arxiv: v1 [math.co] 18 Apr 2019

Transcription

1 Classifications of l-zero-sumfree Sets Ashleigh Adams, Carole Hall, Eric Stucky arxiv: v1 [math.co] 18 Apr Introduction April 22, 2019 In 1988, Cameron and Erdős [6] conjectured that the maximum size of a sum-free subset S {1,2,...,n} is O(2 n 2), where sum-free refers to the condition that no two distinct elements in S add to a third distinct element contained in S. This conjecture has since been upgraded to a theorem [7] [9], and recently a generalization of this sum-free property has arisen in the form of (k, l)-sumfree sets. Calkin and Thomson first defined (k,l)-sumfree sets in [5] as sets S N such that the equation x 1 +x 2 + +x k = y 1 +y 2 + +y l has no solutions with all x i,y i S. Notice that when k = 2 and l = 1, the definition agrees with the classical definition of a sum-free set. These sets and their close variants have been studied by many authors; see e.g. [4] for an early study of (k,l)-sumfree sets in cyclic groups, and [3] for a detailed survey of recent directions. We will consider the case of (k,l)-sumfree sets in Z/nZ where k = 0, which we call l-zerosumfree sets and denote by n,l. Explicitly, n,l := { {s 1,...,s k } Z/nZ : c 1 s 1 + +c k s k 0 whenever k i=1 } c i = l. This case appears to have qualitatively different behavior than when both k and l are strictly positive. For instance, although Bajnok and Matzke [2], following on the work of [8], recently determined an explicit formula for the maximum size of a(k,l)-sumfree set in Z/nZfor any k,l > 0, their methods do not directly extend to the k = 0 case. We are concerned with understanding global properties of n,l. To this end, it is extremely useful to have a complete classification of all l-zero-sumfree sets. We are able to observe numerous properties of n,l for variations on parameters n and l by the use of an algorithm which we will describe in detail in the following section. In particular, we completely describe n,l for three families of parameters: 1. a doubling class with parameters n = 2 m+1 ρ and l = 2 m ρ, for odd ρ 3, 2. a prime powers class with parameters n = p e and l = p e 1 for prime p 2 and exponent e 1, and 3. three arms and legs classes with parameters n = 2p, l = 2p s for prime p 3 and s {1,2,3}. 1

2 One benefit of the complete descriptions of the families introduced in this paper is that we are also able to compute naturally related objects with relative ease. For instance, from each n,l we may construct an object called a subspace arrangement. In general, a subspace arrangement is simply a collection A of finitely many subspaces S of some vector space. In particular, for each of the n,l above, we compute two common invariants of their associated subspace arrangements: the characteristic polynomial and the intersection poset. 2 Simplicial Complexes Given a set V, a simplicial complex (or just a complex) on V is a nonempty collection Γ of subsets of V which is closed under inclusion; that is, if S Γ and T S, then T Γ as well. Elements of simplicial complexes are called faces, and faces which are maximal under inclusion are called facets. For any face S Γ, its dimension is defined to be dim(s) = S 1, and then the dimension of the complex itself is defined to be dim(γ) = max S Γ dim(s). Notice that simplicial complexes are entirely determined by their (nonempty) set of facets. Therefore,givenanycollection F ofsubsetsofv, wewrite F tomean { S 2 V : S F for some F F }. If no two elements of F contain each other, then F is precisely the collection of facets in F. We observe that for any k l 0, the collection of (k,l)-sumfree sets in any abelian group G is a simplicial complex on G. This is because if there are no solutions to x 1 + +x k = y 1 + y l with all x i,y j in S, then the same is clearly true for any subset of S. The structure of these complexes are not well-understood; indeed, most prior research has been devoted merely to computing their dimensions. In the case that k = 0, this means that n,l is a simplicial complex for any 0 < l < n. In order to understand this class of complexes, we developed an algorithm for computing small examples. Key to this algorithm is the notion of the Alexander dual: Γ = 2 V \ { S 2 V : S / Γ }. Notice that Γ is a complex if and only if Γ is a complex, and (Γ ) = Γ. We also recall that a partition λ of N into l parts is a non-increasing ordered list of numbers (λ 1,...,λ l ) which sum to N. Theorem 2.1. The following procedure computes n,l, the simplicial complex of of all l-zerosumfree subsets of Z/nZ: 1. For each 0 m n 1, generate the partitions of mn into at most l parts which also satisfy λ 1 n 1 and consider their underlying sets. That is, create the set (without multiplicity) σ = {λ 1,...,λ h } with h l and λ 1 λ 2 λ h from each such partition λ. Store these σ into a set called NLC (short for (n, l)-congruent partitions). 2. Take the complement of every element in NLC and denote the set of complements NLC c, which is a simplicial complex. 3. Take the Alexander dual of NLC c to obtain n,l : NLC c = n,l. Proof. The set NLC is the collection of all subsets of our vertex set V such that the subset contains an NLC partition; this is, by definition, the collection of all subsets of V that are not l-zero-sumfree. Thus, we can express this set as as NLC = 2 V \ n,l = c n,l. The set of all complements of elements in NLC is thus as desired. NLC c = { σ : (2 V \σ) NLC } = ( n,l ) = n,l, 2

