Commit Graph

18 Commits

Author SHA1 Message Date
didericis b27b401eb1 face_monochromatic_pairs: extend structural proof of Conj 5.1 to cover the F_outer case
Empirical check (check_v_neighbour_degrees.py): 99.70% of (G, v, i)
triples up to |V(G)| ≤ 20 are covered by the flank-face partial proof
(Theorem deciding-face-partial). The remaining 24 / 7,930 (0.30%)
triples all have BOTH n_i, n_{i+1} ≥ 7, but in every single case the
remaining three neighbour degrees are (n_{i+2}, n_{i+3}, n_{i+4}) =
(5, 5, 5). For these, F^♭_outer has length 5+5-3 = 7 ≡ 1 mod 3 and a
boundary that fully lies in V(K_b) ∪ V(K_c).

Paper changes:
  - Fix the existing flank-face theorem statement (was too loose: the
    "WLOG some n_k" was actually only valid for k ∈ {i, i+1}, not
    arbitrary k; the flank face only exists for the chosen i).
  - Add Definition (Outer face) F^♭_outer (the side-1 + arc + merged +
    arc + side-0 face inside F on the merged side of v_n).
  - Add Lemma (Outer-face length): |F^♭_outer| = n_{i+2} + n_{i+4} - 3.
  - Add Lemma (Outer-face covering, pentagonal-flanks case): if
    n_{i+2} = n_{i+4} = 5, the boundary of F^♭_outer lies in
    V(K_b) ∪ V(K_c). Proof: the two intermediates P_23 and P_40 each
    lie adjacent to A_{i+3} ∈ V(K_b) ∩ V(K_c) and A_{i+4} ∈ V(K_b) ∩
    V(K_c) respectively (via the merged edge's coverage of K_b ∩ K_c),
    and the c_0/c_1 split of A_{i+3} and A_{i+4}'s non-merged edges
    forces each intermediate into one of K_b or K_c.
  - Add Theorem (Extended partial proof): deciding face exists in any
    of cases (a) n_i ∈ {5,6}, (b) n_{i+1} ∈ {5,6}, (c) n_{i+2} =
    n_{i+4} = 5.
  - Rewrite the "remaining case" remark to record that
    Theorem (Extended partial proof) covers 100% of empirical
    (G, v, i) triples up to |V(G)| ≤ 20 -- giving a STRUCTURAL
    PROOF of Conjecture 5.1 on the full empirical range.

So the combined result is:

  Conjecture 5.1 (face-monochromatic-pair) is proven structurally for
  every chord-apex+Kempe colouring of every reduced dual of every
  triangulation of min degree 5 with |V(G)| ≤ 20.

The only remaining open structural case is configurations with both
n_i, n_{i+1} ≥ 7 AND (n_{i+2}, n_{i+4}) not both 5 -- which never
arises empirically up to |V(G)| ≤ 20 but could appear for larger
triangulations.

Paper grows from 20 to 21 pages.

Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 4.7 <noreply@anthropic.com>
2026-05-25 04:41:37 -04:00
didericis 25cb109ab7 face_monochromatic_pairs: empirical check on flank-adjacent neighbour degrees
experiments/check_v_neighbour_degrees.py reports the cyclic degree
sequence of v's 5 neighbours in G across all (G, v, i) triples
underlying chord-apex+Kempe colourings (|V(G)| ≤ 20).

Result:
  - 100.00% of (G, v) pairs have at least one neighbour of v of
    degree 5. So the partial proof of the deciding-face conjecture
    (Theorem deciding-face-partial, which requires n_k ∈ {5, 6} for
    some k) handles all (G, v) pairs IF we can pick any k freely.
  - 99.70% of (G, v, i) triples have min(n_i, n_{i+1}) ≤ 6, so the
    partial proof's flank-face argument applies to the specific i.
  - 24 / 7,930 (0.30%) triples have BOTH n_i ≥ 7 AND n_{i+1} ≥ 7
    (the "bad" case where the partial proof's flank-face doesn't
    work). These occur at n_G = 19, 20 for triangulations with
    cyclic neighbour-degree sequences like (5,7,7,5,5).

For these 24 bad triples, the remaining 3 neighbours typically have
degree 5, so F^♭_outer (length n_{i+2} + n_{i+4} - 3 = 5+5-3 = 7,
not divisible by 3) becomes the candidate deciding face. Extending
the structural proof to cover F^♭_outer is the next step.

Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 4.7 <noreply@anthropic.com>
2026-05-25 04:36:32 -04:00
didericis d7e9b6af2f face_monochromatic_pairs: reduce Conj 5.1 to a "deciding face" conjecture
NEW PROOF STRATEGY for Conjecture 5.1 (face-monochromatic-pair):

1. NEW Conjecture (Deciding face): For every chord-apex+Kempe
   colouring φ of every reduced dual, the reduced dual has a face f
   with ∂f ⊆ V(K_b) ∪ V(K_c) and |f| ≢ 0 (mod 3).

2. NEW Theorem: Deciding-face conjecture implies Conj 5.1.

   Proof: contradiction. Assume no clauses-(1)-(3) witness for some
   chord-apex+Kempe φ. By Lemma 5.3, h_φ ≡ ε ∈ {±1} on V(K_b) ∪ V(K_c).
   By the deciding-face conjecture, ∃ face f with ∂f ⊆ V(K_b) ∪ V(K_c),
   |f| ≢ 0 (mod 3). Heawood's face-sum identity (Heawood 1898) gives
   Σ_{v ∈ ∂f} h_φ(v) = ε|f| ≡ 0 (mod 3). Since gcd(|f|, 3) = 1, we get
   ε ≡ 0 (mod 3), but ε ∈ {±1} — contradiction.

3. EMPIRICAL: Conjecture (Deciding face) verified on 142,812 / 142,812
   chord-apex+Kempe colourings of reduced duals up to |V(G)| ≤ 20 --
   matching the full coverage of check_constancy_obstruction.py.
   Face-length distribution:
     |f| = 4:  13,074
     |f| = 5: 102,498 (most common)
     |f| = 7:  18,570
     |f| = 8:   7,752
     |f| = 10:    846
     |f| = 11:     72
   (All ≢ 0 mod 3.)

New scripts:
  - check_kb_kc_coverage.py: |V(K_b) ∪ V(K_c)| / |V(Ĝ')| distribution.
    73.87% of colourings have V(K_b) ∪ V(K_c) = V (full coverage); the
    remaining 26% have coverage ≥ 70%, mostly ≥ 90%.
  - check_deciding_face.py: existence of deciding face across all
    colourings; 100.00% / 142,812.

Why this is the right reduction:
  - It uses ALL THREE pieces of chord-apex+Kempe structure: Lemma 5.3
    (constancy from no-witness), forced colour-equality at merged/spike,
    and forced Kempe-cycle containment of merged + spike + side edges
    (the latter two enter via V(K_b) ∪ V(K_c) covering specific
    structural vertices).
  - It uses Heawood's face-sum identity, which is the classical 3-fold
    parity constraint on cubic plane 3-edge-colourings.
  - The C28 counterexample to Conjecture 5.5 is not affected: it's not
    a chord-apex+Kempe colouring of a reduced dual, so the deciding-face
    structure doesn't apply.

Remaining work: prove the deciding-face conjecture structurally (likely
via the specific F_01 / F_12 "flank face" of the reduced dual, whose
length n_0 - 1 from the adjacent G'-face of length n_0 ≥ 5 is ≢ 0 mod 3
exactly when n_0 ≢ 1 mod 3, plus boundary-in-V(K_b) ∪ V(K_c) which
follows from Lemma 5.X kempe-spike + colour analysis at A_i).

Paper grows from 17 to 18 pages.

Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 4.7 <noreply@anthropic.com>
2026-05-25 04:12:09 -04:00
didericis 9103fa7068 face_monochromatic_pairs: confirm C28 counterexample to 5.5 does not lift to 5.1
experiments/check_c28_no_chord_apex_kempe_constancy.py iterates all
3 triangulations on 16 vertices with min degree 5 (whose duals are
the 28-vertex cubic plane graphs with face length ≥ 5 -- including
the C28 fullerene that disproves Conjecture 5.5). For each:

  - applies every chord-apex reduction (every pentagonal face of the
    dual × every rotation index i ∈ {0,…,4}),
  - enumerates every proper 3-edge-colouring of each reduced dual,
  - filters to chord-apex+Kempe colourings (Lemmas 5.X chord-apex +
    Kempe-spike),
  - traces K_b, K_c through the merged edge,
  - computes h_φ via the CW rotation at each vertex,
  - reports any colouring where h_φ is constant on V(K_b), V(K_c), or
    both.

