On 1-factors with prescribed lengths in tournaments

Abstract: Kühn, Osthus, and Townsend asked whether there exists a constant $C$ such that every strongly $Ct$-connected tournament contains all possible $1$-factors with at most $t$ components. We answer this question in the affirmative. This is best possible up to constant. In addition, we can ensure that each cycle in the $1$-factor contains a prescribed vertex.Indeed, we derive this result from a more general result on partitioning digraphs which are close to semicomplete. More precisely, we prove that there exists a constant $C$ such that for any $k\geq 1$, if a strongly $Ck^4t$-connected digraph $D$ is close to semicomplete, then we can partition $D$ into $t$ strongly $k$-connected subgraphs with prescribed sizes, provided that the prescribed sizes are $\Omega(n)$. This result improves the earlier result of Kühn, Osthus, and Townsend. Here, the condition of connectivity being linear in $t$ is best possible, and the condition of prescribed size being $\Omega(n)$ is also best possible.

\section{Introduction}\label{sec:intro}

\subsection{Disjoint cycles in tournaments with prescribed lengths and vertices}
A \emph{$1$-factor} in a digraph $D$ is a spanning subgraph that is a union of vertex-disjoint cycles of length at least three in $D$.

In 1959, Camion~\cite{camion1959} proved that a tournament admits a Hamiltonian cycle (a cycle containing all vertices) if and only if it is strongly
connected. As a generalization of Camion's theorem, Bollob\'as (see~\cite{reid1989}) posed the following question: for each $t\in \mathbb{N}$, what is the least integer $g(t)$ such that all strongly $g(t)$-connected tournaments, up to finitely many exceptions, contain a  $1$-factor with exactly $t$ components?  Clearly $g(1)=1$ by Camion's theorem, and it is easy to see that $g(t)$ exists and $g(t) \geq t$ for each $t \in \mathbb{N}$.
Reid~\cite{reid1985} proved $g(2)=2$ by showing that every strongly 2-connected $n$-vertex tournament $T$ with $n \geq 6$ contains two vertex-disjoint cycles $C_1$ and $C_2$ with $|V(C_1)|=3$ and $|V(C_2)|=n-3$, if $T$ is not isomorphic to
the $7$-vertex tournament with no transitive $4$-vertex subtournament. Finally, Chen, Gould, and Li~\cite{chen2001} resolved the question of Bollob\'as by proving that every strongly $t$-connected $n$-vertex tournament with $n \geq 8t$ contains $t$ vertex-disjoint cycles covering all vertices of the tournament, implying $g(t) = t$.

As these results only guarantee the existence of a $1$-factor with $t$ components in highly connected tournaments, it is natural to ask when tournaments have all possible $1$-factors with $t$ components (i.e. contain pairwise vertex-disjoint cycles of lengths $\ell_1,\dots, \ell_t$ for all tuples $(\ell_1,\dots, \ell_t)$ of natural numbers with $\sum_{i=1}^{t}\ell_i = n$ and $\ell_i\geq 3$).
Song~\cite{song1993} extended the result of Reid by proving that every strongly $2$-connected $n$-vertex tournament with $n\geq 6$ contains all possible $1$-factors with two components as long as $T$ is not isomorphic to the $7$-vertex tournament with no transitive $4$-vertex subtournament, and posed the following question analogous to the question of Bollob\'as: for each $t\in \mathbb{N}$, what is the least integer $f(t)$ such that all strongly $f(t)$-connected tournaments, up to finitely many exceptions, contain all possible $1$-factors with exactly $t$ components? Clearly, the result of Song~\cite{song1993} shows $f(2)=2$, and it was conjectured that $f(t)=g(t)$ for all $t \in \mathbb{N}$.

Recently, K\"uhn, Osthus, and Townsend~\cite{kuhn2016cycle} extended the result of Song by proving that every strongly $10^{10} t^4 \log t$-connected $n$-vertex tournament contains all possible $1$-factors with at most $t$ components. More precisely, they showed that, for any integers $\ell_1,\dots, \ell_t \geq 3$ with $\sum_{i\in [t]} \ell_i=n$, the tournament $T$ contains $t$ vertex-disjoint cycles $C_1 , \dots , C_t$ such that $|V(C_i)| = \ell_i$ for each $i\in [t]$. They asked
whether the connectivity $10^{10} t^4 \log t$ could be reduced to $O(t)$. Later in \cite[Problem 5.2]{pokrovskiy2016edge}, Pokrovskiy asked the same question again. In Theorem~\ref{thm:cycle}, we answer their question in the affirmative.

On the other hand, Moon~\cite{moon1966} proved another generalization of Camion's theorem stating that every strongly connected tournmanet $T$ is \emph{vertex-pancyclic}, meaning that for every vertex $v\in V(T)$ and any integer $3\leq \ell\leq |V(T)|$, there exists a cycle of length $\ell$ containing $v$ in $T$. Bang-Jensen, Guo and Yeo~\cite{jensen2000} proved that for any strongly $3$-connected tournament $T$ with at least $8$ vertices and two distinct vertices $v_1,v_2\in V(T)$, the tournament $T$ can be partitioned into two vertex-disjoint cycles $C_1$ containing $v_1$ and $C_2$ containing $v_2$.
In Theorem~\ref{thm:cycle} we proved that one can guarantee a much stronger pancyclicity with $t$ cycles if the connectivity of the tournament is linear in $t$.

\begin{THM}\label{thm:cycle}
Let $n,t, \ell_1,\dots, \ell_t \in \mathbb{N}$ with $\ell_1,\dots, \ell_t\geq 3$ and $\sum_{i\in [t]} \ell_i = n$. For any strongly $10^{50} t$-connected $n$-vertex tournament $T$ and $t$ distinct vertices $x_1 , \dots , x_t \in V(T)$, the tournament $T$ contains vertex-disjoint cycles $C_1 , \dots , C_t$ such that $x_i \in V(C_i)$ and $|V(C_i)| = \ell_i$ for each $i\in [t]$.
\end{THM}

The connectivity bound is sharp up to a multiplicative constant, and we do not attempt to optimize the constant $10^{50}$.
In particular, Theorem~\ref{thm:cycle} implies that $t \leq f(t) \leq 10^{50}t$. It would be interesting if one can prove $f(t) = t$, answering the conjecture of Song~\cite{song1993}.  Note that one can easily extend Theorem~\ref{thm:cycle} to strongly $10^{51}t$-connected semicomplete digraphs, as every strongly $(3k-2)$-connected semicomplete digraph contains a strongly $k$-connected spanning tournament~\cite{guo1997}.

There are some related results in different settings. Amar and Raspaud~\cite{amar1991} proved that every strongly connected $n$-vertex digraph with at least $(n-1)(n-2)+3$ edges contains all possible $1$-factors except in two cases.
Keevash and Sudakov \cite{keevash2009cycle} proved that every $n$-vertex oriented graph with minimum semidegree close to $n/2$ admits $t$ vertex-disjoint cycles with prescribed lengths covering almost all vertices. For undirected graphs, the El-Zahar conjecture determines the minimum degree condition guaranteeing a partion of an $n$-vertex graph into vertex-disjoint cycles of prescribed lengths, and was proved for all large $n$ by Abbasi~\cite{Abbasi}. For more on topics and results related to $1$-factors in digraphs, the readers are referred to~\cite[Chapter 13]{bang2008digraphs}.

We end this subsection by noting that Theorem~\ref{thm:cycle} is best possible in the following sense.
\begin{itemize}
\item
A partition of a highly connected tournament $T$ into strongly $k$-connected subgraphs of prescribed sizes for $k\geq 2$ may not exist (observe that Theorem~\ref{thm:cycle} is the case of $k=1$).

\item A partition of a highly connected tournament $T$ into cycles of prescribed lengths containing at least two prescribed vertices may not exist.
\end{itemize}
Indeed, the following proposition presents a highly connected tournament $T$ with diameter at least $\Omega(n)$ such that every strongly $k$-connected subgraph of $T$ with $k\geq 2$ contains at least $\Omega(n)$ vertices. Note that the diameter of $T$ implies that there are two vertices $x,y$ with distance $\Omega(n)$, thus any cycle containing both $x$ and $y$ must have length at least $\Omega(n)$.

\begin{PROP}\label{prop:example}
For $k, s, n \in \mathbb{N}$ with $2\leq k\leq s$ and $2\binom{s+1}{2}+2s+2\leq n$, there exists an $n$-vertex strongly $s$-connected tournament $T$ of diameter at least $\binom{s+1}{2}^{-1} (n - 2s)$ such that every strongly $k$-connected subtournament $T'$ of $T$ satisfies $|V(T')|\geq k\binom{s+1}{2}^{-1}n-k-2$.
\end{PROP}

 However, if we further assume that all the prescribed sizes are $\Omega(n)$, then both generalizations of Theorem~\ref{thm:cycle} become true. Theorem~\ref{thm:balanced} shows that such a partition exists, provided that all prescribed sizes are $\Omega(n)$.

\subsection{Partitioning tournaments into highly connected subtournaments with prescribed sizes}
Thomassen~\cite{reid1989} asked whether for integers $k_1 , \dots , k_t$, there exists $f(k_1 , \dots, k_t)$ such that every strongly $f(k_1 , \dots , k_t)$-connected tournament admits a vertex-partition $
W_1 , \dots , W_t$ such that for each $i\in [t]$, the set $W_i$ induces a strongly $k_i$-connected subtournament.

The following two concepts were introduced to tackle the above problem.
A tournament $T$ is \emph{critically strongly $k$-connected} if $T$ is strongly $k$-connected but it is no longer strongly $k$-connected after deleting any vertex. A tournament is \emph{minimally strongly $k$-connected tournament} if it is strongly $k$-connected but any proper subtournament is not strongly $k$-connected.

By Moon's theorem, the cycle of length three is the only critically (or minimally) strongly $1$-connected tournament. However, Thomassen (see~\cite[Theorem 2.14.11]{bang2018classes}) showed that there are infinitely many critically strongly $k$-connected tournaments for every integer $k \geq 2$.
On the other hand, Lichiardopol~\cite{lichiardopol2012} (see also~\cite[Conjecture 2.14.12]{bang2018classes}) conjectured that the situation is different for minimally strongly $k$-connected tournaments: for every integer $k \geq 1$, there are only finitely many minimally strongly $k$-connected tournaments, which yields the positive answer to the Thomassen's question if it is true. However, the following corollary disproves Lichiardopol's conjecture.
One can easily prove this corollary by considering a smallest strongly $k$-connected subtournament of large strongly $k$-connected tournament $T$ in Proposition~\ref{prop:example}.

\begin{COR}\label{cor:disproof}
For every integer $k \geq 2$, there are infinitely many minimally strongly $k$-connected tournaments.
\end{COR}

Nonetheless, Thomassen's problem turned out to be true: K\"uhn, Osthus, and Townsend~\cite{kuhn2016cycle} recently answered this question in the affirmative, and proved that every strongly $10^7 k^6 t^3 \log (kt^2)$-connected
tournament can be partitioned into $t$ strongly $k$-connected subtournaments. Moreover, they also proved that the sizes of $W_i$ can be prescribed  as long as the prescribed sizes are not too small. We improve their result in the following theorem.
Here, $\delta(D)$ denotes $\min_{v\in V(D)} \big\{|N^+_D(v)\cup N^-_D(v)|\big\}$.

\begin{THM}\label{thm:balanced}
Let $k, t, \ell, m,n,q, a_1,\dots, a_t \in \mathbb{N}$ with $t,m\geq 2$, $\sum_{i\in [t]} a_i \leq n$ and $a_i\geq n/(10tm)$ for each $i\in [t]$.
Suppose that $D$ is a strongly $10^{8} qk^2 \ell (k+\ell)^2  tm^2 \log(m) $-connected $n$-vertex digraph with $\delta(D)\geq n-\ell$, and $Q_1 , \dots , Q_t \subseteq V(D)$ are $t$ disjoint sets with $|Q_i| \leq q$ for each $i \in [t]$.
Then there exists a partition $W_1 , \dots , W_t$ of $V(D)$ satisfying the following.
\begin{itemize}[noitemsep]
\item[$(\rm 1)$] $Q_i \subseteq W_i$.
\item[$(\rm 2)$] For every $i\in [t]$, the subgraph $D[W_i]$ is strongly $k$-connected.
\item[$(\rm 3)$] $|W_i| = a_i$.
\end{itemize}
\end{THM}

Note that the condition $\delta(D) \geq n - \ell$ in the theorem ensures that the digraph $D$ is close to being semicomplete. Compared to the result in \cite{kuhn2016cycle}, we improve the connectivity bound to $O(t)$ that is best possible. Note that there are infinitely many strongly $(kt-1)$-connected tournaments without $t$ pairwise vertex-disjoint strongly $k$-connected subtournaments.

Also, we extend the theorem to digraphs which are close to semicomplete, rather than just for tournaments, and to allow each part to contain a small set of prescribed vertices, where the lower bound $\Omega(n)$ on the size $a_i$ is necessary by Proposition~\ref{prop:example}.

The dependence on $k,m,\ell$ in the connectivity bound is unlikely to be best possible. Indeed, K\"uhn, Osthus and Townsend~\cite{kuhn2016cycle} conjectured that connectivity $O(kt)$ suffices for tournaments when we do not consider the prescribed sizes.
For the clarity of statement and the argument, we have not attempted to improve the orders of $m$ and $\ell$ in the statements. In fact, it is very easy to make small improvements of the orders of $m$ and $\ell$.\footnote{
If we assume that $n$ is large, then the connectivity can be easily replaced with $10^{8} qk^2 \ell (k+\ell)^2  tm \log(m)$. Note that the only place we need the term $m^2\log(m)$ instead of $m\log(m)$ is \eqref{eq: W'i size}. However, as long as $n$ is large, we can still obtain \eqref{eq: W'i size} with the smaller connectivity.
Also, by sacrificing the order of $k$, one can easily improve the order of $\ell$.
Note that \ref{U*1} in Claim~\ref{cl: extension} can be easily replaced by $|U^*_i|\leq \min\{4k(k+\ell), (k+1)^2|U_i|\}$ assuming $|U_i| =O(\ell^2 k^2tm\log(km\ell))$. By altering some parameters and calculations in the proof, we can show that the connectivity $O(qk^5 \ell^2 m^2 t \log(km\ell))$ suffices.
}

We remark that Theorem~\ref{thm:balanced} proves a generalization of the following conjecture of Bang-Jensen, Guo and Yeo~\cite{jensen2000}, which states that there is a function $h(k_1,k_2)$ such that for all strongly $h(k_1,k_2)$-connected tournaments $T$ and $v_1,v_2 \in V(T)$, $T$ can be partitioned into vertex-disjoint tournaments $T_1$ containing $v_1$ and $T_2$ containing $v_2$ such that each $T_i$ is strongly $k_i$-connected.
\footnote{Indeed, a few modification of the proof of the theorem by K\"uhn, Osthus and Townsend~\cite{kuhn2016cycle} already implies the existence of $h(k_1,k_2)$.}

Now we end this subsection with some related open questions.  Hajnal~\cite{hajnal1983} and Thomassen~\cite{thomassen1983} proved an analogous theorem  for undirected graphs. They proved that there exists $f(k)$ such that any $f(k)$-connected graph can be partitioned into two $k$-connected subgraphs. Later, K\"uhn and Osthus~\cite{kuhn2003} further generalized this. It would be very interesting if one can prove Theorem~\ref{thm:balanced} with a connectivity independent of $\ell$. Indeed, K\"uhn, Osthus, and Townsend~\cite{kuhn2016cycle} asked the following question.
\begin{QUE}\cite{kuhn2016cycle}\label{que:gen_balanced}
For all $k,t \in \mathbb{N}$, does there exist $f(k,t)$ such that every strongly $f(k,t)$-connected digraph $D$ can be partitioned into $t$ vertex-disjoint strongly $k$-connected subdigraphs?
\end{QUE}

Stiebitz~\cite{stiebitz96} considered similar question for minimum degree instead of connectivity and proved that for integers $s,t \geq 0$ and an undirected graph $G$ with minimum degree at least $s+t+1$, there exist two disjoint sets $A,B \subseteq V(G)$ with $V(G)=A\cup B$ such that both $G[A]$ and $G[B]$ have minimum degree at least $s$ and $t$, respectively. He further asked the following question, whether the analogue of this result also holds for digraphs.

\begin{QUE}\cite{stiebitz95}\label{que:gen_degree}
For integers $s,t \geq 0$, does there exist $g(s,t)$ such that every digraph $D$ with minimum out-degree at least $g(s,t)$ can be partitioned into two vertex-disjoint subdigraphs $D_1$ and $D_2$ with minimum out-degree $s$ and $t$ respectively?
\end{QUE}

\subsection{Disjoint paths in tournaments with prescribed lengths connecting prescribed vertices}

For an integer $t \geq 1$, a digraph $D$ is \emph{$t$-linked} if $|V(D)| \geq 2t$ and for any $2t$ distinct\footnote{In fact, one may remove this condition by replacing some vertices with their neighbors.} vertices $x_1 , \dots , x_t , y_1 , \dots , y_t$ of $D$, there exist $t$ vertex-disjoint paths $P_1,\dots, P_t$ such that for each $i\in [t]$ the path $P_i$ starts at $x_i$ and ends at $y_i$.  Note that it is easy to see  that every $t$-linked digraph is strongly $(2t-1)$-connected,
and it is natural to ask whether highly connected digraphs are highly linked. For undirected graphs, Bollob\'as and Thomason~\cite{bollobas1996highly} proved that every $22t$-connected
graph is $t$-linked. However, Thomassen~\cite{thomassen1991} proved that for every integer $m \geq 1$,
there exists a strongly $m$-connected digraph that is not $2$-linked, so high connectivity does not imply high linkedness for digraphs in general.

On the other hand, Thomassen~\cite{thomassen1984} showed that there exists a constant $C$ such that any strongly $2^{C t \log t}$-connected tournament is $t$-linked, and thus high connectivity implies high linkedness for tournaments. Recently, K\"uhn, Lapinskas, Osthus and Patel~\cite{kuhn2014proof} improved the connectivity bound to $O(t \log t)$, and finally  Pokrovskiy~\cite{pokrovskiy2015highly} gave a linear bound on the connectivity that any strongly $452t$-connected tournament is $t$-linked. Gir\~ao and Snyder \cite{GS18tournamentlinkage} proved that every strongly $4t$-connected tournament $T$ is $t$-linked if the minimum out-degree of $T$ is large. Pokrovskiy~\cite{pokrovskiy2016edge} also proved that there exists a constant $C$ such that every strongly $Ct$-connected tournament
is $t$-linked, so that the union of $t$ paths connecting given $t$ pairs of vertices covers all vertices.

\begin{THM}[Pokrovskiy~\cite{pokrovskiy2016edge}]\label{thm:spanlink}
There exists $c>0$ such that for any integer $t \geq 1$, every strongly $ct$-connected $n$-vertex tournament $T$ with $2t$ distinct vertices $x_1 , \dots , x_t , y_1 , \dots , y_t \in V(T)$ admits $t$ vertex-disjoint paths $P_1 , \dots , P_t$ so that $P_i$ is a path from $x_i$ to $y_i$ for $1 \leq i \leq t$ and $\sum_{i=1}^{t} |V(P_i)| = n$.
\end{THM}

By using Theorem~\ref{thm:balanced}, we can easily derive Theorem~\ref{thm:controlpath} which provides us vertex disjoint paths of prescribed lengths connecting prescribed vertices.

\begin{THM}\label{thm:controlpath}
For integers $n,t \geq 1$ and $\ell_1 , \dots , \ell_t \geq n/(100t)$ with $\sum_{i=1}^{t}\ell_i \leq n$, every strongly $10^{14} t$-connected semicomplete digraph $D$ with $2t$ distinct vertices $x_1,\dots,x_t,y_1,\dots,y_t \in V(D)$ contains $t$ vertex-disjoint paths $P_1 , \dots , P_t$ so that $P_i$  starts at $x_i$ and ends at $y_i$ and $|V(P_i)| =\ell_i$ for each $i\in [t]$.
\end{THM}
\begin{proof}
Thomassen~\cite{thomassen1980} proved that given any strongly 4-connected semicomplete digraph $D$ and two vertices $x \ne y$ of $D$, there is a Hamiltonian path from $x$ to $y$. Applying Theorem~\ref{thm:balanced} with $(k,\ell,m,q,a_i)=(4,1,10,2, \ell_i)$ and using the result of Thomassen, the theorem follows.
\end{proof}

By Proposition~\ref{prop:example}, the lower bound $\Omega(n)$ on the length of paths is best possible in the sense that the digraph $D$ may have the diameter linear in $n$.

We will derive both Theorems~\ref{thm:cycle} and~\ref{thm:balanced} from Lemma~\ref{lem:main} that provides a powerful connectivity structures of tournament-like digraphs, which may be of independent interest. To prove Lemma~\ref{lem:main}, we use the concept of robust linkage structures introduced by K\"uhn, Lapinskas, Osthus and Patel in \cite{kuhn2014proof}. Robust linkage structure is a very useful tool providing ``skeletons'' of highly connected tournaments that gives control on the connectivity. Further results were obtained by using this method \cite{kangstrong2018, kang2017sparse, kim2016bipartitions, kuhn2016cycle, pokrovskiy2015highly, pokrovskiy2016edge}. We also remark that  the sparse linkage structure introduced in \cite{kang2017sparse} is useful for our proof.

\section{Preliminaries and Tools}\label{sec:prelim}

\subsection{Basic terminology}\label{sec:basic}
Let $\mathbb{N}=\{1,2,\dots\}$ and for an integer $n$, we denote $[n] :=  \{1,\dots, n \}$. In particular, $[n] = \emptyset$ if $n \leq 0$.
We
always denote logarithm as $\log:= \log_2$.
For $k\in \mathbb{N}$ and tuples $(i_1,\dots, i_k), (j_1,\dots, j_k) \in \mathbb{N}^k$, we write $(i_1,\dots, i_k)< (j_1,\dots, j_k)$
if $i_s < j_s$ where $s= \min\{s'\in [k]: i_{s'}\neq j_{s'}  \}.$
We omit floors and ceilings and treat all large numbers as integers whenever it does not affect our argument.