3 2.1 Disjoint Unions of Simplices A d-simplex is the simplicial complex = 2 V on some set V having d+1 elements. Note that the indexing is chosen this way so that a d-simplex has dimension d. Some of the n,l that we consider are simplices or disjoint unions of simplices: for any two simplicial complexes Γ 1 and Γ 2 on disjoint vertex sets V 1 and V 2, Γ 1 Γ 2 is a simplicial complex on V 1 V 2. Because we have not found this information elsewhere in the literature, we would like to state some elementary facts about such complexes. For any simplicial complex Γ with dimension d, its f-vector f(γ), or f if there is no risk of confusion, is the list of numbers (f 1,f 0,...,f d ), where each f k is the number of faces in Γ having dimension k. This information is also encoded in its h-vector h(γ) = h = (h 0,h 1,...,h d+1 ), where h k = k ( ) d+1 i ( 1) k i f i 1. d+1 k i=0 Notice that any simplicial complex contains, the unique face of dimension 1, and so f 1 = h 0 = 1. Proposition 2.2. If Γ = 1... α where each i is a d i -simplex, then the f-vector of Γ is given by f 1 = 1 and f k 1 = α ) i=1 for all 1 k d. ( di +1 k Proof. Let Γ be a simplicial complex of dimension d such that it is comprised of only α many d i -simplices, not necessarily distinct. By definition of the binomial coefficient, a d-simplex has the f-vector given by f k 1 = ( d+1) k. One easily checks that the f-vector is nearly additive with respect to disjoint unions: f k (Γ 1 Γ 2 ) = f k (Γ 1 )+f k (Γ 2 ) for all k 0, from which the proposition follows. We now turn our attention to the h-vector. The non-additivity of f 1 for disjoint unions causes more serious difficulties for the h-vector, since the defining sum for h k contains a term with f 1 for any k. However, there is a surprisingly pleasing formula for the h-vector as well. Given a partition λ = (λ 1,...,λ α ), we may draw its Young diagram (in French notation), a left-and-bottom-justified array of boxes with λ i boxes in row i. For example, if λ = (5,4,1,1), then its Young diagram is Since λ is a decreasing list, reflection across the line y = x gives rise to another Young diagram, called the conjugate partition µ of λ. For instance, relfecting the λ above yields µ = (4,2,2,2,1): In the proof of the following proposition, it will be helpful to observe the formal definition of the conjugate partition µ = (µ 1,...,µ l ): µ m = #{j : λ j m}, 1 m λ 1 =: l. 3

4 It will also be convenient to write [N] as shorthand for the set {1,2,...,N}. Proposition 2.3. Let Γ λ be a disjoint union of simplices 1 α where λ is a partition and each i is a (λ i 1)-simplex. Then h 0 = 1, and for all 1 k λ 1 ( 1) k 1 h k = where µ is the conjugate partition of λ. l k+1 m=1 ( ) l m (µ m 1), k 1 Proof. Beginning with the definition, we apply Proposition 2.2, separating out the exceptional f 1 term from the others and then swapping the order of summation. k ( ) h k = ( 1) k i λ1 i f i 1 k i i=0 ( ) = ( 1) k λ1 k ( ) + ( 1) k i λ1 i α k k i ( ) = ( 1) k λ1 + k i=1 α k j=1 i=1 ( 1) k i ( λ1 i k i ( ) λj i j=1 )( λj At this point, we observe the following combinatorial fact, which we will prove later. Lemma 2.4. Let a,b, and k be nonnegative integers. Then k ( )( ) a+b i b ( 1) i = k i i i=0 ( ) a. k We apply this fact with a = λ 1 λ j and b = λ j. When plugging in to the formula for h k above, note that we need to be careful with the i = 0 term: ( ) h k = ( 1) k λ1 r [( ) ( )] + ( 1) k λ1 λ j λ1. k k k j=1 Observe that when k > 0, the j = 1 term contributes ( λ 1 λ 1 ) ( k λ1 ) ( k = λ1 ) k. Therefore, we can cancel it with the exceptional term and start the sum at j = 2: r [( h k = ( 1) k λ1 λ j k j=2 ) ( )] λ1. k We divide both sides by ( 1) k+1 and interpret this sum as follows: ( 1) k+1 h k = r j=2 S [λ 1 ] S =k 1 S [λ 1 ] [λ j ] S =k 1. i ). 4

