaov [13] states that if a graph G does not contain a graph H as an induced sugraph then it contains either a very dense or a very sparse induced sugraph on a linear numer of vertices. Theorem 2.1 ([13]). For every integer and every constant 0 < ε < 1/2 there exists a constant δ such that every n-vertex graph G satisfies the following. G contains every graph on vertices as an induced sugraph; there exists A V (G) of size at least δ V (G) such that either G[A] or the complement of G[A] has maximum degree at most ε A. We need the following path-growing argument of Bousquet, Lagoutte, and Thomassé [3]. Since the paper [3] states weaer ounds on the constants, we provide the proof for completeness. Lemma 2.2 ([3]). Let t, 1 e integers. Then, for every connected graph G of maximum degree at most and more than (t + 2) vertices, and for every v V (G), either G contains a pair (A, B) of disjoint anti-adjacent vertex sets of size at least each, or an induced path on t vertices with one endpoint in v. Proof. Assume that the graph G does not contain the pair (A, B) as in the lemma statement. This implies that for every set C V (G) of size at least 3, the largest connected component of G[C] has more than C vertices. We construct an induced path on vertices v 1, v 2,... inductively, starting with v 1 = v. Given an integer 1 i < t and vertices v 1, v 2,..., v i that induce a path in G, we define Z i = N[{v 1, v 2,..., v i }] and C i to e the vertex set of the largest connected component of G Z i. Note that Z i 1 + i, and thus V (G) \ Z i 3. Consequently, C i V (G) 1 i (t + 1 i). In the first step, we pic v 2 to e a neighor of v 1 that is adjacent to a vertex of C 1 ; such a vertex exists y the connectivity of G. In susequent steps, we maintain the invariant that v i is adjacent to a vertex of C i 1. This allows us always to choose the next vertex v i+1 within the neighorhood of C i, completing the construction. Since C t 1 2, the construction process does not stop efore defining the vertex v t, which gives the desired t-vertex path starting in v. 3 Proof of main theorem Let T e a caterpillar and let h 0, d 0, t 0 1 e such that T is an induced sugraph of T h0,d 0,t 0. Let l = l(h 0, d 0 ) e a large enough integer and let ε = ε(h 0, d 0, t 0 ) > 0 e small enough. (We will determine l and ε later.) Let G 0 e a graph that does not contain T nor the complement of T as an induced sugraph. We show that G 0 contains an ε 0 -pair where ε 0 = ε 0 (ε, l, T ) is small enough. By Theorem 2.1, there exists a constant δ = δ(t, ε/l) and a set A V (G 0 ) of size at least δ V (G 0 ) such that either G 0 [A] or the complement of G 0 [A] has maximum degree at most ε A /l. Let G e equal to G 0 [A] or the complement of G 0 [A], so that G has maximum degree at most ε A /l. We partition aritrarily the vertex set V (G) into l parts V 1... V l such that V i V j 1 for all i, j. Now, either G contains an ε/2l-pair, in which case we are done, or the following holds: (a) deg(v, V i ) ε V i for all v V (G) and all 1 i l, and () there are no two sets A V i, B V j, for some 1 i, j n, such that A ε V i, B ε V j and such that (A, B) forms an anti-adjacent pair. 3

4 A 1,1 A 1,2 A 2,1 A 2,2 A 3,1 A 3,2 A 4,1 A 4,2 v 1 v 2 v 3 v 4 Figure 2: A (α, h, d)-junior caterpillar for h = 4 and d = 2. Buds are depicted y empty circles. The uds are disjoint and pairwise anti-adjacent. The edges etween uds and the path represent at least one edge; a ud is not allowed to neighor any other vertex v i on the path. By discarding at most l vertices of G we may in fact assume that V 1... V l is an equipartition, i.e. that V i = V j for all i, j [l] and thus V i = V (G) /l. Call a graph G l-coloured if the vertex set of G is partitioned into l (not necessarily independent) sets V 1... V l ; and call an l-coloured graph G ε-clean if it satisfies (a) and (). We prove y induction on the maximum degree d 0 that an l-coloured ε-clean graph G contains the spine of a caterpillar which can e extended to an induced copy of T d0,h 0,t 0, as long as l is ig enough and ε is small enough. To e precise, we need some notation. For α > 0 a set B V (G) is called an α-ud if G[B] is connected and N(B) V j α V j for