Result:
  reductions tried        : 60 + 60 + 70 = 190
  chord-apex+Kempe colourings: 432 + 432 +   0 = 864
  constant on V(K_b)      :   0 +   0 +   0 =   0
  constant on V(K_c)      :   0 +   0 +   0 =   0
  constant on both        :   0 +   0 +   0 =   0

So even though the C28 fullerene admits a proper 3-edge-colouring on
which two intersecting Kempe cycles are both constant h_φ (the
Conjecture 5.5 counterexample), none of its chord-apex reductions
admits a chord-apex+Kempe colouring with the same property -- the
extra constraints (merged + spike same colour; K_b ⊇ {spike, side_0,
merged}; K_c ⊇ {spike, side_1, merged}) genuinely rule it out.

This is consistent with the broader empirical near-proof
(check_constancy_obstruction.py: 0/142,812 colourings constant) and
shows that the C28 obstruction-killing is not a fluke specific to
some smaller class; it works for the full chord-apex+Kempe layer.

Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 4.7 <noreply@anthropic.com>
2026-05-25 03:53:13 -04:00
didericis 10a53e9de1 face_monochromatic_pairs: strengthen Conj 5.5 to face-length ≥ 5, find 28-vertex counterexample
- Paper: Conjecture 5.5 restated with the hypothesis that every face
  of H has length ≥ 5 (= the cubic plane analogue of "no triangles
  or quadrilaterals as faces"). This kills K_4 and the n=8 trivial
  counterexamples (girth 3) and the ad-hoc n=40 counterexample
  (which has 2 triangles and 4 quadrilaterals). A new remark catalogues
  these excluded counterexamples and the smallest cubic plane graphs
  satisfying the hypothesis (dodecahedron at |V| = 20).
- search_smaller_counterexample.py: --min-face=N option to filter
  cubic planar graphs by minimum face length.
- search_min_face5_counterexample.py: enumerates triangulations T
  with min degree ≥ 5 via graphs.triangulations(n, minimum_degree=5),
  takes planar dual (= cubic plane with all faces ≥ 5), and runs the
  Heawood-constancy check.
- Result: smallest counterexample at triangulation order n_T = 16,
  whose dual is a 28-vertex cubic plane graph (graph6
  [kG[A?_A?_?_?K?D?@_CO?o?@_??A??@C??O??AG?C????`???a???W???A_???F).
  Faces: 12 pentagons + 4 hexagons (a C28 fullerene). Both
  K_{red, blue} and K_{red, green} are 12-cycles sharing the
  colour-red edge (0, 1) and both have h_φ ≡ -1. 8 of 28 vertices
  lie outside V(K_0) ∪ V(K_1).
- verify_28_vertex_counterexample.py: reproduces the counterexample,
  verifies all properties, and renders figures/min-face-5-counterexample.png.

Note on the boundary: face-length ≥ 6 is impossible for cubic plane
graphs by Euler (6F = 6(V/2 + 2) > 3V = sum face lengths for V > 4).
So face-length ≥ 5 is the strongest face-length restriction admitting
any cubic plane graphs at all.

Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 4.7 <noreply@anthropic.com>
2026-05-25 03:42:08 -04:00
didericis 3aec31b3ac face_monochromatic_pairs: search for smallest cubic plane counterexample to Conjecture 5.5
experiments/search_smaller_counterexample.py enumerates 3-connected
cubic planar graphs via graphs.planar_graphs(n, min_deg=3, min_conn=2)
(filtering to cubic), then for each graph tries every proper
3-edge-colouring (backtracking with symmetry-break on first edge),
computes h_φ via the CW rotation from sage's planar embedding, and
checks whether some pair of intersecting Kempe cycles K_{a,b} and
K_{a,c} are both constant-Heawood.

Results (up to n=10 in initial run):
  n= 4: K_4 itself. Coloring (1,2)=red, (3,4)=red, (1,3)=blue,
        (2,4)=blue, (1,4)=green, (2,3)=green; sage's CW embedding
        gives h_φ ≡ -1 on all 4 vertices. K_{red,blue} = 4-cycle
        1-2-4-3 and K_{red,green} = 4-cycle 1-2-3-4 share both red
        edges; both constant.
  n= 6: no counterexample (only the triangular prism).
  n= 8: a 12-edge cubic planar graph (graph6 G}GOW[) on 8 vertices.
        Both Kempe cycles are 8-cycles visiting every vertex.
  n=10: 8 cubic planar graphs checked, no counterexample.

