Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-s2hrs Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-09T02:03:43.391Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

Site Percolation on the d-Dimensional Hamming Torus

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  29 November 2013

DAVID SIVAKOFF*
Affiliation:
Department of Statistics, Department of Mathematics, Ohio State University, Columbus, OH 43210, USA (e-mail: dsivakoff@stat.osu.edu)

Abstract

The d-dimensional Hamming torus is the graph whose vertices are all of the integer points inside an a1n × a2n × ⋅⋅⋅ × adn box in $\mathbb{R}^d$ (for constants a1, . . ., ad > 0), and whose edges connect all vertices within Hamming distance one. We study the size of the largest connected component of the subgraph generated by independently removing each vertex of the Hamming torus with probability 1 − p. We show that if p = λ/n, then there exists λc > 0, which is the positive root of a degree d polynomial whose coefficients depend on a1, . . ., ad, such that for λ < λc the largest component has O(log n) vertices (w.h.p. as n → ∞), and for λ > λc the largest component has $(1-q) \lambda \bigl(\prod_i a_i \bigr) n^{d-1} + o (n^{d-1})$ vertices and the second largest component has O(log n) vertices w.h.p. An implicit formula for q < 1 is also given. The value of λc that we find is distinct from the critical value for the emergence of a giant component in bond percolation on the Hamming torus.

Type
Paper
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 2013 

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]Ajtai, M., Komlós, J. and Szemerédi, E. (1981) Largest random component of a $k$-cube. Combinatorica 2 17.Google Scholar
[2]Athreya, K. B. and Ney, P. E. (1972) Branching Processes, Dover.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
[3]Barbour, A. D., Holst, L. and Janson, S. (1992) Poisson Approximation, Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
[4]Bollobás, B., Janson, S. and Riordan, O. (2007) The phase transition in inhomogeneous random graphs. Random Struct. Alg. 31 3122.Google Scholar
[5]Bollobás, B., Janson, S. and Riordan, O. (2009) Line-of-sight percolation. Combin. Probab. Comput. 18 83106.Google Scholar
[6]Bollobás, B., Kohayakawa, Y. and Łuczak, T. (1991) On the evolution of random boolean functions. In Extremal Problems for Finite Sets, Visegrád, Hungary, pp. 137156.Google Scholar
[7]Borgs, C., Chayes, J. T., van der Hofstad, R., Slade, G. and Spencer, J. (2005) Random subgraphs of finite graphs I: The scaling window under the triangle condition. Random Struct. Alg. 27 137184.Google Scholar
[8]Borgs, C., Chayes, J. T., van der Hofstad, R., Slade, G. and Spencer, J. (2005) Random subgraphs of finite graphs II: The lace expansion and the triangle condition. Ann. Probab. 33 18861944.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
[9]Durrett, R. (2007) Random Graph Dynamics, Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
[10]Erdős, P. and Rényi, A. (1960) On the evolution of random graphs. Publ. Math. Inst. Hungar. Acad. Sci. 5 1761.Google Scholar
[11]van der Hofstad, R. and Luczak, M. (2009) Random subgraphs of the 2D Hamming graph: The supercritical phase. Probab. Theory Rel. Fields 147 141.Google Scholar