Abstract:SIAM Journal on Computing, Volume 53, Issue 5, Page 1578-1601, October 2024. We show that for any natural number [math], there is a constant [math] and a subgraph-closed class having, for any natural [math], at most [math] graphs on [math] vertices up to isomorphism, but no adjacency labeling scheme with labels of size at most [math]. In other words, for every [math], there is a small—even tiny—monotone class without universal graphs of size [math]. Prior to this result, it was not excluded that every small class has an almost linear universal graph, or equivalently a labeling scheme with labels of size [math]. The existence of such a labeling scheme, a scaled-down version of the recently disproved Implicit Graph Conjecture, was repeatedly raised [Gavoille and Labourel, Proceedings of the 15th Annual European Symposium on Algorithms, Lecture Notes in Comput. Sci. 4698, Springer, 2007, pp. 582–593; Dujmović et al., J. ACM, 68 (2021), pp. 1–33; Bonamy, Gavoille, and Pilipczuk, SIAM J. Discrete Math., 36 (2022), pp. 2082–2099; Bonnet et al., Comb. Theory, 2 (2022)]. Furthermore, our small monotone classes have unbounded twin-width and thus simultaneously disprove the already-refuted Small conjecture, but this time with a self-contained proof, not relying on elaborate group-theoretic constructions. As our main ingredient, we show that with high probability an Erdős–Rényi random graph [math] with [math] has, for every [math], at most [math] subgraphs on [math] vertices, up to isomorphism. As a barrier to our general method of producing even more complex tiny classes, we show that when [math], the latter no longer holds. More concretely, we provide an explicit lower bound on the number of unlabeled [math]-vertex induced subgraphs of [math] when [math]. We thereby obtain a threshold for the property of having exponentially many unlabeled induced subgraphs: if [math] with [math], then with high probability even the number of all unlabeled (not necessarily induced) subgraphs is [math], whereas if [math] for sufficiently large [math], then with high probability the number of unlabeled induced subgraphs is [math]. This result supplements the study of counting unlabeled induced subgraphs that was initiated by Erdős and Rényi with a question on the number of unlabeled induced subgraphs of Ramsey graphs, eventually answered by Shelah.

L(2, 1)-labeling for brick product graphs.

L(2,1) -labeling for brick product graphs

$$L(2,1)$$L(2,1)-labeling for brick product graphs

-labeling for brick product graphs

L (3,2,1)-Labeling of Certain Planar Graphs

Optimal L(d,1)-Labeling of Certain Direct Graph Bundles Cycles over Cycles and Cartesian Graph Bundles Cycles over Cycles

Optimal L(3,2,1)-labeling of trees

Optimal $L(d,1)$-labeling of certain direct graph bundles cycles over cycles and Cartesian graph bundles cycles over cycles

Optimal $L(2,1)$-labeling of certain strong graph bundles cycles over cycles

The List L(2, 1)-Labeling of Planar Graphs

On L(2, 1)-labeling of zero-divisor graphs of finite commutative rings

L(2, 1)-labeling of some zero-divisor graphs associated with commutative rings

Optimal Distance Labeling for Permutation Graphs

On L ( p , q ) -labelling of planar graphs without cycles of length four

On the number of unlabeled vertices in edge-friendly labelings of graphs

On The Number Of Labeled Bipartite Graphs

Small but Unwieldy: A Lower Bound on Adjacency Labels for Small Classes

Two product formulas for counting successive vertex orderings

List-Distinguishing Cartesian Products of Cliques

A note on distance labeling in planar graphs

Achieving DNA Labeling Capacity with Minimum Labels through Extremal de Bruijn Subgraphs