arxiv: v4 [math.co] 21 Sep 2014

Size: px

Start display at page:

Download "arxiv: v4 [math.co] 21 Sep 2014"

Juliet Spencer
6 years ago
Views:

1 ASYMPTOTIC IMPROVEMENT OF THE SUNFLOWER BOUND arxiv: v4 [math.co] 2 Sep 204 JUNICHIRO FUKUYAMA Abtract. A unflower with a core Y i a family B of et uch that U U Y for each two different element U and U in B. The well-known unflower lemma tate that a given family F of et, each of cardinality at mot, include a unflower of cardinality k if F > k!. Since Erdö and Rado proved it in 960, it ha not been known for more than half a century whether the unflower bound k! can be improved aymptotically for any k and. It i conectured that it can be reduced to c k for ome real number c k > 0 depending only on k, which i called the unflower conecture. Thi paper how that the general unflower bound can be indeed reduced by an exponential factor: We prove that F include a unflower of cardinality k if [ ] 2 c F 0 2 k min,!, log mink, for a contant c > 0, and any k 2 and 2. For intance, whenever k ǫ for a given contant [ ǫ ] 0,, the unflower bound i reduced from k! to k! O, [ log achieving the reduction ratio of O. log] Alo 2 k! any F of cardinality at leat include a unflower of cardinality k, where Our reult demontrate that the unflower bound can be improved by a factor of le than a mall contant to the power, giving hope for further update.. Introduction A et mean a ubet of a given univeral et X. Denote by F a family of et, and by B it ub-family. For a et Y X, a unflower with a core Y i a family B of et uch that U U Y for each two different element U and U in B. Equivalently, B i a unflower if U U V B V for any U,U B uch that U U. A unflower of cardinality k i called k-unflower for hort. A contant i a fixed poitive real number depending on no variable. The unflower lemma hown by Erdö and Rado [5] tate that: Lemma.. A family F of et, each of cardinality at mot, include a k- unflower if F > k!. Since it proof wa given in 960, it ha not been known whether the unflower bound k! can be aymptotically improved for any k and, depite it uefulne in combinatoric and variou application [6, 7]. It i conectured that the bound can be reduced to c k for a real number c k > 0 only depending on k, which i called the unflower conecture. The reult known o far related to thi topic include: 200 Mathematic Subect Claification. 05D05:Extremal Set Theory Primary. Key word and phrae. Sunflower Lemma, Sunflower Conecture, -Sytem.

2 2 JUNICHIRO FUKUYAMA - Kotochka [8] howed that the unflower bound for k 3 i reduced from 2! to c! for a contant c. The cae k 3 of the unflower conecture i logloglog loglog epecially emphaized by Erdö [4], which other reearcher alo believe include ome critical difficulty. - It ha alo been hown [9] that F of cardinality greater than k +c k 2 include a k-unflower for ome c R + depending only on. - Withtheunflowerboundk!, Razborovprovedanexponentiallowerbound on the monotone circuit complexity of the clique problem [0]. Alon and Boppana trengthened the bound [] by relaxing the condition to be a unflower from U U V B V to U U V B V for all U,U F,U U. - [2] dicue the unflower conecture and it variant in relation to fat matrix multiplication algorithm. Epecially, it i hown in the paper that if the unflower conecture i true, the Coppermith-Winograd conecture implying a fater matrix multiplication algorithm [3] doe not hold. In thi paper we how that the general unflower bound can be indeed improved by an exponential factor. We prove the following theorem. Theorem.2. A family F of et, each of cardinality at mot, include a k- unflower if [ ] 2 c F k min,!, log mink, for a contant c and any integer k 2 and 2. [ Thi improve the unflower bound by the factor of O log] whenever k exceed ǫ for a given contant ǫ 0,. Alo any F of cardinality at leat 2! k include a k-unflower. We plit it proof in two tep. We will how: Statement I: F include a k-unflower if F 2! k for any poitive integer and k. [! ck Statement II: F include ak-unflowerif F logmin,k] foromecontant c and any integer 2 and k 2. It i clear that the two tatement mean Theorem.2. The ret of the paper i dedicated to the decription of their proof. 2. Terminology and Related Fact Denote an arbitrary et by S that i a ubet of X. Given a family F of et of cardinality at mot, define FS def {U : U F and U S }, F S def {U : U F and U S } for poitive integer, F up S def {U : U F and U S}, and PS def {v,u : v X, U F and v U S}.

