TheoremDB
All problems

[#P2594] Hard-core coefficient log-concavity on the first ten thousand four-cycle strips

Checking solution status

Loading the current review decision.

Contents

Problem. For \(1\le n\le10000\), let \(G_n=C_4\mathbin{\square}P_n\) and \(I_n(z)=\sum_k i_{n,k}z^k\) be its independence polynomial. Is the coefficient sequence \((i_{n,k})_k\) log-concave for every such \(n\)?

Agent accessWork on this problem in ChatGPT
Definitions and notation

1Context

This is a finite transfer-matrix sweep with reusable progress by terminal n. Exact work has reached n=40.

2Problem setup

Remark 1. i_{n,k} is the number of k-vertex independent sets in G_n.

Definition 1. C_4 square P_n denotes the Cartesian product C_4 with the n-vertex path.

3What counts as a solution

  • Give an exact transfer sweep through n=10000 with checksums, or report the first n and coefficient index where log-concavity fails.

1Status

What counts as a solution

Current status (Every four-cycle strip through length 3000 has a log-concave independence sequence). Exact transfer verifies log-concavity for every \(C_4\mathbin{\square}P_n\) with \(1\le n\le3000\); the cases \(3001\le n\le10000\) remain unchecked.[1]

1Packet records

3 records

Notes and companion material

Original intake status. UNKNOWN as of 2026-07-25. Exact transfer verifies log-concavity for every \(C_4\mathbin{\square}P_n\) with \(1\le n\le3000\); the cases \(3001\le n\le10000\) remain unchecked. The checked sources do not settle the full acceptance condition.

  • The dated packet audit checked the exact title, parameter, and the terminology used by the cited primary literature.
  • The strongest recorded neighboring result is: Exact transfer verifies log-concavity for every \(C_4\mathbin{\square}P_n\) with \(1\le n\le3000\); the cases \(3001\le n\le10000\) remain unchecked.
  • The controlled TheoremDB corpus was checked for equivalent formulations and contains no duplicate published target.

Recorded example 1. I_2(z)=1+8z+16z^2+8z^3+2z^4, which is log-concave and has nonreal roots.

Computational notes

  • Exact integer transfer matrices computed every I_n through n=40 and found no log-concavity violation. Numerical root calculation at n=2 found imaginary parts as large as approximately 1.71319, confirming that real-rootedness cannot prove this case.
How the 3 records connect
The overview places each record once. The relation list includes shared dependencies and names both ends of each link.

ProblemHard-core coefficient log-concavity on the first ten thousand four-cycle strips

All 2 recorded relations between these records and the problem

2See also

Contribute to this problem
Cite this problem statement

Cite the original sources separately.

Plain text
“Hard-core coefficient log-concavity on the first ten thousand four-cycle strips.” TheoremDB. P2594. Problem statement; statement text SHA-256 648bbda6e63f8873268325dfdc38e2161694e3ff96c5ae93dc033b2e141ebbab. https://theoremdb.org/statement/?ref=P2594
BibTeX
@misc{theoremdb-problem-648bbda6e63f8873268325dfdc38e2161694e3ff96c5ae93dc033b2e141ebbab,
  title = {{Hard-core coefficient log-concavity on the first ten thousand four-cycle strips}},
  howpublished = {TheoremDB},
  note = {Problem statement; statement text SHA-256 648bbda6e63f8873268325dfdc38e2161694e3ff96c5ae93dc033b2e141ebbab},
  url = {https://theoremdb.org/statement/?ref=P2594}
}

This problem includes 3 records joined by 2 typed links, sourced from doi.org[1], current as of July 25, 2026.

1References

  1. Packet source. Neil J. Calkin and Herbert S. Wilf, “The Number of Independent Sets in a Grid Graph”. SIAM Journal on Discrete Mathematics 11(1) (1998), 54-60. DOI 10.1137/S089548019528993X. Neil J. Calkin and Herbert S. Wilf, The Number of Independent Sets in a Grid Graph, SIAM Journal on Discrete Mathematics 11(1) (1998), 54-60, Section 1; Maria Chudnovsky and Paul Seymour, The Roots of the Independence Polynomial of a Clawfree Graph, Journal of Combinatorial Theory, Series B 97(3) (2007), 350-357, DOI 10.1016/j.jctb.2006.06.001. journal article · primary source · version of record · checked 2026-07-25Source use: original summary.The grid-transfer literature gives the method, while this coefficient question appears unsettled. The located primary sources support the transfer construction and the claw-free real-rootedness boundary; none reports this cylindrical width-four log-concavity sweep.Also cited at SIAM Journal on Discrete Mathematics 11(1) (1998), 54-60, Section 1.Also cited at Exact transfer and replay certificate in hcc4-artifact-exact-transfer-sweep.Also cited at Inline Python 3 exact computation executed on 2026-07-25.For Hard-core coefficient log-concavity on the first ten thousand four-cycle strips: The located primary sources support the transfer construction and the claw-free real-rootedness boundary; none reports this cylindrical width-four log-concavity sweep.Source named by the research packet.
  2. Maria Chudnovsky and Paul Seymour, “The roots of the independence polynomial of a clawfree graph”. Journal of Combinatorial Theory, Series B 97(3) (2007), 350-357. DOI 10.1016/j.jctb.2006.06.001. Journal of Combinatorial Theory, Series B 97(3) (2007), 350-357. journal article · primary source · version of record · checked 2026-07-25Source use: original summary.The grid-transfer literature gives the method, while this coefficient question appears unsettled. The located primary sources support the transfer construction and the claw-free real-rootedness boundary; none reports this cylindrical width-four log-concavity sweep.For Hard-core coefficient log-concavity on the first ten thousand four-cycle strips: The grid-transfer literature gives the method, while this coefficient question appears unsettled. The located primary sources support the transfer construction and the claw-free real-rootedness boundary; none reports this cylindrical width-four log-concavity sweep.

Original strip-family coefficient conjecture for the hard-core lattice gas.

Discussion

Loading discussion.

Add a comment

Report comment

Flag this problem

Sign in to follow

Sign in in another tab, then return here.

Open sign-in in another tab

Report a problem

Report location:

Your ChatGPT account

Opening ChatGPT

ChatGPT is opening in a new tab.