,i+1}$: $$\label{V0i+1SmallerV0i}
\sigma(v) \leq \left[3.001 - 0.1745448 \left(i+1\right)\right]d = \left(2.8264552 - 0.1745448i\right)d < \sigma(u).$$ Finally, to justify that there are no sum conflicts between vertices from $V_0$ and $V_1$, by (\[V1iSmallerV1i+1\]) and (\[V0i+1SmallerV0i\]) it is sufficient to show that sums in $V_{1,10^4}$ are smaller than sums in $V_{0,4}$. To see that this is actually true, note that by (\[SecondSv\]), (\[DefinitionOfc1i\]), (\[Delta2\]) and (\[LowerSvBoundinV0i\]), for any $u\in V_{1,10^4}$ and $v\in V_{0,4}$: $$\begin{aligned}
\sigma(u) &\leq& \left(1.0776+1.06875\cdot \left(10^4-1\right)\cdot 10^{-4}\right)d + 0.0018956d + 10^{-4}\cdot 1.0603 d \nonumber\\
&=& 2.148244755 d
<  2.1514248 d - 1
=  \left(2.849604 - 0,1745448\cdot 4\right)d - 1 
\leq \sigma(v). \nonumber\end{aligned}$$ This finishes the proof of Theorem \[123largeregTh\] as the obtained weighting $\omega_2$ is thus indeed a $3$-weighting of the edges of $G$ such that there are no sum conflicts between neighbours in $G$.

Concluding Remarks
==================

The constant $10^8$ above could still be improved, but at the cost of clarity of presentation of the proof of Theorem \[123largeregTh\]. Nevertheless, we were far from being able to push it down to $10^7$. Actually, introducing the special subgraph $G'_1$ of $G_1$, based on Corollary \[QuarterDecompositionLemma\], served merely optimization purposes. These required also using only $1$’s and $3$’s as
, i+1}$: $ $ \label{V0i+1SmallerV0i } 
 \sigma(v) \leq \left[3.001 - 0.1745448 \left(i+1\right)\right]d = \left(2.8264552 - 0.1745448i\right)d < \sigma(u).$$ Finally, to justify that there are no sum battle between vertex from $ V_0 $ and $ V_1 $, by   (\[V1iSmallerV1i+1\ ]) and   (\[V0i+1SmallerV0i\ ]) it is sufficient to show that sums in $ V_{1,10 ^ 4}$ are smaller than sum in $ V_{0,4}$. To see that this is actually true, notice that by   (\[SecondSv\ ]), (\[DefinitionOfc1i\ ]), (\[Delta2\ ]) and   (\[LowerSvBoundinV0i\ ]), for any $ u\in V_{1,10 ^ 4}$ and $ v\in V_{0,4}$: $ $ \begin{aligned } 
 \sigma(u) & \leq & \left(1.0776 + 1.06875\cdot \left(10 ^ 4 - 1\right)\cdot 10^{-4}\right)d + 0.0018956d + 10^{-4}\cdot 1.0603 d \nonumber\\ 
 & = & 2.148244755 d 
 <   2.1514248 d - 1 
 =   \left(2.849604 - 0,1745448\cdot 4\right)d - 1 
 \leq \sigma(v). \nonumber\end{aligned}$$ This finishes the validation of Theorem   \[123largeregTh\ ] as the prevail weighting $ \omega_2 $ is therefore indeed a $ 3$-weighting of the edges of $ G$ such that there are no sum conflicts between neighbor in $ G$. 

 Concluding Remarks 
 = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = 

 The constant $ 10 ^ 8 $ above could still be improved, but at the cost of clarity of display of the proof of Theorem   \[123largeregTh\ ]. Nevertheless, we were far from being able to push it down to $ 10 ^ 7$. Actually, introduce the special subgraph $ G'_1 $ of $ G_1 $, based on Corollary   \[QuarterDecompositionLemma\ ], serve merely optimization purposes. These necessitate also using only $ 1 $ ’s and $ 3 $ ’s as
,i+1}$: $$\lwbel{V0i+1SmallerV0i}
\sigma(v) \led \left[3.001 - 0.1745448 \left(i+1\rntht)\rigit]d = \lert(2.8264552 - 0.1745448i\rigft)d < \sigma(u).$$ Finally, to justihy tyat tyere are no sum conflizts betwevn verticws fcom $V_0$ and $V_1$, by (\[V1iSmallerV1l+1\]) and (\[B0l+1SmalnxrV0i\]) it is sufflcient to svow that sums hn $V_{1,10^4}$ are smaller than sums in $V_{0,4}$. To see ehat thos is actually ttue, npee tgat by (\[SecondSv\]), (\[DefinitionOfc1i\]), (\[Deltz2\]) and (\[LoxerSvBoundinV0i\]), gor any $u\in V_{1,10^4}$ and $v\in V_{0,4}$: $$\behin{apigned}
\sigma(u) &\leq& \lfft(1.0776+1.06875\cdot \lefj(10^4-1\digrr)\cdot 10^{-4}\right)d + 0.0018956d + 10^{-4}\cdot 1.0603 d \nonumber\\
&=& 2.148244755 d
<  2.1514248 d - 1
=  \left(2.849604 - 0,1745448\cdot 4\right)d - 1 
\ldq \siyma(v). \nonumbgx\wnd{wnigned}$$ This finifhes the proof of Thaorem \[123latgeregTh\] as thc obteinee weighting $\omega_2$ is vhus indeed a $3$-weightyng of tha zdges of $G$ such that rhwre ate no sum xonwlidtx getweej nxighbours ih $G$.