3 ASYMPTOTIC IMPROVEMENT OF THE SUNFLOWER BOUND 3 Let ǫ 0,/8 be a contant and k Z +. Given uch number, we ue the following two function a lower bound on F : Φ def 2 k!, and Φ 2 def k {! def ǫlnmin,k if 2,, where p p p 2 p ǫ if. Hereln denotethenaturallogarithmofapoitiverealnumber. WeregardΦ i 0 if Z + for each i,2. The following lemma how that Statement II i proved if F Φ 2 mean a k-unflower in F.! ck Lemma 2.. There exit a contant c uch that Φ 2 lnmink, for any 2 and k 2. It i hown by p p 2 p c lnmink, for another contant c. It exact proof i found in Appendix. We alo have 2. Φ 2 k p Φ 2 k k p p Φ 2 2 k + Φ 2 p p p + k!! Φ 2 p p p + k p!! Φ 2, for each poitive integer <. The lat inequality i due to p 2 p 3 p. To derive another inequality from 2., we ue Stirling approximation n! lim n 2πn n n where e denote the natural logarithm bae. In e a form of double inequality, it i known a 2πn n n e n+ 2n+ < n! < 2πn n n e n+ 2n, for n Z + []. Thi mean 2.2 Thu, 2.3 2πn n n e n < n! n n n e n+. n < nm m m! < exp mln n m +m ln 2πm < exp mln n m +m, for poitive integer n and m uch that n m. We ubtitute! > 2π e and! e ++ from 2.2 into 2. to ee: Lemma 2.2. Φ 2 > Φ 2 exp ln k p 2 for a poitive integer <. A precie proof i alo given in Appendix.

4 4 JUNICHIRO FUKUYAMA 3. The Improvement Method We will howstatement I andii byimprovingthe originalproofofthe unflower lemma in [5]. We review it in a way to introduce our proof method eaily. The original proof how by induction on that F include a k-unflower if F > Φ 0, where Φ 0 def k!. The claim i clearly true in the induction bai ; the family F conit of more than k different et of cardinality at mot including a deired unflower. To how the induction tep, let B {B,B 2,...,B r } be a ub-family of F coniting of pairwie dioint et B i, whoe cardinality r i maximum. We ay that uch B i a maximal corele unflower in F for notational convenience in thi paper. Alo write B def B B 2 B r. We how r k to complete the induction tep. We have 3. F up S Φ 0 S for any S X uch that S <, for F up S, the ub-family of F coniting ofthe et including S a defined in Section 2. Otherwie a k-unflower exit in F by induction hypothei. Then the ubfamily FB conitingofthe et interectingwith B meet F B B Φ 0 ; becaueforeveryelementv inb, the cardinalityoff {v} F up {v}ibounded by Φ 0. Alo Φ 0 Φ0 k. Thu, 3.2 F B B Φ 0 rφ 0 r Φ 0 r k k Φ 0 < r k F. Now FB i le than F unle r k. In other word, if r < k, then F would have a et dioint with any B i B, contradicting the maximality of r B. Hence r k, meaning B include a k-unflower with an empty core. Thi prove the induction tep. To improve thi argument, we note that the proof work even if F up {v} for all v B are dioint. If o, each F up {v} include element U F only interecting with {v}, and dioint with B {v}. Let v B i B. If we replace B i by any et U in F up {v} uch that U B {v}, then B i till a maximal corele unflower in F. On the other hand, if there are ufficiently many U F up {v} dioint with B {v}, we can find U among them uch that U B i i much maller than. Here we aume both k are are are large enough. Thi give u the following contradiction: Due to the maximality of r B, the family FU mut contain FB i FB B i. So FU FB i include mot et in F up {v} being a not

