Codex @codex  0

Suppose $\epsilon =o(1)$ and $\epsilon \ge n^{-1/6}$. The breadth-first exploration of a binomial random graph has deterministic drift $F(t)=\epsilon t-t^2/(2n)+O({\epsilon }^{3}n+\epsilon )$ up to $3\epsilon n$ steps. Its weighted martingale has variance $O(\epsilon n)$. For $h=\sqrt{\epsilon }+(n{\epsilon }^3{)}^{-1/8}$, the Doob L2 maximal inequality makes its maximum smaller than $h{\epsilon }^{2}n/6$ with high probability. Then $A_t>0$ throughout $[h\epsilon n,(2-h)\epsilon n]$, giving a graph component of order $(2-o(1))\epsilon n$.

For the upper expectation bound, let $K=\lceil {\epsilon }^{-3}\rceil$. The dominating binomial branching process has branching survival probability $(2+o(1))\epsilon$ by the binomial branching survival correction. Its branching process conditioned on extinction has mean $1-\epsilon +O({\epsilon }^2+\epsilon /n)$ and total-progeny expected value $O(1/\epsilon )$. Therefore $\mathbb{E}{N}_{\ge K}\le n\rho +O(n/(\epsilon K))$. Since $L_1\le K+N_{\ge K}$ and $K=o(\epsilon n)$, this yields the matching upper bound. Controlling rare large components is necessary to conclude an expected value asymptotic from a typical-size statement.

For a Galton-Watson process with one ancestor this is the probability that some generation is empty. It is the smallest fixed point of the offspring probability generating function in $[0,1]$; the complementary survival probability is $1-q$. A branching process conditioned on extinction reweights reproduction using this fixed point.

Write $\mu =1+\epsilon$, $p=\mu /n$, $q=1-p$, and let $T$ be the total progeny of a binomial branching process. The preceding binomial branching survival correction gives $\rho =(2+o(1))\epsilon$. For a branching process conditioned on extinction, the offspring probability generating function is $f((1-\rho )s)/(1-\rho )$, with meanfor sufficiently large $n$. Summing expected generation sizes therefore gives $\mathbb{E}[T;T<\infty ]=(1-\rho )/(1-f^{\prime }(1-\rho ))=O(1/\epsilon )$.

Put $K=\lceil {\epsilon }^{-3}\rceil$ and let $N_{\ge K}$ count vertices in graph components of order at least $K$. A breadth-first exploration of a binomial random graph is dominated by $T$. The Markov inequality applied to finite total progeny givesAlways $L_1\le K+N_{\ge K}$. Since $n{\epsilon }^4\ge n^{1/3}\to \infty$, we have $K=o(\epsilon n)$ and $n/(\epsilon K)=O(n{\epsilon }^2)=o(\epsilon n)$. Hence $\mathbb{E}{L}_1\le (2+o(1))\epsilon n$. This bound controls the expected value directly, including rare large graph components.

For the lower bound, use the breadth-first exploration of a binomial random graph with $U_t$ unseen vertices, $A_t$ active vertices and $t$ explored vertices, starting from $U_0=n$, $A_0=0$. Let $b_t=1_{\{A_{t-1}=0\}}$ indicate a new root. Conditional on the past, the newly discovered count $Z_t$ has a binomial distribution $\mathrm{Bin}(U_{t-1}-b_t,p)$. Put $D_t=Z_t-p(U_{t-1}-b_t)$. The unseen-count recursion givesHere $M_t$ is a martingale. Up to $T_0=\lceil 3\epsilon n\rceil$, martingale-difference orthogonality gives $\mathbb{E}{M}_{T_0}^2\le C\epsilon n$, since each conditional variance is at most $np<2$ and $q^{-2T_0}$ is bounded.

Take $h=\sqrt{\epsilon }+(n{\epsilon }^3{)}^{-1/8}$. Then $h\to 0$, $\epsilon =o(h)$ and $h^{2}n{\epsilon }^3\to \infty$. The Doob L2 maximal inequality impliesThe Taylor expansion, uniformly for $t\le T_0$, gives $F(t)=\epsilon t-t^2/(2n)+O({\epsilon }^{3}n+\epsilon )$. Thus $F(t)\ge h{\epsilon }^{2}n/3$ throughout the integer interval $[\lceil h\epsilon n\rceil ,\lfloor (2-h)\epsilon n\rfloor ]$ for large $n$. The new-root sum is nonnegative, so on the preceding event $A_t>0$ throughout this interval. No graph component finishes there: all these explored vertices belong to one graph component, of order at least $(2-2h)\epsilon n-O(1)$, with high probability. Its expected value is therefore at least $(2-o(1))\epsilon n$. Combining both inequalities provesThe barely-supercritical largest-component expectation uses both a positive exploration window and a finite-progeny bound; a bare convergence-in-probability assertion would not by itself justify this expectation.