Markov's inequality states that for and , . It follows by taking expectations in .
If has finite mean and variance , apply Markov to to obtain Chebyshev's inequality:
For the first moment method, assume . Nonnegative integer values give , so
For a standard second moment method, suppose eventually, the second moments are finite, and . Equivalently, . The zero event is contained in , so
Hence . The second-moment condition controls the fluctuations relative to the mean; a large mean alone is insufficient.
Let count the four-vertex sets spanning all four of their possible triples. For each such set , write for its indicator. Independence of the four hyperedges gives
If , then , and the first moment method shows that the probability of a four-clique tends to zero.
For the other direction, consider two distinct four-sets. If they meet in at most two vertices, they have no possible triple in common, so their indicators are independent. If they meet in three vertices, they share exactly one triple, so and their covariance is at most . There are ordered pairs of this latter type. The diagonal variances sum to at most , hence
For large , is a constant multiple of , and consequently
If , the first term tends to zero, and so does the second since . The second moment method proves that a four-clique exists with probability tending to one. Therefore a threshold function is
The shared-triple overlap, rather than overlaps in one or two vertices, is the only off-diagonal dependence that affects this computation.
The requested scale is . To see its first-moment origin, the number of -cliques has expectation
For on the proposed scale, taking base-two logarithms gives
The leading terms balance at . In particular, for any fixed , taking near makes the expectation tend to zero, so such cliques are absent with probability tending to one.
Thus the first-moment estimate places the largest-clique scale at a constant multiple of , as requested. A diverging expectation below that balance does not itself prove existence; a corresponding probabilistic lower-bound proof would require an additional argument and is not part of the requested first-moment estimate.

Articles by others on the same topic (0)

There are currently no matching articles.