So K_4 is the smallest counterexample to Conjecture 5.5 as stated,
but both K_4 and the n=8 example are structurally trivial: K_0 and
K_1 jointly cover V(H). The user's 40-vertex counterexample (paper
Figure) is the smallest non-trivial example found so far, with 24
vertices outside V(K_0) ∪ V(K_1).

Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 4.7 <noreply@anthropic.com>
2026-05-25 03:31:48 -04:00
didericis 0d5aebbff7 face_monochromatic_pairs: record graph6 + invariants of Conj-5.5 counterexample; drop partial proof attempt
- Disproof remark now records the canonical graph6 string (via
  G.canonical_label().graph6_string()) and the basic invariants
  (V=40, E=60, vertex/edge-conn 3, girth 3, trivial Aut, Hamiltonian,
  not bipartite, face-length distribution).
- The graph appears to be a fresh ad-hoc construction; the
  research-analyst literature search ruled out gen. Petersen,
  C40 fullerenes, snarks, Archimedean/Catalan polyhedra, McKay's
  cubic planar non-Hamiltonian catalogues, and the Foster census.
- counterexample_conj_5_5.py now prints the canonical graph6,
  girth, |Aut|, and hamiltonicity so the invariants are reproducible
  from the script.
- The "Partial proof attempt" (Steps 1-5: local CW structure, forced-
  crossing, mod-3 Heawood face-sum, lune-face Case A, Case B TBD) is
  removed --- the counterexample disproves the conjecture outright, so
  the partial structural arguments toward it are no longer needed.
  Paper drops from 19 to 17 pages.

Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 4.7 <noreply@anthropic.com>
2026-05-25 03:13:01 -04:00
didericis 34141322ce face_monochromatic_pairs: explicit counterexample to Conjecture 5.5
Adds the concrete construction (40 vertices, 60 edges, cubic + planar
+ proper 3-edge-coloured) on which h_φ is simultaneously constant on
two Kempe cycles sharing an edge:

  - K_{red, blue}  = 8-cycle (the outer frame): all h_φ = -1
  - K_{red, green} = 12-cycle (outer frame + upper-left ladder side):
                      all h_φ = -1
  - They share the colour-red edge (0, 7) (and others).

The graph is drawn in TikZiT and stored as
  papers/face_monochromatic_pairs/constant_heawood_counterexample.tikz

The Sage transcription + Heawood/Kempe verification + PNG renderer is
  papers/face_monochromatic_pairs/experiments/counterexample_conj_5_5.py

Rendered PNG (with the four bent outer-face / trapezoid arcs matching
the tikz drawing) is at
  papers/face_monochromatic_pairs/figures/no-two-constant-kempe-counterexample.png

Globally h_φ has 16 vertices at +1 and 24 at -1; the +1 vertices are
concentrated in the inner "tilted ladder" region, leaving the outer
and the K_{red,green}-extension all at -1. This is the structural
reason both Kempe cycles can be constant.

Also includes the TikZiT styles file default.tikzstyles defining the
red/blue/green edge styles used by the .tikz file.

Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 4.7 <noreply@anthropic.com>
2026-05-25 02:55:35 -04:00
didericis e6880371ff face_monochromatic_pairs: minimum-flip and minority-location diagnostics
Two more diagnostics on chord-apex+Kempe colourings (n <= 18,
13,800 colourings) probing how thin the non-constancy obstacle on
V(K_b) is:

1. check_min_flip_structure.py
   - Flip count on K_b drops as low as 2 (at n = 18, 12 colourings):
     these have a single minority Heawood vertex on K_b. So the
     structural obstacle has NO slack: proving "at least 1 minority
     vertex on V(K_b)" is the bar.
   - All n=14 colourings (216) have flip count = 8 exactly. At
     larger n the distribution spreads.

2. check_minority_location.py
   - For colourings with K_b flip count <= 4, identify the minority
     Heawood vertices and tally where they sit:

       v_n      : 12.86%
       A_{i+1}  : 10.82%
       A_{i+2}  :  8.98%
       A_i      :  7.76%
       A_{i+4}  :  5.31%
       A_{i+3}  :  5.10%
       "other"  : 49.18%

   - About half the minority vertices live on non-named vertices in
     the rest of G'. No single named vertex is *always* the
     minority. The obstruction is genuinely diffuse / global, not
     anchored to a specific structural location.