some j [l]. A family A of susets of V (G) is called colour-compatile if for all A A there is an index i A [l] such that A V ia and the indices i A for A A are pairwise distinct. For integers h 1, d 0, and a constant α > 0, an (α, h, d)-junior caterpillar (in the underlying l-coloured graph G) is a pair (P, B), where P is an induced path in G on h vertices V (P ) = {v 1, v 2,..., v h } and B is a family of pairwise anti-adjacent α-uds {B i,j : i [h], j [d]} such that the family B {{v i } : i [h]} is colour-compatile and N(B i,j ) V (P ) = {v i } for all i [h], j [d]. Note that colour-compatiility implies in particular that the B i,j s are pairwise disjoint and that B i,j V (P ) = for all i, j. See Figure 2 for an illustration. We prove the following. Lemma 3.1. For all integers h 1 and d 0 there exist a constant α > 0 and an integer l 0 1 such that every l 0 -coloured α-clean graph G contains an (α, h, d)-junior caterpillar. Before proving the lemma let us show how this finishes the proof of Theorem 1.2. By choosing l l 0 (h 0, d 0 ) and ε < α(h 0, d 0 ), where l 0 and α are the constants given y Lemma 3.1, we may assume that G contains an (α, h 0, d 0 )-junior caterpillar (P, B). (We may fix l = l 0 (h 0, d 0 ) at this point, ut we do need further restrictions on ε.) Note that y definition, P is an induced path and B is a family of h 0 d 0 pairwise disjoint α-uds. Let B 0 for [h 0 d 0 ] e an aritrary enumeration of the uds B B and let v e the unique vertex of V (P ) in N(B 0 ). For every [h 0 d 0 ], let B e a minimal suset of B 0 with the following properties: G[B ] is connected, v N(B ), and N[B ] 10h 0 d 0 t 0 2 ε V (G). We claim that B exists for all. Indeed, since B 0 is an α-ud we have that N[B 0 ] α V j α V (G) /l for some j [l]. Hence, we can pic B vertex y vertex, starting with a neighour of v, eeping B connected, until N[B ] 10h0 d 0 t 0 2 ε V (G), which is possile if ε is chosen such that 10h 0 d 0 t 0 2 lε < α. (3.1) We now show that N(B ) is not too ig either. First note that y the minimality of B and the ound on the maximum degree, we have that N[B ] ( 10h0 d 0 t ) ε V (G) < V (G) /2. 4

5 Now (B, V (G)\N[B ]) is an anti-adjacent pair. Hence, we can assume that B < ε V (G) for all [h0 d 0 ]. It follows that for every [h 0 d 0 ] we have that ( 10h0 d 0 t ) ε V (G) N(B ) N[B ] ( 10h0 d 0 t ) ε V (G). (3.2) Therefore, for all [h 0 d 0 ], N[B j ] N[V (P )] N[B j ] + N[V (P )] j< j< ( (2 2)10h 0 d 0 t h 0 ) ε V (G) (2 1)10h 0 d 0 t 0 ε V (G), where we used that N[V (P )] 2h 0 ε V (G) y the ound on the maximum degree, and that + 2h 0 3h 0 d 0 t 0. Hence, the sets C defined y C = N(B ) \ N[B j ] N[V (P )] j< satisfy C 9h0 d 0 t 0 ε V (G), (3.3) using (3.2) as well. By definition, C N(B ) and C is anti-adjacent to B j for all 1 j < h 0 d 0. Now, for every [h 0 d 0 ] in decreasing order, we define an induced path P on t vertices with V (P ) {v } B C and endpoint v as follows. First, we define D = {v } ( B C ) \ N[V (P j ) \ {v j }]. j> Since B and A j C j are anti-adjacent for 1 < j h 0 d 0 and since V (P j ) {v j } B j C j, we have that {v } B D and, consequently, G[D ] is connected. Note that N[V (P j ) \ {v j }] h 0d 0 t 0 ε V (G) j> so that D 8h0 d 0 t 0 ε V (G), y (3.3). Finally, since the maximum degree in G[D ] is at most ε V (G) D /(t0 + 2), we can apply Lemma 2.2 to G[D ] to find an induced path P on t vertices rooted in v. From the construction, we infer that every path P is induced with an endpoint in v, v is the unique vertex of V (P ) N[V (P )\{v }], and V (P )\{v } and V (P j )\{v j } are anti-adjacent for every 1 < j h 0 d 0. Consequently, V (P ) [h 0d 0] V (P ) induces the caterpillar T h0,d 0,t 0 in G. This finishes the proof of Theorem 1.2. It remains to prove Lemma 3.1. We remar that the aove proof does not use the assumptions on the parts of a junior caterpillar eing colour-compatile; colour-compatiility will e used only in the inductive step in the proof of Lemma 3.1. In that proof we will iteratively find a more general structure which we call ferns. If such a fern is deep enough then it is easy to see that it contains the desired junior caterpillar. Otherwise, we construct the junior caterpillar inductively. Let us recall some notation. A rooted tree is a tree T with one vertex specified as the root. We refer to vertices of such trees as nodes as the rooted trees in this proof are auxiliary structures outside of the graph 5

