RESEARCH / Focused target
Degree generating function of Associated Mersenne graphs
RELEASED FOUNDATIONS / PROPOSED CONNECTION
Research connections
All source anchors (1)
- D5/S1/Words/AssociatedMersenne/DegreeGeneratingFunction.resultAbsent from this graph
Problem
The question
Wei and Yang, Associated Mersenne graphs, arXiv:2407.08237v1, Question 6.2: “For given n and k, how many vertices of Associated Mersenne graph ℳₙ have degree k?” The vertices are labelled binary words for which every circular run of ones is followed by a strictly longer run of zeros. Adjacent vertices differ at one position. The conventions are $\mathbf M_0={\lambda}$ and $\mathbf M_1={0}$.
Motivation
Our foothold
The first-tier external question is preregistered in
#14818.
The formal resolution is Proved by
D5/S1/Words/AssociatedMersenne/DegreeGeneratingFunction.result, with
claim : degSeries * DEN = NUM. The Library entry is
Library/Words/wei2024associatedmersenne.md.
Gap
Missing bridges
The preregistration records no answer in the inspected arXiv version, citing works, MathDB results or repository. The journal full text has not been verified. This bounds the literature claim to the inspected sources. The circular single-run case needs a distinct flip count because both gap endpoints meet the same run.
Route
Proposed approach
Positive marked runs extract ordered tuples $(r_i,s_i)$ with $r_i>0$,
$s_i\ge0$ and total length $\sum_i(2r_i+1+s_i)=n$.
RunTupleBijection.marked_admissible_tuple supplies extraction; the
reconstruction and markedTupleEquiv identify the labelled marked words
and tuples. SingleRunDegrees.singleRun_degree and
MultiRunDegrees.degree_raw_multi classify the legal flips.
MarkedDegreeEnumeration.marked_degree_double_count gives the refined
identity $\ell,#\mathrm{words}=n,#\mathrm{tuples}$.
TransferTuples.trace_coefficient_tuples enumerates the tuple weights,
and TransferResolvent.matrixGeom_inverse supplies the coefficientwise
finite matrix inverse. The settling theorem combines these relations.
The binding IsOneRunStart admits $r=0$. Positive marks use
IsMarkedStart := ∃ r > 0, IsOneRunStart w i r; marked_start_iff
connects the two notions. For $[(r,1)]$, the provisional degree is
$\min(r,2)+1$ and the tuple degree is $\min(r,2)$.
The exact correction is $x(1-y)R$ before marking and
$x,\partial_x(x(1-y)R)$ after marking, as expressed by
singleton_weight_correction.
Writing $R=x^3y+x^5y^2/(1-x^2)$ and
$D=1-xy-R+x(y-1)R^2$, the transfer expression is
$F=1+x(1-y)+x^2(1-y^2)-xD_x/D+x(1-y)(R+xR_x)$.
The Lean statement clears the explicit denominator using NUM and DEN.
The constant coefficient of DEN is $1$, so the coefficients uniquely
specify every $N_n(k)$. Rotations are never quotiented out, including
periodic words.
Falsifier
What would falsify this route
A mismatch between literal circular admissibility and the defining predicate, a coefficient mismatch, or a publication already answering the question in the preregistered literature scope invalidates the proposed settlement. The numerical comparison has exact finite scope; it does not replace the universal Lean theorem.
Evidence
Evidence to collect
The eight D5 modules and their Blueprint Scribes contain the mathematical
proof. The axiom closure of every public declaration is contained in
${\mathrm{propext},\mathrm{Classical.choice},\mathrm{Quot.sound}}$.
The settling node carries OpenProblemResolutionClaim with Proved.
Experiment entry: degree-series numerical check.
At experiments commit 602ec65402d492351ebc19230b04caa93001cda8, run
/usr/bin/time -l python3 docs/reports/wei-yang-2024-associated-mersenne-degree-series/check.py
from that repository root, with Python and SymPy. Exit code: 0.
check.py SHA-256:
2dbc02fa28e1960a0523508203ba5ddfd1b3b72b44a0a1d351adb2dfee7132aa.
Every length $0\le n\le18$ matches independent enumeration of words and
Hamming-distance-one neighbours. In particular:
| length | degree histogram | | --- | --- | | 3 | ${1:3,3:1}$ | | 5 | ${2:5,3:5,5:1}$ | | 8 | ${2:8,3:16,4:4,5:8,6:8,8:1}$ |
The four-slot escape audit is unfinished for the public theorem targets,
including the non-refutation result and the newly public
split_replicates and public shared split_reverse_map: #14898.
No declared_validated registration is claimed. The dependent telescopes
need exact source reconstruction and lawful readout bridges, together
with variation, sensitivity and actual observational dependence evidence.
Triage
Scope assessment
What the settlement shows
Proved — mechanism. The marked-word/ordered-tuple correspondence,
pair-local flip classification, degree-refined marked double count and
corrected transfer expression yield the rational degree generating
function. Their kernel-checked anchors are respectively
RunTupleBijection.marked_admissible_tuple,
SingleRunDegrees.singleRun_degree, MultiRunDegrees.degree_raw_multi,
MarkedDegreeEnumeration.marked_degree_double_count,
TransferTuples.trace_coefficient_tuples,
TransferResolvent.matrixGeom_inverse, and
DegreeGeneratingFunction.result. The result holds for every length,
including $0,1,2$, and all degree coefficients, with labelled positions
and periodic words retained. No length cutoff or aperiodicity hypothesis
is imposed.
Computed — histograms. $N_3$, $N_5$ and $N_8$ have exactly the histograms above. The cited experiment, command, exit code and SHA-256 support this reading, and its full tested scope is $0\le n\le18$. Numerical agreement beyond that scope is not claimed.
Open — asymptotic distribution. Extracting and justifying an asymptotic degree law from the rational function is a follow-up; no limiting law is proved or computed in this delivery.
Open — mean and variance. Coefficient differentiation in $y$ gives a route to moments, but exact moment formulas and their asymptotics are neither formalized nor computed here.
Open — Question 6.1. Hamiltonicity is not addressed. The degree-series identity answers Question 6.2; it supplies no Hamilton cycle and changes no Hamiltonicity conclusion. No dependence of the source's other results on an answer to Question 6.2 is asserted.
ASSUMED-UNVERIFIED
Unverified assumptions
The journal version's full text was not verified; whether it retains Question 6.2 as open is ASSUMED-UNVERIFIED. No publication-priority or exhaustive literature-search claim is made. The linked escape audit lacks the compiled four-slot evidence specified there.