Zarankiewicz's conjecture asserts that graph crossing number for a complete bipartite
graph
is
(1)
|
where
is the floor function. The original proof by Zarankiewicz
(1954) contained an error, but was subsequently solved in some special cases by Guy
(1969). Zarankiewicz (1954) showed that in general, the formula
provides an upper bound to the actual number.
The problem addressed by the conjecture is sometimes known as the brick factory problem, since it was described by Turán (1977) as follows: "We worked near Budapest,
in a brick factory. There were some kilns where the bricks were made and some open
storage yards where the bricks were stored. All the kilns were connected to all the
storage yards. The bricks were carried on small wheeled trucks to the storage yards.
All we had to do was to put the bricks on the trucks at the kilns, push the trucks
to the storage yards, and unload them there. We had a reasonable piece rate for the
trucks, and the work itself was not difficult; the trouble was at the crossings.
The trucks generally jumped the rails there, and the bricks fell out from them, in
short this caused a lot of trouble and loss of time which was precious to all of
us. We were all sweating and cursing at such occasions, I too; but 'nolens volens'
the idea occurred to me that this loss of time could have been minimized if the number
of crossings of the rails had been minimized. But what is the minimum number of crossings?
I realized after several days that the actual situation could have been improved,
but the exact solution of the general problem with kilns and
storage yards seemed to be very difficult. The problem occurred
to me again at my first visit to Poland where I met Zarankiewicz. I mentioned to
him my 'brick-factory' problem and Zarankiewicz thought he had solved it. But Gerhard
Ringel found a gap in his published proof, which nobody has been able to fill so
far--in spite of much effort. This problem has also become a notoriously difficult
unsolved problem."
The conjecture has been shown to be true for all . Woodall (1993) settled the
case, with the smallest unsettled cases as of Feb. 2009
being
and
.
The table below gives known results.
1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | |
1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
2 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | |
3 | 1 | 2 | 4 | 6 | 9 | ||
4 | 4 | 8 | 12 | 18 | |||
5 | 16 | 24 | 36 | ||||
6 | 36 | 54 | |||||
7 | 81 |
Richter and Širáň (1996) computed the crossing number of the complete bipartite graph as
(2)
|
Kleitman (1970, 1976) showed that the crossing numbers for ,
,
, and
satisfy
(3)
|
giving the specific equations
(4)
| |||
(5)
| |||
(6)
| |||
(7)
|
for all positive .