7
$\begingroup$

The Lovasz Local Lemma has several generalizations, with names usually starting with L, such as Lopsided or Lefthanded. Here I ask whether another possible generalization (for which I could not yet find a name starting with L) holds or not.

Suppose that for some events $\mathbf A$ we have a dependency graph and an assignment $x$ that is degenerate in the sense that $\exists A \in \mathbf A$ such that $\Pr[A] \;\leqslant\; x(A) \prod_{B \in \Gamma(A)} (1-x(B))$ and after deleting $A$ we again have another such event from $\mathbf A\setminus \{A\}$ etc. In other words, I want that the events can be ordered such that $$\Pr[A] \;\leqslant\; x(A) \prod_{\substack{B \in \Gamma(A)\\ B<A}} (1-x(B)).$$

Is this sufficient to guarantee that we can avoid all events?

ps. I don't care about the exact formula, it might hold only with some weaker inequality, that is also OK.

$\endgroup$
2
  • $\begingroup$ What's $\Gamma $ here? $\endgroup$ Apr 15, 2015 at 3:38
  • $\begingroup$ @B: The neighborhood of $A$ in the dependency graph. $\endgroup$
    – domotorp
    Apr 15, 2015 at 4:33

1 Answer 1

5
$\begingroup$

Here is my intuition that it may not be possible.

I am guessing that as in the case of the original LLL, such an inequality would in turn imply a simpler inequality of the following form:

"If the dependency graph is $d$-degenerate and every event has probability at most $p$ and $4pd<1$, then we can avoid all events".

But this latter statement appears to be false, even if the inequality is changed to $4pf(d)<1$ for some large function $f$ of the degeneracy.

For example, consider $n$ events $E_1,\ldots,E_n$, which are independent, each having probability $p$. Consider an event $A$ which is simply the complement of the union of the $E_is$. $Prob[A]=(1-p)^n$.

It is not possible to avoid the $n+1$ events ($E_is$ and $A$). The dependency graph is a star with $A$ being the central node. We have $d=1$, $p$ can be made small enough to satisfy the inequality for any choice of $f$, function of degeneracy. The value of $n$ can be made large enough so that $Prob[A]$ also satisfies the inequality.

$\endgroup$
1
  • $\begingroup$ It seems to me that you can cash this out formally in terms of the assignment version of the problem by taking all $x(E_i)$ and $x(A)$ equal to $1/2$, and taking the ordering so that the center vertex is minimal. Now to satisfy the hypothesis in the question we just need all $P[E_i] \leq 1/4$ and $P[A] \leq 1/2$, which as you say is easy to arrange. $\endgroup$ Apr 17, 2015 at 21:10

Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service and acknowledge you have read our privacy policy.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.