K3K_3-WORM colorings of graphs: Lower chromatic number and gaps in the chromatic spectrum

A $K_3$-WORM coloring of a graph $G$ is an assignment of colors to the vertices in such a way that the vertices of each $K_3$-subgraph of $G$ get precisely two colors. We study graphs $G$ which admit at least one such coloring. We disprove a conjecture of Goddard et al. [Congr. Numer., 219 (2014) 161--173] who asked whether every such graph has a $K_3$-WORM coloring with two colors. In fact for every integer $k\ge 3$ there exists a $K_3$-WORM colorable graph in which the minimum number of colors is exactly $k$. There also exist $K_3$-WORM colorable graphs which have a $K_3$-WORM coloring with two colors and also with $k$ colors but no coloring with any of $3,\dots,k-1$ colors. We also prove that it is NP-hard to determine the minimum number of colors and NP-complete to decide $k$-colorability for every $k \ge 2$ (and remains intractable even for graphs of maximum degree 9 if $k=3$). On the other hand, we prove positive results for $d$-degenerate graphs with small $d$, also including planar graphs. Moreover we point out a fundamental connection with the theory of the colorings of mixed hypergraphs. We list many open problems at the end.Comment: 18 page

Academic team formation as evolving hypergraphs

This paper quantitatively explores the social and socio-semantic patterns of constitution of academic collaboration teams. To this end, we broadly underline two critical features of social networks of knowledge-based collaboration: first, they essentially consist of group-level interactions which call for team-centered approaches. Formally, this induces the use of hypergraphs and n-adic interactions, rather than traditional dyadic frameworks of interaction such as graphs, binding only pairs of agents. Second, we advocate the joint consideration of structural and semantic features, as collaborations are allegedly constrained by both of them. Considering these provisions, we propose a framework which principally enables us to empirically test a series of hypotheses related to academic team formation patterns. In particular, we exhibit and characterize the influence of an implicit group structure driving recurrent team formation processes. On the whole, innovative production does not appear to be correlated with more original teams, while a polarization appears between groups composed of experts only or non-experts only, altogether corresponding to collectives with a high rate of repeated interactions