6 Figure 3: A (α, d)-fern for d = 3. Buds are depicted y empty circles. A line connecting two uds represents that every vertex from a lower ud has at least one neighor in the upper ud. All other pairs of uds are anti-adjacent. we are woring with. For a node t V (T ), the sutree of T rooted at t is denoted y T t. If s is the neighour of t in T on the path from the root to t then s is called the parent of t whereas t is called a child of s. The height of a rooted tree T is the maximum numer of edges on a path from the root to a leaf. For a constant α > 0 and an integer d 1, an (α, d)-fern (in an underlying coloured graph G ) is a pair F = (T, B) where T is a rooted tree in which every internal node has exactly d children, and where B = {B t : t V (T )} is a colour-compatile family of α-uds, one for each node in T, that are pairwise anti-adjacent unless s is a parent of t in T in which case A s N(A t ), i.e. every v A s has a neighour in A t. For a given fern F = (T, B), we refer to T as T (F ), to B as B(F ), and we set V (F ) = B B B to e the vertex set on which the fern lives. The height of a fern (T, B) is the height of the tree T. See Figure 3 for an illustration. Finally, we say that a fern (T, B) grows on a set Z V (G ) if Z is disjoint from every ud B t B, Z is anti-adjacent to every ud B t for non-root nodes t, and Z N(B r ) for the root r of T. It is easy to oserve that a high enough fern contains a junior caterpillar. Lemma 3.2. Let l, h 1 and d 0 e integers, and let α > 0 e a constant. If an l-coloured graph G contains an (α, d + 1)-fern of height at least h, then G contains an (α, h, d)-junior caterpillar. Proof. Let (T, B) e an (α, d+1)-fern of height at least h. By the assumption on height, there exists a path P in T, say on nodes {t 1, t 2,..., t h+1 }, such that t 1 is the root of T and t i+1 is a child of t i for all i [h]. Iteratively, for every i [h] in increasing order, pic v i B ti such that v i v i 1 E(G) for i > 1; this is always possile since N(B ti ) B ti 1. Oserve that the adjacency conditions on a fern imply that {v 1, v 2,..., v h } induce a path in G with vertices in this order. To complete the construction of a junior caterpillar, for every i [h], define α-uds B i,j, j [d], to e the d uds B s for children s of t i except for t i+1. Finally, oserve that the adjacency conditions on a fern imply that B i,j are pairwise anti-adjacent with N(B i,j ) {v 1, v 2,..., v h } = {v i }, while colour-compatiility of B implies colour-compatiility of {B i,j : i [h], j [d]} V (P ). We are now ready to prove our main technical lemma. Proof of Lemma 3.1. We prove the statement y induction on d. Fix integers h 1 and d 0 and, if d > 0, assume that the statement is true for h and d 1 with parameters α = α(h, d 1) > 0 and l = l 0 (h, d 1). Let G e an l 0 -coloured α-clean graph where l 0 = h + l ((d + 1) h ) (3.4) α = 3 l0 α /10, (3.5) and where, for revity, we set α = l = 1 in the case d = 0. Assume that V 1,..., V l0 are the colour classes of G. 6

7 W 1 W 2 W 3 W 4 W 5 Figure 4: A state after -th step of the inductive process for d = 2. As efore, uds are represented y circles and an edge etween two sets means that every vertex in the lower set has at least one neighor in the upper set. Rectangles depict sets Wi which are of size linear in the size of their original color classes. There may e edges etween different sets Wi ; except for these and the drawn edges, every other pair of depicted sets is anti-adjacent. Next step will e performed inside the set a = 3, as this set has d + 1 ferns growing on it. We now descrie an iterative process in which we find a family F of ferns in G, increasing the total numer of uds y 1 in each step. For = 0, 1,..., we define a set I I 1... [l] of l active colours, susets Wi V i for all i I, and a family F of (α, d + 1)-ferns, each one growing on Wi for some i I. See Figure 4 for an illustration. In each step, let Fi e the set of all those ferns F F that grow on