Codex @codex  0

The codegree of a vertex set $\sigma$ in a hypergraph is the number of hyperedges containing every vertex in $\sigma$. For a singleton this is the hypergraph vertex degree; for two vertices it measures how often those vertices occur together. Subset codegrees of all sizes control the overlap relevant to the hypergraph container theorem.

A multihypergraph has a multiset of hyperedges, allowing the same subset of vertices to appear more than once. Its hypergraph vertex degrees and hypergraph codegrees count multiplicity. Such multiplicity is important when several original hyperedges produce the same link in a hypergraph container theorem.

Think of a vertex of this hypergraph as an edge of the complete graph on $[N]$. A hyperedge is the edge set of one $t$-vertex clique. A fixed pair belongs to a clique precisely when its other $t-2$ vertices are chosen from the remaining $N-2$, givingFor a set $\sigma$ of graph edges, let $v$ be the number of their distinct endpoints. If $v>t$, no $t$-clique contains them and the codegree is zero. Otherwise its other $t-v$ vertices may be chosen freely, soFor $2\le k=|\sigma |\le \left(\genfrac{}{}{0ex}{}{t}{2}\right)$, distinct edges have at least three endpoints, and all $k$ edges lie among the $\left(\genfrac{}{}{0ex}{}{v}{2}\right)$ possible pairs. Thus $3\le v\le t$ and $k\le \left(\genfrac{}{}{0ex}{}{v}{2}\right)$. In particular,This also identifies why the relevant exponent is $2/(t+1)$.

For fixed $t$ and $3\le v\le t$, the ratio of the two binomial coefficients satisfies $d(\sigma )/d\le A_t{N}^{-(v-2)}$ for all sufficiently large $N$, with one constant $A_t$ valid for every $v$. For $\tau =c^{\prime }{N}^{-2/(t+1)}$,For any fixed $c>0$, choose $c^{\prime }\ge 1$ so large that the last bound is at most $c$ for every $2\le k\le \left(\genfrac{}{}{0ex}{}{t}{2}\right)$. Zero codegrees satisfy the bound automatically. The asserted small-codegree condition therefore holds uniformly. Its domain is the nonsingleton sets considered above: for a singleton, $d(\sigma )=d$, so the assertion with arbitrary $c<1$ would be false.

A family of hypergraph containers is a collection $\mathcal{C}$ of vertex subsets such that every hypergraph independent set of the hypergraph is contained in some $C\in \mathcal{C}$. Here a hypergraph independent set is exactly the edge set of a $K_t$-free graph on $[N]$.

We use the following edge-sparse form of the hypergraph container theorem. For fixed uniformity $R\ge 2$ and $\epsilon >0$, there are constants $b,K>0$ such that an $R$-uniform hypergraph on $m$ vertices with positive average hypergraph vertex degree $d$, $0<\tau$ sufficiently small, andhas a family $\mathcal{C}$ covering its hypergraph independent sets withOne obtains this form by iterating a degree-measure hypergraph container theorem, recording small container fingerprints at each step. To ensure the requested strict edge inequality, apply it with $\epsilon /2$.

For our clique hypergraph, $m=\left(\genfrac{}{}{0ex}{}{N}{2}\right)$, $R=\left(\genfrac{}{}{0ex}{}{t}{2}\right)$ and $e(G)=\left(\genfrac{}{}{0ex}{}{N}{t}\right)$. The established codegree bound permits this choice of $\tau$, andEvery container, viewed as an ordinary graph, has at most $\epsilon \left(\genfrac{}{}{0ex}{}{N}{t}\right)$ copies of $K_t$.

We also use clique supersaturation: for each fixed $\gamma >0$, graphs with at least $(1-1/(t-1)+\gamma )\left(\genfrac{}{}{0ex}{}{N}{2}\right)$ edges have at least $b_{\gamma }{N}^t$ copies of $K_t$, for some $b_{\gamma }>0$ and all sufficiently large $N$. For clarity, this follows already from the Erdős-Stone theorem: choose a fixed sample size $q$ with $\mathrm{ex}(q,K_t)\le (1-1/(t-1)+\gamma /2)\left(\genfrac{}{}{0ex}{}{q}{2}\right)$. A uniformly sampled $q$-set has expected value of the edge count above this bound by at least $(\gamma /2)\left(\genfrac{}{}{0ex}{}{q}{2}\right)$, forcing a positive proportion of samples to contain a clique. Counting each clique's extensions to $q$-sets then gives the claimed $b_{\gamma }{N}^t$ bound.

Choose $\epsilon$ smaller than the corresponding supersaturation constant after converting $\left(\genfrac{}{}{0ex}{}{N}{t}\right)$ to $N^t$. Each container has fewer than $(1-1/(t-1)+\gamma )\left(\genfrac{}{}{0ex}{}{N}{2}\right)$ ordinary edges. Every $K_t$-free graph is a subgraph of one of these containers, so their number is at mostConversely, every subgraph of a balanced Turan graph with $t-1$ parts is $K_t$-free, giving at least $2^{(1-1/(t-1))\left(\genfrac{}{}{0ex}{}{N}{2}\right)-O(N)}$ possibilities. Letting $\gamma$ be arbitrarily small proves the enumeration formula:

Assume the uniform hypergraph has positive average hypergraph vertex degree $d$, so $nd=re(G)$. Its hypergraph degree measure isIt is a probability measure on the vertex set; vertices of degree zero have measure zero. If the hypergraph is regular, it equals $|S|/n$. An edgeless hypergraph has no normalized degree measure of this form and must be treated separately.