5 In other words, each subset S [λ 1 ] contributes to the inner sum precisely if it is not a subset of {λ j +1,...,λ 1 }. This means that S contributes to the j term of the outer sum precisely when its smallest element is at least λ j. In other words, by swapping the order of summation, we obtain ( 1) k+1 h k = S [λ 1 ] S =k #{j 2 : λ j min(s)}. Now splitthis sumintoparts by tracking theminimumelement of each set (which exists because S = k > 0). Once the minimum element of a k-element set S is known to be m, the other elements may form any (k 1)-element subset of {m+1,...,λ 1 }. Therefore: ( 1) k+1 h k = = λ 1 m=1 λ 1 m=1 S {m+1,...,λ 1 } S =k ( λ1 m k 1 #{j 2 : λ j m} ) #{j 2 : λ j m} This is the desired identity, slightly disguised. First, the binomial coefficient ensures the terms vanish when m λ 1 k + 1, so we can match the upper limit of the sum. Finally, #{j 2 : λ j m} = µ m 1, by definition of the conjugate partition and because λ 1 m for all m in the summation. For completeness, we now prove Lemma 2.4. Proof (of Lemma 2.4). The unsigned version of the left-hand side k ( )( ) a+b i b k i i i=0 counts the numberof ways to choose k elements from [a+b] in two phrases: choosing first i elements from [a], and choosing second k i more (distinct) elements from [a+b]. There is a sign-reversing involution on such two-phase sets, given by swapping the phase in which the smallest element was chosen. This cancels the contribution of all subsets except for those with no elements in [a], since it is impossible to choose any of their elements in the first phase. Therefore, each of these ( a k) sets contributes exactly once to the sum, which gives the desired identity. Corollary 2.5. If Γ = 1... α where each i is a d-simplex, then the h-vector of Γ is given by h 0 = 1 and h k = ( 1) k+1 (α 1) ( ) d+1 k for all 1 k d. We were led to Proposition 2.3 by observing two qualitative features of Corollary 2.5 which we tried to generalize. The first of these is that, h 0 notwithstanding, the signs in the h- vector alternate; we now have a satisfactory explanation. However, the second property remains mysterious even with the explicit formula. A sequence (a 1,a 2,...) is called log-concave if a 2 k a k 1 a k+1 for all k 2; this property means that the sequence increases smoothly until it hits a maximum, and then decreases smoothly afterward. Many combinatorial sequences, such as binomial coefficients and Eulerian numbers, are known to be log-concave; we conjecture that so too is the unsigned h-vector for general disjoint unions of simplices. 5

6 Conjecture 1. Let Γ λ be a disjoint union of simplices 1 α where λ is a partition and each i is a (λ i 1)-simplex. If the d i are all distinct, then the unsigned h-vector ( h 1, h 2,..., h λ1 ) is log-concave. It is worth noting that the analogous conjecture is false for the f-vector; for instance, having a single high-dimensional simplex, together with extremely many low-dimensional ones, will cause the f-vector to spike in low dimension, which is not permitted in a log-concave sequence. 2.2 Subspace Lattices and Intersection Posets The f-vector and h-vector are two combinatorial features of Γ, and we now wish to discuss a geometric one. Fix a field K. For any simplicial complex Γ on V = {v 1,...,v n }, we define A Γ (or A if there is no risk of confusion) to be the associated subspace arrangement in K V, which consists of all subspaces of the form S F = {(z v1,...,z vn ) : z v = 0 for all v V \F}, where F is an facet of Γ. This is a natural object to consider for the following reason. The Stanley-Riesner ideal I Γ of Γ, is the ideal in the polynomial ring K[v 1,...,v n ] which is generated by the monomials v/ F v for all faces F Γ. One studies the geometric properties of ideals J in polynomial rings by considering their variety V(J) K n, defined as V(J) = {z K n : f(z) = 0 for all f J}. It is a straightforward but tedious exercise in element-chasing to show that V(I Γ ) is the union of all the subspaces in A Γ. We conclude this section by describing the features of subspace arrangements that are used in the statement of our results. Define the intersection poset of a subspace arrangement A, denoted L(A), as the finiteset containing all intersections of subspaces S F A, orderedby reverse-inclusion: I J if J I. Notice that this set has a minimum element ˆ0 = K n, the empty intersection, and a maximum element ˆ1, given by intersecting all of the subspaces in the arrangement. The most well-studied subspace arrangements are those for which all subspaces have codimension one, known as hyperplane arrangements. Hyperplane arrangements have particularly wellbehaved intersection posets. For instance, say that a poset is graded of rank n if all maximal chains have length n. Note that a maximal chain is a chain that is not a proper subset of another chain. Hyperplane arrangements are graded of rank n, which can be seen by a closer examination of their structure: elements in a poset are called atoms if they cover the minimum element, i.e. such that there does not existanother element x L(A)with ˆ0 < x < a. Atoms in theintersection poset of ahyperplane arrangement are precisely the subspaces in the arrangements. Since they all have codimension one, intersections having codimension two are precisely the intersections of two subspaces; similarly codimension three corresponds to the intersection of three subspaces, and so on. For general subspace arrangements, the atoms of L(A) are still the subspaces in the arrangement. However, because the subspaces may have higher codimension, there is no longer a guarantee that L(A) is not graded at all. Despite this deficit, Athanasiadis [1] showed that the so-called finite field method, which counts the points in L(A) for K a sufficiently large finite field, can be extended to general subspace arrangements. To make this result work, the appropriate notion of a characteristic polynomial for a subspace arrangement A is χ A (x) = µ(ˆ0,t)x dim(t), t L(A) 6