Concludibg Remarks
==================

The constsne $10^8$ above could still bq improved, but at the cost of clarity ox pdesentation of the prood of Theorem \[123largeregTj\]. Neverthqless, we were far from being able to push it down to $10^7$. Ecguaoln, ingeofucing the special subgraph $G'_1$ of $G_1$, based on Cjdoklsry \[QuarterDecoipositionLekmw\], xgrved merely oktimizacjoh purposes. These rfquired also using onjy $1$’s and $3$’s as
,i+1}$: $$\label{V0i+1SmallerV0i} \sigma(v) \leq \left[3.001 - 0.1745448 \left(2.8264552 0.1745448i\right)d < Finally, to justify conflicts vertices from $V_0$ $V_1$, by (\[V1iSmallerV1i+1\]) (\[V0i+1SmallerV0i\]) it is sufficient to show sums in $V_{1,10^4}$ are smaller than sums in $V_{0,4}$. To see that this actually true, note that by (\[SecondSv\]), (\[DefinitionOfc1i\]), (\[Delta2\]) and (\[LowerSvBoundinV0i\]), for any $u\in and V_{0,4}$: \sigma(u) \left(1.0776+1.06875\cdot \left(10^4-1\right)\cdot 10^{-4}\right)d + 0.0018956d + 10^{-4}\cdot 1.0603 d \nonumber\\ &=& 2.148244755 d < 2.1514248 d 1 = \left(2.849604 - 0,1745448\cdot 4\right)d - 1 \sigma(v). \nonumber\end{aligned}$$ This finishes proof of Theorem \[123largeregTh\] as obtained $\omega_2$ is indeed $3$-weighting the edges of such that there are no sum conflicts between neighbours in $G$. Concluding Remarks ================== The constant $10^8$ could still but at cost clarity presentation of the Theorem \[123largeregTh\]. Nevertheless, we were far to push it down to $10^7$. Actually, introducing special subgraph of $G_1$, based on Corollary \[QuarterDecompositionLemma\], merely optimization purposes. These required also using only and $3$’s as
,i+1}$: $$\label{V0i+1SmallerV0i}
\sigma(v) \leQ \left[3.001 - 0.1745448 \left(i+1\Right)\RigHt]d = \LeFt(2.8264552 - 0.1745448i\rIght)D < \sigma(u).$$ Finally, TO jusTify that there are no sum cOnfliCtS BetwEEn VertiCes from $v_0$ AnD $v_1$, By (\[V1ISMaLleRV1I+1\]) AnD (\[V0i+1SmAllErV0i\]) it iS sufficienT to ShOw that sums in $v_{1,10^4}$ ArE smaller thAn sUms in $V_{0,4}$. To see tHat This is AcTuaLLy truE, noTe thaT by (\[SecONdSv\]), (\[DeFinitionOFc1I\]), (\[delta2\]) aND (\[LowerSVbOuNdinv0i\]), for any $u\in V_{1,10^4}$ and $v\iN v_{0,4}$: $$\bEGin{aligned}
\sigmA(u) &\leq& \lEfT(1.0776+1.06875\CdOT \LefT(10^4-1\riGht)\cdot 10^{-4}\rigHt)D + 0.0018956d + 10^{-4}\cdoT 1.0603 D \nonumbER\\
&=& 2.148244755 d
<  2.1514248 D - 1
=  \LEFt(2.849604 - 0,1745448\cDOt 4\right)d - 1 
\leq \siGma(v). \nonumbeR\End{AligneD}$$ THis FInisheS the pRoOF of theorem \[123largEregth\] as the obTained WEightinG $\Omega_2$ is Thus inDeeD a $3$-wEighTInG oF thE eDGes OF $G$ SucH ThaT there arE nO sUm conFlicTS BETweeN neIghbOurs iN $G$.

