Indexed metadata

A rainbow partition theorem for trees and connected maximin share allocations of chores

Marcin Anholcer, Maciej Bartkowiak, Bartłomiej Bosek, Jarosław Grytczuk, Zbigniew Lonc, Paweł Rzążewski

Source record

Source: arXiv

Published: Sep 29, 2026

arXiv: 2609.38628

Open original source ↗

Source abstract

Xiao, Qiu, and Huang (AAMAS 2023) and independently Lonc (personal communication) asked whether indivisible chores located at the vertices of a tree can always be allocated to nn agents in connected bundles so that the cost of every agent is at most its connected maximin share; for goods, this is a theorem of Bouveret, Cechlárová, Elkind, Igarashi, and Peters. We answer the question affirmatively, even for monotone costs. The answer follows from a combinatorial theorem: if P1,…,Pk\mathcal P_1,\ldots,\mathcal P_k are partitions of the vertex set of a finite tree, each into at most kk connected parts, then the vertex set can be split into disjoint sets B1,…,BkB_1,\ldots,B_k, some possibly empty, such that each nonempty BiB_i is connected and contained in a part of Pi\mathcal P_i. Equivalently, if each of kk colours occurs on at most k−1k-1 edges of a tree, then the vertices can be partitioned into connected sets labelled by distinct colours, none containing an edge of its own colour; in particular, one can choose for every colour a component of the forest obtained by deleting that colour so that the chosen components cover the tree. The bound is already best possible for paths, and for additive costs, the theorem is equivalent to the fair-division statement. The proof reduces the problem to inward partitions of oriented trees, which we obtain from the colourful KKM theorem on a simplex of edge weights, using a leaf-elimination labelling that remains compatible when weights vanish. We also give an algorithm running in time kO(k)k^{O(k)} plus polynomial time.

Evidence graph

No public relationships recorded yet.

Integrity note: This page is a factual metadata record created by deterministic ingestion. It is not a claim that the work moves a mathematical frontier or has been independently verified.