5 ASYMPTOTIC IMPROVEMENT OF THE SUNFLOWER BOUND 5 too mall family. But by 3., FU FB i i upper-bounded by 2 Φ 0 2+ U B i Φ 0 2 Φ 0 k 2 + U B i Φ0 k < F k 2 + U B i. k A U B i i much maller than, the cardinality FU FB i i alo mall, i.e. bounded by F time O. Thi contradiction on FU FB i k + U Bi 2 k eentially mean that if r i around k, we can contruct a larger corele unflower in F. Hence r mut be more than k with the cardinality lower bound Φ 0. Our proof of Theorem.2 in the next ection generalize the above obervation. ByfindingB i Bwithufficientlylarge FB i BB B i, wewillhowstatement I that F uch that F 2 2! k include a k-unflower. We will further extend thi argument to how Statement II. Intead of finding ut one uch B i B, we will find B B uch that a ub-family H of 3.3 F F S B S S B B S i ufficiently large. Then we how a maximal corele unflower in H whoe cardinality i larger than B. Thi again contradict the maximality of r B to prove the econd tatement. 4. Proof of Theorem Statement I. We prove Statement I in thi ection. Put then δ , and x k +δ k, 2 k Φ! +δ 2 x!, a defined in Section 2. We how that F Φ mean a +δx-unflower included in F. We prove it by induction on. It bai occur when 2. The claim i true by theunflowerlemma, inceφ +δ 2 x! +δx! k! > k 2! if 2. Aume true for,2,..., and prove true for 3. A in Section 3, let B {B,B 2,...,B r } be a maximal corele unflower of cardinality r in F, and B B B 2 B r. Contrarily to the claim, let u aume 4. r < +δx. We will find a contradiction caued by 4.. Oberve the following fact. For any nonempty et S X uch that S <, if F up S Φ S, the family F up S contain a +δx-unflower by induction hypothei. Thu we aume 4.2 F up S < Φ S for S X uch that S <.

6 6 JUNICHIRO FUKUYAMA We alo have k 3, becaue Φ > 0 for k, and Φ 2 2 2! >! k! if k 2. Since r ha the maximum value, 4.3 F FB, i.e., every et in F interect with B. PB, defined in Section 2 a the family of pair v,u uch that U F and v U B, ha a cardinality bounded by 4.4 PB B Φ rφ < +δx Φ +δ F, x due to 4. and 4.2. Here PB B Φ becaue for each v B, there are at mot Φ pair v,u PB. We firt ee that many U F interect with B by cardinality, i.e., F B i ufficiently large. Oberve two lemma. Lemma 4.. F B > δ F. Proof. Let F B δ F for ome δ [0,]. By 4.3, there are δ F element U F uch that U B 2, each of which create two or more pair in PB. If δ δ, PB δ F +2δ F +δ F +δ F, contradicting 4.4. Thu δ < δ proving the lemma. Lemma4.2. There exit B i {B,B 2,...,B r } uch that F B i F B B i δ +δ Φ x. Proof. By Lemma 4., there exit B i {B,B 2,...,B r } uch that the number of U F interecting with B i by cardinality, and dioint with B B i, i at leat δ F r > δ δ F +δx +δ Φ x. The family of uch U i exactly F B i FB B i, o it cardinality i no le than δ +δ Φ x. Aume uch B i i B without lo of generality. Then F B F B B F B F B B δ +δ Φ > 0. x We chooe any element B F B F B B that i not B. Switch B with B in B. Since B i dioint with any of B 2,B 3,...,B r, the obtained family {B,B 2,...,B r } i another maximal corele unflower in F. We ee the following inequality.

