Olympiad Maths Prep

Library / /4 of 4

Combinatorics Difficulty 7.5 National olympiad, round 2 Prove it Bulgaria

Let GG be a complete bipartite graph with partition sets AA and BB of sizes kmkm and knkn, respectively. The edges of GG are colored in kk colors. Prove that there exists a monochromatic connected component with at least m+nm+n vertices (which means that there exists a color and a set of vertices, such that between any two of them, there is a path consisting of edges only in that color).

Solution

There are at least kmnkmn edges colored in the most used color. We delete the remaining edges and prove that there exists a connected component with at least m+nm+n vertices in the remaining graph. The idea is to consider all the connected components. If each one has less than m+nm+n vertices, then the graph is too fragmented and it's impossible to have too many (at least kmnkmn) edges even if all edges are present in every connected component. It boils down to prove a certain inequality.

Lemma. Let x,yx, y be two positive real numbers and ,k\ell, k; k\ell \ge k be natural numbers. Let xi,yi,i=1,2,,x_i, y_i, i = 1, 2, \dots, \ell satisfy the following conditions.
xi0,yi0,xi+yi(x+y)/k,i=1,2,,; x_i \ge 0, y_i \ge 0, x_i + y_i \le (x+y)/k, i = 1, 2, \dots, \ell;
i=1xi=x,i=1yi=y.(1) \sum_{i=1}^{\ell} x_i = x, \quad \sum_{i=1}^{\ell} y_i = y. \qquad (1)
Then it holds
i=1xiyixyk. \sum_{i=1}^{\ell} x_i y_i \le \frac{xy}{k}.
The equality is reached only if xi=x/k,yi=y/k,i=1,2,,kx_i = x/k, y_i = y/k, i = 1, 2, \dots, k; xi=yi=0,i>kx_i = y_i = 0, i > k.
Proof. Let us denote f(x,y):=i=1xiyif(x, y) := \sum_{i=1}^{\ell} x_i y_i, where x=(x1,,x)x = (x_1, \dots, x_{\ell}), y=(y1,,y)y = (y_1, \dots, y_{\ell}). The conditions in (1) determine a compact set, hence ff attains its maximum value on it, say, at the points xi,yi,i=1,2,,x'_i, y'_i, i = 1, 2, \dots, \ell. We can assume x1x2xx'_1 \ge x'_2 \ge \dots \ge x'_{\ell}. We shall prove that yiy'_i are also in decreasing order. Let us assume on the contrary that yi<yi+1y'_i < y'_{i+1}. Set
xi=xi+1:=(xi+xi+1)/2;yi=yi+1:=(yi+yi+1)/2. x_i = x_{i+1} := (x'_i + x'_{i+1})/2; \quad y_i = y_{i+1} := (y'_i + y'_{i+1})/2.
Then (Chebyshev inequality)
xiyi+xi+1yi+1>xiyi+xi+1yi+1. x_i y_i + x_{i+1} y_{i+1} > x'_i y'_i + x'_{i+1} y'_{i+1}.
But it contradicts the maximality of xi,yi,i=1,,x'_i, y'_i, i = 1, \dots, \ell. Next, if x1+y1<(x+y)/kx'_1 + y'_1 < (x+y)/k we can similarly set x1:=x1+ε,x2:=x2ε;y1:=y1+δ,x2:=x2δx_1 := x'_1 + \varepsilon, x_2 := x'_2 - \varepsilon; y_1 := y'_1 + \delta, x_2 := x'_2 - \delta for sufficiently small ε,δ0\varepsilon, \delta \ge 0 and get a larger value of ff. Therefore, x1+y1=(x+y)/kx'_1 + y'_1 = (x+y)/k.
Let kk' be the largest index for which xk>0x_{k'} > 0 and yk>0y_{k'} > 0. In the same way we can see that xi+yi=(x+y)/k,i=1,2,,kx'_i + y'_i = (x+y)/k, i = 1, 2, \dots, k'. Hence, kkk' \le k. Assume that k<kk' < k and yi=0,i>ky_i = 0, i > k'. We modify x,yx', y' as follows. Set
xi:=xi,yi:=yi,i=1,2,,k1;xk:=xk,yk:=ykε,xk+1:=(x+y)/k,yk+1:=ε. x_i := x'_i, y_i := y'_i, i = 1, 2, \dots, k' - 1; \\ x_{k'} := x'_{k'}, y_{k'} := y'_{k'} - \varepsilon, x_{k'+1} := (x+y)/k, y_{k'+1} := \varepsilon.
For i>k+1i > k' + 1 we set yi=0y_i = 0, and the values of xi,i>k+1x_i, i > k' + 1 are irrelevant providing they comply with (1). Since xk<(x+y)/kx'_k < (x+y)/k, it can be seen that f(x,y)>f(x,y)f(x, y) > f(x', y') which contradicts the maximality of x,yx', y'.
Thus, k=kk' = k. We prove that xi=x/k,yi=y/k,i=1,2,,kx'_i = x/k, y'_i = y/k, i = 1, 2, \dots, k. Assume on the contrary it doesn't hold and let jj be the first index for which xjx/kx'_j \ne x/k. WLOG let xj<x/kx'_j < x/k. Then there exists i>ji > j for which xi>x/kx'_i > x/k. This means xi>xjx'_i > x'_j and thus the sequence x1,x2,,xkx'_1, x'_2, \dots, x'_k is not decreasing, contradiction. To recap, we established that xi=x/k,yi=y/k,i=1,2,,kx'_i = x/k, y'_i = y/k, i = 1, 2, \dots, k. In this case f(x,y)=kxyf(x', y') = kxy, and Lemma 1 is proved. \square

Back to the problem. The number of all edges of KK is k2mnk^2mn, hence there is a color, say, white such that at least kmnkmn edges are colored white. We delete all edges colored in a color other than white. We'll prove that in the remaining graph KK', there exists a connected component with at least m+nm+n vertices. Assume on the contrary it is not true. Denote the connected components of KK' by G(Ai,Bi)G(A_i, B_i), i=1,2,,i = 1, 2, \dots, \ell and let Ai=mi,Bi=ni,i=1,2,,|A_i| = m_i, |B_i| = n_i, i = 1, 2, \dots, \ell. We have
i=1mi=km,i=1ni=kn,mi+ni<m+n. \sum_{i = 1}^\ell m_i = km, \quad \sum_{i=1}^\ell n_i = kn, m_i + n_i < m + n.
According to Lemma 1,
i=1mini<kmn \sum_{i=1}^{\ell} m_i n_i < kmn
which contradicts the choice of the white color. This means that for at least one index ii it holds mi+nim+nm_i + n_i \ge m + n.

Looking for a route rather than an archive? The track puts 2,000 problems in a working order, from AMC 10 level to the IMO shortlist.

Source: MathNet, licensed CC-BY-4.0. Statement and solution reproduced as published; topic and difficulty added by this site.