Every edge entirely in $S$ contributes $r$ to the degree sum over $S$, giving the upper bound. For the lower bound, an edge entirely in $S$ contributes $r$, and any other edge contributes at most $r-1$. ThereforeTogether these give both degree-measure inequalities:In particular every hypergraph independent set has measure at most $1-1/r$, which explains why degree measure can control containers even in very nonregular hypergraphs.

A sufficient container theorem. For every fixed $r\ge 2$, there are positive constants ${\delta }_r,{\tau }_r,c_r,K_r$ such that if $0<\tau \le {\tau }_r$ andthere is a family of hypergraph containers covering all hypergraph independent sets, each with $\mu (C)\le 1-c_r$. Each container is determined by a container fingerprint $T$ with $|T|\le K_r\tau n$ and $\mu (T)\le K_r\tau$. In particular, for sufficiently small $\tau$, the number of containers is at most $\exp (O_r(\tau n\log (1/\tau )))$. We will give an algorithm and constants establishing this version.

The golden rule for container algorithms is that reconstruction may depend on the small container fingerprint, but never on unrevealed information about the independent set. When a deterministic test calls for inspecting a vertex, a positive membership answer is recorded in the container fingerprint, while a negative answer permits its exclusion from the container. All tests and all state updates must be reproducible using that container fingerprint. Choosing tests that permit only a few positive answers then yields few containers.

Here is an explicit implementation with controlled links. Use the fixed order $1,\dots ,n$, parameters $\tau ,\delta ,\zeta >0$, and a bound $d_G(\sigma )\le \delta d{\tau }^{|\sigma |-1}$ on nonsingleton codegrees. Let $d_s(\sigma )$ count incidences with multiplicity in the $s$-uniform multihypergraph $P_s$. Define thresholdsA saturated subset is one whose current degree has reached its threshold.

Every generated edge of $P_s$ extends to an original edge by adding $r-s$ earlier vertices from $T$. Thus, for a hypergraph independent set $I$, no singleton generated in $P_1$ can be a member of $I$. In particular an inspected vertex in ${\Gamma }_1$ cannot give a positive membership answer. All other positive answers are recorded. The golden rule for container algorithms now proves that the reconstructed container contains $I$ and that its state depends only on $T$.

Control the possible overshoot at saturation. The multisets are added in batches; merely claiming $d_s(\sigma )\le {\theta }_s(\sigma )$ would be wrong. In the last batch that increases $d_s(\sigma )$, the set $\sigma$ was not yet saturated, and the batch comes from some vertex $v\notin \sigma$. Its contribution is at most $d_{s+1}(\sigma \cup \{v\})$. HenceInduction downwards from $P_r$ yields, for $|\sigma |\ge 2$,Indeed the two terms in the last-batch bound have coefficients $1$ and $r-s$ with the same power of $\tau$. Applying this nonsingleton bound to $\{u,v\}$ gives the singleton estimateSumming over $U$, using $|U|\le n$, proves the requested estimate at every stage of the algorithm:It applies with multiplicities; replacing the multisets by sets in the accounting would invalidate the argument.

Check that the container fingerprint is small and the container loses positive measure. Assign each positive inspected vertex to one index $s$ witnessing its test. Its added link batch has size at least $\zeta {\tau }^{r-s-1}{d}_G(v)$. Distinct batches count separately in the multiset. Since $|P_s|=s^{-1}{\sum }_u{d}_s(u)$, the preceding bound givesThe second inequality uses $d_G(v)\ge \zeta d$ for every $v\in T$.

For completeness, the loss of measure can be verified by a short incidence count. Put $D=([n]\setminus C)\cup T\cup B$ and $a_s=|P_s|/({\tau }^{r-s}nd)$. Every saturated singleton belongs to $D$. Partition $P_{s+1}$ by its earliest vertex. An earliest vertex in $D$ accounts for at most ${\tau }^{r-s-1}nd(\mu (D)+r\delta )$ incidences. For any other earliest vertex, the unsaturated link has size less than $\zeta {\tau }^{r-s-1}{d}_G(v)$; the remaining edges meet some saturated subset of ${\Gamma }_s$.

For a saturated nonsingleton $\sigma$, the degree bounds imply $d_{s+1}(\sigma )\le (r/\tau )d_s(\sigma )$. For a saturated singleton the corresponding bound is $d_{s+1}(u)\le {\tau }^{-1}{d}_s(u)+r\delta d{\tau }^{r-s-1}$. Every multiedge of $P_s$ has fewer than $2^s$ nonempty subsets. These observations giveFor $s=1$, all saturated subsets are singletons in $D$, so directly summing their $P_2$ degrees givesSince $a_r=1/r$, these inequalities prevent $D$ from having arbitrarily small measure. To make the constants explicit, letIterating the displayed inequalities gives $a_r\le L(\mu (D)+\zeta +3r\delta )$, hence $\mu (D)\ge 3b/4$ whenever $\delta \le {\delta }_r$. Also $r\delta \le 1$, so $\tau \le {\tau }_r$ gives $\mu (T)\le 2r\tau /\zeta \le b/8$, while $\mu (B)\le \zeta =b/8$. ThereforeOne can take $K_r=2r/{\zeta }^2$ in the stated container fingerprint bounds. Counting subsets of size at most $K_r\tau n$ gives the asserted bound on the number of containers. Thus the explicit algorithm produces the family promised by the sufficient hypergraph container theorem, as well as the required intermediate degree estimate.

For the standard weak-threshold formulation, see Online containers for hypergraphs. The constants above come from the explicit incidence estimates given here.

For $r=1$, no multilevel construction is needed: take the sole container to be the vertices that are not singleton edges. It contains every hypergraph independent set and has degree measure zero when $d>0$; its fingerprint is empty. The requested degree-sum inequality follows directly from the definition of $\mu$.