MathLabs

Worked solution: Gladkov–Pak–Zimin's explicit counterexample disproving the bunkbed conjecture (2024)

Step 1 of 8: The bunkbed conjecture: same-level connections are at least as likely
In plain words

Build a bunkbed frame out of a graph GG: take two identical copies of GG, called level 00 (bottom bunk) and level 11 (top bunk), and at some chosen set of vertices TT, add a vertical "post" edge joining the bottom-bunk copy to the top-bunk copy. Now independently retain each edge of the two copies of GG with probability pp; the posts are always retained. Ask: for two fixed vertices uu and vv of GG, is it at least as likely for the bottom copy of uu to be connected to the bottom copy of vv as it is for it to be connected to the top copy of vv?

Pieter Kasteleyn conjectured in 1985 that the answer is always yes — staying on the same level should never hurt your chances of getting from one point to another. For nearly forty years, this felt so obviously true to probabilists that it was described as "self-evident", even though nobody could find a proof that covered every graph.

Pr⁡[u0↔v0]≥Pr⁡[u0↔v1]for all u,v∈V, T⊆V\Pr[u_0 \leftrightarrow v_0] \ge \Pr[u_0 \leftrightarrow v_1] \quad \text{for all } u, v \in V, \ T \subseteq V
Detailed analysis

For a connected graph G=(V,E)G = (V, E) and a chosen subset of transversal vertices T⊆VT \subseteq V, the bunkbed graph G‾\overline{G} consists of two copies GG and G′G' (levels 00 and 11) together with a post edge joining ww to w′w' for every w∈Tw \in T. In bunkbed percolation, each edge of GG and G′G' is kept independently with probability p∈(0,1)p \in (0,1), while every post is always kept. Kasteleyn's 1985 bunkbed conjecture (Gladkov, Pak & Zimin 2024, Conjecture 1.1, attributed to Kasteleyn via van den Berg & Kesten 2001, Remark 5) states that for every such GG, TT, and pp, and every pair of vertices u,v∈Vu, v \in V, Pr⁡pbb[u↔v]≥Pr⁡pbb[u↔v′]\Pr^{\text{bb}}_p[u \leftrightarrow v] \ge \Pr^{\text{bb}}_p[u \leftrightarrow v'] — connecting to vv's own level is at least as likely as connecting to vv's copy on the other level.

The most commonly cited special case takes T=VT = V (a post at every vertex), but the general statement with an arbitrary transversal set TT is what Gladkov, Pak, and Zimin actually address, and it is the version their counterexample refutes. The conjecture had been verified in several special cases — for wheels, complete graphs, complete bipartite graphs, graphs with an automorphism swapping uu and vv, and for one or two transversal vertices — and, remarkably, in the limit p→1p \to 1, but a fully general proof or disproof had eluded probabilists for essentially the whole four decades since it was posed.

The rest of this proof builds an explicit graph, transversal set, and pair of vertices for which the inequality fails at p=12p = \tfrac12, disproving the conjecture in general.

Terms in this step
Bernoulli bond percolation
A random process on a graph in which each edge is independently kept ("open") with probability pp and removed ("closed") with probability 1−p1-p, producing a random subgraph.
Transversal vertex / post
A vertex ww in the chosen set TT is called transversal; the edge joining its two copies ww and w′w' across levels is called a post, and posts are never randomly removed.
Knowledge used in this step