Proof of `Bipartite comb lemma`
What this proof establishes
no assumptions
Assuming the claims on the left, the claim on the right holds — checked by the archive's pipeline. Proof code is not displayed here.
Description
Proof of the case of Theorem 2.1. At each four-adic degree scale, a maximal peeling sequence is pruned in reverse order to form a comb. If no block has the required size, strong induction on the degree bound, together with , yields the sparse alternative.