These together imply that the structural proof of "h_phi non-constant
on V(K_b)" must be global (no local "this vertex must flip"
argument suffices) and handle the edge case where only one minority
vertex exists. Likely requires a topological / homological / global
counting argument.

Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 4.7 <noreply@anthropic.com>
2026-05-25 00:53:55 -04:00
didericis 33b51b675b face_monochromatic_pairs: per-cycle refinement + Corollary 5.4
Empirical refinement of Lemma 5.3: h_phi is non-constant on V(K_b)
alone (not just on the union) and likewise on V(K_c) alone, in every
one of 142,812 chord-apex+Kempe colourings tested (n in [12, 20]).
This is strictly stronger than what we previously reported.

The proof of Lemma 5.3 already constructs the (F, e_1, e_2) witness
from any consecutive same-Heawood failure on either Kempe cycle
through merged -- never needing the other cycle. Pull that out into
a separate Corollary 5.4 ("Per-cycle form"), which makes the
empirical-to-conjecture path more direct.

Update Remark 5.5 to:
  - Cite Corollary 5.4 instead of the contrapositive of Lemma 5.3.
  - Replace "non-constant on V(K_b) U V(K_c)" with the per-cycle form.
  - Extend the empirical table with separate columns for K_b and K_c
    non-constancy.

Also commit experiments/check_constancy_obstruction.py, the script
that produced these refined empirical findings. It additionally
records that no single named vertex (v_n, A_i, ..., A_{i+4}) is
structurally majority or minority -- the minority rates cluster in
31-39%, ruling out a single-vertex-mismatch identity.

Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 4.7 <noreply@anthropic.com>
2026-05-25 00:43:35 -04:00
didericis a29d145cec face_monochromatic_pairs: cycle-side splits and shared-vertex transitions
For each chord-apex+Kempe colouring (n in [12, 18]), record:
  (1) (#L, #R) split of c-edge sides along K_b and K_c. #L == #R only
      in 35.43% of colourings (the rest have unbalanced sides --
      consistent with the empirical Heawood non-constancy).
  (2) Ordered sequence of (i_b mod 2, i_c mod 2) parity pairs at
      shared K_b cap K_c vertices in K_b walk order, plus a tally of
      transitions in the 4-state space.

Two clean structural observations on the transition matrix:

(A) i_b parity strictly alternates between consecutive shared
    K_b-vertices. Every transition goes (0, *) -> (1, *) or
    (1, *) -> (0, *); transitions within (0, *) or within (1, *) are
    never observed. So shared positions on K_b alternate even/odd in
    walk order -- the gap on K_b between consecutive shared vertices
    is always odd.

(B) From odd-i_b states, i_c parity must flip too: (1, 0) only
    transitions to (0, 1) and (1, 1) only to (0, 0). From even-i_b
    states, both i_c outcomes occur.

(B) is explained structurally: at an odd-i_b shared vertex K_b leaves
via the a-edge (which is also on K_c), so K_b and K_c traverse the
same edge and K_c advances exactly one step, flipping i_c. At an
even-i_b shared vertex K_b leaves via the b-edge (off K_c), so K_c
advances at its own pace and i_c can be either parity at the next
shared vertex.

Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 4.7 <noreply@anthropic.com>
2026-05-25 00:32:07 -04:00
didericis 703b523161 face_monochromatic_pairs: empirical near-proof of Conjecture 5.1 via Lemma 5.3
Add Remark 5.5 immediately after Lemma 5.3's proof, recording the
empirical reduction of Conjecture 5.1 via the contrapositive of
Lemma 5.3: the conjecture follows from "h_phi is not constant on
V(K_b) U V(K_c)", and we have verified that non-constancy holds on
every one of 142,812 chord-apex+Kempe colourings up to n <= 20
(including the six Holton-McKay duals as a special case).

This is an independent empirical near-proof of Conjecture 5.1,
complementary to the direct (1)-(3) witness check in
Remark 5.6 / rem:conj-3-6-empirical. A structural proof of the
non-constancy claim would upgrade this to a proof of the
conjecture.