We denote $D= (V(D), E(D))$ as a \emph{directed graph} or \emph{digraph} if $V(D)$ is a finite set and $E(D) \subseteq \{ \overrightarrow{uv} : u\neq v \in V(D)\}$.
For a vertex $v$ of a digraph $D$, we let
$N_D^-(v):= \{ u\in V(D): \overrightarrow{uv} \in E(D)\}$, $N_D^{+}(v):=\{ u\in V(D): \overrightarrow{vu} \in E(D)\}$ and $
N_D(v) := N_D^{-}(v) \cup N_D^+(v)$
be the set of \emph{in-neighbors}, the set of \emph{out-neighbors} and the set of \emph{neighbors} of $v$, respectively.
For $v\in V(D)$, let
\begin{align*}
d_D^-(v)&:=|N_D^-(v)|, &d_D^+(v)&:=|N_D^+(v)|,&
d_D(v)&:= |N_D(v)|,\\
\delta^-(D)&:=\min_{v\in V(D)} \{d_D^{-}(v)\},
&\delta^+(D)&:=\min_{v\in V(D)} \{d_D^{+}(v)\} \enspace
\text{and} &\delta(D)&:=\min_{v\in V(D)} \{d(v)\}.
\end{align*}

A digraph $D$ is \emph{semicomplete} if $\delta(D)=n-1$, and a semicomplete digraph $D$ is a \emph
{tournament} if it does not contain a cycle of length two. For a path $P$ of $D$, we write $P = (v_1 ,
\dots , v_k)$ if $P$ is a path with $V(P) = \left \{v_1 , \dots , v_k \right \}$ and $E(P) = \left \{
\overrightarrow{v_iv_{i+1}} \: : \: i \in [k-1] \right \}$ and we write $\Int(P):=\{ v_2,\dots, v_{k-1}\}$.
We say a cycle $C$ is a \emph{Hamiltonian cycle} of $D$ if
$V(C)=V(D)$.
For two digraphs $D$ and $D'$, we say that $D'$ is a \emph{subgraph} of $D$ if $V(D')\subseteq V(D)$ and $E
(D')\subseteq E(D)$.
For a given set $U\subseteq V(D)$, we write $D[U]$ to denote the digraph with vertex set $U$ and edge set $\{\overrightarrow{uv}:
u,v\in U, \overrightarrow{uv} \in E(D)\}$ and
we write $D\setminus U:= D[V(D)\setminus U]$.
For disjoint sets $U,V \subseteq V(D)$, we write $D[U,V]$ to denote the digraph with vertex set $U\cup V$ and edge set $\{ \overrightarrow{uv} \in E(D): |\{u,v\}\cap U|=|\{u,v\}\cap V| =1\}$.

For $k\in \mathbb{N}$, we say that an ordered pair $(u,v) \in V(D)\times V(D)$ is \emph{$k$-connected in $D$} if for any subset $S\subseteq V(D)\setminus\{u,v\}$ with $|S|\leq k-1$, there exists a path from $u$ to $v$ in $D\setminus S$.
We say that a digraph $D$ is \emph{strongly $k$-connected} if $|V(D)|\geq k+1$ and every ordered pair $(u,v) \in V(D)\times V(D)$ is $k$-connected in $D$.
For a vertex $v\in V(D)$ and a set $U$, we say that
$(v,U)$ is \emph{$k$-connected in $D$} if for any subset $S\subseteq V(D)\setminus\{v\}$ with $|S| \leq k-1$, there exists a path from $v$ to a vertex in $U\setminus S$ in $D\setminus S$.
Similarly, we say $(U,v)$ is \emph{$k$-connected in $D$} if for any subset $S\subseteq V(D)\setminus\{v\}$ with $|S| \leq k-1$, there exists a path from a vertex in $U\setminus S$ to $v$ in $D\setminus S$.
Note that $U$ does not have to be a subset of $V(D)$ in this definition.
However, if $(v,U)$ is $k$-connected in $D$ or $(U,v)$ is $k$-connected in $D$, then either $v\in U$ or $|U\cap V(D)| \geq k$. Note that for $k\geq 2$ and $u\neq v \in V(D)$, the pair $(u,\{v\})$ is never $k$-connected in $D$ while $(u,v)$ may be $k$-connected in $D$.

\subsection{Some lemmas}
Now we state some basic results we use later in the proof. The following can be easily deduced by using Hall's theorem. We omit the proof.
\begin{FACT}\label{fact: perfect matching}
Let $G$ be a bipartite graph on vertex partition $(A,B)$ with $|A|=|B|$.
If  $d_G(a)+d_G(b)\geq |A|$ for any $(a,b)\in A\times B$, then $G$ has a perfect matching.
\end{FACT}
The following theorem by Camion~\cite{camion1959} is useful to find a cycle of certain length in a tournament.
\begin{THM}\cite{camion1959}\label{thm:camion}
Every strongly connected tournament contains a Hamiltonian cycle.
\end{THM}

Moon~\cite{moon1966} extended the result of Camion~\cite{camion1959} by proving the following Theorem.
\begin{THM}\cite{moon1966}\label{thm:moon}
Let $k$ and $n$ be integers with $3 \leq k \leq n$. For any strongly connected $n$-vertex tournament $T$ and a vertex $v \in V(T)$, $T$ contains a cycle $C$ with $|V(C)|=k$ and $v \in V(C)$.
\end{THM}

The following lemma can be proved by using basic definition of strong $k$-connectivity. We omit the proof.

\begin{LEM}\label{lem:glue}
Let $k\in \mathbb{N}$ and $D, D_1, D_2$ be directed graphs and $U,W$ be vertex sets. Then the following hold.
\begin{itemize}
\item For $v\in V(D_1\cup D_2)$, if $(v,U)$ is $k$-connected in $D_1$ and $(u,W)$ is $k$-connected in $D_2$ for all $u\in U$, then $(v,W)$ is $k$-connected in $D_1\cup D_2$.
 \item For $v\in V(D_1\cup D_2)$, if $(U,v)$ is $k$-connected in $D_1$ and $(W,u)$ is $k$-connected in $D_2$ for all $u\in U$, then $(W,v)$ is $k$-connected in $D_1\cup D_2$.
 \item Suppose $D[W]$ is a strongly $k$-connected digraph. If $(u,W)$ and $(W,u)$ are both $k$-connected in $D[U\cup W]$ for all $u\in U$, then $D[U\cup W]$ is strongly $k$-connected digraph.
 \end{itemize}
\end{LEM}

The following theorem by Kim, K\"uhn and Osthus~\cite{kim2016bipartitions} is useful to prove Corollary~\ref{cor:twocycles}.
\begin{THM}\cite{kim2016bipartitions}\label{thm:kko}
For an integer $k \geq 1$ and a strongly $10^9 k^6 \log (2k)$-connected tournament $T$, there exists a partition $V_1,V_2$ of $V(T)$ such that
$T[V_1]$, $T[V_2]$ and $T[V_1,V_2]$ are strongly $k$-connected.
\end{THM}

The following corollary will be useful to prove Theorem~\ref{thm:cycle}. Indeed, slight modification of the proof of Theorem~\ref{thm:kko} gives us a more general result, but Corollary~\ref{cor:twocycles} is sufficient for our purpose.

\begin{COR}\label{cor:twocycles}
Let $\ell$ and $n$ be integers with $n\geq 6$ and $3\leq \ell \leq n-3$ and $T$ be a strongly $10^9$-connected $n$-vertex tournament with a vertex $v \in V(T)$. There exist two vertex-disjoint cycles $C_1$ and $C_2$ in $T$ such that $v \in V(C_1)$, $|V(C_1)| =\ell$ and $|V(C_2)| = n-\ell$.
\end{COR}
\begin{proof}
By Theorem~\ref{thm:kko}, there exists a partition $V_1,V_2$ of $V(T)$ such that $T[V_1]$, $T[V_2]$, and $T[V_1,V_2]$ are strongly connected. We may assume that $v \in V_1$.

If $\ell \leq |V_1|$, then by Theorem~\ref{thm:moon}, $T[V_1]$ contains a cycle $C_1$ of length $\ell$ that contains $v$.
Since $T[V_1,V_2]$ is strongly connected, every vertex $v\in V_1$ has an out-neighbor and an in-neighbor in $V_2$.
As $T[V_2]$ is strongly connected, Lemma~\ref{lem:glue} implies that $T[(V_1 \setminus V(C_1)) \cup V_2]$ is strongly connected, thus Theorem~\ref{thm:camion} implies that $T[(V_1 \setminus V(C_1)) \cup V_2]$ contains a spanning cycle $C_2$ of length $n-\ell$.

If $\ell > |V_1|$, then by Theorem~\ref{thm:moon}, $T[V_2]$ contains a cycle $C_2$ of length $n-\ell$. Again, since $T[V_1,V_2]$ and $T[V_1]$ are strongly connected, Lemma~\ref{lem:glue} implies that $T[V_1 \cup (V_2 \setminus V(C_2))]$ is strongly connected, thus Theorem~\ref{thm:camion} implies that $T[V_1 \cup (V_2 \setminus V(C_2))]$ contains a spanning cycle $C_1$ of length $\ell$ which contains $v$. This completes the proof.
\end{proof}

The following lemma guarantees the existence of a suitable almost dominating set in a semicomplete digraph which plays a crucial role to construct robust linkage structures.

\begin{LEM}\label{lem:dom}
Let $\ell\in \mathbb{N}$ and let $D$ be a digraph with $\delta(D) \geq n-\ell$.
For each vertex $x\in V(D)$ and $c\in \mathbb{N}$, there exists sets $A,B\subseteq V(D)$ such that the
following hold:
 \begin{enumerate}[label=(\roman*)]
\item $|A|,|B|\leq c$ and $D[A]$ contains a spanning path from $x$ and $D[B]$ contains a spanning path to $x$.
\item $|V(D)\setminus \bigcup_{v\in A} N^{-}_D(v)| \leq  2^{1-c} d_D^+(x) + 2\ell$ and
$|V(D)\setminus \bigcup_{v\in B} N^{+}_D(v)| \leq  2^{1-c} d_D^-(x)+ 2\ell$.
\end{enumerate}
\end{LEM}
\begin{proof}
Suppose that for some $i\in [c]$, we have chosen a path $(x=v_1,\dots, v_i)$ of $D$ such that
$$|V(D)\setminus \bigcup_{j=1}^{i} N^{-}_D(v_j)| \leq  2^{1-i} d_D^+(x) + (2-2^{1-i})\ell.$$
Note that such a path exists for $i=1$.
We will either find a desired set $A$, or extend the path by adding a new vertex. Let
$$U:= V(D)\setminus \bigcup_{j=1}^{i} N^{-}_D(v_j) \enspace \text{and}\enspace U' := U\setminus N^+_D(v_i),$$
then we have $|U'|\leq \ell$ as $U'\subseteq V(D)\setminus N_D(v_i)$.
If $U \setminus U' = \emptyset$, then $|U| = |U'| \leq \ell$ and $A=\left \{v_1,\dots,v_i \right \}$ is a desired set and we are done. Otherwise,
we choose a vertex $v_{i+1} \in U\setminus U'$ with maximum in-degree in $D[U \setminus U']$.
Then it is easy to see that $v_{i+1}$ has at least $(|U\setminus U'|-\ell)/2$ in-neighbors in $U\setminus U'$. Then the set  $V(D)\setminus \bigcup_{j=1}^{i+1}N^{-}_D(v_j)$ is included in the union of $U'$ and the set of vertices in $U \setminus U'$ that are not in-neighbors of $v_{i+1}$. Thus we have
\begin{align*}
|V(D)\setminus \bigcup_{j=1}^{i+1}N^{-}_D(v_j) | &\leq |U'| + \left (|U\setminus U'| - \frac{1}{2}(|U\setminus U'| - \ell) \right ) = |U|/2 + \ell/2+ |U'|/2 \\
& \leq
2^{-i}d_D^+(x) + (2- 2^{-i})\ell=
2^{1-(i+1)}d_D^+(x) + (2 - 2^{1-(i+1)})\ell.
\end{align*}
As $v_{i+1}\in U\setminus U' = U\cap N^+_D(v_i)$, $(v_1,\dots, v_{i+1})$ forms a path of $D$. By repeating this $c$ times, we obtain the desired set $A$.
Similarly, we can obtain $B$ by symmetry.
\end{proof}
We frequently use the following lemma which is a combined reformulation of Claim~3.1 and Lemma~3.4 in \cite{kang2017sparse}. In \cite{kang2017sparse}, it is only stated for digraphs with at least $k$ vertices. However, the lemma also holds for digraphs with less than $k$ vertices as we can simply take $A=B=V(D)$ in the case.
\begin{LEM}[Kang, Kim, Kim, and Suh~\cite{kang2017sparse}]\label{lem:sparse}
Let $k \in \mathbb{N}$ and $D$ be a digraph such that $\delta(D) \geq n-\ell$.
Then there exist two sets $A,B\subseteq V(D)$ satisfying the following.
 \begin{enumerate}[label=(\roman*)]
\item $|A|,|B|\leq 2k+ \ell -2 $.
\item For any $w\in V(D)$, both $(w,B)$ and $(A,w)$ are $k$-connected in $D$.
\end{enumerate}
\end{LEM}

Recall that for an integer $k \geq 1$, a digraph $D$ is \emph{$k$-linked} if $|V(D)| \geq 2k$ and for any $k$ (not
necessarily distinct) ordered pairs $(x_1,y_1),\dots, (x_k,y_k)$ of vertices of $D$, there exist $k$
distinct internally vertex-disjoint paths $P_1,\dots, P_k$ such that  $P_i$ is a path from $x_i$ to $y_i$
such that $V(P)\cap \{x_1 , \dots , x_k , y_1 , \dots , y_k\} = \{x_i, y_i\}$ for each $i\in [k]$. Pokrovskiy~\cite{pokrovskiy2015highly} proved that highly connected tournaments are highly linked.

\begin{THM}[Pokrovskiy~\cite{pokrovskiy2015highly}]\label{thm:link}
For each $k\in \mathbb{N}$, every strongly $452k$-connected tournament is $k$-linked.
\end{THM}

Theorem~\ref{thm:link} can be extended to the following corollary. We omit the proof here, because it can be proved by the almost same proof as in \cite{pokrovskiy2015highly} with obvious modifications using Lemma~\ref{lem:dom}.

\begin{COR}\label{cor:digraph_link}
For all $k,\ell\in \mathbb{N}$, let $D$ be a strongly $(452k + 188 \ell)$-connected digraph with $\delta(D) \geq n-\ell$. Then $D$ is $k$-linked.
\end{COR}

The following is the main ingredient in the proof of both Theorems~\ref{thm:cycle}~and~\ref{thm:balanced}.
Lemma~\ref{lem:main} states that every highly connected tournament-like digraph $D$ contains pairwise disjoint vertex sets $W_1,\dots, W_t$ such that for each $j\in [k]$, $T[W_j]$ is strongly $k$-connected, and each vertex $u$ outside $\bigcup W_i$ can be added to $W_j$ for many $j\in [t]$ while preserving the connectivity of $D[W_j]$. To be more precise, for each $u\notin \bigcup W_i$ there exists a set $I_u \subseteq [t]$ of indices such that $T[W_j\cup U]$ is strongly $k$-connected for any set $U$ of vertices as long as $j\in I_u$ for all $u\in U$.
These sets $W_j$ and the relationship between the sets $W_1,\dots, W_t$ and vertices in $V(D)\setminus \bigcup W_i$ provides very useful linkage structures in tournament-like digraphs. We prove it in Section~\ref{sec:balanced}.

\begin{LEM}\label{lem:main}
Let $k, t, \ell, m, n, q\in \mathbb{N}$ with $t,m\geq 2$ and $q \geq 1$.
Suppose that $D$ is an $n$-vertex strongly $10^{8} q k^2 \ell (k+\ell)^2  tm^2 \log(m)$-connected digraph with $\delta(D) \geq n- \ell$ and $Q_1 , \dots , Q_t \subseteq V(D)$ are $t$ disjoint sets with $|Q_i| \leq q$ for each $i \in [t]$. Then there exist disjoint sets $W_1 , \dots , W_t \subseteq V(D)$ that satisfy the following for all $i\in [t]$ and $w\in V_0$, where $V_0:=V(D) \setminus \bigcup_{j=1}^{t}W_j$.
\begin{enumerate}[label=\text{\rm (A\arabic*)}]
\item \label{A5}$Q_i \subseteq W_i$.
\item \label{A2} $D[W_i]$ is strongly $k$-connected.

\item \label{A1} $|W_i| \leq \frac{n}{50 mt}$.
\item \label{A3}$\big|\big\{i'\in [t] :|N_D^{+}(w)\cap W_{i'}|\geq k \text{ and }
|N_D^{-}(w)\cap W_{i'}| \geq k \big\}\big|\geq (1- \frac{1}{30m^{1/2}k})t$.
\item \label{A4}$\big|\big\{w' \in V_0 :|N_D^{+}(w')\cap W_i|\geq k \text{ and }
|N_D^{-}(w')\cap W_i| \geq k  \big\}\big|\geq (1- \frac{1}{10^5 k^4m^2})|V_0|$.
\end{enumerate}
\end{LEM}

\subsection{An example}
Here, we prove Proposition~\ref{prop:example} showing that some lower bound on $a_i$ in Theorem~\ref{thm:balanced} is necessary.

\begin{proof}[Proof of Proposition~\ref{prop:example}]
Let $m\geq 2$ be an integer such that $n= \binom{s+1}{2}m + 2s +1 + s'$ with $1\leq s' < \binom{s+1}{2}$.
Let $$V:= \{  x_s,\dots, x_1, y_1,\dots, y_s\} \cup \{z^i_{j,\ell}: i\in [m], j\in [s], \text{ and } \ell\in[j]\} \cup \{w^*, w_1,\dots, w_{s'} \}.$$
We define an ordering $<$ on $V$ as follows.
\begin{itemize}
\item $x_s< \dots< x_1< w^* < w_1<\dots < w_{s'} < y_1 < \dots, <y_s$.
\item For all $i\in [m], j\in [s]$, and $\ell\in [j]$, we have
$ w^* < z^i_{j,\ell} < w_{1}$.
\item For all $i,i'\in [m], j,j'\in [s]$, $\ell\in [j]$, and $\ell'\in [j']$, we have
$z^i_{j,\ell} < z^{i'}_{j',\ell'}$ if and only if $(i,j,\ell)<(i',j',\ell')$.
\end{itemize}
Let
$$E:=\Big\{\overrightarrow{ z^1_{j,\ell} x_j}, \overrightarrow{y_j z^m_{j,\ell}} : j\in [s], \ell\in [j] \Big\}
\text{ {\Large $\cup$} } \Big\{ \overrightarrow{z^{i+1}_{j,\ell}z^i_{j,\ell}} : (i,j)\in [m-1]\times [s], \ell\in [j]\Big\}.$$
See Figure~1 for an illustration of $E$. Let $T$ be a tournament with $V(T)=V$ and
$$E(T):= E\cup \{ \overrightarrow{uv} \in V(T)\times V(T) : u<v \text{ and } \overrightarrow{vu}\notin E \}.$$
\begin{figure}\label{fig:1}
\centering
\begin{tikzpicture}[scale=1]

\filldraw[fill=black] (1,0) circle (2pt);
\filldraw[fill=black] (2,0) circle (2pt);
\filldraw[fill=black] (3,0) circle (2pt);
\filldraw[fill=black] (4,0) circle (2pt);
\filldraw[fill=black] (5,0) circle (2pt);
\filldraw[fill=black] (6,0) circle (2pt);
\filldraw[fill=black] (7,0) circle (2pt);
\filldraw[fill=black] (8,0) circle (2pt);
\filldraw[fill=black] (9,0) circle (2pt);
\filldraw[fill=black] (10,0) circle (2pt);
\filldraw[fill=black] (11,0) circle (2pt);
\filldraw[fill=black] (12,0) circle (2pt);
\filldraw[fill=black] (13,0) circle (2pt);

\draw[dotted] (2.45,1) to (2.45,-2);

\draw[dotted] (3.45,1) to (3.45,-2);

\draw[dotted] (6.45,1) to (6.45,-2);
\draw[dotted] (9.45,1) to (9.45,-2);

\draw[dotted] (11.45,1) to (11.45,-2);

\node at (1,-1.5) {\large $x_2$};
\node at (2,-1.5) {\large $x_1$};
\node at (3,-1.5) {\large $w^*$};
\node at (4,-1.5) {\large $z^{1}_{1,1}$};
\node at (5,-1.5) {\large $z^{1}_{2,1}$};
\node at (6,-1.5) {\large $z^{1}_{2,2}$};
\node at (7,-1.5) {\large $z^{2}_{1,1}$};
\node at (8,-1.5) {\large $z^{2}_{2,1}$};
\node at (9,-1.5) {\large $z^{2}_{2,2}$};
\node at (10,-1.5) {\large $w_1$};
\node at (11,-1.5) {\large $w_2$};
\node at (12,-1.5) {\large $y_1$};
\node at (13,-1.5) {\large $y_2$};

\draw[middlearrow={latex}, line width=0.2mm] (13,0) to[bend right=25] (9,0);
\draw[middlearrow={latex}, line width=0.2mm] (13,0) to[bend right=25] (8,0);
\draw[middlearrow={latex}, line width=0.2mm] (12,0) to[bend left=20] (7,0);

\draw[middlearrow={latex}, line width=0.2mm] (9,0) to[bend right=30] (6,0);
\draw[middlearrow={latex}, line width=0.2mm] (8,0) to[bend right=30] (5,0);

\draw[middlearrow={latex}, line width=0.2mm] (7,0) to[bend left=30] (4,0);

\draw[middlearrow={latex}, line width=0.2mm] (6,0) to[bend right=25] (1,0);
\draw[middlearrow={latex}, line width=0.2mm] (5,0) to[bend right=25] (1,0);

\draw[middlearrow={latex}, line width=0.2mm] (4,0) to[bend left=35] (2,0);

\end{tikzpicture}
\caption{Ordering of vertices from left to right and edges in $E$ when $s=m=s'=2$.}
\end{figure}
Let $X:=\{x_1,\dots, x_s\}$ and  $Y:=\{y_1,\dots,y_s\}$,
and for each $i\in [m]$, let
$
Z^i:=\{ z^i_{j,\ell} :j\in [s], \ell\in [j]\}.$
For all $j\in [k]$ and $\ell\in [j]$, we let $P^{j,\ell} :=  (z^{m}_{j,\ell},\dots, z^{1}_{j,\ell})$.
Then $\{P^{j,\ell} : j\in [k] \text{ and } \ell\in [j]\}$ forms a collection of internally vertex-disjoint paths.