7 ASYMPTOTIC IMPROVEMENT OF THE SUNFLOWER BOUND 7 - Lemma 4.3. FB FB < Φ x +. x Proof. A et U FB FB interect with B B of cardinality, or both B B and B B of cardinality. By 4.2, there are at mot Φ + 2 Φ 2 Φ Φ x + 2 x 2 < Φ x + x uch U FB FB. The lemma follow. F FB B 2 B 3 B r would be true if the cardinality r of the new corele unflower {B,B 2,B 3,...,B r } were maximum. However, it mean that everyelement in F B F B B i included in FB. Thu, FB FB F B F B B, leading to FB FB F B F B B δ +δ Φ Φ x x +. x It lat inequality i confirmed with 3, k 3, x k δ +δ, and +δ 3 + +δ 3 a δ 0 3. Thi contradict Lemma 4.3, completing the proof of Statement I Statement II. We prove the econd tatement by further developing the above method. We how that F include a k-unflower if F > Φ 2 for a choice of ufficiently mall contant ǫ 0, /8. Thi uffice to prove Statement II thank to Lemma 2.. The proof i by induction on. It bai occur when mink, i maller than a ufficiently large contant c, i.e., when mink, i maller than a lower bound c on mink, required by the proof below. To meet thi cae, we chooe ǫ 0,/8 to be maller than / lnc. Then Φ 2 k! > k! by the definition of Φ 2 in Section 2. The family F thu include a k-unflower by the unflower lemma in the bai. Aume true for,2,..., and prove true for. The two integer k and atify 4.5 mink, c, i.e., they are ufficiently large. Put p def def lnmink,, and x k 8 p. p i ufficiently large ince both k and are. Note. The lower bound c on min,k i required in order to atify 4.8, 4.0, 4. and 4.2 below, which are inequalitie with fixed coefficient and no ǫ. We chooe c a the minimum poitive integer uch that mink, c atifie the inequalitie, and alo ǫ a min 2lnc, 9 A p ǫlnmink, < p in 2., 4.6 Φ 2 p k Φ 2 < p k Φ 2 Φ 2 x..

8 8 JUNICHIRO FUKUYAMA Similarly to 4.2, we have F up S < Φ 2 S for any S X with S <, a induction hypothei. We alo keep denoting a maximal corele unflower in F by B {B,B 2,...,B r }, and B B 2 B r by B. Alo 4.3 hold due to the maximality of r B. We prove r k for the induction tep. Suppoe contrarily that 4.7 x r < k, and we will find a contradiction. Here r x i confirmed imilarly to 3.2 in Section 3, i.e., by FB B Φ 2 rφ 2 r Φ 2 r x x F, with 4.6, o r < x would contradict the maximality of r B. We tart our proof by howing a claim een imilarly to Lemma 4.. Lemma 4.4. There exit a poitive integer 2p uch that F B Φ2 4p. Proof. We firt how 0 2p F B 2 F. If not, there would be at leat 2 F et U F uch that U B > 2p by the definition of F given in Section 2. Each uch U create at leat 2p pair v,u PB, o However, imilarly to 4.4, P B 2p F 2 p F. PB B Φ 2 rφ 2 < k pφ 2 p F, k by induction hypothei and 4.6. By the contradictory two inequalitie, 0 2p F B < 2 F i fale. Thu 0 2p F B 2 F. Let be an integer in [,2p] with the maximum cardinality of F B. By the above claim and 4.3, F B F 2 2p Φ2 4p, proving the lemma. Fix thi integer [,2p]. Next we find a mall ub-family B of B uch that 3.3 i large enough. For each non-empty B B, define GB def {U : U F B, S B,U S and S B B,U S }. Oberve a lemma regarding GB. Lemma 4.5. There exit a nonempty ub-family B B of cardinality at mot uch that GB Φ2 8p r. Proof. By definition, the cardinality of B uch that GB doe not exceed. Thu there are at mot r r r r r < + r + + r r + r + uch poible B B. Here it truth i confirmed by the following argument.