Also include two diagnostic scripts that informed the remark:
  - check_shared_parity.py: parity-bucket symmetry n_{0,0} = n_{1,1},
    n_{0,1} = n_{1,0} at vertices in V(K_b) cap V(K_c). 100%.
  - check_cw_parity_prediction.py: structural identity
    s_b XOR s_c = i_b XOR i_c XOR 1 holds at every shared vertex
    (263,004 / 263,004), and the simple constancy prediction matches
    exactly 50% of shared vertices per colouring with 0 perfectly
    matching colourings.

Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 4.7 <noreply@anthropic.com>
2026-05-25 00:21:52 -04:00
didericis d659bf40d5 face_monochromatic_pairs: instrument K_b cap K_c size and per-cycle flip counts
For each chord-apex+Kempe colouring, record:
  - |V(K_b)|, |V(K_c)|, |V(K_b) cap V(K_c)|, |V(K_b) cup V(K_c)|
  - "Flip count" on each cycle: #consecutive pairs whose third-colour
    edges lie on opposite local sides (= #same-Heawood pairs by Lemma A).

Results (n in [12, 18], 13,800 colourings):
  - |V(K_b) cap V(K_c)| is NEVER 2 -- always >= 6. The two Kempe cycles
    through merged share many vertices.
  - Distributions of flip_Kb and flip_Kc are identical multisets
    (consistent with b <-> c symmetry of the construction).
  - But per-colouring, flip_Kb == flip_Kc only 39.65% of the time --
    the symmetry is statistical, not pointwise.
  - Max observed flip count is 20, never the maximum possible |V(K)|.
    Consistent with h_phi never being constant on V(K_b) U V(K_c).

The substantial overlap of K_b and K_c (>= 6 shared vertices) means
the constancy hypothesis would impose simultaneous alternation
constraints from both cycles at every shared vertex -- the topological
"trap" the proof needs to exploit.

Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 4.7 <noreply@anthropic.com>
2026-05-25 00:00:08 -04:00
didericis cebe6e5dbd face_monochromatic_pairs: confirm Lemma A biconditional empirically
Two diagnostic scripts probing the side-classification of c-edges at
K_b-vertices and their relationship to Heawood numbers:

1. check_heawood_side_correlation.py (first attempt)
   - Defines "side" as connected component of H \ K_b.
   - Result: K_b separates H into 2 components in 0% of cases, so
     this notion doesn't capture the planar side. (Negative result --
     kept for the record / so we don't redo it.)

2. check_heawood_local_side.py (correct version)
   - Defines "side" locally via the planar CW embedding at v: c-edge
     is on local RIGHT if, going CW from incoming K-neighbour at v,
     we hit the c-neighbour before the outgoing K-neighbour; local
     LEFT otherwise.
   - Result on 625,200 consecutive K_b-pairs across 13,800
     chord-apex+Kempe colourings (n in [12, 18]):

     same h, same side: 0
     same h, diff side: 372,456 (59.57%)
     diff h, same side: 252,744 (40.43%)
     diff h, diff side: 0

     The empirical biconditional holds perfectly:

       h_phi(v_0) == h_phi(v_1)  <==>  c-edges on opposite sides

     This is "Lemma A" -- the corrected version of the proposed
     orientation lemma. Equivalently: constant Heawood on a Kempe
     cycle K forces the c-edges (off-K) to ALTERNATE inside/outside
     of K along the cycle (not all on one side as I initially
     conjectured).

This empirical result revises the spiral picture for Path 4: under
the Lemma 5.3 hypothesis of constant h on V(K_b) U V(K_c), the
c-edges alternate sides on K_b (and the b-edges alternate sides on
K_c). K_c must then cross K_b at every K_b-vertex it shares -- a
strong topological constraint we can now exploit.

Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 4.7 <noreply@anthropic.com>
2026-05-24 23:54:20 -04:00
didericis b72c38b8ce face_monochromatic_pairs: diagnostic scripts for Path 4 (Heawood
constancy on V(K_b) U V(K_c))

Three empirical checks on all chord-apex+Kempe colourings up to
n = 20 (142,812 colourings):

1. check_heawood_on_kempe.py
   - Sum_v h_phi(v): not zero in general; 17.6% of colourings have
     sum 0, the rest range in {+-4, +-8, +-12, +-16, +-20, +-24}.
     So the global "Heawood sum = 0" identity fails.
   - h_phi constant on V(K_b) U V(K_c): NEVER (0/142,812). This is
     the central empirical result -- by Lemma 5.3's contrapositive
     it gives an empirical proof of Conjecture 5.1 on these
     surrogates.

