Proving the Classification Theorem III
Sorry, but what with errands today and work on some long-term plans, I forgot to put this post up this afternoon.
We continue with the proof of the classification theorem. The first two parts are here and here.
- If
is a simple chain in the graph
, then we can remove these vectors and replace them by their sum. The resulting set is still admissible, and its graph is obtained from
by contracting the chain to a single vertex.
- The graph
contains no subgraph of any of the following forms:
A simple chain in is a subgraph like

We define
I say that if we replace by
in
then we still have an admissible set
. Any edges connecting to any of the vertices
will then connect to the vertex
.
It should be clear that is still linearly independent. If there’s no way to write zero as a nontrivial linear combination of the vectors in
, then of course there’s no way to do it with the additional condition that the coefficients of all the
are the same.
Because we have a simple chain, we find for
and
otherwise. Thus we calculate (compare to step 2)
and so is a unit vector.
Any can be connected by an edge to at most one of the
, or else
would contain a cycle (violating step 3). Thus we have either
if
is connected to no vertex of the chain, or
if
is connected to
by some number of edges. In either case we still find that
is
,
,
, or
, and so
is admissible.
Further, the previous paragraph shows that the edges connecting to any other vertex
of the graph
are exactly the edges connecting the chain to
. Thus we obtain the graph
of
by contracting the chain in
to a single vertex.



Indeed, if one of these graphs occurred in it would be (by step 1) the graph of an admissible set itself. However, if this were the case we could contract the central chain to a single vertex by step 6. We would then find one of the graphs



But each of these graphs has four edges incident on the central vertex, which violates step 4!

[...] Proving the Classification Theorem IV We continue proving the classification theorem. The first three parts are here, here, and here. [...]
Pingback by Proving the Classification Theorem IV « The Unapologetic Mathematician | February 25, 2010 |
You have \epsilon minus instead of \epsilon = in your definition of the linear combination of a simple chain.
Thanks, fixed.
[...] conclude the proof of the classification theorem. The first four parts of the proof are here, here, here, and [...]
Pingback by Proving the Classification Theorem V « The Unapologetic Mathematician | February 26, 2010 |