7 where the Möbius function µ is defined recursively by µ(s,s) = 1 and µ(s,t) = µ(s,z). s z t Proposition 2.6. Let Γ = 1... α, be a simplicial complex on a vertex set V where each i is a d i -simplex. Let L(A) be the corresponding intersection lattice. Then every maximal chain in L(A) is of the form: C = {ˆ0 = a 0 < a 1 < a 2 = ˆ1}. Proof. Let C be a maximal chain in L(A). We want to show that every maximal chain in L(A) is of the form: C = {ˆ0 = a 0 < a 1 < a 2 = ˆ1}. Since C is a maximal chain, it contains a minimal element ˆ0 and maximum element ˆ1. Then clearly the minimal element is ˆ0 = a 0 = K V. Since each subspace is an atom a 1, then ˆ0 = a 0 = K V < a 1. Let F 1,F 2 be facets in Γ and let S 1,S 2 A be the corresponding subspaces. Since F 1,F 2 Γ, then F 1 F 2 =. Furthermore, since F 1 F 2 =, then (V \F 1 ) (V \ F 2 ) = V. Therefore, by definition of S 1,S 2 A, S 1 S 2 = {0} = a 2. Since any subspace in A covers K V and the intersection of any subspaces in A is {0}, then is a maximal chain as desired. C = {ˆ0 = a 0 < a 1 < a 2 = ˆ1}, Corollary 2.7. Let Γ = 1... α, be a simplicial complex on a vertex set V where each i is a d i -simplex. Let L(A) be the corresponding intersection lattice. Then L(A) is a graded poset of rank 2. Proof. Since Γ is the disjoint union of d i simplices, then by Proposition 2.6, any maximal chain C L(A) has the form C = {ˆ0 = a 0 < a 1 < a 2 = ˆ1}. Since C is arbitrary, then the length of all maximal chains is 2. Thus, L(A) admits grading, in particular, L(A) has rank 2. Proposition 2.8. Let Γ = 1... α, be a simplicial complex on a vertex set V, where each i is a d i -simplex. Let L(A) be the corresponding intersection lattice. Then, χ A (x) = x V F Γx F +α 1. Proof. Let Γ = 1... α,beasimplicial complexon avertex setv whereeach i isad i -simplex. By Proposition 2.6 we have that every maximal chain is of the form C = {ˆ0 = a 0 < a 1 < a 2 = ˆ1}. Recall that by definition, χ A = µ(ˆ0,t)x dim(t). t L(A) First, by Proposition 2.6 we have that ˆ0 = a 0 = K V. So, dim(z 0 ) = dim(k V ) = V. Also, µ(ˆ0,ˆ0) = 1. Secondly, any atom a 1 is a subspace S F A. Since S F = {(z v1,...,z vn ) : z v = 0, v V \F}, then for F Γ, dim(s F ) = dim(a 1 ) = F and µ(ˆ0,a 1 ) = 1. Finally, by Proposition 2.6, ˆ1 = a 2 = {0}. So dim(a 2 ) = 0. Moreover, since the number of atoms is equal to the number of facets, which is equal to the number of i Γ, then µ(ˆ0,ˆ1) = 1(µ(ˆ0,ˆ0)+µ(ˆ0,a 1 )) = α 1. 7

8 Thus, χ A (x) = x V F Γx F +α 1, as desired. Corollary 2.9. If Γ = 1 α where each i is a δ-simplex, for some fixed dimension δ, then χ A (x) = x α(δ+1) α x δ+1 +(α 1). Proof. By Theorem 2.8, χ A (x) = x V F Γx F +α 1. Since there are α many facets F i Γ, then F Γx F = α ( 1)x Fi = α x F. i=0 Moreover, each facet has F = δ + 1 vertices, for a total of V = α(δ + 1); this completes the proof. 3 Main Results and Conjectures Our main results are a complete description of n,l for certain families of n and l, as well as some implications for their intersection lattices. In particular, it is interesting that these posets are graded for all of the families that we considered here, and we wish to stress that this is not true for every n,l. In this section we only present the results, leaving the calculations themselves to Section 4. Theorem 3.1. Consider Γ = 2l,l for any integer l. Let l = ρ 2 m such that ρ is odd, and A be the subspace arrangement associated to Γ. (a) Γ = m 1, where t is the (ρ 1)-simplex on the set V t of all x Z/2lZ congruent to 2t+1 mod 2 m+1. (b) L(A) is a graded poset of rank 2. (c) The characteristic polynomial of A is χ A (x) = x l 2 m x ρ +(2 m 1). Example. We draw some typical examples of the above theorem: 2 m+1 ρ,2 m ρ for ρ = 3 and m = 1,2, ,3 12,6 24,12 8

