A proof of the stability of extremal graphs, Simonovits' stability from Szemer\'edi's regularity

The following sharpening of Tur\'an's theorem is proved. Let $T_{n,p}$ denote the complete $p$--partite graph of order $n$ having the maximum number of edges. If $G$ is an $n$-vertex $K_{p+1}$-free graph with $e(T_{n,p})-t$ edges then there exists an (at most) $p$-chromatic subgraph $H_0$ such that $e(H_0)\geq e(G)-t$. Using this result we present a concise, contemporary proof (i.e., one applying Szemer\'edi's regularity lemma) for the classical stability result of Simonovits.Comment: 4 pages plus reference

On the editing distance of graphs

An edge-operation on a graph $G$ is defined to be either the deletion of an existing edge or the addition of a nonexisting edge. Given a family of graphs $\mathcal{G}$, the editing distance from $G$ to $\mathcal{G}$ is the smallest number of edge-operations needed to modify $G$ into a graph from $\mathcal{G}$. In this paper, we fix a graph $H$ and consider ${\rm Forb}(n,H)$, the set of all graphs on $n$ vertices that have no induced copy of $H$. We provide bounds for the maximum over all $n$-vertex graphs $G$ of the editing distance from $G$ to ${\rm Forb}(n,H)$, using an invariant we call the {\it binary chromatic number} of the graph $H$. We give asymptotically tight bounds for that distance when $H$ is self-complementary and exact results for several small graphs $H$

The approximate Loebl-Komlos-Sos conjecture and embedding trees in sparse graphs

Loebl, Koml\'os and S\'os conjectured that every $n$-vertex graph $G$ with at least $n/2$ vertices of degree at least $k$ contains each tree $T$ of order $k+1$ as a subgraph. We give a sketch of a proof of the approximate version of this conjecture for large values of $k$. For our proof, we use a structural decomposition which can be seen as an analogue of Szemer\'edi's regularity lemma for possibly very sparse graphs. With this tool, each graph can be decomposed into four parts: a set of vertices of huge degree, regular pairs (in the sense of the regularity lemma), and two other objects each exhibiting certain expansion properties. We then exploit the properties of each of the parts of $G$ to embed a given tree $T$. The purpose of this note is to highlight the key steps of our proof. Details can be found in [arXiv:1211.3050]