2. check_heawood_per_kempe_cycle.py
   - Sum_{V(K_b)} h_phi and sum_{V(K_c)} h_phi range widely (-20 to
     +20), with only ~23% zero. So the "Heawood sum on each Kempe
     cycle = 0" identity also fails -- the per-cycle sum is not the
     right invariant.

3. check_heawood_pair_mismatch.py
   - For each of 16 named-vertex pairs (v_n with each A_j, A_j with
     A_k for j, k in {i, ..., i+4}), counts how often h_phi differs.
     No pair is *always* differing -- the closest are consecutive
     pairs (A_j, A_{j+1}) at ~75% diff. So the Heawood mismatch
     enforcing non-constancy on V(K_b) U V(K_c) is diffuse, not at
     a fixed pair.

Together these results confirm Path 4 (Conjecture 5.1 reduces via
Lemma 5.3 to showing h_phi non-constant on V(K_b) U V(K_c)) but
rule out the simplest single-pair-identity proof; the structural
obstruction lives elsewhere (likely a topological/cycle-winding
argument or a chord-apex/Kempe-spike colour cascade).

Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 4.7 <noreply@anthropic.com>
2026-05-24 23:18:52 -04:00
didericis 037d987c7d face_monochromatic_pairs: reframe Lemma 5.2 as a non-existence result
The previous statement "Heawood is constant on K through merged" was
strictly stronger than what the proof actually established without
Conjecture 5.3. Restate the lemma in the contrapositive direction:

  If h_phi is constant on V(K), then no edge e in E(K) admits a face
  F of G'^hat and edges e_1, e_2 on dF realising the clause-(3) arc
  of Conjecture 5.1 at the endpoints of e.

Proof structure is mostly preserved (same F_R/F_L geometry, same case
split on phi(e) in {a, b}, same reading-off of cyclic colour orders).
The hypothesis "h_phi(v_0) != h_phi(v_1)" becomes "h_phi(v_0) =
h_phi(v_1)", which flips the conclusion: the same-coloured non-e
edges at v_0, v_1 land on opposite faces of e instead of the same
face. No dependency on Conjecture 5.3 or Theorem 4.X.

Redraw the figure to match the new lemma: both vertices labelled
h_phi = +1, both showing CW order (a, b, c), and the same-colour pair
(b-edges in Case A, a-edges in Case B) drawn on opposite sides of e.

Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 4.7 <noreply@anthropic.com>
2026-05-24 22:31:10 -04:00
didericis d99f8e23b3 face_monochromatic_pairs: Heawood numbers, Lemma 5.2 + diagram
- Add Definition 3.1 "Heawood number of a vertex" (+1 if CW colour order
  is (1,2,3), -1 if (1,3,2)) and cite Heawood 1898 in the bibliography.
- Add Lemma 5.2 "Heawood number is constant on the Kempe cycles through
  the merged edge", positioned immediately after Conjecture 5.1. Its
  proof exhibits a (F, e_1, e_2) witness for clauses (1)-(3) of the
  conjecture from any pair (v_0, v_1) of consecutive K-vertices with
  differing Heawood signs, by cases on whether phi(e) = a or b. The
  proof does not invoke Conjecture 5.3 or Theorem 4.X.
- Add a two-panel figure illustrating Case A (b-edges on F_R when
  phi(e) = a) and Case B (a-edges on F_L when phi(e) = b), with the
  cyclic colour orders (a, b, c) at v_0 and (a, c, b) at v_1 visible
  from the angular layout.

Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 4.7 <noreply@anthropic.com>
2026-05-24 21:54:30 -04:00
didericis 41227c6a0f papers: rename folders and retitle
- Main paper: dual_decomposition_minimal_counterexamples/ ->
  face_monochromatic_pairs/. Title is now
  "Face-Monochromatic Pairs and the Four Colour Theorem".
- Companion paper: dual_decomposition_iterated_reduction/ ->
  iterated_reduction_in_reduced_dual/. Title is now
  "An Iterated Reduction in the Reduced Dual". Its prose and bibliography
  cite the parent under the new title.
- Update one absolute sys.path reference inside
  check_conj_face_kempe_n15.py that pointed at the old folder.

Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 4.7 <noreply@anthropic.com>
2026-05-24 15:04:15 -04:00