Now we prove that $T$ is strongly $s$-connected.
First, for a vertex $v\in V(T)$, either $v\in Y$ or it has at least $s$ out-neighbors in $Y\cup\{w_{s'}\}$. As $Y\subseteq N^+_T(w_{s'})$, we conclude that $(v,Y)$ is $s$-connected in $T$. For each $j\in [s]$,
\begin{align*}
&\left\{ \big(y_j,P^{j,j},x_j\big), \big(y_j,y_{j+1},P^{j+1,1},x_{j+1}\big), \dots, \big(y_j,y_{s},P^{s,1},x_{s}\big)\right\}\\
 &\cup
\left\{\big(y_j,z_{j,1}^m, z_{j,1}^{m-1},P^{1,1}, x_{1}\big), \dots, \big(y_j,z_{j,j-1}^m, z_{j,j-1}^{m-1},P^{j-1,1}, x_{j-1}\big)\right\}
\end{align*}
forms a collection of $s$ paths from $y_j$ to $X$, where they intersect only at $y_j$. See Figure~2 for an illustration.
Thus, $(y_j, X)$ is $s$-connected in $T$. Together with Lemma~\ref{lem:glue}, this implies that for any $v\in V(T)$, the pair $(v,X)$ is $s$-connected in $T$.

\begin{figure}\label{fig:1}
\centering
\begin{tikzpicture}[scale=0.8]

\filldraw[fill=black] (0,0.5) circle (2pt);
\filldraw[fill=black] (1,0) circle (2pt);
\filldraw[fill=black] (2,-0.5) circle (2pt);
\filldraw[fill=black] (3,0) circle (2pt);

\draw[dotted] (2.45,2) to (2.45,-2.5);

\draw[dotted] (3.45,2) to (3.45,-2.5);

\draw[dotted] (9.45,2) to (9.45,-2.5);

\draw[dotted] (15.45,2) to (15.45,-2.5);
\draw[dotted] (17.45,2) to (17.45,-2.5);

\filldraw[fill=black] (4,-0.5) circle (2pt);
\filldraw[fill=black] (5,-0.5) circle (2pt);
\filldraw[fill=black] (6,0) circle (2pt);
\filldraw[fill=black] (7,0.5) circle (2pt);
\filldraw[fill=black] (8,0) circle (2pt);
\filldraw[fill=black] (9,0) circle (2pt);
\filldraw[fill=black] (10,-0.5) circle (2pt);
\filldraw[fill=black] (11,-0.5) circle (2pt);
\filldraw[fill=black] (12,0) circle (2pt);
\filldraw[fill=black] (13,0.5) circle (2pt);
\filldraw[fill=black] (14,0) circle (2pt);
\filldraw[fill=black] (15,0) circle (2pt);
\filldraw[fill=black] (16,0) circle (2pt);
\filldraw[fill=black] (17,0) circle (2pt);
\filldraw[fill=black] (18,0) circle (2pt);
\filldraw[fill=black] (19,0) circle (2pt);
\filldraw[fill=black] (20,0.5) circle (2pt);

\node at (0,-2) {\large $x_3$};
\node at (1,-2) {\large $x_2$};
\node at (2,-2) {\large $x_1$};
\node at (1, 2) {\large $X$};

\node at (3,-2) {\large $w^*$};
\node at (4,-2) {\large $z^{1}_{1,1}$};
\node at (5,-2) {\large $z^{1}_{2,1}$};
\node at (6,-2) {\large $z^{1}_{2,2}$};
\node at (7,-2) {\large $z^{1}_{3,1}$};
\node at (8,-2) {\large $z^{1}_{3,2}$};
\node at (9,-2) {\large $z^{1}_{3,3}$};

\node at (6.5, 2) {\large $Z^1$};

\node at (10,-2) {\large $z^{2}_{1,1}$};
\node at (11,-2) {\large $z^{2}_{2,1}$};
\node at (12,-2) {\large $z^{2}_{2,2}$};
\node at (13,-2) {\large $z^{2}_{3,1}$};
\node at (14,-2) {\large $z^{2}_{3,2}$};
\node at (15,-2) {\large $z^{2}_{3,3}$};

\node at (12.5, 2) {\large $Z^2$};

\node at (16,-2) {\large $w_1$};
\node at (17,-2) {\large $w_2$};
\node at (18,-2) {\large $y_1$};
\node at (19,-2) {\large $y_2$};
\node at (20,-2) {\large $y_3$};
\node at (19, 2) {\large $Y$};

\draw[middlearrow={latex}, line width=0.2mm] (19,0) to[bend right=25] (12,0);
\draw[middlearrow={latex}, line width=0.2mm] (12,0) to[bend right=25] (6,0);
\draw[middlearrow={latex}, line width=0.2mm] (6,0) to[bend right=25] (1,0);

\draw[middlearrow={latex}, line width=0.2mm] (19,0) to (20,0.5);
\draw[middlearrow={latex}, line width=0.2mm] (20,0.5) to[bend right=25] (13,0.5);
\draw[middlearrow={latex}, line width=0.2mm] (13,0.5) to[bend right=25] (7,0.5);
\draw[middlearrow={latex}, line width=0.2mm] (7,0.5) to[bend right=25] (0,0.5);

\draw[middlearrow={latex}, line width=0.2mm] (19,0) to[bend left=25] (11,-0.5);
\draw[middlearrow={latex}, line width=0.2mm] (11,-0.5) to[bend left=25] (5,-0.5);
\draw[middlearrow={latex}, line width=0.2mm] (5,-0.5) to (10,-0.5);
\draw[middlearrow={latex}, line width=0.2mm] (10,-0.5) to[bend left=25] (4,-0.5);
\draw[middlearrow={latex}, line width=0.2mm] (4,-0.5) to[bend left=25] (2,-0.5);

\end{tikzpicture}
\caption{$s$ paths from $y_2$ to $X$ when $s=3, m=2$ and $s'=2$. }
\end{figure}

Similarly, for a vertex $v\in V(T)$, either $v\in X$ or it has at least $s$ in-neighbors in $X\cup\{w^*\}$. As $X\subseteq N^-_T(w^*)$, we conclude that $(X,v)$ is $s$-connected in $T$. For each $j\in [k]$,
\begin{align*}
&\left\{ \big(y_j,P^{j,j},x_j\big), \big(y_{j+1},P^{j+1,1},x_{j+1},x_j\big), \dots, \big(y_{s},P^{s,1},x_{s},x_j\big)\right\}\\
 &\cup
\left\{\big(y_1,P^{1,1},z^{2}_{j,1}, z^{1}_{j,1}, x_{j}\big), \dots, \big(y_{j-1},P^{j-1,1},z^{2}_{j,j-1}, z^{1}_{j,j-1}, x_{j}\big)\right\}
\end{align*}
forms a collection of $s$ paths from $Y$ to $x_j$, where they intersect only at $x_j$. Thus $(Y,x_j)$ is $s$-connected in $T$. Together with Lemma~\ref{lem:glue}, this implies that for any $v\in V(T)$, the pair $(Y,v)$ is $s$-connected in $T$.

Hence, for any $S\subseteq V(T)$ with $|S|\leq k-1$, there exists a path
$P^X$ from $u$ to $X$ and a path $P^Y$ from $Y$ to $v$.
Since we have $\overrightarrow{xy} \in E(T)$ for all $x\in X$ and $y\in Y$,
$P^X \cup P^Y$ contains a path from $u$ to $v$ in $T\setminus S$.
This shows that $T$ is strongly $s$-connected.

Let $P$ be a path from a vertex $y \in Y$ to a vertex $x \in X$. For every $i\in [m]$, there is no edge from $Y\cup \bigcup_{j=i+1}^{m}Z^j$ to
$X\cup \bigcup_{j=1}^{i-1} Z^j$ in $T$. Hence, for each $i\in [m]$, $Z^i$ intersects every path from $Y$ to $X$ in $T$. Since $Z^1,\dots, Z^m$ are pairwise vertex-disjoint, it follows that
\begin{eqnarray}\label{eqn:path}
|\Int(P)| \geq \sum_{i\in [m]} |V(P)\cap Z^i|\geq m,
\end{eqnarray}
implying that $P$ has length at least $m+1 \geq \binom{s+1}{2}^{-1}(n - 2s)$. This proves that $T$ has diameter at least $\binom{s+1}{2}^{-1}(n - 2s)$.

Let $T'$ be a strongly $k$-connected subtournament of $T$. Let $x,y $ be the minimum and maximum elements in $V(T')$ with respect to the order $<$, respectively.
Since every vertex $v\in V(T)\setminus X$ satisfies
$$|N^-_T(v)\cap \{ v'\in V(T): v' >v\}| \leq 1,$$
if $x\notin X$, then $|N^-_T(x)\cap V(T')| \leq |N^-_T(x)\cap \{ v'\in V(T): v' >x\}| \leq 1$, contradicting that $T'$ is strongly $k$-connected with $k\geq 2$. Hence $x \in X$. Similarly, it follows that $y\in Y$. Since $T'$ is strongly $k$-connected, by Menger's theorem, there are $k$ internally vertex-disjoint paths $P_1,\dots, P_{k}$ from $y$ to $x$ in $T'$. By~\eqref{eqn:path}, $|\Int(P_j)| \geq m$ for every $j \in [k]$, and thus $|V(T')| \geq \sum_{j=1}^{k}|\Int(P_{j})| + |\left \{x,y \right \}| \geq km+2 \geq k \binom{s+1}{2}^{-1} n-k-2$. This finishes the proof.
\end{proof}

\section{Proof of Lemma~\ref{lem:main}}\label{sec:balanced}

\noindent {\bf Outline of the proof}. We first sketch the idea of the proof. As in \cite{kuhn2016cycle}, our proof starts with constructing robust linkage structures. However, we introduce more involved ideas and techniques in order to obtain the connectivity bound linear in $t$.

We aim to find $t$ disjoint subsets of vertices $W_1 , \dots , W_t$ satisfying all the conditions~\ref{A5}--\ref{A4} of Lemma~\ref{lem:main}. First, let us consider the following ideal scenario. Assume
$Q_1 = \dots = Q_t = \emptyset$ and that there are small in-dominating sets $A_{i,j}$ (i.e. every vertex outside $A_{i,j}$ has an out-neighbor in $A_{i,j}$) and small out-dominating sets $B_{i,j}$ (i.e. every vertex outside $B_{i,j}$ has an in-neighbor in $B_{i,j}$) for each $(i,j) \in [t] \times [k]$, so that all sets are pairwise disjoint and each $D[A_{i,j}]$ and each $D[B_{i,j}]$ contain a spanning path.
As $D$ is highly connected, provided that all these dominating sets are small enough, one can use Corollary~\ref{cor:digraph_link} to find $kt$ vertex-disjoint paths $P_{i,j}$ from the sink of the spanning path in $D[A_{i,j}]$ to the source of the spanning path in $D[B_{i,j}]$, where the path $P_{i,j}$ intersects $\bigcup_{i \in [t]}\bigcup_{j\in[k]}(A_{i,j} \cup B_{i,j})$ only at its ends.

We will later construct $W_1,\dots, W_t \subseteq V(D)$ in such a way that each set $W_i$ contains $\bigcup_{j \in [k]} (A_{i,j}\cup P_{i,j}\cup B_{i,j})$. This will guarantee the following property: for any vertex $u , v \in W_i\setminus \bigcup_{j \in [k]} (A_{i,j}\cup P_{i,j}\cup B_{i,j})$, there are $k$ edges from $u$ to $\bigcup A_{i,j}$ and $k$ edges from $\bigcup B_{i,j} $ to $v$ and these together with $k$ paths $P_{i,j}$ in $W_i$ gives $k$ internally vertex-disjoint paths from $u$ to $v$.
This property will be later useful to ensure that each $W_i$ satisfies \ref{A2}.

However, we cannot hope for this ideal case, due to several issues. The following are some major issues complicating the proof. Figure~\ref{fig: Z} drawn at the beginning of {\bf Step~3} will be helpful to understand the structure we construct in {\bf Step~1--Step~3}.

\begin{itemize}
\item Because dominating sets may be large in general, one cannot apply Corollary~\ref{cor:digraph_link} to obtain the desired paths $P_{i,j}$ internally disjoint from the dominating sets. Instead of in/out-dominating sets, we will use Lemma~\ref{lem:dom} to construct small almost in-dominating sets $A_{i,j}$ and almost out-dominating sets $B_{i,j}$ that dominate most of the vertices outside $\bigcup_{i \in [t]}\bigcup_{j\in[k]}(A_{i,j} \cup B_{i,j})$.
Moreover, we will assign $3k$, instead of $k$, almost in/out-dominating sets to the set $W_i$ and define vertices ``exceptional'' (denoted by $E_i^S$ in {\bf Step 2}) if they are not dominated by at least $k$ of those almost dominating sets. This will enable us to control the number of ``exceptional'' vertices (see~\eqref{eq: E size}) and help us to obtain \ref{A4}. We will further elaborate on them in {\bf Step 1} and {\bf Step 2}.

\item Corollary~\ref{cor:digraph_link} does not provide any information on the length of each path. Hence some paths $P_{i,j}$ may be very long and thus $W_i$ may violate~\ref{A1}. In order to control the length of the paths, we build disjoint structures $\bigcup_{j\in [3k]} (A_{i,j}\cup P_{i,j}\cup B_{i,j})$ for each $i\in [h]$ with $h=1200k (k+\ell) tm$ instead of $t$.
This choice of $h$ ensures that many of them are small enough for~\ref{A1} (see Claim~\ref{cl: path short}). We will assign $t$ appropriate structures to the sets $W_1,\dots, W_t$ and discard the vertices in the rest structures (see Claim~\ref{lem:indep}).

However, this may cause other problems, as these discarded vertices might not be in/out-dominated by most of the remaining dominating sets.
 To obtain \ref{A3} at the end,  we will distribute the discarded vertices to $W_1,\dots, W_t$ nicely with guaranteeing \ref{A2} and \ref{A1}. We will also further elaborate on them in {\bf Step 3}.

\item
After {\bf Step 3}, there still could be some vertices not satisfying~\ref{A3} and not assigned to $W_i$ (the sets of these vertices are denoted by $\widetilde{F}^A$ and $\widetilde{F}^B$ in {\bf Step 4}). So we will distribute these vertices into one of the sets $W_i$. Showing that the number of such problematic vertices is small, we will be able to distribute them nicely so that both \ref{A2} and \ref{A1} still hold. We will further elaborate on them in {\bf Step 4}.
\end{itemize}

 \vspace{0.3cm}

\noindent {\bf Step 1. Construction of almost dominating sets.}
Let $D$ be a strongly $10^{8} q k^2 \ell (k+\ell)^2  tm^2 \log(m)$-connected $n$-vertex digraph with $\delta(D)\geq n-\ell$. Let $V:=V(D)$ and $h:= 1200k(k+\ell)t m$ and $c:= 31 + \lceil 5 \log (k\ell m) \rceil$.
 As $D$ is strongly $10^{8} q k^2 \ell (k+\ell)^2  tm^2 \log(m)$-connected, it follows that
\begin{align}\label{eq: n min deg}
\min\{ n, \delta^+(D), \delta^-(D)\} \geq 10^{8} q k^2 \ell (k+\ell)^2 tm^2\log(m).
\end{align}
By our assumption, $t$ pairwise disjoint subsets $Q_1 , \dots , Q_t \subseteq V$ are given and satisfy $|Q_i| \leq q$ for each $i \in [t]$. Let
$$Q := \bigcup_{j\in [t]}Q_j, \enspace V':=V\setminus Q, \enspace D' := D \setminus Q \enspace \text{and}\enspace n' := |V(D')|.$$ Then $D'$ is strongly $9 \cdot 10^{7} q k^2 \ell (k+\ell)^2 tm^2\log(m)$-connected and
\begin{align}\label{eq: n' min deg}
\min\{ n', \delta^+(D'), \delta^-(D')\} \geq 9 \cdot 10^{7} q k^2 \ell (k+\ell)^2 tm^2\log(m).
\end{align}

First, we choose vertices of small out-degrees and small in-degrees, and then we will construct almost dominating sets $A_{i,j}$ and $B_{i,j}$ using these vertices. We plan to allocate the vertices in $A_{i,j}\cup B_{i,j}$ into $W_i$ later.
Using these vertices to construct almost dominating sets, we can  control the size of the set of `exceptional' vertices (vertices that are not dominated) in terms of degrees of vertices (see~\ref{AB3}). This will ensure that any exceptional vertex has many non-exceptional out-neighbors or  many non-exceptional in-neighbors. If we put these neighbors along with $v$ to $W_i$, then $v$ will have enough neighbors to reach (or to be reached from) non-exceptional vertices.
We construct such sets for all
$(i,j) \in [h]\times [3k]$ instead of just $(i,j)\in [t]\times [k]$ so that we have more flexibility later. For example, we can discard some sets later if necessary as $h> t$.

Let $\big\{ x_{i,j} : (i,j)\in [h]\times[3k]\big\}$ and
$\big\{ y_{i,j} : (i,j) \in [h]\times[3k]\big\}$ be two disjoint subsets of $V'$, each consisting of $3kh$ vertices with smallest out-degrees/in-degrees in
$D'$, respectively. Since $n'\geq 6kh$ by~\eqref{eq: n' min deg}, these sets exist. Let
$$V_{\rm low}:= \big\{ x_{i,j} : (i,j)\in [h]\times[3k]\big\} \cup
\big\{ y_{i,j} : (i,j) \in [h]\times[3k]\big\}.$$
\begin{align*}
\delta_0^+:= \min_{w \in V'\setminus V_{\rm low}}d_{D'}^+(w) \enspace \text{and} \enspace \delta_0^- := \min_{w \in V'\setminus V_{\rm low}}d_{D'}^-(w).
\end{align*}
By symmetry, we may assume that
\begin{align}\label{eq: symmetry assume}
\delta_0^+ \geq \delta_0^-.
\end{align}
The other case follows from a symmetric argument. Since $|V_{\rm low}| \leq 6kh$, by \eqref{eq: n min deg} for every $(i,j)\in [h]\times[3k]$, there are subsets $X_{i,j}$ and $Y_{i,j}$ of $V'$ satisfying the following for all $(i,j)\in [h]\times [3k]$.\vspace{0.1cm}
\begin{enumerate}[label=\text{(XY\arabic*)}]
\item \label{XY1} The sets $X_{1,1} , \dots , X_{h,3k} , Y_{1,1} , \dots , Y_{h,3k}$  are pairwise disjoint.
\item \label{XY2} $x_{i,j}\in X_{i,j}$, $y_{i,j}\in Y_{i,j}$ and $|X_{i,j}|= |Y_{i,j}| = 2k+1.$
\item \label{XY3} $x_{i,j}$ has $k$ out-neighbours and $k$ in-neighbours in $X_{i,j}$ and $y_{i,j}$ has $k$ out-neighbours and $k$ in-neighbours in $Y_{i,j}$, respectively.
\end{enumerate}\COMMENT{We have `$\geq k$' instead of `$=k$' because there could be cycles of length two in $D'$.} \vspace{0.1cm}
Let $V_{\rm low}^*:= \bigcup_{(i,j)\in [h]\times [3k]} (X_{i,j}\cup Y_{i,j})$.
We define $A_{i,j}$ and $B_{i,j}$ for each  $(i,j)\in [h]\times[3k]$ as follows.
For each $(i,j)\in [h]\times[3k]$ in lexicographic order, we repeatedly apply Lemma~\ref{lem:dom} to
a digraph
$D^X_{i,j}:= D' \setminus \big((V^*_{\rm low}\setminus\{x_{i,j}\})\cup \bigcup_{(i',j') < (i,j)} A_{i',j'} \big)$ and the vertex $x_{i,j}$ with parameter $c$ to obtain a set $A_{i,j}$ and a vertex $a_{i,j}$ where $D'[A_{i,j}]$ has a spanning path from $x_{i,j}$ to $a_{i,j}$. Again, for $(i,j)\in [h]\times[3k]$ in lexicographic order, we repeatedly apply Lemma~\ref{lem:dom} to a digraph
$D^Y_{i,j}:=D' \setminus \big((V^*_{\rm low}\setminus\{y_{i,j}\})\cup \bigcup_{(i',j')\in [h]\times[3k]} A_{i',j'}\cup
\bigcup_{(i',j') < (i,j) } B_{i',j'} \big)$ and the vertex $y_{i,j}$ with parameter $c$ to obtain a set $B_{i,j}$ and a vertex $b_{i,j}$ where $D'[B_{i,j}]$ has a spanning path from $b_{i,j}$ to $y_{i,j}$.
Then we obtain pairwise disjoint sets $A_{1,1},\dots, A_{h,3k}, B_{1,1},\dots, B_{h,3k} \subseteq V'$ and
vertices $a_{1,1},\dots, a_{h,3k},b_{1,1},\dots, b_{h,3k}$.
For each $i\in [h]$, let
$$C_i:= \bigcup_{j\in [3k]} (A_{i,j}\cup B_{i,j} \cup X_{i,j}\cup Y_{i,j}) \enspace \text{and} \enspace C:= \bigcup_{i\in [h]} C_i.$$
For each $(i,j)\in [h]\times [3k]$, let
$$E^A(i,j):=V'\setminus \left(C\cup \bigcup_{v\in A_{i,j}} N^-_{D'}(v)\right) \enspace\text{and}
 \enspace E^B(i,j):=V'\setminus \left(C\cup \bigcup_{v\in B_{i,j}} N^+_{D'}(v)\right),$$
 which are the set of vertices in $V' \setminus C$ not in/out-dominated by $A_{i,j}$ and $B_{i,j}$, respectively. Then the following statements hold for every $(i,j)\in  [h]\times[3k]$.
\begin{enumerate}[label=\text{(AB\arabic*)}]
\item \label{AB1} The sets $X_{1,1},\dots,X_{h,3k} , Y_{1,1} , \dots , Y_{h,3k} , A_{1,1} , \dots , A_{h,3k} , B_{1,1} , \dots , B_{h,3k}$ are pairwise disjoint, $1\leq |A_{i,j}|,|B_{i,j}|\leq c$ and $|C_i| \leq 250k^2 + 30k \log(km\ell)$.\footnote{
For \ref{AB1},
$|C_i| \leq \sum_{j\in [3k]} (|A_{i,j}|+|B_{i,j}| +|X_{i,j}| + |Y_{i,j}|) \leq 3k(62+ 2\lceil 5 \log (kml) \rceil+ 4k+2) \leq 12k^2+200k + 30k\log(km\ell) \leq  250k^2 + 30k \log(km\ell)$.
}

\item \label{AB2} $D'[A_{i,j}]$ contains a spanning path from $x_{i,j}$ to $a_{i,j}$ and $D'[B_{i,j}]$ contains a spanning path from $b_{i,j}$ to $y_{i,j}$.

