Wiki
Wiki

Research notes on every problem, and a library of the papers behind them. Built from the open erdos repository.

Updated

Problem 1216

../

claims/: The 5 claim pages of Problem 1216, one per claimant's result; the problem's standing derives from them.


Statement. A tournament is a complete directed graph. Let f(n)f(n) be such that every tournament on nn vertices contains a transitive tournament on f(n)f(n) vertices (i.e. one such that if i→j→ki\to j\to k then i→ki\to k).

Is it true that f(n)=⌊log⁡2n⌋+1f(n)=\lfloor \log_2 n\rfloor +1?

Formulation. The site's wording (page last edited 12 April 2026). f(n)f(n) is the largest such integer, as Erdős and Moser define it ("the largest number f(n)f(n) such that every oriented graph on nn vertices in which every pair of distinct vertices is jointed [sic] by a directed edge has at least one subgraph of f(n)f(n) vertices in which the orientation is transitive", 1964, p. 125); the site omits "largest". The literature also writes F(n)F(n) for this function, and the inverse function R(k)R(k), the least nn such that every tournament on nn vertices contains a transitive subtournament on kk vertices (TTkTT_k), is called the directed Ramsey number; f(n)≥kf(n)\ge k exactly when R(k)≤nR(k)\le n (an elementary remark). The question asks whether Stearns's lower bound f(n)≥⌊log⁡2n⌋+1f(n)\ge\lfloor\log_2n\rfloor+1 is exact for every nn; one nn with a larger value refutes it.

Status. Disproved. Reid and Parker proved in 1970 that every tournament on 1414 vertices contains a transitive subtournament on 55 vertices (Theorem 4, printed p. 235; with their 1313-vertex tournament free of TT5TT_5, pp. 235--236, this is R(5)=14R(5)=14), so f(14)=5f(14)=5 while ⌊log⁡214⌋+1=4\lfloor\log_214\rfloor+1=4, and more generally f(n)≥⌊log⁡2(16n/7)⌋=⌊log⁡2n+4−log⁡27⌋f(n)\ge\lfloor\log_2(16n/7)\rfloor=\lfloor\log_2n+4-\log_27\rfloor for n≥14n\ge14 (Corollary 2, p. 235), which exceeds ⌊log⁡2n⌋+1\lfloor\log_2n\rfloor+1 for nn in the range [7⋅2j,2j+3)[7\cdot2^j,2^{j+3}) of each j≥1j\ge1. Their paper (J. Combinatorial Theory 9 (1970), 225--238, refereed) is in the publisher's open archive: library home reid_parker_1970_disproof_conjecture_erdos_moser_tournaments, result pages Theorem 4 and Corollary 2. The claim page Reid and Parker 1970 records the theorem, its postings and the acceptance evidence; the later refutations each have their own claim page (listed under Claims below), and the frontmatter standing is derived from them. The paper states the conjecture in the equivalent form "for each positive integer kk, there exists a TnT_n with n=2k−1−1n=2^{k-1}-1 which contains no TTkTT_k" (p. 226) and shows it "false for all k≥5k\ge5" (p. 235). The standing rests on Theorem 4; its proof was followed as a reduction to the paper's Theorems 2 and 3 and is not independently checked. The origin's own bounds, ⌊log⁡2n⌋+1≤f(n)≤2⌊log⁡2n⌋+1\lfloor\log_2n\rfloor+1\le f(n)\le2\lfloor\log_2n\rfloor+1, are cited from the origin itself.

Source. erdosproblems.com/1216, accessed 2026-09-18 at 10:39 UTC: the problem page (DISPROVED, with the site's note that it is solved in the negative; last edited 12 April 2026; source key [ErMo64, p. 127]; commentary citing [St59], [RePa70], [Sa94], [Sa98b]), its three-comment discussion thread (12 April 2026) and its empty proof-claim tab. Cite as: T. F. Bloom, Erdős Problem #1216, https://www.erdosproblems.com/1216, accessed 2026-09-18.

References.