Concluding REmaRks
==================

THE coNstanT $10^8$ abovE couLd Still Be imprOved, bUt At the cost of clarIty oF presentaTioN oF thE pRoof oF theoreM \[123laRgeRegTh\]. NeVerthelESs, wE wERE FaR from being able to puSh IT DoWn to $10^7$. ActuAlly, inTRoDuCIng the spEcIal SubgRAPh $G'_1$ of $g_1$, basED oN CorollaRy \[QuarTErdeComposiTiOnLemmA\], sErvEd mErely OPtimIzatioN purposeS. ThesE Required also usINg only $1$’s and $3$’s as
,i+1}$: $$\label{V0i+1Smal lerV0i}
\s igma( v)\le q\lef t[3. 001 - 0.174544 8  \le ft(i+1\right)\right]d= \le ft ( 2.82 6 45 52 -0.17454 4 8i \ r igh t) d< \ si g ma (u).$ $ F inally,  to justif y t ha t there aren osum confli cts  between ver tic es fro m$V_ 0 $ and  $V _1$,by (\[ V 1iSmal lerV1i+1\ ]) and (\ [ V0i+1Sm a l le rV0i \]) it is suffici e nt to show that s ums in  $ V _{ 1 , 10^ 4}$  are small er  than sums in $V _ { 0 ,4} $ . To see that  this is ac t ual ly tru e,  no t e that  by ( \[ S eco ndSv\]), (\ [Def initionOf c1i\]) ,  (\[Del t a2\]) a nd (\[ Low erS vBou n di nV 0i\ ]) ,  fo r  a ny$ u\i n V_{1,1 0^ 4} $ and  $v\ i n V _{0, 4}$ : $$ \begi n{aligned}
\s igm a(u) &\l eq& \ left( 1.07 76 +1.06 875\cd ot \l ef t(10^4-1\right) \cdo t 10^{-4} \ri gh t)d  +  0.00 1 8956d+ 1 0^{ -4}\cdo t 1.060 3  d\n o n u mb er\\
&=& 2.1482447 55 d 
<   2.1514 248 d-  1 
=  \left(2 .8 496 04 - 0 ,1745 448\ c do t 4\righ t)d -1  \l eq \sig ma (v). \ no num ber \end{ a lign ed}$$This fin ishes the proof of T h eorem \[123la r ge r e gT h \] a s t he obtained  wei g htin g $\ o me ga_ 2 $ isthusin d ee d  a $3$-weighting of  t he edg es of  $G$ such tha t there ar e n o sum co nfli c ts between neighb oursin $G$.

C o ncluding  Rema rks
==== ========= = = ===

The  co nst ant  $1 0 ^ 8$  above coulds t illbe  improv ed,  but at  th e c ost  of  c larity of  present at io nof  th e pro o f of The or em\[ 123 large r egTh\] . Nev erth el es s , w e weref ar f rombe in g ab leto  push  itd own  to $10 ^7$. Actu all y , in tr od ucing t he special su bg raph $G'_1 $of$G_1$, b ased onCorollary \[QuarterDeco m positio nLe mma\] , se rved mere lyoptimi zat i on pur poses.  Thes ereq u i red a l s ousi ng  only $1$’ s and  $3$’ sas
,i+1}$: $$\label{V0i+1SmallerV0i}
\sigma(v)_\leq \left[3.001_- 0.1745448 \left(i+1\right)\right]d =_\left(2.8264552 -_0.1745448i\right)d_< \sigma(u).$$_Finally,_to justify that_there are no_sum conflicts between vertices_from $V_0$ and_$V_1$,_by (\[V1iSmallerV1i+1\]) and (\[V0i+1SmallerV0i\]) it is sufficient to show that sums in $V_{1,10^4}$ are smaller than_sums_in $V_{0,4}$._To_see_that this is actually true,_note that by (\[SecondSv\]), (\[DefinitionOfc1i\]), (\[Delta2\])_and (\[LowerSvBoundinV0i\]), for_any $u\in V_{1,10^4}$ and $v\in V_{0,4}$: $$\begin{aligned}
\sigma(u) &\leq&_\left(1.0776+1.06875\cdot_\left(10^4-1\right)\cdot 10^{-4}\right)d +_0.0018956d + 10^{-4}\cdot 1.0603 d \nonumber\\
&=& 2.148244755 d
< _2.1514248 d - 1
=  \left(2.849604_- 0,1745448\cdot 4\right)d_-_1_
\leq \sigma(v). \nonumber\end{aligned}$$ This_finishes the proof of Theorem \[123largeregTh\] as_the obtained weighting $\omega_2$ is thus_indeed a $3$-weighting of the edges of_$G$ such that there are no_sum conflicts between neighbours in_$G$.

Concluding Remarks
==================

The_constant $10^8$ above could still_be improved, but_at the_cost of clarity_of presentation of the proof of_Theorem \[123largeregTh\]. Nevertheless, we_were far from being able to_push_it down to_$10^7$._Actually,_introducing the_special subgraph $G'_1$_of_$G_1$, based_on_Corollary \[QuarterDecompositionLemma\], served merely optimization purposes. These_required_also using only $1$’s and $3$’s as