\item \label{AB3} $\displaystyle |E^A(i,j)| \leq 2^{1-c} d_{D'}^+(x_{i,j}) + 2\ell \stackrel{\eqref{eq: n' min deg}}{\leq} \frac{\delta_0^+}{10^7 k^2 (k+\ell)^2m^2}$
and  \newline $\displaystyle |E^B(i,j)| \leq 2^{1-c} d_{D'}^-(y_{i,j})+2\ell \stackrel{\eqref{eq: n' min deg}}{\leq}   \frac{\delta_0^-}{10^7 k^2(k+\ell)^2m^2}$.
\end{enumerate}
Note that we obtain \ref{AB3} because we have $d^+_{D^X_{i,j}}(x_{i,j})\leq d_{D'}^+(x_{i,j})\leq \delta_0^+$ and $d^-_{D^Y_{i,j}}(y_{i,j})\leq d_{D'}^+(y_{i,j})\leq \delta_0^+$.
Note that
\begin{align}\label{eq: size C}
|C| \stackrel{\ref{AB1}}{\leq}250 k^2 h + 30 kh \log (km\ell) \leq 4\cdot 10^5 k^2(k+\ell)^2 tm \log(m).
\end{align}

Later, we wish to assign vertices in $Q_i$ to some $W_j$. In order for this, we need to ensure that there are many paths from a vertex in $Q_i$ to $W_j$. To ensure this we want to prepare a set $Q'_i$ and a set $Q^*_i$ so that
there are many paths between $Q_i$ and $Q^*_i$ through $Q'_i$, and there are many paths between $Q^*_i$ and $C_j$ for many $j\in [h]$ (See Figure~\ref{fig: Z} for the case when $j=1$).
Note that the reason why we need $Q'_i$ is that the vertices in $Q_i$ might have very low in/out-degree compare to $\delta^-_0$ or $\delta^+_0$. In particular, \eqref{eq: outside F} might not hold for the vertices in $Q_i$, but it holds for the vertices in $Q'_i$.

\begin{CLAIM}\label{claim:q'}
There exist pairwise disjoint sets $Q_1' , \dots , Q_t' \subseteq V' \setminus C$ satisfying the following for each $i \in [t]$ and $u\in Q_i\cup Q'_i$.
\begin{enumerate}[label=\text{\rm (Q$'$\arabic*)}]
\item\label{Q'0} The sets $C , Q_1 , \dots , Q_t , Q_1' , \dots , Q_t'$ are pairwise disjoint.
\item\label{Q'1} $|Q_i'| \leq 4k(k+\ell)$.
\item\label{Q'2} Both $(u, Q_i')$ and $(Q_i',u)$ are $k$-connected in $D[Q_i \cup Q_i']$.
\end{enumerate}
\end{CLAIM}
\begin{proof}
We iteratively define pairwise disjoint sets $Q_1',\dots, Q'_t$ in order satisfying all \ref{Q'0}--\ref{Q'2}.
 Let $i \in [t]$ and assume that we have defined $Q_1' , \dots , Q_{i-1}'$ satisfying all \ref{Q'0}--\ref{Q'2}. By applying Lemma~\ref{lem:sparse} to $D[Q_i]$, there are two sets $Q^{\rm source}_i, Q^{\rm sink}_i \subseteq Q_i$ such that $|Q^{\rm source}_i|, |Q^{\rm sink}_i|\leq 2k+ \ell-2$ and
\begin{equation}\label{eq: Qi kconn}
\begin{minipage}[c]{0.9\textwidth}\em
for every $v\in Q_i$,
both
$(v,Q^{\rm sink}_i)$ and $(Q^{\rm source}_i,v)$ are $k$-connected in
$D[Q_i]$.
\end{minipage}
\end{equation}
Note that for each $u\in Q^{\rm source}_i$, we have
\begin{align*}
\big|N_D^-(u)\setminus (Q \cup C \cup \bigcup_{j\in [i-1]} Q_{j}')\big|
\stackrel{\eqref{eq: size C}, \ref{Q'1} }{\geq} \delta^{-}(D) - qt - 4\cdot 10^5 k^2(k+\ell)^2 tm \log(m) - 4kt(k+\ell) \stackrel{\eqref{eq: n min deg}}{\geq} k.
\end{align*}
Thus for every $u \in Q^{\rm source}_i$, we can choose a set  $\widetilde{Q}_{i,u} \subseteq N_D^-(u) \setminus (Q \cup C \cup \bigcup_{j=1}^{i-1} Q'_{j})$ with $|\widetilde{Q}_{i,u}|= k$.
Let $\widetilde{Q}_i := \bigcup_{u \in Q^{\rm source}_i}\widetilde{Q}_{i,u}$, then we have $|\widetilde{Q}_i|\leq k(2k+\ell-2)$ and
\begin{equation}\label{eq: Qsharpi kconn}
\begin{minipage}[c]{0.9\textwidth}\em
for each $u\in Q^{\rm source}_i$, the pair
$(\widetilde{Q}_i , u )$ is $k$-connected in
$D[Q_i\cup \widetilde{Q}_i]$.
\end{minipage}
\end{equation}
Similarly, for each $u\in Q^{\rm sink}_i$, we have
\begin{align*}
\big|N_D^+(u)\setminus (Q \cup C \cup \bigcup_{j\in [i-1]} Q_{j}')\big|
\stackrel{\eqref{eq: size C}, \ref{Q'1}}{\geq} \delta^{+}(D) - qt - 4\cdot 10^5 k^2(k+\ell)^2 tm \log(m) - 4kt(k+\ell) \stackrel{\eqref{eq: n min deg}}{\geq} k.
\end{align*}
Thus for every $u \in Q^{\rm sink}_i$, we can choose a set  $\widehat{Q}_{i,u} \subseteq N_D^+(u) \setminus (Q \cup C \cup \bigcup_{j=1}^{i-1} Q'_{j})$ with $|\widehat{Q}_{i,u}|= k$.
Let $\widehat{Q}_i := \bigcup_{u \in Q^{\rm sink}_i}\widehat{Q}_{i,u}$, then we have $|\widehat{Q}_i|\leq k(2k+\ell-2)$ and
\begin{equation}\label{eq: Qsharpi kconn_2}
\begin{minipage}[c]{0.9\textwidth}\em
for each $u\in Q^{\rm sink}_i$, the pair
$(u , \widehat{Q}_i )$ is $k$-connected in
$D[Q_i\cup \widehat{Q}_i]$.
\end{minipage}
\end{equation}
Let $Q_i' := \widetilde{Q_i} \cup \widehat{Q_i}$.
Then $|Q'_i| \leq 2k(2k+\ell-2) \leq 4k(k+\ell)$, so we prove \ref{Q'1}.
The contruction and \ref{AB1} imply \ref{Q'0}.
 Combining Lemma~\ref{lem:glue} with~\eqref{eq: Qi kconn},~\eqref{eq: Qsharpi kconn}, and~\eqref{eq: Qsharpi kconn_2} it follows that $Q_i'$ satisfies \ref{Q'2}. This completes the proof.
\end{proof}

Let $Q' := \bigcup_{i=1}^{t}Q_i'$. Then by Claim~\ref{claim:q'} we have
\begin{align}\label{eqn:q'}
|Q'| \leq \sum_{i=1}^{t}|Q_i'| \leq 4k(k+\ell)t.
\end{align}

\noindent {\bf Step 2. Defining exceptional vertices and constructing sets $C^*_i$ and $Q^*_i$.} In this step, we define layers of the following two types of ``exceptional" vertices.

For each $i\in [h]$ and $S\in \{A,B\}$, we define
\begin{align}\label{eq: E def}
\begin{split}
E^S_i  &:=  \left\{x \in V' \setminus C \: \colon \: \big|\{ j\in [3k] \colon x \in E^S(i,j)\}\big| \geq k \right\} \text{ and }
\end{split}\\
\begin{split}\label{eq: F def}
F^S & :=\big\{x \in V' \setminus C \: \colon \:
|\{ i\in [h] \colon x \in E^S_i\}| \geq \frac{t}{100 k(k+\ell)} \big\}.
\end{split}
\end{align}

Note that for any vertex $u \in V' \setminus (C \cup E^A_i \cup E^B_i)$, there are at least $3k - 2k \geq k$ indices $j \in [3k]$ such that there exist an edge from $u$ to $A_{i,j}$ and an edge from $B_{i,j}$ to $u$. Hence, this ensures that if $W \subseteq V(D)$ contains $C_i$ and $D[W]$ is strongly $k$-connected, then $D[W \cup \{u \}]$ is also strongly $k$-connected. For each $j \subseteq [h]$, if $U_j \subseteq V(D)$ contains $C_j$ and $D[U_j]$ is strongly $k$-connected, then for any vertex $u \in V' \setminus (C \cup F^A \cup F^B)$, the digraph $D[U_j \cup \{u \}]$ is strongly $k$-connected for all but at most $\frac{t}{100k(k+\ell)}$ choices $j \in [h]$.

These definitions yield the following upper bounds on the size of each exceptional set, which is independent of $t$. For each $i\in [h]$, we have
\begin{align}
\begin{split}\label{eq: E size}
|E^A_i| &\leq\frac{1}{k} \sum_{j=1}^{3k}|E_A(i,j)| \stackrel{\ref{AB3}}{\leq}
\frac{3\delta_0^+}{10^{7}k^2(k+\ell)^2m^2 }, \enspace \\
|E^B_i| &\leq \frac{1}{k}\sum_{j=1}^{3k}|E_B(i,j)| \stackrel{\ref{AB3}}{\leq} \frac{3\delta_0^-}{10^{7}k^2(k+\ell)^2 m^2 },
\end{split}\\
\begin{split}\label{eq: F size}
|F^A| &\leq \frac{100k(k+\ell)}{t}\sum_{i \in [h]}|E^A_i|\stackrel{\eqref{eq: E size}}{\leq} \frac{300k(k+\ell)h \delta_0^+}{10^{7}k^2(k+\ell)^2  m^2 t } \leq
\frac{\delta^+_0}{24 m}\leq
\frac{\delta^+_0}{30}  \enspace \text{and}  \enspace \\
|F^B| &\leq \frac{100k(k+\ell)}{t}\sum_{i \in [h]}|E^B_i|\stackrel{\eqref{eq: E size}}{\leq} \frac{300k(k+\ell)h \delta_0^-}{10^{7}k^2(k+\ell)^2  m^2 t } \leq
 \frac{\delta^-_0}{30 } \stackrel{\eqref{eq: symmetry assume}}{\leq}  \frac{\delta^+_0}{30 }.
\end{split}
\end{align}\COMMENT{
$\frac{100k(k+\ell)h \delta_0^+}{10^{6}k^2(k+\ell)^2  m^2 t }
\leq \frac{120000 \delta_0^+}{10^{6}  m^2} \leq \frac{\delta^+_0}{30 }$ as $m\geq 2$.
}

Therefore, for every vertex $v\in V'\setminus V_{\rm low}$ and $i\in [h]$, \eqref{eq: E size} with \eqref{eq: F size}, \eqref{eq: n min deg} and \eqref{eq: size C} implies that
\begin{align}\label{eq: outside F}
|N_{D'}^+(v)\setminus (C\cup F^A\cup F^B \cup E^A_i\cup E^B_i)|\geq \frac{9}{10}\delta^+_0 \enspace \text{and} \enspace
|N_{D'}^-(v)\setminus (C\cup F^B\cup E^B_i)| \geq \frac{9}{10}\delta^-_0.
\end{align}

The bounds~\eqref{eq: outside F} allow us to choose non-exceptional neighbours of a vertex $u\in V' \setminus V_{\rm low}$ which has in/out-degree at least $\delta^-_0$ and $\delta^+_0$, respectively. In {\bf Step 3}, we will be often in a position to ``distribute" many vertices into pairwise disjoint  $k$-connected sets, while preserving $k$-connectedness and not increasing the size of each too much. We will use the bound on $|F^S|$ to obtain a desired distribution. We will also use the bound on $|E_i^S|$ to ensure~\ref{A4} of Lemma~\ref{lem:main} at the end.

Let $W \subseteq V(D)$ be a set containing $C_i$. Some exceptional vertices in $(E_i^A \cup E_i^B ) \setminus W$ may not have edges to $A_{i,j}$ or edges from $B_{i,j}$ for many indices $j \in [3k]$, however, we wish to find $k$ internally vertex-disjoint paths from/to each exceptional vertex to/from $W$, respectively. In order to do this, for each exceptional vertex $v \in (E_i^A \cup E_i^B) \setminus W$, we take non-exceptional vertices $v^+_1,\dots, v^+_k \in N^+_D(v)$ and $v^-_1,\dots, v^-_k\in N^-_D(v)$ and allocate all vertices $v,v^+_1,\dots, v^+_k, v^-_1,\dots, v^-_k$ together to $W$.
Then there are $k$ internally vertex-disjoint paths from/to $v$ to/from $W$ through the vertices in $\{ v^+_1 , \dots , v^+_k, v^-_1,\dots, v^-_k \}$, respectively.

In a similar way, when we add vertices in some set $U$ into a set $W$, we will find another small set $U^*$ of vertices and put $U$ together with $U^*$ into $W$ in such a way that there are many paths between vertices in $U\cup U^*$  and non-exceptional vertices in $U^*$. We often use the following Claim~\ref{cl: extension} as a blackbox in order to build such  well connected linkages in {\bf Step 3}.

Note that the proof of Claim~\ref{cl: extension} looks similar to the proof of Claim~\ref{claim:q'}, however, it uses slightly different arguments due to the additional constraints in~\ref{U*2} that guarantee linkages from/to non-exceptional vertices. While \ref{Q'2} trivially holds for vertices in $Q'_i$, \ref{U*2} is no longer obvious for vertices in $U_i^*$ which also belong to either $E_i^A \cup F^A$ or $E_i^B \cup F^B$.

\begin{figure}
\centering
\begin{tikzpicture}[scale=1]

  \draw[fill=none] (0,0) ellipse [x radius=3,y radius=1];
  \draw (-1,0.96) -- (-1,-0.96);
   \draw (1,0.96) -- (1,-0.96);
  \node at (0,0) {$U_i$};
  \node at (2.2,0) {$U^{\rm sink}_i$};
  \node at (-2,0) {$U^{\rm source}_i$};

\draw[middleupupuparrow={latex}, line width=0.7mm] (-1.25,0) -- (-0.75,0);
\draw[middleupupuparrow={latex}, line width=0.7mm] (0.75,0) -- (1.25,0) ;

 \draw[fill=none] (-2,-1.5) ellipse [x radius=0.9,y radius=0.65];
 \node at (-2.3,-1.5) {$\widetilde{U}_i$};

\draw[middleupupuparrow={latex}, line width=0.7mm] (-1.8,-1.1) -- (-1.55,-0.7);

\draw[pattern=crosshatch] (-1.4,-1.5) ellipse [x radius=0.3,y radius=0.3];
\draw[middleupuparrow={latex}, line width=0.7mm] (-1.2,-1.5) -- (-0.55,-1.5);
\draw[middleupupupuparrow={latex}, line width=0.7mm] (-1.9,-1.5) -- (-1.5,-1.5);

\draw[pattern=crosshatch] (1.3,-0.62) ellipse [x radius=0.3,y radius=0.3];
\draw[middleupuparrow={latex}, line width=0.7mm] (1.2,-0.75) -- (0.8,-1.35);

\draw[middleupupuparrow={latex}, line width=0.7mm] (1.6,-0.1) -- (1.3,-0.55);

 \draw[fill=none] (0.2,-1.5) ellipse [x radius=0.9,y radius=0.45];
 \node at (0.2,-1.5) {$\widehat{U}_i$};

\draw[pattern=crosshatch] (3,-1.7) ellipse [x radius=0.3,y radius=0.3];
 \node at (4.1,-1.7) {= $\widetilde{U}^{\rm sink}_i$};

\end{tikzpicture}
\caption{Structure of $U_i^*$ in the proof of Claim~\ref{cl: extension}.}\label{fig: *}
\end{figure}

\begin{CLAIM}\label{cl: extension}
Let $U\subseteq V(D')$ with $|U| \leq 10^6 k^2\ell (k+\ell)^2 tm \log(m)$. Let $h'\in [h]$ and $U_1,\dots, U_{h'} \subseteq V(D')\setminus V_{\rm low}$.
Then there exist pairwise disjoint sets $U^*_1,\dots, U^*_{h'} \subseteq V(D')\setminus U$ such that the following hold for all $i\in [h']$ and $u\in U_i\cup U^*_i$.
\begin{enumerate}[label=\text{\rm (U$^*$\arabic*)}]
\item\label{U*1} $|U^*_i| \leq 4k(k+\ell)$.
\item\label{U*2} Both $(u,U^*_i\setminus (C\cup E^A_i\cup F^A) )$ and $(U^*_i\setminus (C\cup E^B_i\cup F^B),u )$ are $k$-connected in $D[U_i\cup U^*_i]$.
\end{enumerate}
\end{CLAIM}
\begin{proof}
We iteratively construct pairwise disjoint sets $U_1^* , \dots , U_{h'}^* \subseteq V(D') \setminus U$ satisfying the claim. Let us assume that for some $i\in [h']$ we have constructed pairwise disjoint sets $U^*_1,\dots, U^*_{i-1}\subseteq V'\setminus U$ satisfying the following.
\begin{enumerate}
\item[(U1)$^{i-1}$] For each $j\in [i-1]$, we have $|U^*_j| \leq 4k(k+\ell)$.
\item[(U2)$^{i-1}$] For each $j\in [i-1]$ and $u\in U_j\cup U^*_j$, both $(u,U^*_j \setminus (C\cup E^A_j\cup F^A) )$ and $(U^*_j \setminus (C\cup E^B_j\cup F^B),u )$ are $k$-connected in $D[U_j\cup U^*_j]$.
\end{enumerate}

Note that the empty collection satisfies (U1)$^{0}$ and (U2)$^{0}$.
See Figure~\ref{fig: *}. We want to build sets $\widetilde{U}_i$ and $\widehat{U}_i$ such that $(\widetilde{U}_i,u)$ and $(u,\widehat{U}_i)$ are both $k$-connected in $D[U^*_i]$ for all $u\in U^*_i$.

By applying Lemma~\ref{lem:sparse} to $D[U_i]$, there are two sets $U^{\rm source}_i, U^{\rm sink}_i \subseteq U_i$ such that $|U^{\rm source}_i|, |U^{\rm sink}_i|\leq 2k+ \ell-2$ and
\begin{equation}\label{eq: Ci kconn}
\begin{minipage}[c]{0.9\textwidth}\em
for every $v\in U_i$,
both
$(v,U^{\rm sink}_i)$ and $(U^{\rm source}_i,v)$ are $k$-connected in
$D[U_i]$.
\end{minipage}
\end{equation}
\COMMENT{If $U_i=\emptyset$, then $U^{\rm source}_i = U^{\rm sink}_i=\emptyset$ vacuously satisfies \eqref{eq: Ci kconn}.}
Note that for each $u\in U^{\rm source}_i$, we have
\begin{align*}
\big|N_{D'}^-(u)\setminus (U\cup C\cup E^B_i\cup F^B \cup \bigcup_{j\in [i-1]} U^*_{j})\big|
\stackrel{\substack{\eqref{eq: outside F},\eqref{eq: size C},\\ \text{(U1)$^{i-1}$}} }{\geq} \frac{9}{10}\delta^-_0- 2\cdot 10^6 k^2\ell(k+\ell)^2 tm \log(m)\stackrel{\eqref{eq: n' min deg}}{\geq} k.
\end{align*}
Thus for every $u \in U^{\rm source}_i$, we can choose a set  $\widetilde{U}_{i,u} \subseteq N_{D'}^-(u) \setminus (U \cup C \cup E^B_i\cup F^B \cup \bigcup_{j=1}^{i-1} U^*_{j})$ with $|\widetilde{U}_{i,u}|= k$.
Let $\widetilde{U}_i := \bigcup_{u \in U^{\rm source}_i}\widetilde{U}_{i,u}$, then we have $|\widetilde{U}_i|\leq k(2k+\ell-2)$ and
\begin{equation}\label{eq: Csharpi kconn}
\begin{minipage}[c]{0.9\textwidth}\em
for each $u\in U^{\rm source}_i$, the pair
$(\widetilde{U}_i\setminus (C\cup E^B_i\cup F^B),u )$ is $k$-connected in
$D[U_i\cup \widetilde{U}_i]$.
\end{minipage}
\end{equation}

Similarly, applying Lemma~\ref{lem:sparse} to $D[\widetilde{U}_i\cup U^{\rm sink}_i]$, there exists a set $\widetilde{U}^{\rm sink}_i \subseteq \widetilde{U}_i\cup U^{\rm sink}_i$ such that
$|\widetilde{U}^{\rm sink}_i|\leq 2k+ \ell-2$ and
\begin{equation}\label{eq: tilde Ci kconn}
\begin{minipage}[c]{0.9\textwidth}\em
for each $v\in \widetilde{U}_i\cup U^{\rm sink}_i$, the pair
$(v,\widetilde{U}^{\rm sink}_i)$ is $k$-connected in
$D[\widetilde{U}_i\cup U^{\rm sink}_i]$.
\end{minipage}
\end{equation}
Note that, again for each $u\in \widetilde{U}^{\rm sink}_i$, we have
\begin{align*}
\big|N_{D'}^+(u)\setminus (U\cup C\cup \bigcup_{S\in \{A,B\}} (E^S_i\cup F^S) \cup \bigcup_{j\in [i-1]} U^*_{j})\big|
\stackrel{\substack{\eqref{eq: outside F},\eqref{eq: size C},\\ \text{(U1)$^{i-1}$}} }{\geq} \frac{9}{10} \delta^+_0 - 10^7 k^2\ell(k+\ell)^2 tm \log(m) \stackrel{\eqref{eq: n' min deg}}{\geq} k.
\end{align*}
Thus for every $u\in \widetilde{U}^{\rm sink}_i$, we can choose a set $\widehat{U}_{i,u} \subseteq N_{D'}^+(u)\setminus (U\cup C\cup \bigcup_{S\in \{A,B\}} (E^S_i\cup F^S)  \cup \bigcup_{j\in [i-1]} U^*_{j})$ with $|\widehat{U}_{i,u}|= k$.
Let $\widehat{U}_i := \bigcup_{u \in \widetilde{U}^{\rm sink}_i} \widehat{U}_{i,u}$,  then we have $|\widehat{U}_i|\leq k(2k+\ell-2)$ and
\begin{equation}\label{eq: Csharpi kconn 2}
\begin{minipage}[c]{0.9\textwidth}\em
for each $u\in  \widetilde{U}^{\rm sink}_i$, the pair
$(v, \widehat{U}_i\setminus (C\cup E^A_i\cup E^B_i\cup F^A\cup  F^B) )$ is $k$-connected in  $D[U_i\cup  \widetilde{U}_i\cup \widehat{U}_i]$.
\end{minipage}
\end{equation}
Let $U^*_i:= \widetilde{U}_i\cup \widehat{U}_i$, then $|U^*_i| \leq 2k(2k+\ell-2)\leq 4k(k+\ell)$, thus (U1)$^{i}$ follows, and $U^*_i$ is disjoint from the sets $U, U^*_1,\dots, U^*_{i-1}$ from its construction.