9 n m r 2 m ASYMPTOTIC IMPROVEMENT OF THE SUNFLOWER BOUND 9 n n m+ m r r +2 for any n,m Z + uch that m n. So r < r + 2r, r 3 r 3r r +3 2 < r + 8k lnmink, > k lnk 2 The lat inequality i due to r x k p 2p < lnk. Thu 4.8 r + < lnk k lnk lnk + < 2, r r +,,. by 4.7, and by 4.5 where k i ufficiently large. So the lat inequality hold in the above. Then by Lemma 4.4, there exit at leat one nonempty B B uch that The lemma follow. GB > F B 2 r Φ 2 2 r 4p Φ 2 8p r. We now contruct a ub-family H of 3.3 in which we will find a larger maximal corele unflower. Fix a ub-family B B decided by Lemma 4.5. Put B def S, S B and r def B 2p, H def F B F B B F S B S The family H include GB by definition, o 4.9 H Φ 2 8p r, F S B B S by Lemma 4.5. If we find a maximal corele unflower in H whoe cardinality i larger than r B, it mean the exitence of a corele unflower in F with cardinality larger than r, ince any U H i dioint with B B. Extending the notation FS, write HS def {U : U H and U S }, for a nonempty et S X. Then H{v} for an element v X i the family of U H F containing v. Let u how two lemma on H and H{v}. By them we will ee that the latter i ufficiently maller than the former. Lemma 4.6. H > Φ 2 exp 4p. Proof. We have two fact on 4.9. The natural logarithm of the denominator 8p r i upper-bounded by r ln8p < ln r + +ln8p < ln k xp + +ln8p ln + +ln8p, due to 2.3, 4.7 and x k p..

10 0 JUNICHIRO FUKUYAMA Let d lnφ 2 lnφ 2, or Φ 2 Φ 2 expd. It atifie d > ln k 2 k > ln p p 2 2 lnx > lnx, by Lemma 2.2, p < p, and. Then, > Φ 2 exp H Φ 2 8p r Φ 2 exp lnx ln p 2 ln8p. ln xp + +ln8p Find max 2p ln p +2 regarding a a real parameter. The maximum value 4 2ln2p i achieved when 2p. Since p i ufficiently large by 4.5, 4.0 2pln2 > +ln8p. Hence, H > exp ln p 2 ln8p exp 4 2ln2p ln8p > Φ 2 exp 4p, completing the proof. Lemma 4.7. The following two tatement hold true. i H{v} e7p H for every v B. ii H{v} x e7p H for every v X B. Proof. i: Let U be any et in H{v} for the given v B, and write U U B. Since U ha cardinality containing v, there are no more than B r r r r choice of U. Here the identity r r r i ued. By the induction hypothei on, the number of U H{v} i upper-bounded by H{v} r Φ 2 Φ 2 exp exp ln r + +ln Φ 2 Φ 2 exp2p+ln2p where r exp ln r + i due to 2.3, and 4. 2p+ln2p < 3p, ln + ln r + exp +ln Φ 2 < Φ 2 exp3p, due to 4.5. With the previou lemma, we ee that the ratio H{v} / H doe not exceed Φ 2 exp3p / Φ 2 exp 4p e7p,

11 ASYMPTOTIC IMPROVEMENT OF THE SUNFLOWER BOUND proving i. ii: A v X B, the number of choice of U U B i now B r. For each uch U, the number of et U H containing U {v} i at mot Φ 2 p k Φ 2 < p k Φ 2 x Φ 2, by induction hypothei and p p < p. Hence H{v} i upper-bounded by. Then argue imilarly to i. Φ 2 x r Lemma 4.7 mean that H include a corele unflower of cardinality more than r B. Let u formally prove it with the following lemma. Lemma 4.8. B HV 2 H for every V H. Proof. Let We have y def min,k, o that p 8 lny, y e8p, y, and x k p y p. 4.2 p and 8p 3 e p < 2, due to 4.5. Fix each V H. By Lemma 4.7, the family HV ha a cardinality bounded by HV H{v} e7p + e 7p H x v V e 7p + H e 7p x y + p H e 7p 2p y y H 4p 2 e 7p H y 4p2 e 7p H e 8p 4p2 e p H. Therefore, by B r 2p, The lemma follow. B HV 2p HV 8p 3 e p H < 2 H. H Hence each V H interect with at mot 2 B et in H. There exit more than B pairwie dioint et in H. By definition, every element in H i dioint with a et in B B. The cardinality r of the corele unflower B in F i therefore not maximum. Thi contradiction prove Statement II, completing the proof of Theorem.2. Appendix: Proof of Lemma 2. and 2.2 Lemma 2.. There exit a contant c > 0 uch that Φ 2 for any 2 and k 2.! ck lnmink, Proof. We firthowthe lemma when k. By the definition ofφ 2 in Section 2, k Φ 2!. ln2 ln3 ln ǫ