  • [ErMo64] Erdős, P. and Moser, L., On the representation of directed graphs as unions of orderings. Magyar Tud. Akad. Mat. Kutató Int. Közl. 9 (1964), 125--132; Theorem 1 and the conjecture, printed p. 127; Stearns's argument, p. 126. Library home: erdos_1964_representation_directed_graphs_as_unions_orderings.
  • [RePa70] Reid, K. B. and Parker, E. T., Disproof of a conjecture of Erdős and Moser on tournaments. J. Combinatorial Theory 9 (1970), no. 3, 225--238, doi:10.1016/S0021-9800(70)80061-8; Theorem 4 and Corollaries 1--2, printed p. 235; the values of f(n)f(n) for n≤23n\le23 and the note on n≤27n\le27, p. 236; Theorem 5, pp. 236--238 (locators to the publisher's open-archive version). Library home: reid_parker_1970_disproof_conjecture_erdos_moser_tournaments
  • [Sa94] Sánchez-Flores, A., On tournaments and their largest transitive subtournaments. Graphs Combin. 10 (1994), no. 2--4, 367--376, doi:10.1007/BF02986687; [Sa98b] Sánchez-Flores, A., On tournaments free of large transitive subtournaments. Graphs Combin. 14 (1998), no. 2, 181--200, doi:10.1007/s003730050025 (Crossref records). Neither held; their theorems, R(7)≤55R(7)\le55 in [Sa94] and R(7)≤54R(7)\le54 in [Sa98b], are recorded from their zbMATH reviews (Zbl 0811.05029, Zbl 0918.05058) on their claim pages, and attested in part by [IRW21], [NMH22] and [Na14].
  • [St59] Stearns, R., The voting problem. Amer. Math. Monthly 66 (1959), 761--763. Not held; its argument is reproduced in [ErMo64], p. 126, and its theorem attested in [ErRa67], pp. 624--625.
  • [ErRa67] Erdős, P. and Rado, R., Partition relations and transitivity domains of binary relations. J. London Math. Soc. 42 (1967), 624--633; pp. 624--625 and Theorem 4 (i), p. 632. Library home: erdos_1967_partition_relations_transitivity_domains_binary_relations.
  • [IRW21] Ihringer, F., Rajendraprasad, D. and Weinert, T., New bounds on the Ramsey number r(Im,Ln)r(I_m,L_n). Discrete Math. 344 (2021), 112268; arXiv:1707.09556v3; the survey paragraph on p. 2. Library home: ihringer_2017_new_bounds_ramsey_number_r_i.
  • [NMH22] Neiman, D., Mackey, J. and Heule, M. J. H., Tighter bounds on directed Ramsey number R(7)R(7). Graphs Combin. 38 (2022), no. 5, Paper No. 156, doi:10.1007/s00373-022-02560-5; arXiv:2011.00683. The locators are to the NSF author manuscript (17 pp.): p. 2 and Section 5. Library home: neiman_2022_tighter_bounds_directed_ramsey_number_r_7.
  • [MM25] McCarthy, D. and Monico, C., A Mathon-type construction for digraphs and improved lower bounds for Ramsey numbers. Electron. J. Combin. 32 (2025), no. 2, P2.42, doi:10.37236/13294; arXiv:2408.04067. Theorem 1 (p. 2) and Table 1 (p. 7) of the journal's open-access file. Library home: mccarthy_2025_mathon_type_construction_digraphs_improved_lower_bounds
  • [Na14] Nagy, Z. L., Density version of the Ramsey problem and the directed Ramsey problem. arXiv:1401.6823 (v1 27 January 2014; v3 21 January 2016, 17 pp.); Theorem 4.2 and the introduction's survey, cited from the author-hosted revised copy (14 pp., linked from the site's thread; fetched 2026-09-18, 285,814 bytes). The copy thanks a referee. Not held in the library.
  • [NeLa94] Neumann-Lara, V., A short proof of a theorem of Reid and Parker on tournaments. Graphs Combin. 10 (1994), 363--366, doi:10.1007/BF02986686 (Crossref record). Not held; by its zbMATH review (Zbl 0811.05028) it gives a shorter proof of Reid and Parker's Corollary 1, recorded on its claim page.

Formalization. None found. No file for this problem exists in google-deepmind/formal-conjectures (main; the directory FormalConjectures/ErdosProblems/, 673 entries, was listed in full), and the community database (teorth/erdosproblems) records the problem disproved (last updated 21 April 2026), not formalized (4 April 2026), with no formal proof. The site's "Formalised statement?" indicator reads "No".