Now we prove that $U_i^*$ satisfies (U2)$^i$.
Note that $U^*_i \cap (C\cup E^B_i\cup F^B) = \emptyset$.
Thus, for $v\in U^*_i$, it is clear that $(U^*_i\setminus (C\cup E^B_i\cup F^B),v )$ is $k$-connected in $D[U_i\cup U^*_i]$.
If $v\in U_i$, then Lemma~\ref{lem:glue} with \eqref{eq: Ci kconn} and \eqref{eq: Csharpi kconn} implies that $(U^*_i\setminus ( C\cup E^B_i\cup F^B),v )$ is $k$-connected in $D[U_i\cup U^*_i]$.

Similarly, if $v\in \widehat{U}_i \subseteq U^*_i\setminus (C\cup E^A_i\cup E^B_i\cup F^A\cup F^B)$, then it is clear that $(v, U^*_i\setminus(C\cup E^A_i\cup E^B_i\cup F^A\cup F^B))$ is  $k$-connected in $D[U_i\cup U^*_i]$.
If $v\in \widetilde{U}^{\rm sink}_i$, then \eqref{eq: Csharpi kconn 2} implies that $(v, U^*_i\setminus(C\cup E^A_i\cup E^B_i\cup F^A\cup F^B))$ is $k$-connected in $D[U_i\cup U^*_i]$.
If $v\in  \widetilde{U}_i\cup U^{\rm sink}_i$, then Lemma~\ref{lem:glue}  with \eqref{eq: tilde Ci kconn} and \eqref{eq: Csharpi kconn 2} implies that $(v, U^*_i\setminus (C\cup E^A_i\cup E^B_i\cup F^A\cup F^B) )$ is $k$-connected in $D[U_i\cup U^*_i]$.
If $v\in U_i$, then Lemma~\ref{lem:glue}  with \eqref{eq: Ci kconn}
implies $(v, U^*_i\setminus (C\cup E^A_i\cup E^B_i\cup F^A\cup F^B) )$ is $k$-connected in $D[U_i\cup U^*_i]$. Thus $U^*_i$ satisfies (U2)$^{i}$.
By repeating this, we obtain desired pairwise disjoint sets $U^*_1,\dots, U^*_h$ satisfying (U1)$^{h'}$ and (U2)$^{h'}$, thus \ref{U*1} and \ref{U*2}. This proves the claim.
\end{proof}
 \vspace{0.3cm}

\noindent {\bf Step 3. Construction of sets $W'_1,\dots, W'_t$.}
In this step, we construct sets $W'_1,\dots, W'_{t}$ satisfying the following \ref{W'0}--\ref{W'3}. Each $W'_i$ together with some more vertices will give the desired set $W_i$ later.

\begin{figure}
\centering
\begin{tikzpicture}[scale=0.92]

  \draw[fill=none, rounded corners=8] (-0.5,-6) rectangle (10.5,2.2);

\node at (5,1.7) {$C_1$};

\draw[middleupuparrow={latex}, line width=0.6mm] (1.9,2.1) -- (1.9,2.1+0.5) ;
\draw[middleupuparrow={latex}, line width=0.6mm] (2.1,2.1+0.5) -- (2.1,2.1) ;

  \draw[fill=none] (2,3.5) ellipse [x radius=1,y radius=1];
  \node at (2,3.5) {$C_1^*$};

\draw[middleupuparrow={latex}, line width=0.6mm] (5.9,2.1+0.5) -- (5.9,2.1) ;
\draw[middleupuparrow={latex}, line width=0.6mm] (6.1,2.1) -- (6.1,2.1+0.5) ;

  \draw[fill=none] (6,2.7+0.5) ellipse [x radius=0.7,y radius=0.7];
  \node at (6,2.7+0.5) {$Q_i^*$};

\draw[middleupuparrow={latex}, line width=0.6mm] (7.1,3.3) -- (6.6,3.3) ;
\draw[middleupuparrow={latex}, line width=0.6mm] (6.6,3.1) -- (7.1,3.1) ;

  \draw[fill=none, rounded corners=8] (7,2.3) rectangle (9,5);

  \draw[fill=none] (8,3) ellipse [x radius=0.5,y radius=0.5];
  \node at (8,3) {$Q'_i$};

  \draw[fill=none] (8,4.3) ellipse [x radius=0.5,y radius=0.5];
  \node at (8,4.3) {$Q_i$};

\draw[middleupuparrow={latex}, line width=0.6mm] (7.9,3.4) -- (7.9,3.9) ;
\draw[middleupuparrow={latex}, line width=0.6mm] (8.1,3.9) -- (8.1,3.4) ;

  \draw[fill=none] (6,-7.5) ellipse [x radius=0.5,y radius=0.5];
  \node at (6,-7.5) {$\Int_1^*$};

\draw[middleupuparrow={latex}, line width=0.6mm] (6.1,-7.1) -- (6.1,-6.6) ;
\draw[middleupuparrow={latex}, line width=0.6mm] (5.9,-6.6) -- (5.9,-7.1);

\draw[middleupuparrow={latex}, line width=0.6mm] (5.9,-7.9) -- (5.9,-8.4) ;
\draw[middleupuparrow={latex}, line width=0.6mm] (6.1,-8.4) -- (6.1,-7.9) ;

  \draw[fill=none] (8,0) ellipse [x radius=0.8,y radius=1.5];

\node at (8.5,0) {$B_{1,1}$};

  \draw[fill=none] (8,-4) ellipse [x radius=0.8,y radius=1.5];

\node at (8.5,-4) {$B_{1,2}$};

 \draw[fill=none] (1,0) ellipse [x radius=0.8,y radius=1.5];
\node at (1.5,0) {$A_{1,1}$};
 \draw[fill=none] (1,-4) ellipse [x radius=0.8,y radius=1.5];
\node at (1.5,-4) {$A_{1,2}$};

\filldraw[fill=black] (1,1) circle (2pt);
\filldraw[fill=black] (1,0.33) circle (2pt);
\filldraw[fill=black] (1,-0.33) circle (2pt);
\filldraw[fill=black] (1,-1) circle (2pt);

\draw[middleuparrow={latex}] (1,1) -- (1,0.33) ;
\draw[middleuparrow={latex}] (1,0.33) -- (1,-0.33) ;
\draw[middleuparrow={latex}] (1,-0.33) -- (1,-1) ;

\node at (1,-1.25) {$a_{1,1}$};
\node at (1,1.2) {$x_{1,1}$};

 \draw[fill=none] (2.7,1) ellipse [x radius=0.4,y radius=0.75];
 \node at (2.7,1) {$X_{1,1}$};
\draw[middleuparrow={latex}] (1,1) -- (2.4,1.5);
\draw[middleuparrow={latex}] (1,1) -- (2.3,1.2);
\draw[middledownarrow={latex}] (2.3,0.8) -- (1,1);
\draw[middledownarrow={latex}] (2.4,0.5) -- (1,1);

\filldraw[fill=black] (1,-3) circle (2pt);
\filldraw[fill=black] (1,-3.67) circle (2pt);
\filldraw[fill=black] (1,-4.33) circle (2pt);
\filldraw[fill=black] (1,-5) circle (2pt);

\draw[middleuparrow={latex}] (1,-3) -- (1,-3.67) ;
\draw[middleuparrow={latex}] (1,-3.67) -- (1,-4.33) ;
\draw[middleuparrow={latex}] (1,-4.33) -- (1,-5) ;

\node at (1,-5.25) {$a_{1,2}$};
\node at (1,-2.8) {$x_{1,2}$};

 \draw[fill=none] (2.7,-3) ellipse [x radius=0.4,y radius=0.75];
 \node at (2.7,-3) {$X_{1,2}$};
\draw[middleuparrow={latex}] (1,-3) -- (2.4,-2.5);
\draw[middleuparrow={latex}] (1,-3) -- (2.3,-2.8);
\draw[middledownarrow={latex}] (2.3,-3.2) -- (1,-3);
\draw[middledownarrow={latex}] (2.4,-3.5) -- (1,-3);

\filldraw[fill=black] (8,1) circle (2pt);
\filldraw[fill=black] (8,0.33) circle (2pt);
\filldraw[fill=black] (8,-0.33) circle (2pt);
\filldraw[fill=black] (8,-1) circle (2pt);

\draw[middleuparrow={latex}] (8,0.33) -- (8,1);
\draw[middleuparrow={latex}] (8,-0.33) -- (8,0.33) ;
\draw[middleuparrow={latex}] (8,-1) -- (8,-0.33) ;

\node at (8.1,-1.25) {$b_{1,1}$};
\node at (8.1,1.2) {$y_{1,1}$};

 \draw[fill=none] (9.7,1) ellipse [x radius=0.4,y radius=0.75];
 \node at (9.7,1) {$Y_{1,1}$};
\draw[middleuparrow={latex}] (8,1) -- (9.4,1.5);
\draw[middleuparrow={latex}] (8,1) -- (9.3,1.2);
\draw[middledownarrow={latex}] (9.3,0.8) -- (8,1);
\draw[middledownarrow={latex}] (9.4,0.5) -- (8,1);

\filldraw[fill=black] (8,-3) circle (2pt);
\filldraw[fill=black] (8,-3.67) circle (2pt);
\filldraw[fill=black] (8,-4.33) circle (2pt);
\filldraw[fill=black] (8,-5) circle (2pt);

\draw[middleuparrow={latex}] (8,-3.67) -- (8,-3);
\draw[middleuparrow={latex}] (8,-4.33) -- (8,-3.67) ;
\draw[middleuparrow={latex}] (8,-5) -- (8,-4.33) ;

\node at (8.1,-5.25) {$b_{1,2}$};
\node at (8.1,-2.8) {$y_{1,2}$};

 \draw[fill=none] (9.7,-3) ellipse [x radius=0.4,y radius=0.75];
 \node at (9.7,-3) {$Y_{1,2}$};
\draw[middleuparrow={latex}] (8,-3) -- (9.4,-2.5);
\draw[middleuparrow={latex}] (8,-3) -- (9.3,-2.8);
\draw[middledownarrow={latex}] (9.3,-3.2) -- (8,-3);
\draw[middledownarrow={latex}] (9.4,-3.5) -- (8,-3);

\filldraw[fill=black] (1,-8.5) circle (2pt);
\filldraw[fill=black] (2,-8.5) circle (2pt);
\filldraw[fill=black] (3,-8.5) circle (2pt);
\filldraw[fill=black] (4,-8.5) circle (2pt);
\filldraw[fill=black] (5,-8.5) circle (2pt);
\filldraw[fill=black] (6,-8.5) circle (2pt);
\filldraw[fill=black] (7,-8.5) circle (2pt);
\filldraw[fill=black] (8,-8.5) circle (2pt);

\draw[middlearrow={latex}] (1,-1) -- (-1.5,-1);
\draw[middlearrow={latex}] (-1.5,-1) -- (-1.5,-8.5);

\draw[middlearrow={latex}] (-1.5,-8.5) -- (1,-8.5);
\draw[middlearrow={latex}] (1,-8.5) -- (2,-8.5);
\draw[middlearrow={latex}] (2,-8.5) -- (3,-8.5);
\draw[middlearrow={latex}] (3,-8.5) -- (4,-8.5);
\draw[middlearrow={latex}] (4,-8.5) -- (5,-8.5);
\draw[middlearrow={latex}] (5,-8.5) -- (6,-8.5);
\draw[middlearrow={latex}] (6,-8.5) -- (7,-8.5);

\draw[middlearrow={latex}] (7,-8.5) -- (8,-8.5);

\draw[middlearrow={latex}] (8,-8.5) -- (11.5,-8.5);

\draw[middlearrow={latex}] (11.5,-1) -- (8,-1);
\draw[middlearrow={latex}] (11.5,-8.5) -- (11.5,-1);

\node at (4.5,-7) {{\bf $P_{1,2}$}};

\node at (4.5,-9) {{\bf $P_{1,1}$}};

\filldraw[fill=black] (1,-6.5) circle (2pt);
\filldraw[fill=black] (2,-6.5) circle (2pt);
\filldraw[fill=black] (3,-6.5) circle (2pt);
\filldraw[fill=black] (4,-6.5) circle (2pt);
\filldraw[fill=black] (5,-6.5) circle (2pt);
\filldraw[fill=black] (6,-6.5) circle (2pt);
\filldraw[fill=black] (7,-6.5) circle (2pt);
\filldraw[fill=black] (8,-6.5) circle (2pt);

\draw[middlearrow={latex}] (1,-5) -- (1,-6.5);
\draw[middlearrow={latex}] (1,-6.5) -- (2,-6.5);
\draw[middlearrow={latex}] (2,-6.5) -- (3,-6.5);
\draw[middlearrow={latex}] (3,-6.5) -- (4,-6.5);
\draw[middlearrow={latex}] (4,-6.5) -- (5,-6.5);
\draw[middlearrow={latex}] (5,-6.5) -- (6,-6.5);
\draw[middlearrow={latex}] (6,-6.5) -- (7,-6.5);
\draw[middlearrow={latex}] (7,-6.5) -- (8,-6.5);
\draw[middlearrow={latex}] (8,-6.5) -- (8,-5);

\end{tikzpicture}
\caption{Structure of $Z_1$.}\label{fig: Z}
\end{figure}

\begin{PROP}\label{prop: W'}
After permuting the indices in $[h]$ (hence the sets $C_1,\dots, C_{h}$), there exist pairwise disjoint sets $W'_1,\dots, W'_{t}\subseteq V$ of vertices and pairwise vertex-disjoint paths
$P_{1,1},\dots, P_{t,3k}$ that satisfy the following for each $i\in [t]$, where $W'=\bigcup_{i\in [t]} W'_i$.
\begin{enumerate}[label=\text{\rm (W$'$\arabic*)}]
\item\label{W'0} $Q_i \cup C_{i} \cup \bigcup_{j\in [3k]} \Int(P_{i,j}) \subseteq W'_i$ and $C\subseteq W'$.
\item \label{W'1}$3k +\ell \leq |W'_i| \leq \frac{n}{180mt}$.
\item \label{W'2} For each $v\in W'_i$, both $(v, V'\setminus(C\cup E^A_i))$ and $(V'\setminus (C \cup E^B_i),v )$ are $k$-connected in $D[W'_i]$.
\item \label{W'3}For each $j\in [3k]$, the path $P_{i,j}$ starts at $a_{i,j}$ and ends at $b_{i,j}$.
\end{enumerate}
\end{PROP}
\begin{proof}

To prove this proposition, we will first construct pairwise disjoint vertex sets $Z_1,\dots, Z_t$ which satisfy \ref{W'2}, \ref{W'3} and the first part of \ref{W'0}. For this, we will construct sets $C_i, C^*_i, Q^{*}_i, \Int^*_i$ and paths $P_{i,j}$ for all $i\in [h]$ and $j\in [3k]$. After that, we will discard some of these sets and we will permute the indices in $[t]$ so that the remaining sets are $Z_1,\dots, Z_t$ containing $C_1,\dots, C_t$, respectively.  Once we obtain such sets, we will distribute more vertices into appropriate sets $Z_i$ to obtain a desired set $W'_i$ that also satisfies~\ref{W'0} and~\ref{W'1}.  Figure~\ref{fig: Z} shows how we will construct $Z_i$.

First, we construct disjoint sets $C^*_1,\dots, C^*_h$. The below property \ref{C*2} ensures that every exceptional vertex in $C_i\cup C^*_i$ can reach to $V'\setminus E^A_i$ and can be reached from $V'\setminus E^B_i$ even after deleting at most $k-1$ vertices.
Moreover, as we plan to later discard $C_i\cup C^*_i$ for some $i\in [h]$, we wish to be able to reassign them to $Z_j$ for many appropriate choices of $j\in [h]$ to satisfy $C \subseteq W'$, without making each set $Z_j$ too large. Note that \ref{C*2} also ensures that every vertex can reach to $V'\setminus F^A$ and can be reached from $V'\setminus F^B$ even after deleting at most $k-1$ vertices, and the vertices $v$ outside $F^A$ or $F^B$ have many `good' choices of $Z_{j}$ to ensure~\ref{W'2}, allowing us to reassign the vertices in $C_i\cup C^*_i$ together to some $Z_j$.

\begin{CLAIM}\label{claim:c*}
There exist pairwise disjoint sets $C^*_1,\dots, C^*_h \subseteq V'\setminus (Q' \cup C)$ satisfying the following. For all $i\in [h]$ and $v\in C_i\cup C^*_i$,
\begin{enumerate}[label=\text{\rm (C$^*$\arabic*)}]
\item \label{C*0} The sets $C , C^*_1 , \dots , C^*_h , Q_1 , \dots , Q_t , Q_1' , \dots , Q_t'$ are pairwise disjoint.
\item\label{C*1} $|C^*_i| \leq 4k(k+\ell)$.
\item\label{C*2} Both $(v,C^*_i\setminus (E^A_i\cup F^A) )$ and $(C^*_i\setminus (E^B_i\cup F^B),v )$ are $k$-connected in $D[C_i\cup C^*_i]$.
\end{enumerate}
\end{CLAIM}
\begin{proof}
We apply Claim~\ref{cl: extension} with $C_i\setminus V_{\rm low}$ and $Q' \cup C$ playing the roles of $U_i$ and $U$, respectively, which is possible by~\eqref{eq: size C} and~\eqref{eqn:q'}. Then we obtain sets $C^*_1,\dots, C^*_h$ that satisfy~\ref{C*0} and \ref{C*1}, and \ref{C*2} holds for all vertices $v\in (C_i\cup C^*_i)\setminus V_{\rm low}$.

For $u\in C_i\cap V_{\rm low}$, it follows that $(v,C_i\setminus V_{\rm low})$ and $(C_i\setminus V_{\rm low},v)$ are both $k$-connected in $D[C_i]$ by~\ref{XY3}. Hence Lemma~\ref{lem:glue} implies~\ref{C*2}, which proves the claim.
\end{proof}
Let $C^*:=\bigcup_{i\in [h]} C^*_i$. By~\eqref{eq: size C} with~\ref{C*1}, we have
\begin{align}\label{eq: size C C*}
|C\cup C^*| \leq 5 \cdot 10^5 k^2(k+ \ell)^2 tm\log(m).
\end{align}

Using the similar argument as the proof of Claim~\ref{claim:c*}, we can prepare sets $Q^*_i$ as the following claim. These sets will ensure that for each $i\in [t]$, there are many choices of $j$ such that we can assign vertices in $Q_i\cup Q'_i\cup Q^*_i$ together into $W_j$.
\begin{CLAIM}\label{claim:q*}
There exist pairwise disjoint sets $Q^*_1,\dots, Q^*_t \subseteq V'\setminus (Q \cup Q' \cup C\cup C^*)$ satisfying the following. For all $i\in [t]$ and $v\in Q_i\cup Q_i' \cup Q^*_i$,
\begin{enumerate}[label=\text{\rm (Q$^*$\arabic*)}]
\item\label{Q*0} The sets $C , C^* , Q_1^{\#} , \dots , Q_t^{\#}$ are pairwise disjoint, where $Q_i^{\#} := Q_i \cup Q_i' \cup Q_i^*$ for each $i \in [t]$.
\item\label{Q*1} $|Q^*_i| \leq 4k(k+\ell)$.
\item\label{Q*2} Both $(v,Q^*_i\setminus F^A )$ and $(Q^*_i\setminus F^B,v )$ are $k$-connected in $D[Q_i\cup Q_i' \cup Q^*_i]$.
\end{enumerate}
\end{CLAIM}
\begin{proof}
By~\eqref{eqn:q'} and \eqref{eq: size C C*}, for each $i \in [t]$ we can apply Claim~\ref{cl: extension} with $Q_i'$ and $Q \cup Q' \cup C\cup C^*$ playing the roles of $U_i$ and $U$ respectively. This gives $t$ disjoint sets $Q_1^* , \dots , Q_t^*$ satisfying \ref{Q*0} and \ref{Q*1}. Moreover, by \ref{Q'2} and \ref{U*2}, we can deduce that $Q_1^* , \dots , Q_t^*$ satisfy \ref{Q*2}.
\end{proof}

Recall that $Q^{\#}_i = Q_i\cup Q'_i \cup Q^*_i$ for each $i \in [t]$. Let $Q^{\#} := \bigcup_{i=1}^{t} Q^{\#}_i$.
By~\eqref{eqn:q'} and~\ref{Q*1}, for each $i\in [t]$, we have
\begin{align}\label{eq: size Q Q' Q*}
|Q^{\#}_i| \leq q+ 8k(k+\ell) \text{ and } |Q^{\#}| \leq qt + 8k(k+\ell)t.
\end{align}

Now we will construct paths $P_{i,j}$ from $a_{i,j}$ to $b_{i,j}$.
In order to satisfy~\ref{A1}, we ensure that the length of each $P_{i,j}$ is not too long; the factor of $m$ in the definition of $h$ is for this. After constructing $3kh$ paths, we will choose short ones and discard the rest of them. However, discarding some paths and dominating sets might cause some issues which we will handle later.

Since $D'$ is $9 \cdot 10^7 q k^2 \ell(k+\ell)^2 tm^2\log(m)$-connected and
$9 \cdot 10^{7} q k^2 \ell(k+\ell)^2tm^2\log(m) - |Q^{\#} \cup C \cup C^*| \geq 452\cdot 3 k h+ 188\ell$, the subgraph
$D' \setminus ((Q^{\#} \cup C\cup C^*)\setminus \{a_{i,j},b_{i,j} : (i,j)\in [h]\times [3k]\})$ is strongly $(452\cdot 3k h + 188 \ell)$-connected, and thus $3kh$-linked by  Corollary~\ref{cor:digraph_link}.

