20 Chapter 1.

Random Graphs
Chapter 2

Evolution

Here begins our story of the typical growth of a random graph. All the results up
to Section 2.3 were first proved in a landmark paper by Erdős and Rényi [332].
The notion of the evolution of a random graph stems from a dynamic view of a
graph process: viz. a sequence of graphs:

G0 = ([n], 0),
/ G1 , G2 , . . . , Gm , . . . , GN = Kn .

where
Gm+1 is obtained from Gm by adding a random edge em . We see that there

are n2 ! such sequences and Gm and Gn,m have the same distribution.
In process of the evolution of a random graph we consider
properties possessed
by Gm or Gn,m w.h.p., when m = m(n) grows from 0 to n2 , while in the case of
Gn,p we analyse its typical structure when p = p(n) grows from 0 to 1 as n → ∞.
In the current chapter we mainly explore how the typical component structure
evolves as the number of edges m increases.

2.1 Sub-Critical Phase

The evolution of Erdős-Rényi type random graphs has clearly distinguishable
phases. The first phase, at the beginning of the evolution, can be described as
a period when a random graph is a collection of small components which are
mostly trees. Indeed the first result in this section shows that a random graph Gn,m
is w.h.p. a collection of tree-components as long as m = o(n), or, equivalently, as
long as p = o(n−1 ) in Gn,p . For clarity, all results presented in this chapter are
stated in terms of Gn,m . Due to the fact that computations are much easier for Gn,p
we will first prove results in this model and then the results for Gn,m will follow
by the equivalence established either in Lemmas 1.2 and 1.3 or in Theorem 1.4.
We will also assume, throughout this chapter, that ω = ω(n) is a function growing
slowly with n, e.g. ω = log log n will suffice.
22 Chapter 2. Evolution

Theorem 2.1. If m  n, then Gm is a forest w.h.p.

Proof. Suppose m = n/ω and let N = n2 , so p = m/N ≤ 3/(ωn). Let X be the

number of cycles in Gn,p . Then

n
 
n (k − 1)! k
EX = ∑ p
k=3 k 2
n
nk (k − 1)! k
≤ ∑ p
k=3 k! 2
n
nk 3k
≤ ∑ k k
k=3 2k ω n
= O(ω −3 ) → 0.

Therefore, by the First Moment Method, (see Lemma 26.2),

P(Gn,p is not a forest) = P(X ≥ 1) ≤ E X = o(1),

which implies that

P(Gn,p is a forest) → 1 as n → ∞.
Notice that the property that a graph is a forest is monotone decreasing, so by
Lemma 1.3
P(Gm is a forest) → 1 as n → ∞.
(Note that we have actually used Lemma 1.3 to show that P(Gn,p is not a forest)=o(1)
implies that P(Gm is not a forest)=o(1).)
We will next examine the time during which the components of Gm are isolated
vertices and single edges only, w.h.p.

Theorem 2.2. If m  n1/2 then Gm is the union of isolated vertices and edges
w.h.p.

Proof. Let p = m/N, m = n1/2 /ω and let X be the number of paths of length two
in the random graph Gn,p . By the First Moment Method,

n4
 
n 2
P(X > 0) ≤ E X = 3 p ≤ → 0,
3 2N 2 ω 2
2.1. Sub-Critical Phase 23

as n → ∞. Hence

P(Gn,p contains a path of length two) = o(1).

Notice that the property that a graph contains a path of a given length two is
monotone increasing, so by Lemma 1.3,

P(Gm contains a path of length two) = o(1),

and the theorem follows.

Now we are ready to describe the next step in the evolution of Gm .

Theorem 2.3. If m  n1/2 , then Gm contains a path of length two w.h.p.

Proof. Let p = Nm , m = ωn1/2 and X be the number of paths of length two in Gn,p .
Then  
n 2
EX = 3 p ≈ 2ω 2 → ∞,
3
as n → ∞. This however does not imply that X > 0 w.h.p.! To show that X > 0
w.h.p. we will apply the Second Moment Method
Let P2 be the set of all paths of length two in the complete graph Kn , and let
X̂ be the number of isolated paths of length two in Gn,p i.e. paths that are also
components of Gn,p . We will show that w.h.p. Gn,p contains such an isolated
path. Now,
X̂ = ∑ IP⊆i Gn,p .
P∈P2