Wi, and let B = F F B(F ) e the collection of all uds in all ferns of F. The procedure. We set I 0 = [l], Wi 0 = V i, and Fi 0 = for every i I0. Now assume that for 0 we have sets I, (Wi ) i I, and a family F of ferns as aove. We stop the process if for all i I we have that 0 < F i < d + 1, or if I = 1. Otherwise, we define I +1, (W +1 i ) i I +1, and F +1 as follows. Pic an index a I as follows. If there exists a set Fi of size d + 1, pic a = i; otherwise, pic a so that Fa =. Now, let A 0 e the vertex set of the largest connected component of G [Wa ]. Let A A 0 e a minimal suset such that G [A] is connected and there exists an index I \ {a} with N(A) W W /3. Set I +1 = I \ {a}, W +1 = W N(A), W +1 i = W i \ N(A) for every i I +1 \ {}, and F +1 i = F i for every i I +1 \ {}. Finally, set F +1 = F {F A} for a fern F A = (T, B A ) defined as follows. For f = Fa {0, d + 1}, suppose that F 1, F 2,..., F f are the ferns in Fa (growing on Wa ), and suppose that F i = (T i, B i ) for i [f], and let r i e the root of T i. We create a new node r to e the root of T, associate with it the set A, and append all trees T i as sutrees rooted at the children of r; that is, every node r i ecomes a child of r. We then define B A = {A} i [f] B i. Note that for = 0 and for the initial choices I 0, W 0 i, and F, the following hold trivially. 1. W i 3 V i. 2. Every F F is indeed an (α, d + 1)-fern, growing on W i for some i I. 3. B = and B {W i : i I } is colour-compatile. 4. W i is anti-adjacent to all uds B B(F ) of ferns F F \ F i. 7

8 5. V (F ) and V (F ) are anti-adjacent for all distinct ferns F, F F. 6. F i d + 1, and F i = d + 1 for at most one family F i. Assume now that for 0 we have sets I, (Wi ) i I, and a family F of ferns that satisfy the conditions We claim that, unless the process stops, the procedure is well-defined and that the properties hold for I +1, (W +1 i ) i I +1, and F +1. Note that < l 1 since otherwise the process would stop (since I = l ). Furthermore, we can assume that F i {0, d + 1} for some i I y the stopping condition, and hence the index a is well-defined. Note also that there is at most one family with F i = d+1 y 6., and that the index a pics this unique family if it exists. By 1., W a 3 V i, and hence, A 0 > W a /2, as otherwise G contains an anti-adjacent pair (U, W ), oth U, W V a and of size at least V a /2 3 > α V a, contradicting G eing α-clean. This then implies that N(A 0 ) Wi Wi /2 for all i I \ {a} as otherwise (A 0, Wi \ N(A 0 )) would e an anti-adjacent pair contradicting G eing α-clean. Consequently, since I \ {a} =, the set A as defined exists. It follows that I +1, (W +1 i ) i I +1 and (F +1 i ) i I +1 are well-defined. By definition, N(A) W W /3 3 (+1) V. Furthermore, we have that N(A) W i Wi /3 + α V i 2 Wi /3 for all i I +1 \ {}, y minimality of A and the upper ound on deg(v, V i ) for every v A (y part (a) of the definition of G eing α-clean). Hence, for all i I +1, W +1 i Wi /3 3 (+1) V i, and thus 1. holds. We now show that F A = (T, B A ) is an (α, d + 1)-fern. By definition, T is a rooted tree. If Fa = then T consists of a single node r (which is the root). Otherwise, F a = d+1 and the trees T1,..., T d+1 are appended as sutrees rooted at the children of r. Thus, the degree of r is d + 1 in T. The family B A = {A} i [f] B i is colour-compatile since A Wa and B {Wi : i I } is colour-compatile y 3. Furthermore, A is an α-ud since N(A) W α V. Note that A is anti-adjacent to B for any ud B i [f] B i unless B is a ud corresponding to the root of T i for some i [f]. This is ecause A Wa and each F i grows on Wa. For the same reason, A N(B) for every B corresponding to the root of T i for some i [f]. We now claim that F A grows on W +1. Indeed, W +1 W is disjoint from V (F A) since B {Wi : i I } is colour-compatile y 3. By definition, W +1 N(A). Finally, W +1 W is anti-adjacent to B for any B i [f] B i since F i Fa and y 4. This proves 2. for +1. For 3. note that B +1 = B {A} and that colour-compatiility of B +1 {W +1 i : i I +1 } follows from W +1 i Wi for all i I +1, from A Wa, and from colour-compatiility of B {Wi : i I }. For 4., note that (W +1 i, V (B)) is anti-adjacent for all i I +1, B B ( F +1 (F +1 i {A}) ), y 4. for. By definition, A is anti-adjacent to all W +1 i for i and 4. follows. Similarly, we only need to chec 5. for A. But this follows since A Wa and from 4. for. Finally, in step + 1 we add 1 fern to the family F +1 growing on W (and to no other family), and the choice of a guarantees that there is at most one family F +1 i, i I +1, with exactly d + 1 ferns. Let us consider the case when d = 0 first. Note that for every 0, every family Fi has size 0 or 1, for i I. So the process only stops after step = l 0 1 when I = 1 and the process produces a fern in which the auxiliary tree is a path of length l 0 1 h. That is, the fern is an (α, 1)-fern of height at least h, which contains an (α, h, 0)-junior caterpillar y Lemma 3.2. This proves the statement for d = 0. For d 1, assume now that the process stops at step for some 0 l 0, that is, I = 1 or 1 F i d for all i I. If there exists a fern F F of height at least h then G contains an (α, h, d)- junior caterpillar y Lemma 3.2, and we are done. So we may assume that every fern F F is of height less than h, and thus it contains at most (d + 1) h uds. Since every set Fi is of size at most d, and the total numer of uds in B is exactly, we have that = B I (d + 1) h+1. Now since = l 0 I as well, we infer that I l0 / ( (d + 1) h ) l, y (3.4). Pic any set I I of size exactly l and consider an l -coloured graph H = G [ i I W i ] with colour classes Wi, i I. Since G is α-clean and Wi 3 V i 3 l0 V i, we have that H is α -clean y (3.5). By induction, there exists an (α, h, d 1)-junior caterpillar (P, B ) in H. Let V (P ) = {v 1, v 2,..., v h } and let B = {B i,j : i [h], j [d 1]} e the family of α -uds so that B {{v i } : i [h]} is colour-compatile in H and so that {B i,j : j [d 1]} is the set of private α -uds for vertex v i (in H). Note that an α -ud in H is an α-ud in G, since α W i α Vi. Note also that colour-compatiility in H implies colour-compatiility in G. 8

9 For i [h], let a(i) e such that v i W a(i), let F i e any fern in F a(i) (which exists as F a(i) 1), and let B i,d B(F i ) e the ud associated with the root node of F i. Note that B i,d is anti-adjacent to all W j for i a(i), y Property 4, and hence it is anti adjacent to all B i,j for i i, all j [d 1]. Furthermore, N(B i,d ) V (P ) = {v i }, and B i,d is anti-adjacent to B i,d for any i i y Property 5. Hence, (P, B ) is an (α, h, d)-junior caterpillar in G, where B = {B i,j : i [h], j [d]}. This finishes the proof of the lemma. 4 Conclusions We would lie to conclude with a numer of future research directions. Our result inscries into a recent trend in studying the (strong) Erdős-Hajnal property for graph classes closed under complementation. Here, the progress is triggered y the result of Fox and Sudaov [13], see Theorem 2.1, which allows to concentrate on sparse graphs. For a fixed graph H, let G H e the class of graphs that does not contain H nor the complement of H as an induced sugraph. As shown in [4], a simple randomized construction shows that G H does not have the strong Erdős-Hajnal property unless H is a forest or the complement of a forest. In this wor, we significantly extend the family of H for which G H is nown to have the strong Erdős-Hajnal property from paths [3] and hoos [4] to aritrary caterpillars. We elieve that Conjecture 1.1 is true in general. The natural next step would e to prove the conjecture for the tree depicted in Figure 1. To prove the (strong) Erdős-Hajnal property for graph classes closed under complementation similar techniques are used as for proving χ-oundedness. A graph class G is called χ-ounded if for every there exists a constant c such that every graph G G with chromatic numer at least c contains a complete sugraph on vertices. The well-nown Gyárfás-Sumner conjecture [14, 18] asserts that for every tree T, the class of T -free graphs is χ-ounded. The proof of Bousquet, Lagoutte, and Thomassé [3] can e considered as the Erdős-Hajnal analogue of the proof of Gyárfás that graphs excluding a fixed path are χ-ounded. In the world of χ-oundedness, an old result of Scott [16] proves that if one excludes a fixed tree T and all its sudivisions, then one otains a χ-ounded