Hence there is a collection $\{P_{i,j}: (i,j)\in [h]\times [3k]\}$ of vertex-disjoint paths in $D' \setminus ((Q^{\#} \cup C\cup C^*)\setminus \{a_{i,j},b_{i,j} : (i,j)\in [h]\times [3k]\})$ such that
\begin{enumerate}[label=\text{\rm (P\arabic*)}]
\item\label{P1} $P_{i,j}$ is a path from $a_{i,j}$ to $b_{i,j}$, and
\item\label{P2} The sets $C , C^* , Q^{\#} , \Int_1 , \dots , \Int_h$ are pairwise disjoint, where $\Int_{i}:=\bigcup_{j=1}^{3k} \Int(P_{i,j})$ for each $i\in [h]$.
\end{enumerate}
By permuting indices on $[h]$ if necessary, we may assume that for $i\in [h/6]$ and $i' \in [h]\setminus [h/6]$, we have
$|C_{i}\cup C^*_{i}\cup \Int_{i}| \leq \ |C_{i'}\cup C^*_{i'}\cup \Int_{i'}|$.

\begin{CLAIM}\label{cl: path short}
For each $i\in [h/6]$, we have
$|C_i\cup C^*_i\cup \Int_i|\leq \frac{n'}{1000mt }$
\end{CLAIM}
\begin{proof}
For $i\neq j\in [h]$, the set $C_i\cup C^*_i\cup \Int_i$ is disjoint from $C_j\cup C^*_j\cup \Int_j$.
If the claim is not true, then we have
$$|V'| \geq \sum_{i\in [h]\setminus [h/6]} |C_i\cup C^*_i\cup \Int_i|
> \frac{5 h n'}{6000mt } \geq n',$$
a contradiction. This proves the claim.
\end{proof}
As some $P_{i,j}$ may contain exceptional vertices, we need to `take care of' such vertices. We will construct small sets $\Int^*_i$ so that $\Int_i$ can be assigned to $W'_i$ as long as we assign it together with $\Int_i^*$.

\begin{CLAIM}\label{cl: Int*}
There exist pairwise disjoint sets $\Int^*_1,\dots, \Int^*_{h/6} \subseteq V'\setminus (Q^{\#} \cup C\cup C^*)$ such that the following holds for all $i\in [h/6]$ and $u\in \Int_i\cup \Int^*_i$.
\begin{enumerate}[label=\text{\rm (Int$^*$\arabic*)}]
\item \label{Int*0} The sets $C , C^* , Q^{\#} , \Int^*_1 , \dots , \Int^*_{h/6}$ are pairwise disjoint.
\item\label{Int*1} $|\Int^*_i| \leq 4k(k+\ell)$.
\item\label{Int*2} Both $(u,\Int^*_i\setminus (C\cup E^A_i\cup F^A) )$ and $(\Int^*_i \setminus (C\cup E^B_i\cup F^B),u )$ are $k$-connected in $D[\Int_i\cup \Int^*_i]$.
\end{enumerate}
\end{CLAIM}
\begin{proof}
For each $i\in [h/6]$, we have $\Int_i\cap V_{\rm low} \subseteq \Int_i\cap C = \emptyset$. By this with \eqref{eq: size C C*} and \eqref{eq: size Q Q' Q*}, we can apply Claim~\ref{cl: extension} with $\Int_i$ and $Q^{\#} \cup C\cup C^*$ playing the role of $U_i$ and $U$, respectively.
Then we obtain sets $\Int^*_1,\dots, \Int^*_{h/6}$ satisfying all \ref{Int*0}, \ref{Int*1} and \ref{Int*2}.
\end{proof}
Note that the condition~\ref{Int*1} holds no matter how big $|V(P_{i,j})|$ is.
For each $i\in [h/6]$, let
$$Z'_i:= C_i\cup C^*_{i} \cup \Int_i \cup \Int^*_{i}.$$
 Although the set $\Int^*_i$ takes care of the exceptional vertices in $\Int_i$ by~\ref{Int*2}, the set $\Int^*_i$  may intersect with another path $P_{i',j'}$, hence $\{ Z'_i \}_{i \in [h/6]}$ does not necessarily consist of pairwise disjoint sets. We utilise the following Claim~\ref{lem:indep} to keep only pairwise disjoint sets $Z'_i$.

\begin{CLAIM}\label{lem:indep}
There is a set $I \subseteq [h/6]$ with $|I|=t$ satisfying the following.
\begin{enumerate}[label=\text{\rm (I\arabic*)}]
\item\label{I1} For all $i\neq j \in I$, we have
$Z'_i \cap Z'_{j}=\emptyset$.

\item\label{I2} There is a bijective function $\phi : [t] \to I$ such that for each $i \in [t]$ and all $v \in Q_i^* \setminus F^A$ and $u \in Q_i^* \setminus F^B$, we have $v \notin E_{\phi(i)}^A$ and $u \notin E_{\phi(i)}^B$.
\end{enumerate}
\end{CLAIM}
\begin{proof}
Let $D^{\rm aux}$ be a digraph on a vertex-set $[h/6]$ such that
$\overrightarrow{ij} \in E(D^{\rm aux})$ if $\Int^*_i\cap \Int_j\neq \emptyset$ and
$G^{\rm aux}$ be a graph on a vertex-set $[h/6]$ obtained from $D^{\rm aux}$ by removing orientation of the edges and by removing parallel edges.
By \ref{P2} and \ref{Int*0}, $ij \notin E(G^{\rm aux})$ implies $Z'_i\cap Z'_j=\emptyset$.

As $\Int_1,\dots, \Int_{h/6}$ are pairwise disjoint, it is easy to see that for each $i\in [h/6]$, we have $d^+_{D^{\rm aux}}(i) \leq |\Int^*_i|$.
Thus
$$|E(G^{\rm aux})| \leq |E(D^{\rm aux})| \leq \sum_{i\in [h/6]} d^+_{D^{\rm aux}}(i) \stackrel{\ref{Int*1}}{\leq } \frac{4k(k+\ell)h}{6}.$$

By Tur\'an's theorem, any $n$-vertex graph with average degree $d$ has an independent set of size at lease $n/(d+1)$. Hence there exists an independent set $I_0 \subseteq [h/6]$ of $G^{\rm aux}$ with size $2t \leq \frac{h}{6\cdot 8k(k+\ell)+1}$.

Now it is easy to see that every subset of $I_0$ satisfies~\ref{I1} as $I$ is an independent set in $G^{\rm aux}$, and thus it is enough to show that there is a subset $I \subseteq I_0$ with $|I|=t$ and $\phi : [t]\rightarrow I$ satisfying~\ref{I2}. For each $i \in [t]$, since
\begin{eqnarray*}
\sum_{S\in \{A,B\}}\Big| \hspace{-0.1cm} \bigcup_{v\in Q^*_i \setminus F^S} \{ j \in [t] : v \in E^{S}_j \}\Big|
&\stackrel{\eqref{eq: F def}}{\leq} & \hspace{-0.1cm}
\big(|Q^*_i \setminus F^A|
+ |Q^*_i \setminus F^B| \big) \frac{t}{100k(k+\ell)}
\stackrel{\ref{Q*1}}{\leq } \hspace{-0.1cm}  \frac{4t}{25},
\end{eqnarray*}
there exists a set $J_i \subseteq [2t]$ with $|J_i| \geq 2t - \frac{4t}{25} > t$, where for all $v \in Q_i^* \setminus F^A$ and $u \in Q_i^* \setminus F^B$, we have $v \notin E_j^A$ and $u \notin E_j^B$ for each $j \in J_i$. Hence we can greedily choose $\phi(i) \in J_i$ for each $i \in [t]$ so that $\phi$ is injective. Let us define $I := \phi([t])$, which satisfies~\ref{I2}. This proves the claim.
\end{proof}

By permuting indices on $[h/6]$, we assume that $\phi(i) = i$ for each $i \in [t]$, and thus $I = [t]$. Note that, by \ref{Int*0}, for all $i\in [h]\setminus [t]$ and $j\in [t]$, the vertices in $C_i\cup C^*_i$ do not intersect with $Z'_j$.
For each $i\in [t]$, let
$$Z_i:= Z'_i\cup Q^{\#}_i,$$
then $Z_1,\dots, Z_t$ are pairwise disjoint and Claim~\ref{cl: path short},\ref{Int*1} and \eqref{eq: size Q Q' Q*} imply that,
for each $i\in [t]$,
\begin{align}\label{eq: Z size}
|Z_i| \leq \frac{n'}{500mt}.
\end{align}

Now we want to add some more vertices to each $Z_i$ to get the desired set $W_i$. However, some discarded vertices in $C_i\cup C^*_i$ for $i\in [h]\setminus[t]$ might be dangerous to guarantee~\ref{A3}, because~\eqref{eq: E def} and~\eqref{eq: F def} only consider vertices in $V' \setminus C$ and thus we have no information of the vertices in $C$ on whether they are in/out-dominated by almost dominating sets.

Therefore, we need to assign the vertices in these sets to one of $Z_j$ for $j\in [t]$. This issue can be handled by using the property \ref{C*2} as follows. Note that if $W'_i$ is too small, then it is difficult to control the non-edges between two vertices. Hence we will add a set $W''_i$ of a few vertices into $W'_i$ to obtain the lower bound in \ref{W'1}.

\begin{CLAIM}\label{cl: J}
For each $a\in [h]\setminus [t]$, we can choose $j(a)\in [t]$ satisfying the following.
\begin{enumerate}[label=\text{\rm (j\arabic*)}]
\item\label{j1} $C^*_a \setminus F^A$ and $E^{A}_{j(a)}$ are disjoint, and
$C^*_a\setminus F^B$ and $ E^{B}_{j(a)}$ are disjoint.

\item\label{j2} For each $i \in [t]$, we have $|J_i|\leq \lceil\frac{h}{23t/25}\rceil \leq \frac{ 6h}{5t}$, where $J_{i}:= \{ i'\in [h]\setminus [t]: j(i')= i \}.$
\end{enumerate}
\end{CLAIM}
\begin{proof}
For each $a \in [h]\setminus [t]$,
we have
\begin{eqnarray*}
\sum_{S\in \{A,B\}}\Big| \hspace{-0.1cm} \bigcup_{v\in C^*_{a} \setminus F^S} \{ i \in [t] : v \in E^{S}_i \}\Big|
&\stackrel{\eqref{eq: F def}}{\leq} & \hspace{-0.1cm}
\big(|C^*_{a} \setminus F^A|
+ |C^*_{a} \setminus F^B| \big) \frac{t}{100k(k+\ell)}
\stackrel{\ref{C*1}}{\leq } \hspace{-0.1cm}  \frac{2t}{25}.
\end{eqnarray*}
Thus, for every $a\in [h]\setminus [t]$, there are at least $\frac{23t}{25}$ indices $i\in [t]$ such that $C^*_{a}\setminus F^S$ and $E^S_{i}$ are disjoint for each $S\in \{A,B\}$. For each $a\in [t]\setminus [t]$, we can choose $j(a) \in [t]$  among those $\frac{23t}{25}$ choices in a way that \ref{j2} holds. Moreover, this choice guarantees \ref{j1}.
\end{proof}

By Claim~\ref{cl: path short} and \ref{Int*1},
for every $i\in [t]$,
$$ \Big|V\setminus \Big(Q^{\#} \cup E^A_i\cup E^B_i\cup \bigcup_{i'\in [t]} (\Int_{i'}\cup \Int^*_{i'})\cup (C\cup C^*)\Big) \Big| \stackrel{\eqref{eq: size Q Q' Q*},\eqref{eq: E size},\eqref{eq: n' min deg}}{\geq } t\ell.$$
Therefore, for every $i\in [t]$, we may choose a set $W''_i$ of $\ell$ vertices in
$V\setminus \Big(Q^{\#} \cup E^A_i\cup E^B_i\cup \bigcup_{i'\in [t]} (\Int_{i'}\cup \Int^*_{i'})\cup (C\cup C^*)\Big)$
such that $W''_i\cap W''_{j}=\emptyset$ for all $i\neq j\in [t]$. For every $i\in [t]$, let
$$W'_i := W''_i\cup Z_i \cup \bigcup_{i'\in J_i} (C_{i'}\cup C^*_{i'}).$$

Now we aim to show $W'_i$ satisfies~\ref{W'0}--\ref{W'3} for each $i \in [t]$.
First, \ref{W'0} is obvious from the construction and the fact that $J_1,\dots, J_t$ partitions $[h]\setminus [t]$.
Also \ref{P2} and~\ref{I1} imply that $W'_1,\dots, W'_t$ are pairwise disjoint and \ref{P2} with the definition of $P_{i,j}$ imply that $P_{1,1},\dots, P_{t,3k}$ are pairwise disjoint paths satisfying \ref{W'3}.

Now we show~\ref{W'2}. For each $v\in Q_i^*\setminus F^A$, since $v\notin C$, \ref{I2} implies that
$v \in V'\setminus (C\cup E^A_i)$, thus $(v, V'\setminus (C\cup E^A_i))$ is $k$-connected in $D[W'_i]$.
For each $v \in Q^{\#}_i$, \ref{Q*2} with Lemma~\ref{lem:glue} implies that $(v,V'\setminus (C\cup E_i^A))$ is $k$-connected in $D[W'_i]$.

Similarly, for all $i'\in J_i$ and $v\in C^*_{i'} \setminus F^A$, since $v\notin C$,  \ref{j1} implies that $v\in V'\setminus(C\cup E_i^A)$, thus $(v, V'\setminus(C\cup E_i^A))$ is $k$-connected in $D[W'_i]$. Since this holds for all $i'\in J_i$ and $v\in C^*_{i'}\setminus F^A$,
Lemma~\ref{lem:glue} together with~\ref{C*2} and \ref{Int*2} implies that for any $v\in W'_i\setminus W''_i$, the ordered pair $(v, V'\setminus(C\cup E^A_i))$ is $k$-connected in $D[W'_i]$. For each $v\in W''_i$, since $v \in V' \setminus (C \cup E_i^A)$, it is clear that $(v,V'\setminus(C\cup E^A_i))$ is $k$-connected in $D[W'_i]$.
Similarly, we can show that for any $v\in W'_i$, the ordered pair $(V'\setminus(C\cup E^B_i) ,v)$ is $k$-connected in $D[W'_i]$, hence \ref{W'2} holds.

Finally, we verify~\ref{W'1}. For every $i\in [t]$, we have
\begin{eqnarray}\label{eq: W'i size}
|W'_i| &\leq& \sum_{i'\in J_i} |C_{i'}\cup C^*_{i'}| + |Z_i| + |W''_i| \nonumber \\
&\stackrel{\substack{\ref{AB1},\ref{C*1}} }{\leq}& |J_i|\big(250k^2 + 30k \log(km\ell) + 4k(k+\ell)\big) + |Z_i| +  \ell \nonumber \\
&\stackrel{\ref{j2},\eqref{eq: Z size}}{\leq}& \frac{h(310k(k+\ell) + 36k\log(km\ell) )}{t} + \frac{n}{500mt} + \ell \stackrel{\eqref{eq: n min deg}}{\leq} \frac{n}{180mt},
\end{eqnarray}\COMMENT{The last place that we need $m^2\log{m}$-term in the connectivity.
We can instead assume $n\geq (...)m^2\log{m}$ while connectivity is at least
$(...)m\log{m}$-connected.}
where $3k + \ell \leq |W'_i|$ comes from \eqref{eq: n' min deg} and the fact that $|W''_i|=\ell$, hence \ref{W'1} holds. This completes the proof of the proposition.

\end{proof}

Using Proposition~\ref{prop: W'}, we re-order the indices in $[h]$ and
find sets $W'_1,\dots, W'_t$ and paths $P_{1,1},\dots, P_{t,3k}$ satisfying \ref{W'0}--\ref{W'3}. Let
$W':= \bigcup_{i\in [t]} W'_i$, then we have $|W'| \stackrel{\ref{W'1}}{\leq} \frac{n}{180m}.$
\vspace{0.3cm}

\noindent {\bf Step 4. Distribution of updated exceptional vertices.}

In this step, we aim to distribute exceptional vertices not satisfying \ref{A3} into $W'_1 , \dots , W'_t$, without increasing each size not too much. The resulting pairwise disjoint sets will be the final sets $W_1 , \dots , W_t$ of Lemma~\ref{lem:main}.

From the construction, $W'_i$ may contain many vertices other than the vertices in $A_{i,j}\cup B_{i,j}\cup V(P_{i,j})$;  some exceptional vertices in $E^{A}_i\cup E^{B}_i$ may have many in-neighbors and out-neighbors in $W'_i$, and thus become non-exceptional at this stage. Moreover, note that we defined $F^{A}, F^{B}$  based on the partition over $[h]$ and as we discard many parts from the linkage structures and only preserve linkage structures $A_{i,j}\cup B_{i,j}\cup P_{i,j}\subseteq W'_i$ for $i\in [t]$, this changes the meaning of `exceptional'. Hence we consider the ``updated'' sets $\widetilde{E}^A_i, \widetilde{E}^B_i, \widetilde{F}^A$ and $\widetilde{F}^B$ of exceptional vertices. Specific structures inside $W_i$ will not be important any more in this step.

One of the main difficulties is that for a vertex $v\in \widetilde{F}^B$, its in-degree provided by \ref{AB3} can be much smaller than $|\widetilde{F}^A\cup \widetilde{F}^B|$, as $\delta^-_0$ may be significantly smaller than $\delta^+_0$; in this case, we may not be able to find non-exceptional in-neighbors of $v$ which we will assign together with $v$. To handle this problem, we first distribute vertices in $\widetilde{F}^A$, and then we only define $\widetilde{F}^B$ after the distribution of $\widetilde{F}^A$. \newline

\noindent {\bf Step 4.1. Distribution of vertices in $\widetilde{F}^A$.}
We define updated sets of exceptional vertices. For every  $i\in [t]$, let
\begin{align}
\begin{split}\label{eq: tilde E def}
\widetilde{E}^A_i&:= \{ x \in V\setminus W' : |N^+_D(x)\cap W'_i| < k \}, \\
\widetilde{E}^A_0 &:= \{x\in V\setminus W': |N^+_D(x)\setminus W'| < \frac{\delta_0^+}{4} \},  \\
\widetilde{F}^A &:= \{ x \in V\setminus W': \big|\{ i'\in [t]: x\in \widetilde{E}^A_{i'}\}\big| > \frac{t}{50m^{1/2}k} \}.
\end{split}
\end{align}

\begin{figure}
\centering
\begin{tikzpicture}[scale=0.7]

  \draw[fill=none] (0,0) ellipse [x radius=1.2,y radius=2.2];
  \node at (0,0.5) {$W'$};

  \draw[fill=none] (0,-1) ellipse [x radius=0.7,y radius=0.7];
  \node at (0,-1) {$W'_1$};

  \draw[fill=none] (4,0) ellipse [x radius=1.4,y radius=3.2];
  \node at (4,-4) {$V\setminus W'$};

  \draw[fill=none] (4,-1.5) ellipse [x radius=0.8,y radius=0.8];
    \draw[fill=none] (4,0) ellipse [x radius=0.8,y radius=1];
  \node at (4,0) {$\widetilde{E}^A_0$};

    \node at (4,-1.5) {$\widetilde{E}^A_1$};

\filldraw[fill=black] (3.5,-1.5) circle (2pt);

\draw[middlearrow={latex}] (0.4,-1) -- (3.5,-1.5) ;
\draw[middlearrow={latex}] (0.4,-0.6) -- (3.5,-1.5) ;
\draw[middlearrow={latex}] (0.4,-1.4) -- (3.5,-1.5) ;

\filldraw[fill=black] (3.5,0.4) circle (2pt);

\draw[middlearrow={latex}] (3,1.2) -- (3.5,0.4) ;
\draw[middlearrow={latex}] (3.2 ,1.3) -- (3.5,0.4);
\draw[middlearrow={latex}] (3.4, 1.4) -- (3.5,0.4);

\filldraw[fill=black] (4,1.3) circle (2pt);

\draw[middleuparrow={latex}] (4,1.3) -- (5,1) ;
\draw[middleuparrow={latex}] (4,1.3) -- (5,1.3) ;
\draw[middleuparrow={latex}] (4,1.3) -- (5,1.6) ;

\end{tikzpicture}
\caption{$\widetilde{E}^A_0$, $\widetilde{E}^A_1$ and in/out-neighbours guaranteed at a vertex in each set.}\label{fig: EA}
\end{figure}

For a vertex $v\in \widetilde{E}_i^A$, it has at most $k-1$ out-neighbors in $W'_i$ and thus by~\ref{W'1}, there are at least $k$ in-neighbors of $v$ in $W'_i$.
We can find many in-neighbours in $V\setminus W'$ of a vertex in $\widetilde{E}_0^A$ and we can find many out-neighbors in $V\setminus W'$ of a vertex in $(V\setminus W')\setminus \widetilde{E}_0^A$. See Figure~\ref{fig: EA}.

One of the issues is that we do not wish to assign too many vertices to a fixed $W'_i$ so that we can guarantee~\ref{A1}. In order for this, we will first define a set $I_A(x)$ of the indices $i\in [t]$ such that $x$ can be assigned to $W_i$ provided that some set $N^A(x)$ of additional vertices are assigned together with $x$. We will then choose $i(x) \in I_A(x)$ in the way that, for each $i\in [t]$, not too many vertices $x$ satisfies $i(x)=i$. We will further choose a set $N^A(x)$ of $k$ vertices and assign vertices in $N^A(x)\cup \{x\}$ together to $W_{i(x)}$.