Current assessment

The question (site formulation, accessed 2026-09-18). The statement above; DISPROVED, with the site's note that it is solved in the negative; last edited 12 April 2026. The commentary names the inverse of ff the directed Ramsey number; attributes the lower bound f(n)≥⌊log⁡2n⌋+1f(n)\ge\lfloor\log_2n\rfloor+1 to Stearns [St59], by a greedy argument from a vertex of out-degree at least (n−1)/2(n-1)/2; attributes the upper bound f(n)≤2⌊log⁡2n⌋+1f(n)\le2\lfloor\log_2n\rfloor+1 and the value f(7)=3f(7)=3 to Erdős and Moser [ErMo64]; records that Reid and Parker [RePa70] answered the question in the negative for every n≥14n\ge14 by proving f(n)≥⌊log⁡2n+4−log⁡27⌋f(n)\ge\lfloor\log_2n+4-\log_27\rfloor there (the phrase "for every n≥14n\ge14" overstates the result: the formula ⌊log⁡2n⌋+1\lfloor\log_2n\rfloor+1 holds again for 16≤n≤2716\le n\le27 and for n=32,33n=32,33, as the values assembled below show, and fails for infinitely many nn); and lists the improvements of Sánchez-Flores, f(n)≥⌊log⁡2n−log⁡2(55)⌋+7f(n)\ge\lfloor\log_2n-\log_2(55)\rfloor+7 for n≥55n\ge55 [Sa94] and f(n)≥⌊log⁡2n−log⁡2(54)⌋+7f(n)\ge\lfloor\log_2n-\log_2(54)\rfloor+7 for n≥32n\ge32 [Sa98b], noting that 7−log⁡2(54)≈1.247-\log_2(54)\approx1.24. The thread (three comments, 12 April 2026): the site's maintainer phrases the Erdős--Moser upper bound probabilistically (a random orientation has no transitive kk-subtournament when (nk)k!<2(k2)\binom nkk!<2^{\binom k2}, so for n<2(k−1)/2n<2^{(k-1)/2}) and says a standard application of the local lemma should give f(n)≤2log⁡2n−1f(n)\le2\log_2n-1 for large nn, asking for a citation; a reply the same day, which says the reference was found with GPT-5.4 Thinking, points to Theorem 4.2 of Nagy's paper, noting that Nagy's F(n)F(n) is this f(n)f(n), and the maintainer confirms it is the calculation meant. The proof-claim tab is empty. The community database record of 2026-09-18 says disproved (last updated 21 April 2026) and not formalized.

Origin. Theorem 1 of [ErMo64] (printed p. 127): [log⁡2n]+1≤f(n)≤2[log⁡2n]+1[\log_2n]+1\le f(n)\le2[\log_2n]+1. Page 126 sketches Stearns's argument for the lower bound (order the vertices by out-degree; the first has out-degree at least (n−1)/2(n-1)/2; induct in its out-neighborhood) and gives the counting argument for the upper bound (if every tournament on nn vertices has a transitive kk-set then (nk)k! 2(n2)−(k2)≥2(n2)\binom nkk!\,2^{\binom n2-\binom k2}\ge2^{\binom n2}, so k≤2log⁡n/log⁡2+1k\le2\log n/\log2+1). Page 127 adds "We remark that f(7)=3f(7)=3", with the quadratic-residue tournament on Z/7\mathbb Z/7 as the upper-bound witness, and the conjecture: "we have been unable to disprove the conjecture that f(n)=[log⁡2n]+1f(n)=[\log_2n]+1. In particular we cannot decide if f(15)=4f(15)=4." Erdős and Rado's 1967 paper (pp. 624--625) attests Stearns's theorem in the form that a relation with exactly one of x=yx=y, x≺yx\prec y, y≺xy\prec x for every pair is transitive on some aa-set when ∣S∣≥2a−1|S|\ge2^{a-1}, "first obtained by R. Stearns [7]. His proof is reproduced in [8; p. 126]", and its Theorem 4 (i) restates it.