9 In the previous section we discussed properties of complexes which are disjoint unions of simplices. The complex 2l,l is thus a naturally occurring instance of such an object in which all the simplices have the same dimension. One may wonder whether more general unions of simplices also arise from a n,l, and the next result answers this in the affirmative. Theorem 3.2. Consider Γ = p e,p e 1 for prime p and and positive integer e. Let A be the subspace arrangement associated to Γ. (a) p e,p e 1 is a disjoint union of e(p 1) simplices, with e 1 many ( p j 1 ) -simplices for each 0 j e 1. (b) L(A) is a graded poset of rank 2. (c) The characteristic polynomial of A is χ A (x) = x pe 1 (p 1) e 1 j=0 xpj. Example. We draw a typical example of the above theorem: p e,p e 1 for p = 3,e = , We note that these two families are not the only parameters n and l which yield a disjoint union of simplices; for instance, 12,9 is the disjoint union of a 5-simplex and a 2-simplex. It may be interesting to seek a complete classification of the parameters n and l which exhibit this phenomenon. We also note that in the Theorem 3.2, n l = 1. In all the explicit calculations we were able to carry out, we observed that n,l is somehow simpler when n l is small. In particular, the facets for such complexes seem to be determined by elementary number-theoretic conditions. The last theorem may be interpreted as some further evidence for this observation. Theorem 3.3. Consider Γ s = 2p,2p s for prime p 2 and positive integer s 2p. Let A s be the subspace arrangement associated to Γ s. (a) Γ 2 is a disjoint union of the p 1 edges {i 1,i 2 } for which i 1 i 2 0 mod p. The facets of Γ 1 are the facets of Γ 2 together with {1,3,5,...,2p 1}. If p 5, the facets of Γ 3 are the facets of Γ 1 together with the p 1 edges {i 1,i 2 } for which i 1 is odd, i 2 0 is even, and i 2 2i 1 mod 2p. (b) L(A s ) is a graded poset. In particular, L(A 2 ) is of rank 2; and L(A 1 ) and L(A 3 ) are each of rank 3. (c) The characteristic polynomial of A s is x 2p 1 x p (p 1)x 2 +(p 1)x : s = 1 χ As (x) = x 2p 2 p x 2 +p 1 : s = 2 x 2p 1 x p 2(p 1)x 2 +2(p 1)x : s = 3 Example. We draw some typical examples of the above theorem: 2p,2p s for p = 7 and s = 1,2,3. 9

10 ,13 14,12 14,11 We conclude this section with some avenues for further work. These conjectures were generated by explicitly computing n,l for all n 19, using Theorem 2.1. The following conjecture partially extends the investigation suggested by Theorem 3.3 to smaller l: Conjecture 2. For any prime p and even l with p > l p 1 2, the complexes 2p,l have no isolated vertices; i.e., they have no facets of dimension 0. It is known, for instance by [3, Theorem F.6], that all of these complexes are graphs. Therefore, this conjecture shows that all of their facets have dimension one. In general, a complex whose facets all have the same dimension is called pure. Conjecture 3. For odd n each of the complexes n, n 1 2 prime. and n, n+1 2 is pure if and only if n is Surprisingly, the h-vector which in principle records nothing at all about facets seems to contain a sufficient condition for purity for n,l : Conjecture 4. The complex n,l is pure if h i 0 for all i = 1,...,d. In a different direction, call a complex Γ connected if for any two vertices v and w, there is a sequence of vertices (p 0 = v,p 1,p 2,...p k 1,w = p k ) such that {p i,p i+1 } Γ for every 0 i k 1. We conjecture that a significant portion of all n,l are connected: Conjecture 5. For any n > 2l, the complex n,l is connected. Theorem 3.1 shows that the inequality is sharp, in the sense that 2l,l is connected if and only if l is odd. However, if n is odd, the data suggests that there may be some weaker bound on l; in particular, it appears that n, n+1 is connected for n 7. 2 The topologically sophisticated reader will be aware that a complex is connected if and only if its zeroth homology group vanishes. The small examples we computed suggest that higher homology groups also vanish when n h, but the evidence is too weak to give a more quantitative estimate. 4 Proofs of Theorems Recall that an integer N is called even if there is another integer such that N = 2M, and odd otherwise. In the proofs below, we will be performing modular arithmetic but it will be helpful to have these words available. So, we say that N Z/nZ is even if N = 2M for some M Z/nZ, and odd otherwise. When n is odd, there are no odd elements, but we will only be concerned with the case when n is even, where these definitions are more intuitive. 10

