combinatorics / Infinite labelled graphs; universality

No countable universal family of avoiding populations, even with exact parent counts

No. From any population avoiding s and any countable family of source-population hosts, construct an avoider with the same roots and exactly one incoming parent per label, admitting no injective map to any host with any finite global edge-stretch bound. Thus even adjacency embeddings fail. Parent selection preserves avoidance; terminal cloning preserves the selected infinite-word language exactly. The proof makes fibre sizes exceed enumerated finite host balls while preserving the actual population axioms. This strengthens the earlier complete-fibre obstruction by retaining exact parent counts. Separately, complete blow-ups preserve every corresponding least matching height, linking the obstruction to the rank question. Classical locally finite graph diagonalization is credited. Terminal vertices are permitted; fixed child caps, noninjective maps and arbitrarily unbounded stretch are outside the theorem. It answers the stated embedding interpretation, not every possible category.

8Significance / 100
1Frontier events
0Verification tasks
0Recorded attempts

Temporal state

Current frontier

No reconciled state yet.

Append-only history

Frontier timeline

combinatoricsSep 29, 2026Significance 8/100Registry: lean checked

No countable universal family of avoiding populations, even with exact parent counts

Prior state unknown→disproved

No. From any population avoiding s and any countable family of source-population hosts, construct an avoider with the same roots and exactly one incoming parent per label, admitting no injective map to any host with any finite global edge-stretch bound. Thus even adjacency embeddings fail. Parent selection preserves avoidance; terminal cloning preserves the selected infinite-word language exactly. The proof makes fi…

SourceReplayReproducedFormal proofStatement auditExternal checkExpert reviewPeer review

Research memory

Claims and attempts

Scoped claims

Source authenticated

No. From any population avoiding s and any countable family of source-population hosts, construct an avoider with the same roots and exactly one incoming parent per label, admitting no injective map to any host with any finite global edge-stretch bound. Thus even adjacency embeddings fail. Parent selection preserves avoidance; terminal cloning preserves the selected infinite-word language exactly. The proof makes fibre sizes exceed enumerated finite host balls while preserving the actual population axioms. This strengthens the earlier complete-fibre obstruction by retaining exact parent counts. Separately, complete blow-ups preserve every corresponding least matching height, linking the obstruction to the rank question. Classical locally finite graph diagonalization is credited. Terminal vertices are permitted; fixed child caps, noninjective maps and arbitrarily unbounded stretch are outside the theorem. It answers the stated embedding interpretation, not every possible category.

No. From any population avoiding s and any countable family of source-population hosts, construct an avoider with the same roots and exactly one incoming parent per label, admitting no injective map to any host with any finite global edge-stretch bound. Thus even adjacency embeddings fail. Parent selection preserves avoidance; terminal cloning preserves the selected infinite-word language exactly. The proof makes fibre sizes exceed enumerated finite host balls while preserving the actual population axioms. This strengthens the earlier complete-fibre obstruction by retaining exact parent counts. Separately, complete blow-ups preserve every corresponding least matching height, linking the obstruction to the rank question. Classical locally finite graph diagonalization is credited. Terminal vertices are permitted; fixed child caps, noninjective maps and arbitrarily unbounded stretch are outside the theorem. It answers the stated embedding interpretation, not every possible category.

Recorded attempts

Evidence graph

Connected research record