The disproof. Theorem 4 of [RePa70] (printed p. 235): "Every T14T_{14} contains a TT5TT_5." The proof is a paragraph: a node of outdegree or indegree at least 88 has a TT4TT_4 in its outset or inset by Stearns's f(8)≥4f(8)\ge4, hence a TT5TT_5; otherwise the score sequence is seven 66s and seven 77s, and for a node xx of outdegree 77 either OS(x)OS(x) is not the unique TT4TT_4-free T7T_7 (Theorem 2, p. 226), so it contains a TT4TT_4, or OS(x)≃ST7OS(x)\simeq ST_7 and Theorem 3 (p. 227: a T11T_{11} with a node xx such that IS(x)≃TT3IS(x)\simeq TT_3 and OS(x)≃ST7OS(x)\simeq ST_7 contains a TT5TT_5) applies to xx, a TT3TT_3 in IS(x)IS(x) and OS(x)OS(x). Theorem 3 is proved on pp. 227--235 by a case analysis over the outsets in OS(x)OS(x) of the three nodes of IS(x)IS(x), using the automorphisms y↦ay+by\mapsto ay+b of the quadratic-residue tournament ST7ST_7; it was read for structure and not checked. With f(13)=4f(13)=4, witnessed on pp. 235--236 by the T13T_{13} on Z/13\mathbb Z/13 with arcs i→ji\to j for j−i≡1,2,3,5,6,9j-i\equiv1,2,3,5,6,9, whose automorphisms y↦αy+βy\mapsto\alpha y+\beta (α∈{1,3,9}\alpha\in\{1,3,9\}) reduce the check to the cyclic triple OS(0,1)={2,3,6}OS(0,1)=\{2,3,6\} (the paper's reduction; the arcs with difference in {2,5,6}\{2,5,6\} form a second orbit, mapped to (0,2)(0,2), and OS(0,2)={3,5}OS(0,2)=\{3,5\} has only two elements, so no TT3TT_3 lies above them either), this is R(5)=14R(5)=14. Corollary 2 (p. 235), f(n)≥⌊log⁡2(16n/7)⌋f(n)\ge\lfloor\log_2(16n/7)\rfloor for n≥14n\ge14, follows from Corollary 1 (every TmT_m with m≥7⋅2k−4m\ge7\cdot2^{k-4} contains a TTkTT_k for k≥5k\ge5, by induction from Theorem 4 with Stearns's doubling step) and is the site's bound f(n)≥⌊log⁡2n+4−log⁡27⌋f(n)\ge\lfloor\log_2n+4-\log_27\rfloor. The later sources' attestations agree with it: [IRW21], p. 2, whose r(I2,Ln)r(I_2,L_n) is R(n)R(n), lists R(3)=4R(3)=4, R(4)=8R(4)=8 and, citing the Reid--Parker paper (its [18]), R(5)=14R(5)=14 and R(6)=28R(6)=28; it attributes R(n)≤2n−1R(n)\le2^{n-1} to Stearns, the improvement R(n)≤7⋅2n−4R(n)\le7\cdot2^{n-4} for n>4n>4 to Reid and Parker, R(n)≤55⋅2n−7R(n)\le55\cdot2^{n-7} for n>6n>6 to Sánchez-Flores and the lower bound R(n)≥2(n−1)/2R(n)\ge2^{(n-1)/2} to Erdős and Moser; [NMH22], p. 2, lists R(5)=14R(5)=14 among the known values without a citation; MM25, p. 7: "R(3)=4R(3)=4, R(4)=8R(4)=8 [2], R(5)=14R(5)=14 [10], R(6)=28R(6)=28 [11]" with [10] the Reid--Parker paper; [Na14], introduction: Erdős and Moser "conjectured that the lower bound of Stearns in fact holds with equality. However this turned out to be false [24]", [24] being the Reid--Parker paper. The site's bound f(n)≥⌊log⁡2n+4−log⁡27⌋f(n)\ge\lfloor\log_2n+4-\log_27\rfloor for n≥14n\ge14 is R(k)≤7⋅2k−4R(k)\le7\cdot2^{k-4} for k≥5k\ge5, the paper's Corollary 1, read inversely. None of these later sources reproduces the proof; [NeLa94] gives a shorter proof of Corollary 1 (its zbMATH review), and the label rests on the paper's Theorem 4 as recorded above.

The function as far as it is known (assembled here from the sources named). Through f(n)≥kf(n)\ge k if and only if R(k)≤nR(k)\le n:

