Generalized and geometric Ramsey numbers for cycles. (Q5941504)

The authors study the Ramsey number for two cycles \(C_k, C_l\), first in the context of graphs, then for noncrossing cycles in geometric graphs. The exact value of the graph Ramsey number \(R(C_k, C_n)\) was already previously determined in several papers: \textit{R. J. Faudree} and \textit{R. H. Schelp} [Discrete Math. 8, 313--329 (1974; Zbl 0294.05122)], \textit{V. Rosta} [J. Comb. Theory, Ser. B 15, 94--104 (1973; Zbl 0261.05118), J. Comb. Theory, Ser. B 15, 105--120 (1973; Zbl 0261.05119)], \textit{G. Chantrand} and \textit{S. Schuster} [Trans. Am. Math. Soc. 173, 353--362 (1972; Zbl 0255.05110)] and \textit{J. A. Bondy} and \textit{P. Erdős} [J. Comb. Theory, Ser. B 14, 46--54 (1973; Zbl 0248.05127)]. The present authors give another proof for the surprisingly complicated formula. Then they consider geometric graphs, that is, straight-line drawings in the plane, where the same question can be asked with the additional condition that the cycles should be noncrossing. They define \(R_g(C_k, C_l)\) as the smallest number \(n\) such that any two-coloring of the edges of any straight-line drawing of \(K_n\) contains either a crossingfree \(C_k\) in the first color or a crossingfree \(C_l\) in the second color. They show that \(kl -k -l +2\leq R_g(C_k, C_l)\leq 2kl -3k -3l +6\), and conjecture the lower bound to be the correct value.