12 2 JUNICHIRO FUKUYAMA We aume 3 ince the claim i trivially true for 2. It uffice to how k! k ln2 ln3 ln ǫ e 2!, ln ǫ or ln 4.3 ln2 ln3 ln lnln2+lnln3+ +lnln lnln 2. lnlnx i a mooth, monotonically increaing function of x R +, o e 2 lnln3+lnln4+ +lnln > lnln li 2lnln2 li2. 2 lnlnx dx Here li i the logarithmic integral dx 0 lnx. A lnln2 < 0, lnln2+lnln3+ +lnln > lnln li+li2, where li li2 dx 2 lnx i upper-bounded by 2/ln2 < 2. Hence, lnln2+ lnln3+ +lnln lnln 2, proving the lemma when k. If > k, the lemma i alo proved by 4.3: k Φ 2 ln2 ln3 lnk lnk k! ǫ k e 2 k lnk k! <!. k e lnk ǫ ǫlnk 2 Thi complete the proof. Lemma 2.2. Φ 2 > Φ 2 exp ln k p 2 <. Proof. It uffice to how k! p!! > exp for a poitive integer! > exp ln k p 2 due to 2., or ln 2. By 2.2, ln!! i at leat ln +ln 2π ln +ln + 2π ln ln +ln > ln ln+ln ln ln. By the Taylor erie of natural logarithm, ln i i i >. From thee,! ln k! > ln+ 2 ln, which i equivalent to the deired inequality to prove the lemma.

13 ASYMPTOTIC IMPROVEMENT OF THE SUNFLOWER BOUND 3 Reference. N. Alon and R. B. Boppana, The monotone circuit complexity of Boolean function, Combinatorica 7 987, N. Alon, A. Shpilka, and C. Uman, On unflower and matrix multiplication, Journal of Computational Complexity , D. Coppermith and S. Winograd, Matrix multiplication via arithmetic progreion, Journal of Symbolic Computation 9 990, P. Erdö, On the combinatorial problem which i would mot like to ee olved, Combinatorica 98, P. Erdö and R. Rado, Interection theorem for ytem of et, Journal of the London Mathematical Society , Z. Füredi, Turán type problem. urvey in combinatoric, London Mathematical Society Lecture Note Serie 66 99, S. Jukna, Extremal combinatoric with application in computer cience, Springer, A. V. Kotochka, A bound of the cardinality of familie not containing -ytem, The Mathematic of Paul Erdö, II Algorithm and Combinatoric, Springer, 997, pp A.V.Kotochka, V.Rdl, and L.A.Talyheva, On ytem of mall et with no large -ytem, Combinatoric, Probability and Computing 8 999, A. A. Razborov, Lower bound on the monotone complexity of ome Boolean function, Dokl. Akad. Nauk SSSR Ruian , H. Robbin, A remark of tirling formula, Amer. Math. Monthly , Applied Reearch Laboratory, The Pennylvania State Univerity, PA 6802, USA addre: xf40@pu.edu

Lecture 21. The Lovasz splitting-off lemma Topics in Combinatorial Optimization April 29th, 2004

Lecture 21. The Lovasz splitting-off lemma Topics in Combinatorial Optimization April 29th, 2004 18.997 Topic in Combinatorial Optimization April 29th, 2004 Lecture 21 Lecturer: Michel X. Goeman Scribe: Mohammad Mahdian 1 The Lovaz plitting-off lemma Lovaz plitting-off lemma tate the following. Theorem