11 Proof of Theorem 3.1 Theorem 3.1. Consider Γ = 2l,l for any integer l. Let l = ρ 2 m such that ρ is odd, and A be the subspace arrangement associated to Γ. (a) Γ = m 1, where t is the (ρ 1)-simplex on the set V t of all x Z/2lZ congruent to 2t+1 mod 2 m+1. (b) L(A) is a graded poset of rank 2. (c) The characteristic polynomial of A is χ A (x) = x l 2 m x ρ +(2 m 1). (a) The vertex set V of 2l,l contains precisely the odd elements of Z/2lZ; indeed, any l even elements sum to zero. All vertices in the same residue class modulo 2 m+1 and thus contained in V t that is, vertices congruent to 2t+1 mod 2 m+1 for a fixed 0 t 2 m 1 are connected. If this were not the case, there would exist a set of elements that is not ρ 2 m -zero-sumfree: { (2t+1+k1 2 m+1 ),(2t+1+k 2 2 m+1 ),...,(2t +1+k ρ 2 m2 m+1 ) } (where the k i for 0 k i ρ 1 are not necessarily distinct), implying that ρ 2 m (2t+1+2 m+1 k i ) 0 mod ρ 2 m+1. i=1 However, this is a contradiction since ρ 2 m (2t+1+2 m+1 k i ) = i=1 ρ 2 m i=1 ρ 2 m 2t+ i=1 ρ 2 m 1+ i=1 2 m+1 k i ρ 2 m = (ρ 2 m )2t+(ρ 2 m )1+(ρ 2 m )2 2 m k i = ρ 2 m+1 t+ρ 2 m +ρ 2 0+ρ 2 m +0 mod ρ 2 m+1 ρ 2 m 0 mod ρ 2 m+1. m+1 ρ 2m i=1 2 m k i Thus all vertices in the same residue class modulo 2 m+1 are connected, forming a ρ 1-simplex. No two vertices lying in different residue classes modulo 2 m+1 are connected, demonstrated by the following proof: suppose we have any two vertices contained in different residue classes modulo 2 m+1, 2t 1 +k 1 2 m+1 and 2t 2 +1k 2 2 m+1 where t 1 t 2. Then if it is possible for us to solve the congruence r (2t 1 +1+k 1 2 m+1 )+(ρ 2 m r) (2t 2 +1+k 2 2 m+1 ) 0 mod ρ 2 m+1 for r, then 2t 1 +1+k 1 2 m+1 and 2t 2 +1+k 2 2 m+1 are not ρ 2 m -zero-sumfree. Note that r (2t 1 +1+k 1 2 m+1 )+(ρ 2 m r) (2t 2 +1+k 2 2 m+1 ) 2r(t 1 t 2 +2 m (k 1 k 2 ))+ρ 2 m mod ρ 2 m+1 i=1 11

12 Thus we wish to find r such that r(t 1 t 2 +2 m (k 1 k 2 )) ρ 2 m 1 mod ρ 2 m. (1) We can express t 1 t 2 = t 3 2 e for some odd number t 3 and 0 e m 2. Then we have r(t 3 +2 m e (k 1 k 2 )) ρ 2 m 1 e mod ρ 2 m e. (2) Since t m e (k 1 k 2 ) is odd, gcd(t m e (k 1 k 2 ),ρ 2 m e ) = q if and only if gcd(t m e (k 1 k 2 ),ρ) = q. Suppose that gcd(t 3 +2 m e (k 1 k 2 ),ρ) = q for some 1 q ρ. Suppose also that t 3 +2 m e (k 1 k 2 ) = s and ρ q q = ρ and thus gcd(s,ρ ) = 1, implying s is invertible modulo ρ 2 m e. Then we have from (2), r(qs) qρ 2 m 1 e mod qρ 2 m e rs ρ 2 m 1 e mod ρ 2 m e r ρ 2 m 1 e s mod ρ 2 m e. and thus 2t 1 +k 1 2 m+1 and 2t 2 +k 2 2 m+1 are not ρ 2 m -zero-sumfree. This implies that any two vertices contained in different residueclasses modulo 2 m+1 are disconnected in ρ 2 m,ρ 2 m+1. These facts show that Γ = m 1 is a collection of 2 m many (ρ 1)-simplices. (b) Let L(A) be the corresponding intersection lattice of subspaces. Since Γ on a vertex set V is a collection of 2 m many (ρ 1)-simplices, then by Proposition 2.7, L(A) is graded of rank 2. (c) Now, notice that V = l and for each facet F Γ, F = ρ. So, by Corollary 2.9, χ A (x) = x l 2 m x ρ +(2 m 1). Corollary 4.1. If n = ρ 2 m+1,l = ρ 2 m for all m 1 and for some odd number ρ, then n,l is a pure simplicial complex. Proof. ByTheorem 3.1(a), 2 m+1 ρ,2 m ρ contains2 m ρdisjoint(ρ 1)-simplices. Sinceeverysimplex is pure, 2 m+1 ρ,2 m ρ is pure. Proof of Theorem 3.2 Theorem 3.2. Consider Γ = p e,p e 1 for prime p and and positive integer e. Let A be the subspace arrangement associated to Γ. (a) p e,p e 1 is a disjoint union of e(p 1) simplices, with e 1 many ( p j 1 ) -simplices for each 0 j e 1. (b) L(A) is a graded poset of rank 2. (c) The characteristic polynomial of A is χ A (x) = x pe 1 (p 1) e 1 j=0 xpj. (a) Partition the vertex set of p e,p e 1 into e (p 1) disjoint sets, each denoted V i,j, where V i,j = { x V x i p j 1 mod p j,1 i p 1 }. One can comprehend the structure of p e,p e 1 with greater ease by use of the following table: 12

