Wiki
Wiki

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

Updated


Claim. Write f(r)(n;s,k)f^{(r)}(n;s,k) for the largest number of edges of an rr-uniform hypergraph on nn vertices containing no kk edges on at most ss vertices, and π(r,k)\pi(r,k) for the limit of n−2f(r)(n;rk−2k+2,k)n^{-2}f^{(r)}(n;rk-2k+2,k), which exists for every r≥3r\ge3 and k≥2k\ge2 (Delcourt and Postle for r=3r=3, Shangguan for r≥4r\ge4, as the paper recalls). Theorem 1.2 of Pikhurko and Sun states that π(3,8)≥3/16\pi(3,8)\ge3/16. The 33-graphs with no eight edges on at most ten vertices are exactly the 33-graphs with no member of the site's F10\mathcal F_{10}, the family with 1010 vertices and 88 edges, so ex3(n,F10)=f(3)(n;10,8)\mathrm{ex}_3(n,\mathcal{F}_{10})=f^{(3)}(n;10,8) and

ex3(n,F10)≥(316−o(1))n2,316=948>848=16,\mathrm{ex}_3(n,\mathcal F_{10})\ge\Bigl(\frac3{16}-o(1)\Bigr)n^2, \qquad \frac3{16}=\frac9{48}>\frac8{48}=\frac16,

so ex3(n,F10)∼n2/6\mathrm{ex}_3(n,\mathcal F_{10})\sim n^2/6 is false: the displayed asymptotic fails at k=10k=10 with Fk\mathcal F_k the single family the site's wording defines, and the site's wording, an assertion about every k≥5k\ge5, is false. The lower bound comes from the paper's Theorem 3.1, a lower-bound criterion it quotes from Glock, Joos, Kim, Kühn, Lichev and Pikhurko, applied to an explicit 33-graph built from copies of a five-vertex, three-edge configuration; the paper conjectures that 3/163/16 is the exact value (Conjecture 1.3) and determines π(r,8)=1/(r2−r)\pi(r,8)=1/(r^2-r) for every r≥4r\ge4 (Theorem 1.1), which concerns higher uniformities and not this problem. The refutations at k=5k=5, 66, 77, 88 and 99 are on Glock's page, the (6,4) page and the (7,5), (8,6) and (9,7) page.

Why it is rejected. The result is correct, but it answers the site's wording, the single family F10\mathcal F_{10}, not the corrected Statement of Problem 1076, whose family is cumulative: under the corrected Statement a 33-graph avoiding F4∪⋯∪F10\mathcal F_4\cup\dots\cup\mathcal F_{10} is linear, so the bound says nothing against it, and the page does not count toward the problem's standing. The problem page's Notes credit the result.

Acceptance. Refereed: O. Pikhurko and S. Sun, On the quadratic 8-edge case of the Brown–Erdős–Sós problem, European J. Combin. 135 (2026), 104364, dated 4 March 2026 in the publisher's record, after the arXiv posting of 2 June 2025. The site does not cite the paper on this problem and its curator makes no statement about it; the proof is unreviewed, and no formalization is known.