  • R(2)=2R(2)=2, R(3)=4R(3)=4, R(4)=8R(4)=8 (Stearns's bound is exact here; [NMH22] p. 2, [MM25] p. 7), so f(n)=⌊log⁡2n⌋+1f(n)=\lfloor\log_2n\rfloor+1 for 2≤n≤132\le n\le13; in particular f(7)=3f(7)=3 as in [ErMo64].
  • R(5)=14R(5)=14 ([RePa70], Theorem 4 with f(13)=4f(13)=4, pp. 235--236): f(n)=5f(n)=5 for 14≤n≤2714\le n\le27, and f(15)=5f(15)=5, the case Erdős and Moser could not decide. The paper prints f(n)=5f(n)=5 for 14≤n≤2314\le n\le23 (p. 236) and, in a note added after submission, for 24≤n≤2724\le n\le27 by the quadratic-residue tournament on the field of order 2727, which "one author verified" (p. 236; no argument is printed).
  • R(6)=28R(6)=28: the upper half, f(28)≥6f(28)\ge6, is [RePa70]'s Corollary 2 at n=28n=28 (p. 236: "By Corollary 2, f(27)≥5f(27)\ge5 and f(28)≥6f(28)\ge6"), equivalently Corollary 1 at k=6k=6, and the lower half, f(27)=5f(27)=5, is the TT6TT_6-free T27T_{27} of the paper's note (p. 236), stated as verified without a printed argument; [IRW21] p. 2 and [MM25] p. 7 cite the value to Reid--Parker and to Sánchez-Flores 1994 respectively (the latter not held). So f(n)=6f(n)=6 for 28≤n≤3328\le n\le33, the upper end from R(7)≥34R(7)\ge34.
  • 34≤R(7)≤4734\le R(7)\le47 (NMH22, Section 5, computer-assisted: an explicit 3333-vertex TT7TT_7-free tournament, and a SAT-based degree case analysis excluding 4747 vertices; Graphs Combin. 2022, refereed; the computations were not replayed here): f(n)≥6f(n)\ge6 for 34≤n≤4634\le n\le46, where f(n)≥7f(n)\ge7 is undecided, and f(n)≥7f(n)\ge7 for n≥47n\ge47 (the bound f(n)≤7f(n)\le7 for 34≤n≤4634\le n\le46 comes from R(8)≥57R(8)\ge57, next item). The manuscript reports 5305 known non-isomorphic TT7TT_7-free tournaments on 33 vertices, none extending to 34.
  • R(8)≥57R(8)\ge57 (MM25, Theorem 1, a computer search over Paley tournaments with a digraph Mathon construction; Electron. J. Combin. 2025, refereed; not replayed): so f(n)=7f(n)=7 for 47≤n≤5647\le n\le56. Table 1 of [MM25] gives lower bounds on R(m)R(m) up to m=20m=20.

General bounds. Lower: the site's ⌊log⁡2n−log⁡2(54)⌋+7\lfloor\log_2n-\log_2(54)\rfloor+7 for n≥32n\ge32 from [Sa98b], which proves R(7)≤54R(7)\le54 (its zbMATH review), and the earlier 5555-form from [Sa94], which proves R(7)≤55R(7)\le55 (its zbMATH review); the site's attribution of the 5555-form to the 1994 paper is right, and [Na14]'s introduction, which attributes F(n)≥⌊log⁡2(n/55)⌋+7F(n)\ge\lfloor\log_2(n/55)\rfloor+7 to the 1998 paper, is in error on this point. The same doubling step that produces these formulas, R(k+1)≤2R(k)R(k+1)\le2R(k) (Stearns's recursion, in [Na14]'s words "F(2n)≥F(n)+1F(2n)\ge F(n)+1"), applied to R(7)≤47R(7)\le47 gives f(n)≥⌊log⁡2(n/47)⌋+7f(n)\ge\lfloor\log_2(n/47)\rfloor+7 for n≥47n\ge47, a slightly better constant (7−log⁡247≈1.447-\log_247\approx1.44); this one line is written here and is not a source's statement. Upper: f(n)≤2⌊log⁡2n⌋+1f(n)\le2\lfloor\log_2n\rfloor+1 ([ErMo64]) and Theorem 4.2 of [Na14], F(n)<2log⁡2n−1+o(1)F(n)<2\log_2n-1+o(1), by the Lovász local lemma on a random tournament (the author-hosted copy, p. 11; the paper's FF is this ff). The factor 22 between the lower and upper bounds is the open question behind the disproved statement; the maintainer's comment compares it with the factor 22 in the lower bound 2n/22^{n/2} for the diagonal Ramsey numbers. Whether f(n)=(1+o(1))log⁡2nf(n)=(1+o(1))\log_2n, the asymptotic version of the conjecture, is not decided by any source found ([Na14]'s introduction says the same of the Sánchez-Flores bounds).

