Skip to content
DraconiticResearch
Search Sources API
186,125 studies31 sourcesUpdated 9 min ago
PreprintCC BY 4.0arXiv

Greedy Uniformity on Trees: Exact Obstruction and Near-Uniform Spiders

Abstract

Choose a uniformly random ordering of the vertices of a finite tree and run the usual greedy maximal-independent-set algorithm. We compare the resulting law on maximal independent sets with the uniform law. We prove that exact uniformity occurs only for the one-vertex tree and the single edge. The proof is structural: a diameter endpoint exposes a pendant star, and the remaining one-pendant-leaf case is resolved by a strict injection between exact permutation fibres obtained by swapping the pendant leaf with its support vertex. Exact uniformity is therefore rigid, but it can be approached closely. For an explicit mixed-spider family Tk,l we count the maximal independent sets and compute the exact probability of every output. With l=2k−k the total-variation bias is positive and satisfies [ b(T_{k,2^k-k})=O!\left(\frac{\sqrt{k}}{4^k}\right) =O!\left(\frac{\sqrt{\log n_k}}{n_k^2}\right), \qquad n_k=2^k+k+1. ] The theorem package has also been formalised in Lean and registered with Palomar. These records document machine-checked formal verification and the checked axiom boundary; they are not peer review or a certificate of novelty.

Related

  1. Greedy sampling designs via reduced basis methods: optimal recovery in the uniform norm
    Sebastian Neumayer, Kateryna Pozharska, Tino Ullrich
    arXivPreprintCC BY 4.0Full textAnalysis & PDEsNumerical analysis & scientific computingarXiv
  2. Uniform integrability of the distance to the nearest leaf in random trees
    Víctor J. Maciá, Benedikt Stufler
    arXivPreprintCC BY 4.0Full textCombinatorics & discrete mathematicsProbabilityarXiv
  3. An algorithm for uniform generation of unlabeled (Pólya) trees
    Laurent Bartholdi, Persi Diaconis
    Forum Math. SigmaPeer-reviewedCC BYFull textCombinatorics & discrete mathematicsHAL
  4. On the largest common subtree of uniform attachment trees
    Johannes Bäumler, Céline Kerriou, Bas Lodewijks +4
    arXivPreprintCC BY 4.0Full textCombinatorics & discrete mathematicsProbabilityarXiv
  5. Product approximations for uniform spanning trees and determinantal processes
    András Mészáros, Yuval Peled
    arXivPreprintarXiv licenceFull textCombinatorics & discrete mathematicsProbabilityarXiv
BibTeX
@misc{fairfaxball2026greedy,
  title = {{Greedy Uniformity on Trees: Exact Obstruction and Near-Uniform Spiders}},
  author = {John Fairfax-Ball},
  howpublished = {arXiv},
  year = {2026},
  month = oct,
  doi = {10.48550/arxiv.2610.02276},
  eprint = {2610.02276},
  archivePrefix = {arXiv},
  url = {https://arxiv.org/abs/2610.02276},
  note = {CC BY 4.0},
}
RIS
TY  - UNPB
TI  - Greedy Uniformity on Trees: Exact Obstruction and Near-Uniform Spiders
AU  - John Fairfax-Ball
PY  - 2026
DA  - 2026/10/01
PB  - arXiv
DO  - 10.48550/arxiv.2610.02276
UR  - https://arxiv.org/abs/2610.02276
AB  - Choose a uniformly random ordering of the vertices of a finite tree and run the usual greedy maximal-independent-set algorithm. We compare the resulting law on maximal independent sets with the uniform law. We prove that exact uniformity occurs only for the one-vertex tree and the single edge. The proof is structural: a diameter endpoint exposes a pendant star, and the remaining one-pendant-leaf case is resolved by a strict injection between exact permutation fibres obtained by swapping the pendant leaf with its support vertex. Exact uniformity is therefore rigid, but it can be approached closely. For an explicit mixed-spider family T_k,l we count the maximal independent sets and compute the exact probability of every output. With l=2^k−k the total-variation bias is positive and satisfies [ b(T_{k,2^k-k})=O!\left(\frac{\sqrt{k}}{4^k}\right) =O!\left(\frac{\sqrt{\log n_k}}{n_k^2}\right), \qquad n_k=2^k+k+1. ] The theorem package has also been formalised in Lean and registered with Palomar. These records document machine-checked formal verification and the checked axiom boundary; they are not peer review or a certificate of novelty.
ER  -