As the definition of $E^A(i,j)$ with \eqref{eq: E def} implies
$\widetilde{E}^A_i \subseteq E^A_i$, we have
\begin{align}
\begin{split}\label{eq: wide tilde F size}
|\widetilde{F}^A| &\leq \frac{50m^{1/2}k}{t}\sum_{i \in [t]}|\widetilde{E}^A_i|\stackrel{\eqref{eq: E size}}{\leq} \frac{50 m^{1/2} k t \delta_0^+}{10^{6}k^2(k+\ell)^2  m^2 t } \leq
\frac{\delta^+_0}{2 \cdot 10^4 k^3 m^{3/2} }.
\end{split}
\end{align}
For each $x\in \widetilde{F}^A$, we define
\begin{align}\label{eq: I(x) def}
I_A(x):= \left\{\begin{array}{ll}
\{i\in [t] : |N^-_D(x)\cap W'_i|\geq k\} & \text{if } x\in \widetilde{F}^A\setminus \widetilde{E}^A_0, \\
\{i\in [t] :|N^+_D(x)\cap W'_i|\geq k\} & \text{if } x\in \widetilde{F}^A\cap \widetilde{E}^A_0.
\end{array}\right.
\end{align}

Note that for each $i\in [t]$, if $x\in \widetilde{E}^A_i$, then \ref{W'1} with \eqref{eq: tilde E def} implies that $| N^-_D(x)\cap W'_i| \geq k$.
Thus, for each $x\in  \widetilde{F}^A\setminus \widetilde{E}^A_0$, the set $I_A(x)$ contains all $i \in [t]$ with $x \in \widetilde{E}^A_i$, so we have
\begin{align}\label{eq: IA size 1}
|I_A(x)| \geq \big|\{i'\in [t]: x\in \widetilde{E}_{i'}^A\}\big| \stackrel{\eqref{eq: tilde E def}}{\geq } \frac{t}{50 m^{1/2} k}.
\end{align}
For each $x\in \widetilde{F}^A\cap \widetilde{E}^A_0$, we have
$$\delta_0^+ \leq d_D^+(x)\leq |N_D^+(x)\setminus W'| + \sum_{i\in [t]\setminus I_A(x) } k + \sum_{i\in I_A(x)} |W'_i| \stackrel{\eqref{eq: tilde E def},\ref{W'1}}{\leq }\delta_0^+/4 + kt + \frac{|I_A(x)|n}{180mt}.$$
Thus by \eqref{eq: n min deg}, for each $x\in \widetilde{F}^A\cap \widetilde{E}^A_0$ we have
\begin{align}\label{eq: IA size 2}
|I_A(x)| \geq \frac{100 \delta_0^+ mt}{n}.
\end{align}
Thus for each $x\in \widetilde{F}^A$, by \eqref{eq: IA size 1} and \eqref{eq: IA size 2}, we can choose $i(x) \in I_A(x)$ in such a way that the following holds for each $i\in [t]$.
\begin{align}
\begin{split}\label{eq: index choice}
\big|\{ x\in  \widetilde{F}^A :i(x)=i \}\big| &\leq \max \left (\Big\lceil \frac{ |\widetilde{F}^A| }{t/(50m^{1/2} k)}\Big\rceil, \Big\lceil\frac{|\widetilde{F}^A|}{100 \delta_0^+mt/n } \Big\rceil\right )
\stackrel{ \eqref{eq: wide tilde F size}}{\leq } \frac{n}{300 k^2 m t}.
\end{split}
\end{align}
For each $x\in \widetilde{F}^A\setminus \widetilde{E}^A_0$, we have
\begin{align}\label{eq: N(x)1}
|N^+_D(x)\setminus (W' \cup E^A_{i(x)}\cup E^B_{i(x)})|
\stackrel{\eqref{eq: tilde E def}}{\geq} \delta^+_0/4 - |E^A_{i(x)}\cup E^B_{i(x)}| \stackrel{\eqref{eq: E size},\eqref{eq: wide tilde F size}}{\geq} k|\widetilde{F}^A|.
\end{align}
Similarly, for every $x\in \widetilde{F}^A\cap \widetilde{E}^A_0$, we have
\begin{eqnarray}\label{eq: N(x)2}
|N^-_D(x)\setminus (W' \cup E^A_{i(x)}\cup E^B_{i(x)})|
&\geq& |V\setminus W'| - |N^+_D(x)\setminus W'| - (n- d_D(x)) - |E^A_{i(x)}\cup E^B_{i(x)}| \nonumber \\
&\stackrel{\ref{W'1},\eqref{eq: E size}}{\geq }& \left (1- \frac{1}{180m} \right )n - \delta^+_0/4 - \ell - \delta^+_0/4  \stackrel{\eqref{eq: wide tilde F size}}{\geq} k|\widetilde{F}^A|,
\end{eqnarray}
where the last inequality follows since we have $\ell < n/10$ by~\eqref{eq: n min deg}.
Hence, for every $x\in \widetilde{F}^A$, we can choose a set $N^A(x)$ of the size $k$
such that $N^A(x)\cap N^A(y) =\emptyset$ for all $x\neq y \in \widetilde{F}^A$ and
\begin{align}\label{eq: N(x) def}
N^A(x) \subseteq \left\{\begin{array}{ll}
N^+_D(x)\setminus (W' \cup E^A_{i(x)}\cup E^B_{i(x)}) &\text{if } x\in \widetilde{F}^A\setminus \widetilde{E}^A_0, \\
N^-_D(x)\setminus (W' \cup E^A_{i(x)}\cup E^B_{i(x)}) & \text{if } x\in \widetilde{F}^A\cap \widetilde{E}^A_0.
\end{array}\right.
\end{align}
For each $i\in [t]$, let
$$W^{*}_i:= W'_i\cup \bigcup_{x\in \widetilde{F}^A \colon i(x)=i} (N^A(x)\cup \{x\}) \enspace \text{and} \enspace W^{*}:= \bigcup_{i\in [t]} W^{*}_i.$$

\begin{CLAIM}\label{cl: W* exists}
The sets $W^*_1,\dots, W^*_t$ satisfy the following.
\begin{enumerate}[label=\text{\rm (W$^*$\arabic*)}]
\item \label{W*0} $W^*_1,\dots, W^*_t$  are pairwise disjoint.
\item\label{W*1} $W'_i\subseteq W^*_i$ and $\widetilde{F}^A\subseteq W^*$.
\item \label{W*2} $3k +\ell \leq |W^*_i| \leq \frac{n}{80mt}$.
\item \label{W*3} For each $v\in W^*_i$, both $(v, V'\setminus(C\cup E^A_i))$ and  $(V'\setminus (C \cup E^B_i),v )$ are $k$-connected in $D[W^*_i]$.
\end{enumerate}
\end{CLAIM}
\begin{proof}
As $i(x)$ is well-defined for all $x\in \widetilde{F}^{A}$ and $W'_1,\dots, W'_t$ are pairwise disjoint, the definition of $W^*_i$ implies \ref{W*0}. By the definition, \ref{W*1} is clear. For every $i\in [t]$, we have
$$|W^*_i| \leq |W'_i| +  (k+1)\big|\{x\in \widetilde{F}^A: i(x)=i\}| \stackrel{\ref{W'1},\eqref{eq: index choice}}{\leq}  \frac{n}{180mt} + \frac{n }{150 k m t} \leq \frac{n}{80mt}.$$
Together with the fact that $|W^*_i|\geq |W'_i| \stackrel{\ref{W'1}}{\geq} 3k+\ell$, the condition~\ref{W*2} follows.
To prove \ref{W*3}, by \ref{W'2}, we only have to show that for all $i\in [t]$ and $v\in W^*_i\setminus W'_i$, both $(v, V'\setminus(C\cup E^A_i))$ and  $(V'\setminus (C\cup E^B_i),v )$ are $k$-connected in $D[W^*_i]$.
If $v\in N^A(x)$ for some $x\in \widetilde{F}^A$ with $i(x)=i$, then $v \in V'\setminus (C\cup E^A_i\cup E^B_i)$, thus we are done.
If $v\in \widetilde{F}^A$ with $i(v)=i$, then
\eqref{eq: I(x) def} together with \eqref{eq: N(x) def} implies that
$v$ has at least $k$ out-neighbors and $k$ in-neighbors in $W'_i\cup N^A(v)$.
Thus \ref{W*3} holds.
\end{proof}

\noindent {\bf Step 4.2. Distribution of vertices in $\widetilde{F}^B$.}
Now we will define the set $\widetilde{F}^B$ of vertices which are exceptional with respect to the partition $W^*_1,\dots, W^*_{t}$. Since $\widetilde{F}^A \subseteq W^*$,
all vertices in $V\setminus W^*$ has at least $k$ out-neighbors in $W'_i\subseteq W^*_i$ for many indices $i\in [t]$, which will simplify our analysis.

\begin{figure}
\centering
\begin{tikzpicture}[scale=0.7]

  \draw[fill=none] (0,0) ellipse [x radius=1.2,y radius=2.2];
  \node at (0,0.5) {$W^*$};

  \draw[fill=none] (0,-1) ellipse [x radius=0.7,y radius=0.7];
  \node at (0,-1) {$W^*_1$};

  \draw[fill=none] (4,0) ellipse [x radius=1.4,y radius=3.2];
  \node at (4,-4) {$V\setminus W'$};

  \draw[fill=none] (4,-1.5) ellipse [x radius=0.8,y radius=0.8];
    \draw[fill=none] (4,0) ellipse [x radius=0.8,y radius=1];
  \node at (4,0) {$\widetilde{E}^B_0$};

    \node at (4,-1.5) {$\widetilde{E}^B_1$};

      \draw[fill=none] (4,1.5) ellipse [x radius=0.8,y radius=0.8];
    \node at (4,1.5) {$\mathcal{E}^A_1$};

\filldraw[fill=black] (3.5,-1.5) circle (2pt);

\draw[middlearrow={latex}] (3.5,-1.5) -- (0.5,-1) ;
\draw[middlearrow={latex}] (3.5,-1.5) -- (0.5,-0.6) ;
\draw[middlearrow={latex}] (3.5,-1.5) -- (0.5,-1.4);

\filldraw[fill=black] (3.5,0.4) circle (2pt);

\draw[middleuparrow={latex}]  (3.5,0.4) -- (2.7,0.1);
\draw[middleuparrow={latex}]  (3.5,0.4) -- (2.8 ,-0.1);
\draw[middleuparrow={latex}]  (3.5,0.4) -- (2.9, -0.3);

\filldraw[fill=black] (5,0) circle (2pt);

\draw[middlearrow={latex}]  (4.7,1) -- (5,0);
\draw[middlearrow={latex}] (5,1) -- (5,0);
\draw[middlearrow={latex}] (5.3,1)  -- (5,0);

\filldraw[fill=black] (3.5,1.5) circle (2pt);

\draw[middledownarrow={latex}] (0.2,-0.5)  -- (3.5,1.5);
\draw[middledownarrow={latex}]  (0.4,-0.7) -- (3.5,1.5);
\draw[middledownarrow={latex}] (0.6,-0.9) -- (3.5,1.5);

\end{tikzpicture}
\caption{$\mathcal{E}^A_1$, $\widetilde{E}^B_0$, $\widetilde{E}^B_1$ and in/out-neighbours guaranteed at a vertex in each set.}\label{fig: EB}
\end{figure}

Again, for each $x\in \widetilde{F}^B$, we aim to find $i(x)\in [t]$ and a vertex-set $N^B(x)$ so that we can assign $x$ together with $N^B(x)$ to $W_{i(x)}$.
We define the following ``updated'' sets of exceptional vertices. For each $i\in [t]$,
\begin{align}\begin{split}\label{eq: B E def}
\mathcal{E}^A_i&:= \{x\in V\setminus W^{*}: |N^+_D(x)\cap W^{*}_i| <k\}, \\
\widetilde{E}^B_i&:= \{ x \in V\setminus W^{*} : |N^-_D(x)\cap W^{*}_i| < k \},\\
\widetilde{E}^B_0& := \{x\in V\setminus W^{*}: |N^-_D(x)\setminus W^{*}| < \delta_0^-/4 \}, \text{ and} \\
\widetilde{F}^B &:= \{ x \in V\setminus W^{*}: \big|\{ i'\in [t]: x\in \widetilde{E}^B_{i'}\}\big| > \frac{t}{100m^{1/2}k} \}.
\end{split}
\end{align}
For a vertex $v\in \mathcal{E}_i^A$, it has at most $k-1$ out-neighbors in $W^*_i$ and thus by~\ref{W'1}, there are at least $k$ in-neighbors of $v$ in $W^*_i$. Similarly a vertex in $\widetilde{E}^B_i$ has at least $k$ out-neighbours in $W^*_i$.
Moreover, we can find many out-neighbours in $V\setminus W'$ of a vertex in $\widetilde{E}_0^B$ and we can find many in-neighbors in $V\setminus W'$ of a vertex in $(V\setminus W')\setminus \widetilde{E}_0^B$. See Figure~\ref{fig: EB}.

As $W'_i\subseteq W^*_i$ for all $i\in [t]$, \eqref{eq: tilde E def} implies $\mathcal{E}^A_i \subseteq \widetilde{E}^A_i$.
The definition of $E^B(i,j)$ with \eqref{eq: E def} implies
$\widetilde{E}^B_i \subseteq E^B_i$. Hence
\begin{align}
\begin{split}\label{eq: wide tilde F size B}
|\widetilde{F}^B| &\leq \frac{100m^{1/2}k}{t}\sum_{i \in [t]}|\widetilde{E}^B_i|\stackrel{\eqref{eq: E size}}{\leq} \frac{100  m^{1/2}k t \delta_0^-}{10^{6}k^2(k+\ell)^2  m^2 t } \leq
\frac{\delta^-_0}{10^4 k^3 m^{3/2} }.
\end{split}
\end{align}

For  $x\in \widetilde{F}^B\setminus \widetilde{E}^B_0$, the vertex $x$ has at least $\delta_0^-/4$ in-neighbors in $V\setminus W^*$. As we did in Step~4.1, we wish to choose $k$ non-exceptional in-neighbors of $x$ in $V\setminus W^*$.
However, $\delta_0^-/4$ could be much smaller than $|\mathcal{E}^A_i|$, as $d_D^-(v) \ll \delta_0^+$ could happen while $|\mathcal{E}^A_i|$ is proportional to $\delta_0^+$.
Hence, we may not be able to choose an appropriate set $N^B(x)\subseteq N^{-}_D(x)$ if we determine $i(x)$ first. To resolve this issue, for $x\in \widetilde{F}^B\setminus \widetilde{E}^B_0$, we will choose $N^B(x)$ first and then choose $i(x)$ later, while for $x\in \widetilde{F}^B\cap\widetilde{E}^B_0$, we will choose $i(x)$ first and then choose $N^B(x)$ later.

For each $x\in \widetilde{F}^B\setminus \widetilde{E}^B_0$, we have
$$
|N^{-}_D(x) \setminus (W^{*}\cup \widetilde{F}^B)|
\geq \delta^-_0/4 - |\widetilde{F}^B| \stackrel{\eqref{eq: wide tilde F size B}}{\geq} k |\widetilde{F}^B|.
$$
Thus, we can choose sets $N^B(x) \subseteq N^{-}_D(x) \setminus (W^{*}\cup \widetilde{F}^B)$ with $|N^B(x)|=k$ in such a way that $N^B(x)\cap N^B(y)=\emptyset$ for all $x\neq y\in \widetilde{F}^B\setminus \widetilde{E}^B_0$.
For each $x\in \widetilde{F}^B\setminus \widetilde{E}^B_0$, let
\begin{align}\label{eq: IBx def}
I_B(x):=\big\{ i\in [t]: |N^+_D(x)\cap W_i^*| \geq k\big\} \cap \bigcap_{y\in N^B(x)}\big\{ i\in [t]: y\notin  \widetilde{E}^A_i\cup \widetilde{E}^B_i \big\}.
\end{align}
This definition ensures that we can assign $\{x\}\cup N^B(x)$ to $W^*_i$ as long as $i\in I_B(x)$.
Note that for all $x\in \widetilde{F}^B$ and $z\in N^B(x)$, we have $z \notin \widetilde{F}^A$ (as $\widetilde{F}^A \subseteq W^*$), and $z\notin \widetilde{F}^B$.
Thus \eqref{eq: tilde E def} and \eqref{eq: B E def} imply that, for each $y\in N^B(x)$, we have
$$|\{ i\in [t]: y \notin \widetilde{E}^A_i\cup \widetilde{E}^B_i \}| \geq t - \frac{t}{50m^{1/2}k} - \frac{t}{100m^{1/2}k} \geq \left (1 - \frac{1}{30m^{1/2}k} \right )t.$$
This with \eqref{eq: tilde E def} implies that for every $x\in \widetilde{F}^B\setminus \widetilde{E}^B_0$,
\begin{align}\label{eq: IB size 1}
|I_B(x)| \geq |\{ i\in [t]: x\notin \widetilde{E}^A_i \}| - \frac{kt}{30 m^{1/2} k}
\geq (1- \frac{1}{50m^{1/2}k})t  - \frac{k t}{30 m^{1/2} k} \geq t/2,
\end{align}
where the first inequality follows since we have $\mathcal{E}^A_i \subseteq \widetilde{E}^A_i$ for each $i\in [t]$, and the second inequality follows since we have $x\notin \widetilde{F}^A \subseteq W^*$. Let
$$N^B_1:=\bigcup_{x\in \widetilde{F}^B\setminus \widetilde{E}^B_0}N^B(x).$$
Then
\begin{align}\label{eq: NB1 size}
|N^B_1| = \sum_{x\in \widetilde{F}^B\setminus \widetilde{E}^B_0} |N^B(x)| = k |\widetilde{F}^B|.
\end{align}

Now we wish to choose sets $I_B(x)$ and $N^B(x)$ for the remaining vertices $x \in \widetilde{F}^B\cap \widetilde{E}^B_0$ as follows. For every $x\in \widetilde{F}^B\cap \widetilde{E}^B_0$, we define
\begin{align}\label{eq: I(x) def B}
I_B(x):=
\{i\in [t] : |N^-_D(x)\cap W^*_i| \geq k\}.
\end{align}
For each $x\in \widetilde{F}^{B}\cap \widetilde{E}^B_0$, we have
$$\delta_0^- \leq d_D^-(x)\leq |N_D^-(x)\setminus W^{*}| + \sum_{i\in [t]\setminus I_B(x) } k + \sum_{i\in I_B(x)} |W^{*}_i| \stackrel{\ref{W*2}}{\leq} \delta_0^-/4 + kt + \frac{|I_B(x)|n}{80mt}.$$
Thus by \eqref{eq: n min deg}, we have
\begin{align*
|I_B(x)|  \geq \frac{50 \delta_0^- mt}{n}.
\end{align*}
Now we choose $i(x) \in I_B(x)$ for all $x\in \widetilde{F}^B$, regardless whether it is in $\widetilde{F}^B\cap \widetilde{E}^B_0$ or in $\widetilde{F}^B\setminus \widetilde{E}^B_0$.
Together with \eqref{eq: IB size 1}, for every $x\in \widetilde{F}^B$, we can choose $i(x)\in I_B(x)$ such that for every $i\in [t]$,
\begin{align}\label{eq: covered by i}
|\{x\in \widetilde{F}^B : i(x) =i \}| \leq \max\left( \Big\lceil \frac{ |\widetilde{F}^B|}{t/2}\Big\rceil, \Big\lceil \frac{|\widetilde{F}^B|}{ 50\delta_0^-mt/n }\Big\rceil \right)\stackrel{\eqref{eq: wide tilde F size B}}{\leq} \frac{n}{10^3 k^3 mt}.
\end{align}
For every $x \in  \widetilde{F}^{B}\cap \widetilde{E}^B_0$, we have
\begin{eqnarray}\label{eq: N(x)B 2}
|N^+_D(x)\setminus (W^{*}\cup E^A_{i(x)} \cup E^B_{i(x)})|
&\geq & |V\setminus W^{*}| - |N^-_D(x)\setminus W^*| - (n- d_D(x)) - |E^A_{i(x)}\cup E^B_{i(x)}| \nonumber \\
&\stackrel{\ref{W*2},\eqref{eq: E size}}{\geq }& \left (1- \frac{1}{80m} \right )n - \delta^-_0/4 - \ell - \frac{n}{10^{6}} \nonumber \\
&\geq& \frac{n}{3} \stackrel{\eqref{eq: wide tilde F size B}}{\geq} 2k|\widetilde{F}^B| .
\end{eqnarray}
Thus by \eqref{eq: NB1 size},  for each $x\in \widetilde{F}^B\cap \widetilde{E}^B_0$,
we can choose sets $N^B(x)\subseteq N^+_D(x)\setminus (W^{*}\cup E^A_{i(x)} \cup E^B_{i(x)} \cup N^B_1)$ in such a way that
$N^B(x)\cap N^B(y) =\emptyset$ for all $x\neq y \in  \widetilde{F}^B\cap \widetilde{E}^B_0$. Hence $\{N^B(x) : x\in \widetilde{F}^B\}$ forms a collection of pairwise disjoint subsets of size $k$. As $i(x)\in I_B(x)$, together with \eqref{eq: IBx def} it follows that
\begin{align}\label{eq: N(x) def B}
N^B(x) \subseteq \left\{\begin{array}{ll}
N^-_D(x)\setminus (W^*\cup E^A_{i(x)}\cup E^B_{i(x)}) &\text{if } x\in \widetilde{F}^B\setminus E^B_0, \\
N^+_D(x)\setminus (W^*\cup E^A_{i(x)}\cup E^B_{i(x)}) & \text{if } x\in \widetilde{F}^B\cap E^B_0.
\end{array}\right.
\end{align}
For each $i\in [t]$, let
$$W_i:= W^{*}_i\cup \bigcup_{ x\in \widetilde{F}^B : i(x) = i} \big(\{x\}\cup N^B(x)\big).$$

\begin{CLAIM}\label{cl: W exist}
The following hold.
\begin{enumerate}[label=\text{\rm (W\arabic*)}]
\item \label{W0} $W_1,\dots, W_t$ are pairwise disjoint.
\item \label{W1} $W^*_i\subseteq W_i$ and $|W_i| \leq \frac{n}{50mt}$.
\item \label{W2} $\widetilde{F}^A\cup \widetilde{F}^B\subseteq \bigcup_{i\in [t]} W_i$.
\item \label{W3} For each $v\in W_i$, both $(v, V'\setminus(C\cup E^A_i))$ and
$(V'\setminus (C\cup E^B_i),v )$ are $k$-connected in $D[W_i]$.
\end{enumerate}
\end{CLAIM}
\begin{proof}
Note that \ref{W0} is obvious from \ref{W*0} and the definition of $N^B(x)$.
Note that \ref{W2} is obvious as $i(x)$ is defined for all $x\in \widetilde{F}^A\cup \widetilde{F}^B$.
For each $i\in [t]$,
$$|W_i| \leq |W^*_i| + (k+1)\big|\{ x\in \widetilde{F}^B: i(x)=i\}\big| \stackrel{\ref{W*2},\eqref{eq: covered by i}}{\leq } \frac{n}{80mt} +
\frac{n (k+1)}{10^3 k^3 mt}\leq \frac{n}{50mt}.$$
Thus we have \ref{W1}.
To show \ref{W3}, by Lemma~\ref{lem:glue} together with~\ref{W*3}, it suffices to show that for every $v\in W_i\setminus W^*_i$, both $(v,W^*_i)$ and $(W^*_i,v)$ are $k$-connected in $D[W_i]$.
If $v\in N^B(x)$ for some $x\in \widetilde{F}^B$ with $i(x)=i$, then $v \in V'\setminus (C\cup E^A_i\cup E^B_i)$ by~\eqref{eq: N(x) def B}, and thus we are done.
If $v\in \widetilde{F}^B$ with $i(v)=i$, then
\eqref{eq: I(x) def B}, \eqref{eq: IBx def} and \eqref{eq: N(x) def B} altogether imply that
$v$ has at least $k$ out-neighbors and $k$ in-neighbors in $W^*_i\cup N^B(v)$. This proves \ref{W3} and completes the proof of the claim.
\end{proof}
\vspace{0.3cm}

\noindent {\bf Step 5. Finishing the proof of Lemma~\ref{lem:main}}
To finish the proof of  Lemma~\ref{lem:main}, we now verify \ref{A5}--\ref{A4}. By \ref{W0}, $W_1,\dots, W_t$ are pairwise disjoint.
Note that \ref{W1} implies \ref{A1}, \ref{W2} with \eqref{eq: tilde E def} and \eqref{eq: B E def} implies \ref{A3}, and~\ref{W'0} implies~\ref{A5}.