13 mod p 1 p 0 1 p 0 2 p p 0 (p 2) p 0 (p 1) mod p 2 p 1 1 p 1 2 p p 1 (p 2) p 1 (p 1) mod p 3 p 2 1 p 2 2 p p 2 (p 2) p 2 (p 1) mod p e 1 p e 2 1 p e 2 2 p e p e 2 (p 2) p e 2 (p 1) mod p e p e 1 1 p e 1 2 p e p e 1 (p 2) p e 1 (p 1) Note that each cell of this represents the set of all vertices in the vertex set of p e,p e 1 that are equivalent to the quantity labelling the cell modulo the bolded value labelling the corresponding row. For example, in the first row, the set contained in the third cell labelled p 0 2 is the set { x V : x p 0 2 mod p 1} where V is the vertex set of p e,p e 1. We will prove that (1) all vertices in V i,j form a (p e 1)-zero-sumfree set, and (2) no vertex in V i,j is connected to any vertex in V i,j unless both i = i, and j = j. To prove (1), suppose for the sake of contradiction that the vertices in V i,j for some i and j are not (p e 1)-zero-sumfree. Then there must exist some subset of p e 1 (not necessarily distinct) vertices from V i,j, { i p j 1 +t 1 p j,i p j 1 +t 2 p j,...,i p j 1 +t p e 1p j} such that However, p e 1 k=0 p e 1 k=0 ( i p j 1 +t k p j) 0 mod p e. ( p j 1 i+t k p j) p e 1 = (p e 1)p j 1 i+p j pe 1 p j 1 i+p j k=0 k=0 For this to be equivalent to 0 mod p e, it must be that p e 1 p k=0 pe 1 t k = p e+j 1 i p j 1 i+p j p t k mod p e p (p e 1 j 1 t k i 0 mod p e j+1 k=0 t k i ) k=0 mod p e which is a contradiction since 1 i p 1, and thus gcd(i,p) = 1. Thus the vertices in V i,j form a (p 2 1)-zero-sumfree set. To prove (2), consider vertices (p j 1 i + t 1 p j ) V i,j and (p j 1 i + t 2 p j ) V i,j such that either i i or j j (or both). These two vertices are (p e 1)-zero-sumfree if and only if there exists no r such that the following critical equivalence holds: r (i+pt 1 )p j 1 +(p e 1 r) (i +pt 2 )p j 1 0 mod p e. Suppose for the first case that i i, but that j = j. Suppose without loss of generality that i = i+s 1 for some 1 s p 1. Then the left-hand side of the critical equivalence is p j 1 ((p e 1)i+rs 1 +rpt 2 +(p e 1 r)pt 1 ) p j 1 ( j pt 1 +r(s 1 +p(t 2 t 1 ))) mod p e. t k 13

14 Since gcd(s 1,p) = 1, gcd(s 1 + p(t 2 t 1 ),p e j+1 and thus s 1 + p(t 2 t 1 ) is invertible modulo p e j+1. Thus if we let i+pt 2 r s 1 +p(t 2 t 1 ) mod pe j+1, r solves the critical equivalence, implying that the desired vertices are not adjacent if i i and j = j. For the second case, assume that i = i but that j j. Assume without loss of generality that j = j + s 2 for some 1 s 2 e 1. The left-hand side of the critical equivalence becomes r p j+s 2 1 (i+pt 2 )+(p e 1 r)(i+pt 1 ) p j 1 (r(p s 2 (i+pt 2 ) i pt 1 ) (i+pt 1 )) mod p e. Since gcd(i,p) = 1, gcd(p s 2 (i + pt 2 ) i pt 1,p e j+1 ) = 1, and thus p s 2 (i + pt 2 ) i pt 1 is invertible modulo p e j+1. If we then let r i+pt 1 p s 2 (i+pt2 ) i pt 1, then the critical equivalence is solved, implying that the two vertices are not adjacent. For the final case, assume that both i i and that j j. Assume without loss of generality that i = i+s 1 and that j = j+s 2, for 1 s 1 p 1 and 1 s 2 e 1. The left-hand side of the critical equivalence is then r p j+s 2 1 (i+s 1 +pt 2 )+(p e 1 r)p j 1 (i+pt 1 ) p j 1 (r(p s 2 (i+s 1 +pt 2 ) i pt 1 ) (i+pt 1 )). Since gcd(i,p) = 1, gcd(p s 2 (i+s 1 +pt 2 ) i pt 1,p e j+1 ) = 1, and thus p s 2 (i+s 1 +pt 2 ) i pt 1 is invertible modulo p e j+1. If we then let r i+pt 1 p s 2 (i+s1 +pt 2 ) i pt 2 mod p e j+1, then the critical equivalence is solved, implying that the vertices are nonadjacent. These facts prove that Γ = p e,p e 1 is a collection of e(p 1) many simplices, with e 1 many (p j 1)-simplices for 0 j e 1. (b) Let L(A) be the corresponding intersection lattice of subspaces. Since p e,p e 1 is a collection of e(p 1) many (p j 1)-simplices for each 0 j e 1, then by Proposition 2.7, L(A) is graded of rank 2. (c) Furthermore, p e,p e 1 has p e 1 vertices, and for any facet F = p j for some 0 j e 1. Notice that for each dimension p j 1 with 0 j e 1, there are p 1 facets, and therefore, p 1 atoms in L(A). So, by Proposition 2.8, e 1 χ A (x) = x pe 1 (p 1) x pj. j=0 14

