Body-Pin Rigidity

3. Sparse graphs and addable edges🔗

Section 2.1 of Zheng (2026) defines the class of graphs on which the paper's central estimate is proved: a simple graph is (2,2)-sparse when every nonempty vertex set U spans at most 2|U| - 2 edges. The class enters the proof of the main theorem in its sufficiency direction, that the partition condition implies generic rigidity. That argument first selects, from the pins of a body–pin graph satisfying the partition condition, a (2,2)-sparse subgraph of representative pins — the selection lemma of Section 6.2 — and then bounds the self-stresses of sparse graphs: the stress–codimension inequality, the estimate at the centre of the paper, is stated for exactly this class.

The inequality is proved by deleting one vertex at a time. A (2,2)-sparse graph on n vertices has at most 2n - 2 edges, so some vertex has degree at most three, and deleting a vertex leaves a sparse graph; the deletion argument therefore never leaves the class and always has a vertex of degree at most three to remove. We first state sparsity and tightness, then the two consequences of supermodularity that the deletion argument uses, and then Lemma 2.1, which gives an addable edge among the three neighbours of a deleted degree-three vertex. In the exceptional case of the local classification those three neighbours are collinear, and the induction continues on the smaller graph with one such edge added back, which restores the self-stress dimension; when all three neighbour edges are already present, a collinearity flag is created instead (the flags chapter). The last two sections describe combinatorics that the formalization contains and the paper never mentions: a construction theorem for (2,2)-tight graphs, and a transport lemma that moves sparsity along an embedding.

  1. 3.1. Sparsity and tight sets
  2. 3.2. Two consequences of supermodularity
  3. 3.3. An addable edge among three vertices
  4. 3.4. A construction theorem with no paper counterpart