We always use IE to denote the indicator for an event E . The notation ⊆i indicates
that P is contained in Gn,p as a component (i.e. P is isolated). Having a path of
length two is a monotone increasing property. Therefore we can assume that m =
o(n) and so np = o(1) and the result for larger m will follow from monotonicity
and coupling. Then
 
n 2
E X̂ = 3 p (1 − p)3(n−3)+1
3
n3 4ω 2 n
≥ (1 − o(1)) (1 − 3np) → ∞,
2 n4
as n → ∞.
In order to compute the second moment of the random variable X̂ notice that,
∗
X̂ 2 = ∑ ∑ IP⊆i Gn,p IQ⊆i Gn,p = ∑P,Q∈P IP⊆i Gn,p IQ⊆i Gn,p ,
2
P∈P2 Q∈P2
24 Chapter 2. Evolution

where the last sum is taken over P, Q ∈ P2 such that either P = Q or P and Q are
vertex disjoint. The simplification that provides the last summation is precisely
the reason that we introduce path-components (isolated paths). Now
( )
E X̂ 2 = ∑ ∑ P(Q ⊆i Gn,p| P ⊆i Gn,p) P(P ⊆i Gn,p ).
P Q

The expression inside the brackets is the same for all P and so
 

E X̂ 2 = E X̂ 1 + ∑ P(Q ⊆i Gn,p | P(1,2,3) ⊆i Gn,p ) ,

Q∩P(1,2,3) =0/

where P{1,2,3} denotes the path on vertex set [3] = {1, 2, 3} with middle vertex
2. By conditioning on the event P(1,2,3) ⊆i Gn,p , i.e, assuming that P(1,2,3) is a
component of Gn,p , we see that all of the nine edges between Q and P(1,2,3) must
be missing. Therefore
   
n 2
2 3(n−6)+1
≤ E X̂ 1 + (1 − p)−9 E X̂ .


E X̂ ≤ E X̂ 1 + 3 p (1 − p)
3
So, by the Second Moment Method (see Lemma 26.5),

(E X̂)2 (E X̂)2
P(X̂ > 0) ≥ ≥
E X̂ 1 + (1 − p)−9 E X̂


E X̂ 2
1
= →1
(1 − p)−9 + [E X̂]−1
as n → ∞, since p → 0 and E X̂ → ∞. Thus
P(Gn,p contains an isolated path of length two) → 1,
which implies that P(Gn,p contains a path of length two) → 1. As the property of
having a path of length two is monotone increasing it in turn implies that
P(Gm contains a path of length two) → 1
for m  n1/2 and the theorem follows.
From Theorems 2.2 and 2.3 we obtain the following corollary.
Corollary 2.4. The function m∗ (n) = n1/2 is the threshold for the property that a
random graph Gm contains a path of length two, i.e.,
(
o(1) if m  n1/2 .
P(Gm contains a path of length two) =
1 − o(1) if m  n1/2 .
2.1. Sub-Critical Phase 25

As we keep adding edges, trees on more than three vertices start to appear.
Note that isolated vertices, edges and paths of length two are also trees on one,
two and three vertices, respectively. The next two theorems show how long we
have to “wait” until trees with a given number of vertices appear w.h.p.

k−2
Theorem 2.5. Fix k ≥ 3. If m  n k−1 , then w.h.p. Gm contains no tree with k
vertices.
k−2
2 3
Proof. Let m = n k−1 /ω and then p = Nm ≈ ωnk/(k−1) ≤ ωnk/(k−1) . Let Xk denote the
number of trees with k vertices in Gn,p . Let T1 , T2 , . . . , TM be an enumeration of
the copies of k-vertex trees in Kn . Let

Ai = {Ti occurs as a subgraph in Gn,p }.

The probability that a tree T occurs in Gn,p is pe(T ) , where e(T ) is the number of
edges of T . So,
M
E Xk = ∑ P(At ) = M pk−1.
t=1
n
k−2
since one can choose a set of k vertices in nk ways and then by


But M = k k
Cayley’s formula choose a tree on these vertices in kk−2 ways. Hence
 
n k−2 k−1
E Xk = k p . (2.1)
k
Noting also that (see Lemma 27.1(c))
   
n ne k
≤ ,
k k
we see that
 ne k  k−1
k−2 3
E Xk ≤ k
k ωnk/(k−1)
3k−1 ek
= → 0,
k2 ω k−1
as n → ∞, seeing as k is fixed.
Thus we see by the first moment method that,

P(Gn,p contains a tree with k vertices) → 0.

This property is monotone increasing and therefore

P(Gm contains a tree with k vertices) → 0.