For each $i\in [t]$, because $C \subseteq \bigcup_{i'=1}^{t}W_{i'}$ and $C_i\subseteq W_i$, \eqref{eq: E def} imply that every vertex  $v\in V\setminus (E^A_i\cup E^B_i\cup \bigcup_{i'\in [t]} W_{i'})$ satisfies $|N^+_D(x)\cap W_i|,|N^-_D(x)\cap W_i| \geq k$. We also have
$$\Big|V\setminus \big(E^A_i\cup E^B_i\cup \bigcup_{i'\in [t]} W_{i'} \big) \Big|
\stackrel{\eqref{eq: E size}}{\geq} \Big|V\setminus  \bigcup_{i'\in [t]} W_{i'} \Big| - \frac{n}{10^6 k^2 (k+\ell)^2 m^2} \stackrel{\ref{W1}}{\geq } (1- \frac{1}{10^5 k^4m^2})\Big|V\setminus \bigcup_{i\in [t]} W_{i'}\Big|,$$
hence \ref{A4} follows.

Now it only remains to show~\ref{A2}. Let $u,v \in V(W_i)$ and $S\subseteq V(W_i)$ with $|S| \leq k-1$. By \ref{W3}, both $(u,V'\setminus(C\cup E^A_i))$ and $(V'\setminus (C\cup E_i^B),v)$ are $k$-connected in $D[W_i]$.
Thus there exist a path $P^A$ from $u$ to a vertex $u'\in V'\setminus(C\cup E^A_i)$ in $D[W_i]\setminus S$ and a path $P^B$ from a vertex $v'\in V'\setminus(C\cup E^B_i)$ to $v$ in $D[W_i]\setminus S$.
By~\eqref{eq: E def}, there are $J^A, J^B \subseteq [3k]$ with $|J^A|,|J^B|\geq 2k$
 such that $u' \notin E^A(i,j)$ for each $j\in J^A$ and $v'\notin E^B(i,j')$ for each $j'\in J^B$.
 Note that $|J^A\cap J^B|\geq k > |S|$.
As $3k$ sets $\left \{ A_{i,s}\cup B_{i,s}\cup V(P_{i,s}) \right \}_{s \in [3k]}$ are pairwise disjoint by~\ref{AB1} and~Proposition~\ref{prop: W'}, there exists $j\in J^A\cap J^B$ such that $S\cap (A_{i,j} \cup B_{i,j} \cup V(P_{i,j}) ) =\emptyset$.
Since $j\in J^A\cap J^B$, there exist $u''\in N^+_D(u')\cap A_{i,j}$ and $v''\in N^-_D(v')\cap B_{i,j}$. By \ref{AB2}, there exist a path $Q^A$ in $D[A_{i,j}]$ from $u''$ to $a_{i,j}$ and a path $Q^B$ in $D[B_{i,j}]$ from $b_{i,j}$ to $v''$.
Then $P^A$, $u'u''$, $Q^A$, $P_{i,j}$, $Q^B$, $v''v'$ and $P^B$ together form a directed walk from $u$ to $v$ in $D[W_i]\setminus S$. Therefore, there exists a path from $u$ to $v$ in $D[W_i]\setminus S$ and we obtain \ref{A2}. This completes the proof of Lemma~\ref{lem:main}.

\section{Derivation of main results}\label{sec:proof_balanced}
In this section, we prove Theorem~\ref{thm:cycle} and Theorem~\ref{thm:balanced}. Both theorems will be derived from Lemma~\ref{lem:main} by using appropriate auxiliary bipartite graphs.

\begin{proof}[Proof of Theorem~\ref{thm:balanced}]
Let $D$ be a strongly $10^8 qk^2\ell(k+\ell)^2tm^2\log{m}$-connected $n$-vertex digraph with $\delta(D)\geq n-\ell$, and $Q_1 , \dots , Q_t \subseteq V(D)$ be $t$ disjoint sets with $|Q_i| \leq q$. For each $i\in [t]$, we have $a_i\in \mathbb{N}$ with $\sum_{i\in [t]} a_i \leq n$ and $a_i\geq n/(10tm)$. Let us define $b_1 := a_1 + \left (n - \sum_{i=1}^{t}a_i \right )$ and $b_i := a_i$ for $2 \leq i \leq t$. Then $\sum_{i=1}^{t}b_i = n$.

As $D$ is a strongly $10^8 qk^2\ell(k+\ell)^2tm^2\log{m}$-connected $n$-vertex digraph with $\delta(D)\geq n-\ell$, there are pairwise disjoint sets $W_1,\dots, W_t$ satisfying \ref{A1}--\ref{A5} by Lemma~\ref{lem:main}.
For every $i\in [t]$, it follows that
\begin{align} \label{eq: size}
a_i -|W_i|  \stackrel{\ref{A1}}{\geq} \frac{n}{10tm}-\frac{n}{50tm} \geq \frac{n}{20tm}.
\end{align}
Let
$$A:= V(D)\setminus \bigcup_{i\in [t]} W_i.$$
For each $i\in [t]$, let
$$U_i:=\big\{ x\in A: |N_D^+(x)\cap W_i|\geq k  \text{ and } |N_D^-(x)\cap W_i| \geq k\big\}.$$
Then for each $i\in [t]$, we have
\begin{align}\label{eq: Ui size A4}
|U_i| \stackrel{\ref{A4}}{\geq} (1- \frac{1}{10^5k^4 m^2})|A|.
\end{align}
 For each $i \in [t]$ and $j \in [b_i - |W_i|]$, we define a new vertex $v_{i,j}$ and let $B$ be the set of all these new vertices. Let $H$ be an auxiliary bipartite graph with vertex partition $(A,B)$ such that
$$E(H):= \bigcup_{i\in [t]} \big\{ x v_{i,j}:  j\in [b_i-|W_i|], x\in U_i  \big\}.$$
Note that we have
\begin{align}\label{eq: A B size}
(1-\frac{1}{50m})n \stackrel{\ref{A1}}{\leq} |A| = n - \sum_{i\in [t]} |W_i| = \sum_{i\in [t]} (b_i- |W_i| ) = |B| \leq n.
\end{align}
Moreover, for each $x\in A$,
\ref{A3} with the fact $b_i\geq a_i$ implies that
$$d_H(x) = \sum_{i\in [t]: x\in U_i }(b_i-|W_i|)
\stackrel{\eqref{eq: size}}{\geq } \frac{n}{20tm} |\{ i\in [t]: x\in U_i\}|
\stackrel{\ref{A3}}{\geq} \frac{n}{20tm} \left (1- \frac{1}{30k} \right )t  \geq \frac{n}{30m}.$$
For every $i\in [t]$ and $v_{i,j} \in B$, we have
$$d_H(v_{i,j}) = |U_i| \stackrel{\eqref{eq: Ui size A4},\eqref{eq: A B size}}{\geq}
 (1- \frac{1}{40m})n.$$
Thus for all $x\in A$, $i\in [t]$ and $v_{i,j}\in B$, we have
$$d_H(x)+ d_{H}(v_{i,j})\geq  (1- \frac{1}{40m})n + \frac{n}{30m} > |A|.$$
This together with Fact~\ref{fact: perfect matching} implies that
$H$ has a perfect matching $M$. For each $i\in [t]$, let
$$V_i:= \big\{ x\in A : x v_{i,j} \in M \text{ for some } j\in [b_i-|W_i|]\big\}.$$
Then by the definition of $H$, we have $V_i\subseteq U_i$ and
$V_1,\dots, V_t$ forms a partition of $A$ such that
$|V_i| = b_i - |W_i|$ for each $i\in [t]$. Now we remove $b_1 - a_1\stackrel{\eqref{eq: size}}{ \leq}  |V_1|$ arbitrary vertices from $V_1$, then for each $i\in [t]$ we have $|V_i| = a_i - |W_i|$.

By the definition of $U_i$, each vertex $v\in V_i$ has at least $k$ in-neighbors and at least $k$ out-neighbors in $W_i$.
Hence \ref{A2} together with Lemma~\ref{lem:glue} implies that
$D[W_i\cup V_i]$ is strongly $k$-connected.
As $\left \{W_i\cup V_i\right \}_{i \in [t]}$ forms a partition of $V(D)$ and $|W_i\cup V_i| = |W_i|+ a_i-|W_i| = a_i$ for every $i \in [t]$ and $Q_i \subseteq W_i$ by~\ref{A5}, this gives a desired partition.
\end{proof}

The proof of Theorem~\ref{thm:cycle} is more involved than the proof of Theorem~\ref{thm:balanced}. In addition to the auxiliary matching techniques used before, we also use Corollary~\ref{cor:twocycles} in the proof.

\begin{proof}[Proof of Theorem~\ref{thm:cycle}]
Let $T$ be a strongly $10^{50} t$-connected $n$-vertex tournament with any $t$ distinct vertices $x_1 , \dots , x_t$.
For each $i\in [t]$, let $\ell_i \in \mathbb{N}$ with $\ell_i\geq 3$ and $\sum_{i\in [t]} \ell_i = n$.

The idea is as follows. Let $\ell_1\geq \dots \geq \ell_t$.
We will use Lemma~\ref{lem:main} to partition $V(T)$ into $t$ sets $W_1,\dots, W_t$ satisfying \ref{A1}--\ref{A5}. By using \ref{A1}--\ref{A5}, we will distribute vertices outside $\bigcup_{i\in [t]}W_i$ to each $W_i$ to obtain partition $W_1\cup W^*_1\cup V_1,\dots, W_t\cup W^*\cup V_t$ of $V(T)$ such that each $T[W_i\cup W^*_i\cup V_i]$ is strongly $10^9$-connected with size $\ell'_i$ such that the following holds for some $s\in [t]$.
$$\ell_i \geq \ell'_i \text{ for each } i\in [s] \text{ and } \ell'_i \geq \ell_i \text{ for each } i\in [t]\setminus [s].$$ Furthermore, we will ensure that there exists a partition $J_1,\dots, J_s$ of $[t]\setminus [s]$ such that
$\ell_i - \ell'_i = \sum_{j\in J_i} (\ell'_j-\ell_j)$ for all $i\in [s]$.
By applying Corollary~\ref{cor:twocycles} to $T[W_j\cup W^*_j\cup V_j]$ for each $j\in J_i$ and $i\in [s]$, we will partition it into two cycles of size $\ell_j$ and $\ell'_j-\ell_j$.
By using collected properties, we will be able to combine all the cycles of length $\ell'_j-\ell_j$ with $j\in J_i$ together with $W_i\cup W^*_i\cup V_i$, we will obtain the desired collections of cycles of prescribed lengths.

By permuting indices if necessary, we assume that
$\ell_1\geq \dots \geq \ell_t$.
Let
\begin{align}\label{eq: s def}
s := \max\left\{ i\in [t]: \ell_i >\frac{n}{30t}\right\}.
\end{align}
Note that we have $s \geq 1$ as $\sum_{i\in [t]}\ell_i = n$.

We apply Lemma~\ref{lem:main} to $T$ with $10^9,1,10,1$ and $t$ playing the roles of $k,\ell,m,q$ and $t$, respectively to obtain pairwise disjoint sets $W_1,\dots, W_t$ satisfying the following for every $i\in [t]$, where $W:= \bigcup_{i\in [t]} W_i$ and
$U_{i}:=\{ v\in V(T)\setminus W: |N_D^+(v)\cap W_i|\geq 10^9 \text{ and } |N_D^-(v)\cap W_i| \geq 10^9 \}$.
\begin{enumerate}[label=\text{\rm (C\arabic*)}]
\item \label{C1} $|W_i| \leq \frac{n}{500t}$ and $n':= |V(T)\setminus W| \geq (1- \frac{1}{500})n$.
\item \label{C2} $T[W_i]$ is strongly $10^9$-connected.
\item \label{C3}$\left|\big\{i'\in [t] :|N_T^{+}(w)\cap W_{i'}|\geq 10^9 \text{ and }
|N_T^{-}(w)\cap W_{i'}| \geq 10^9 \big\}\right|\geq (1- \frac{1}{9 \cdot 10^{10}})t$ holds for every $w \in V(T) \setminus W$.
\item \label{C4}$|U_i| \geq (1- \frac{1}{10^{43}})|V(T)\setminus W|$.
\item \label{C5} $x_i \in W_i$.
\end{enumerate}
Now we take a partition of $[t]\setminus [s]$ satisfying the following properties.
\begin{CLAIM}\label{cl: partition [t][s]}
There exists a partition $J_1,\dots, J_s$ of $[t]\setminus [s]$ satisfying the following.
\begin{enumerate}[label=\text{\rm (J\arabic*)}]
\item\label{J1} For every $i\in [s]$, we have $|W_{i}| + |J_{i}|\cdot  \lceil \frac{n}{5t} \rceil + \frac{n}{40t} \leq \ell_{i}$.
\end{enumerate}
\end{CLAIM}
\begin{proof}
We may assume that $s<t$, otherwise the claim is obvious. Let $J_1,\dots, J_s$ be a collection of sets with maximum $|\bigcup_{i\in [s]} J_i|$ among all collections of pairwise disjoint subsets of $[t]\setminus [s]$ satisfying~\ref{J1}.
As $J_1=\dots =J_s =\emptyset$ satisfies~\ref{J1}, such a choice exists. For some $j \in [t]\setminus [s]$, if $j \notin \bigcup_{i\in [s]} J_{i}$ then for every $i\in [s]$, we have
$$|W_{i}| + (|J_{i}|+1)  \lceil \frac{n}{5t} \rceil + \frac{n}{40t}  > \ell_{i},$$
otherwise $J_1,\dots, J_{i-1}, J_{i}\cup \{j\}, J_{i+1},\dots, J_{s}$ still satisfies \ref{J1}, contradicting the maximality of $J_1,\dots, J_s$.
However, we have
\begin{eqnarray*}
n &=& \sum_{i\in [t]} \ell_i
< \sum_{i\in [s]} \Big(|W_i| + (|J_i|+1) (\frac{n}{5t}+1) + \frac{n}{40t}\Big) + \sum_{i\in [t]\setminus[s]} \ell_i  \\
&\stackrel{\eqref{eq: s def}, \ref{C1}}{<}& \frac{sn}{500t} + \frac{(t-s)n}{5t} + (t-s) + \frac{sn}{5t}+ s + \frac{sn}{40t} + \frac{(t-s)n}{30t} < n,
\end{eqnarray*}
where we obtain the inequalities as $0<s<t$. Hence the choice of $J_1,\dots, J_s$ gives a partition of $[t]\setminus [s]$ satisfying \ref{J1}.
\end{proof}
For all $i\in [s]$ and $j\in J_i$,
$$|U_i\cap U_j | \stackrel{\ref{C4}}{\geq} (1-\frac{2}{10^{43}})|V(T)\setminus W| \stackrel{\ref{C1}}{>} \lceil \frac{n}{20t} \rceil (t-s).$$
Thus, for all $i\in [s]$ and $j\in J_i$, we can choose a set
\begin{align}\label{eq: W*sizees}
W^*_j \subseteq U_i\cap U_j  \text{ with }  |W^*_j| = \lceil \frac{n}{20t} \rceil -|W_j|
\end{align}
in such a way that $W^*_{s+1},\dots, W^*_{t}$ are pairwise disjoint, and let $W^*_i := \emptyset$ for $i \in [s]$.

For every $i\in [t]$, let us define
\begin{align}\label{eq: bi sizess}
b_i:= \left\{\begin{array}{ll}
\ell_i - |W_i| - |J_i|\cdot  \lceil \frac{n}{5t} \rceil\stackrel{\ref{J1}}{\geq}\frac{n}{40t} & \text{if } i\in [s] \\
\ell_i + \lceil \frac{n}{5t} \rceil -\lceil \frac{n}{20t} \rceil \geq \frac{3n}{20t} & \text{if } i\in [t]\setminus[s] .
\end{array}\right.
\end{align}
Then we have
\begin{eqnarray}\label{eq: bi sum}
\sum_{i\in [s]} (b_i +|W_i| )+ \sum_{i\in [t]\setminus[s]} (b_i+ |W_i\cup W^*_i|)
\stackrel{\eqref{eq: W*sizees}}{=} \sum_{i\in [t]} \ell_i -  \sum_{i\in [s]} |J_i| \lceil \frac{n}{5t} \rceil + \sum_{i\in [t]\setminus [s]} \lceil \frac{n}{5t} \rceil = \sum_{i\in [t]}\ell_i  =n,
\end{eqnarray}
since $\left \{ J_1,\dots, J_s \right \}$ is a partition of $[t]\setminus[s]$.
Now we are ready to define an auxiliary bipartite graph $H$.
We consider the vertex set $A$ and a set $B$ of
new vertices as follows.
$$A:= V(T) \setminus (W\cup \bigcup_{i\in [t]} W^*_i) \enspace \text{and}\enspace
B:=\{ v_{i,j} : i\in [t], j\in [b_i] \}.$$
Moreover, by \eqref{eq: bi sum}, we have $|A|=|B|$.
Then as $|W_i|+|W_i^*| = \lceil\frac{n}{20t}\rceil$ holds for each $i\in [t]\setminus[s]$ by \eqref{eq: W*sizees}, \ref{C1} implies
\begin{align}\label{eq: A B size2}
\frac{9n}{10}\leq |A|=|B|\leq n.
\end{align}
Let $H$ be a bipartite graph with vertex partition $(A,B)$ and
$$E(H):= \bigcup_{i\in [t]} \{ x v_{i,j}:  j\in [b_i], x\in U_i  \} .$$
Then
\ref{C3} implies that, for each $x\in A$
$$d_H(x) = \sum_{i\in [t]\colon x\in U_i } b_i
\stackrel{\eqref{eq: bi sizess}}{\geq } \frac{n}{40t} \big|\{ i\in [t]: x\in U_i\}\big|
\geq \frac{n}{40t} \left (1- \frac{1}{9 \cdot 10^{10}} \right )t  \geq \frac{n}{50}.$$
Also, for all $i\in [t]$ and $v_{i,j} \in B$, we have
\begin{eqnarray*}
d_H(v_{i,j}) = |U_i \setminus \bigcup_{i'\in [t]} W^*_{i'}|
\stackrel{\ref{C4}}{\geq} |V(T)\setminus (W\cup \bigcup_{i'\in [t]} W^*_{i'})|
- \frac{1}{10^{43}}|V(T)\setminus W|
  \stackrel{\eqref{eq: A B size2},\ref{C1}}{\geq} \left (1 -  \frac{2}{10^{43}} \right )|A|.
\end{eqnarray*}
Hence for every $x\in A$, $i\in [t]$ and $v_{i,j}\in B$, it follows that
$$d_H(x)+ d_{H}(v_{i,j})\geq  \frac{n}{50} +  (1 -  \frac{2}{10^{43}}  ) |A| \stackrel{\eqref{eq: A B size2}}{>}|A|.$$
This together with Fact~\ref{fact: perfect matching} implies that $H$ has a perfect matching $M$. For every $i\in [t]$, let
$$V_i:= \{ x\in A : x v_{i,j} \in M \text{ for some } j\in [b_i]\}.$$
Then by the definition of $H$, we have $V_i\subseteq U_i$ and
$V_1,\dots, V_t$ form a partition of $A$ such that
$|V_i| = b_i$ for each $i\in [t]$.
Also $W^*_i \subseteq U_i$ for all $i\in [t]$.
By the definition of $U_i$, each vertex $v\in W^*_i \cup V_i$ has at least $10^9$ in-neighbors and at least $10^9$ out-neighbors in $W_i$. By~\ref{C2} together with Lemma~\ref{lem:glue}, $T[W_i\cup W^*_i\cup V_i]$ is strongly $10^9$-connected.
Moreover, for all $i\in [s]$ and $j\in[t]\setminus [s]$, we have
\begin{align}\label{eq:WW*V size}
|W_i\cup W^*_i\cup V_i| \stackrel{\eqref{eq: bi sizess}}{=} \ell_i - |J_i|\lceil \frac{n}{5t}\rceil \enspace\text{and}\enspace
|W_j\cup W^*_j\cup V_j| \stackrel{\eqref{eq: bi sizess}}{=} \ell_j + \lceil \frac{n}{5t} \rceil.
\end{align}
Note that we have $\ell_i\geq 3$ and $\lceil \frac{n}{5t}\rceil\geq 3$ for each $i\in [t]\setminus [s]$. Thus by Corollary~\ref{cor:twocycles}, for each $i\in [t]\setminus[s]$, there exist two vertex-disjoint cycles $C_i$ and $C'_i$ in $T[W_i\cup W^*_i\cup V_i]$ with $x_i \in V(C_i)$, $V(C_i)\cup V(C'_i) = W_i\cup W^*_i\cup V_i$ and $|C_i| = \ell_i$ and $|C'_i| = \lceil \frac{n}{5t}\rceil$.

By~\eqref{eq: s def},~\ref{C1} and~\eqref{eq: W*sizees}, for every $j\in [t]\setminus [s]$, we have $|W^*_j| \geq \lceil \frac{n}{20t} \rceil - \frac{n}{500t} > \ell_j$. Thus for each $j\in [t]\setminus [s]$, there is a vertex $y_j \in V(C'_j)\cap W^*_j$.
By~\eqref{eq: W*sizees}, for all $i\in[s]$ and $j\in J_i$, it follows that $y_j \in U_i$.
For each $i\in [s]$, we let
$$\widetilde{V}_i:= W_i\cup V_i \cup \bigcup_{j\in J_i} V(C'_j).$$
As $V_i\subseteq U_i$, each $x\in V_i$ has at least $10^9$ in-neighbors and out-neighbors in $W_i$.
For all $j\in J_i$ and $x\in V(C'_j)$,
there exists a path from $x$ to $y_j$ on $C'_j$, and a vertex $y_j\in U_i$ has at least one out-neighbor in $W_i$, together we obtain a path from $x$ to $W_i$ in $T[\widetilde{V}_i]$. Similarly, we can also obtain a path from $W_i$ to $x$ in $T[\widetilde{V}_i]$. By~\ref{C2} and Lemma~\ref{lem:glue}, we conclude that $T[\widetilde{V}_i]$ induces a strongly connected tournament.
By Camion's theorem (Theorem~\ref{thm:camion}), for each $i\in [s]$, the tournament $T[\widetilde{V}_i]$ contains a cycle $C_i$ of length
$$|\widetilde{V}_i| = |W_i|+ b_i + |J_i| \lceil \frac{n}{5t}\rceil
\stackrel{\eqref{eq: bi sizess}}{=} \ell_i.$$

Since $\big\{\widetilde{V}_i \big\}_{i \in [s]} \cup \left \{V(C_i) \right \}_{i \in [t]\setminus [s]}$ is a partition of $V(T)$, $C_1,\dots, C_t$ form a set of vertex-disjoint $t$ cycles with $x_i \in V(C_i)$ and $|V(C_i)| = \ell_i$ for $i \in [t]$. This completes the proof.
\end{proof}

\bibliographystyle{abbrv}