Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-ndw9j Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-16T15:23:10.770Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Sub-Gaussian Tails for the Number of Triangles in G(n, p)

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  14 May 2010

GUY WOLFOVITZ
GUY WOLFOVITZ*
Affiliation:
Department of Computer Science, Haifa University, Haifa, Israel (e-mail: [email protected])
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Let X be the random variable that counts the number of triangles in the binomial random graph G(n, p). We show that for some positive constant c, the probability that X deviates from its expectation by at least λVar(X)1/2 is at most e−cλ2, provided p = o(1), λ = ω() and λ ≤ (n3p3 + n4p5)1/6.

Type
Paper
Information
Combinatorics, Probability and Computing , Volume 20 , Issue 1 , January 2011 , pp. 155 - 160
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 2010

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

[1]Bollobás, B. (1981) Threshold functions for small subgraphs. Math. Proc. Cambridge Philos. Soc. 90 197–206.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
[2]Erdős, P. and Rényi, A. (1960) On the evolution of random graphs. Magyar Tud. Akad. Mat. Kutató Int. Közl. 5 17–61.Google Scholar
[3]Frieze, A. (1992) On small subgraphs of random graphs. In Random Graphs 2 (Poznań 1989), Wiley-Interscience, pp. 67–90.Google Scholar
[4]Janson, S., Łuczak, T. and Ruciński, A. (1990) An exponential bound for the probability of nonexistence of a specified subgraph in a random graph. In Random Graphs '87 (Poznań 1987), Wiley, pp. 73–87.Google Scholar
[5]Janson, S., Oleszkiewicz, K. and Ruciński, A. (2004) Upper tails for subgraph counts in random graphs. Israel J. Math. 142 61–92.Google Scholar
[6]Janson, S. and Ruciński, A. (2002) The infamous upper tail. Random Struct. Alg. 20 317–342.Google Scholar
[7]Kannan, R. (2008) A new probability inequality using typical moments and concentration results. arXiv:0809.2477v2 [math.PR].Google Scholar
[8]Karoński, M. and Ruciński, A. (1983) On the number of strictly balanced subgraphs of a random graph. In Graph Theory (Łagów 1981), Vol. 1018 of Lecture Notes in Mathematics, Springer, pp. 79–83.Google Scholar
[9]Kim, J. H. and Vu, V. H. (2004) Divide and conquer martingales and the number of triangles in a random graph. Random Struct. Alg. 24 166–174.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
[10]McDiarmid, C. (1989) On the method of bounded differences. In Surveys in Combinatorics (Norwich 1989), Vol. 141 of London Mathematical Society Lecture Notes, Cambridge University Press, pp. 148–188.Google Scholar
[11]Ruciński, A. (1988) When are small subgraphs of a random graph normally distributed? Probab. Theory Rel. Fields 78 1–10.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
[12]Schürger, K. (1979) Limit theorems for complete subgraphs of random graphs. Period. Math. Hungar. 10 47–53.Google Scholar
[13]Vu, V. H. (2001) A large deviation result on the number of small subgraphs of a random graph. Combin. Probab. Comput. 10 79–94.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
[14]Vu, V. H. (2002) Concentration of non-Lipschitz functions and applications. Random Struct. Alg. 20 262–316.Google Scholar