graph class. A weaening of Conjecture 1.1 would e the following. Conjecture 4.1. For every fixed tree T, the set of graphs G such that neither G nor the complement of G contains a sudivision of T as an induced sugraph, has the strong Erdős-Hajnal property. The proof in [16] considers two cases, depending on whether constant-radius alls have small or large chromatic numer. In the world of the Erdős-Hajnal property, this translates to whether the following property is true: For some radius r 1 and a constant ε > 0, every set A V (G) of size at least ε V (G) contains a vertex v A such that in G[A], at least ε A vertices of A are within distance at most r from v. If a graph G has the aove property for some fixed r and ε, then we say that G has the large alls property, which corresponds to the large local chromatic numer case of [16]. In a hypothethical proof of Conjecture 4.1, we elieve that one can handle the case of the large alls property with the techniques of this paper. However, if this property is false, we do not now how to proceed. In Scott s wor [16], the main tool in the small local chromatic numer regime is a Ramsey-lie lemma (Lemma 5 of [16]), which has no good analogue in the Erdős-Hajnal setting. Finally, it would e tempting to use the approach of this paper to mae a progress of the Gyárfás-Sumner conjecture, say to prove it for any caterpillar T. While many parts of the proof can e translated to the χ-oundedness regime, one step specific to the Erdős-Hajnal setting seems is an ostacle: in the proof of Lemma 3.1, we argued that N(A 0 ) contains most of every set Wi for i a, and therefore the set A and the index exist; in the χ-oundedness setting, it is not clear how to proceed if N(Wa ) Wi has small chromatic numer for every i, a I, i a. Acnowledgements. The second author thans Bartosz Walcza for long discussions on research directions outlined in the conclusions, in particular regarding χ-oundedness of various graph classes. After this preprint was finished, we learned that Seymour and Spirl [17] otained independently the same result as Theorem

10 References [1] N. Alon, J. Pach, and J. Solymosi. Ramsey-type theorems with foridden sugraphs. Cominatorica, 21(2): , [2] M. Bonamy, N. Bousquet, and S. Thomassé. The Erdös-Hajnal conjecture for long holes and antiholes. SIAM J. Discrete Math., 30(2): , [3] N. Bousquet, A. Lagoutte, and S. Thomassé. The Erdős-Hajnal conjecture for paths and antipaths. J. Com. Theory, Ser. B, 113: , [4] K. Choromansi, D. Fali, A. Lieenau, V. Patel, and M. Pilipczu. Excluding hoos and their complements. CoRR, arxiv: , [5] M. Chudnovsy. The Erdős-Hajnal conjecture A Survey. Journal of Graph Theory, 75(2): , [6] M. Chudnovsy and S. Safra. The Erdős-Hajnal conjecture for ull-free graphs. Journal of Cominatorial Theory, Series B, 98(6): , [7] P. Erdős. Some remars on the theory of graphs. Bulletin of the American Mathematical Society, 53(4): , [8] P. Erdős and G. Szeeres. A cominatorial prolem in geometry. Compositio Mathematica, 2: , [9] P. Erdős and A. Hajnal. On spanned sugraphs of graphs. In Contriutions to graph theory and its applications (Internat. Colloq., Oerhof, 1977), pages 80 96, [10] P. Erdős and A. Hajnal. Ramsey-type theorems. Discrete Applied Mathematics, 25(1):37 52, [11] J. Fox. A ipartite analogue of Dilworths theorem. Order, 23(2-3): , [12] J. Fox and J. Pach. Erdős-Hajnal-type results on intersection patterns of geometric ojects. In Horizons of cominatorics, pages Springer, [13] J. Fox and B. Sudaov. Induced Ramsey-type theorems. Advances in Mathematics, 219(6): , [14] A. Gyárfás. On Ramsey covering-numers. In Coll. Math. Soc. Janos Bolyai, Infinite and Finite Sets, page 10. North Holland/American Elsevier, [15] A. Lagoutte and T. Trunc. Clique-stale set separation in perfect graphs with no alanced sew-partitions. Discrete Mathematics, 339(6): , [16] A. D. Scott. Induced trees in graphs of large chromatic numer. Journal of Graph Theory, 24(4): , [17] P. D. Seymour and S. Spirl. Caterpillars in Erdős-Hajnal, Manuscript, availale at [18] D. P. Sumner. Sutrees of a graph and chromatic numer. In G. Chartrand, editor, The Theory and Applications of Graphs, pages John Wiley & Sons,