Claims. Five claim pages record results that refute the formula, each on its own: Reid and Parker 1970 (R(5)=14R(5)=14, the first disproof), Neumann-Lara 1994 (a shorter proof of Reid and Parker's Corollary 1), Sánchez-Flores 1994 (R(7)≤55R(7)\le55), Sánchez-Flores 1998 (R(7)≤54R(7)\le54) and Neiman, Mackey and Heule (R(7)≤47R(7)\le47, computer-assisted). The other credited and cited results have no claim page, because none of them settles the question. Stearns's lower bound [St59] is the half of the formula that holds for every nn; the upper bound of [ErMo64] and Theorem 4.2 of [Na14] bound ff from above and decide no value of the formula; the remark f(7)=3f(7)=3 of [ErMo64] confirms the formula at n=7n=7, an instance the disproof does not touch, where Stearns's bound gives f(7)≥3f(7)\ge3 and the quadratic-residue tournament on Z/7\mathbb Z/7 gives f(7)≤3f(7)\le3, and it is recorded under the function's known values rather than as a claim; and R(8)≥57R(8)\ge57 of [MM25] is an upper bound on ff, so the failures of the formula for 47≤n≤5647\le n\le56 come from the lower bounds above.

Search scope. None of the routes below found a copy of [RePa70], a dispute of the disproof, or an improvement of the bounds on R(7)R(7) or on the asymptotic constant. The paper is in the publisher's open archive.

  • The site: problem page, discussion thread and proof-claim tab; the full directory listing of formal-conjectures at the pinned commit (no file for this problem); the community database of 2026-09-18.
  • The primary sources: [ErMo64] printed pp. 125--127; [ErRa67] pp. 624--625 and 632; [IRW21] p. 2; [NMH22] pp. 1--3 and 12--13; [MM25] pp. 1--2 and 7; [Na14] pp. 1--2 and 11 of the author-hosted copy.
  • arXiv: the API queries abs:"transitive subtournament" OR abs:"transitive subtournaments" (27 records, scanned by title: the relevant ones are 2011.00683 [NMH22], 2408.04067 [MM25], 2311.02135 (McCarthy and Springfield, transitive subtournaments of kk-th power Paley digraphs, Graphs Combin. 2024; lower bounds for larger mm, not read), 1401.6823 [Na14] and 1605.02469 (Momihara and Suda, upper bounds on transitive subtournaments in digraphs, Linear Algebra Appl. 2017; abstract read, a spectral bound, not this function)) and abs:"directed Ramsey number" OR abs:"tournament Ramsey" (four records, the same papers); the API records of 1401.6823, 2011.00683, 2408.04067 and 2311.02135 (versions and dates; no journal reference carried by the first).
  • Crossref records of [RePa70], [Sa94], [Sa98b], [NeLa94], [NMH22] and [MM25]; two bibliographic queries for [Na14]'s title (no record); the Monthly DOI of [St59] returned a redirect from the Crossref API and was not followed.
  • Semantic Scholar: the eleven records citing [NMH22] (SAT-verification papers, feedback vertex sets, [MM25]; none a new bound on R(7)R(7)) and the one record citing [MM25] (unrelated).
  • The open-access copies: the publisher's open-archive endpoint for [RePa70], which did not serve the file on that date; the NSF repository copy of [NMH22] and the EJC PDF of [MM25]; the author-hosted copy of [Na14] linked in the thread.

Not searched: MathSciNet, zbMATH, Google Scholar, X. Not held: [Sa94], [Sa98b], [St59], [NeLa94], [Na14] (the author-hosted copy is cited), the McKay data page that [NMH22] cites.

Remaining gaps. (1) The disproof rests on the paper: Theorem 4 (p. 235), its proof followed as a reduction to Theorems 2 and 3, and the case analysis of Theorem 3 (pp. 227--235) read for structure only and not checked; [NeLa94]'s shorter proof is recorded from its zbMATH review, and nothing is independently reviewed. (2) The Sánchez-Flores theorems are recorded from their zbMATH reviews and their proofs are not checked; the site's general bounds follow from them by Stearns's doubling step. (3) The computer-assisted bounds on R(7)R(7) and R(8)R(8) were not replayed. (4) The exact function is open for 34≤n≤4634\le n\le46 and from n=57n=57 on, and the asymptotic constant lies between 11 and 22. (5) [Na14] has no journal record found here; its Theorem 4.2 is cited from an author-hosted copy.

Linked library material

These entries are derived from explicit links on library pages. They are navigation only and do not by themselves record mathematical progress.