15 Proof of Theorem 3.3 In what follows, we say that two vertices i and j are adjacent in a simplicial complex Γ if {i,j} Γ. Lemma 4.2. Consider Γ s = 2p,2p s for prime p 3 and odd s 2p. Then the set of odd vertices is a face of Γ s. Proof. Take any collection of 2p s many (not necessarily distinct) odd vertices {2t 1 + 1,2t 2 + 1,,2t 2p s +1}. Then 2p s 2p s 2p s (2t j +1) = 2 (t j )+2p s = 2 t j s 1 1, 2 j=1 j=1 which is an odd element of Z/2pZ, and thus nonzero. Hence, any subset of odd vertices must be a face of Γ s ; in particular, the set of all odd vertices is a face of Γ s. Lemma 4.3. Consider Γ s = 2p,2p s for p prime and s p. Then no two even vertices are adjacent in Γ s ; moreover, if s is even, then no two odd vertices are adjacent either. Proof. Two even vertices v and w are adjacent in Γ s if and only if the critical equivalence j=1 r(v)+(2p s r)(w) 0 mod 2p has no solution 0 r 2p s. Then if we substitute in two distinct even vertices v = 2t 1 and w = 2t 2, the critical equivalence becomes r(2t 1 ) (2p s r)(2t 2 ) 0 mod 2p r(2(t 1 t 2 )) s(2t 2 ) 0 mod 2p r(2(t 1 t 2 )) s(2t 2 ) mod 2p r(t 1 t 2 ) st 2 mod p Note that t 1 t 2 0 mod p, otherwise 2t 1 and 2t 2 are not distinct modulo 2p. Thus t 1 t 2 is invertible modulo p, and so r st 2 t 1 t 2 mod p. There is necessarily such an r in the range 0 r < p 2p s, and so no two even vertices are adjacent. Now consider the case where s is even, and let s 2 = q. For any odd vertices v = 2t and w = 2t 2 +1, r(2t 1 +1) (2p s r)(2t 2 +1) 0 mod 2p r(2(t 1 t 2 )) s(2t 2 +1) 0 mod 2p As before, t 1 t 2 is invertible modulo p, and hence r(2(t 1 t 2 )) s(2t 2 +1) mod 2p r(t 1 t 2 ) q(2t 2 +1) mod p. r q(2t 2 +1) t 1 t 2 mod p. As before, there is such an r in the range 0 r < p 2p s, and thus no two odd vertices are adjacent in this case. 15

16 Lemma 4.4. Fix a prime p, a positive integer s < p, an odd element i Z/2pZ and a nonzero even element j Z/2pZ. Then a solution exists to the equivalence r(i)+(2p s r)j 0 mod 2p if and only if i j mod p. In this case, all solutions satisfy Proof. Begin by observing that r sj i j mod 2p. r(i)+(2p r s)(j) 0 mod 2p r(i j) sj 0 mod 2p r(i j) sj mod 2p First, suppose that i j mod p. Note that since i j 0 mod p and is also odd, we have that gcd(i j,2p) = 1, and thus i j has a multiplicative inverse modulo 2p. Then a solution to the critical equivalence exists, and any solution satisfies r sj i j mod 2p. To prove that if i j mod p, then there exists no solution to the critical equivalence, suppose that i j mod p. Then then in the critical equivalence, since i j is odd, this implies that r must be even. Suppose that r 2 = q. Then the critical equivalence becomes q(i j) sj mod p. Since i j 0 mod p, and since j 0 mod p and s 0 mod p (as s < p), it follows that there exists no solution to the critical equivalence when i j mod p. These facts show that a solution to the critical equivalence exists if and only if i j mod p. Theorem 3.3. Consider Γ s = 2p,2p s for prime p 2 and positive integer s 2p. Let A s be the subspace arrangement associated to Γ s. (a) Γ 2 is a disjoint union of the p 1 edges {i 1,i 2 } for which i 1 i 2 0 mod p. The facets of Γ 1 are the facets of Γ 2 together with {1,3,5,...,2p 1}. If p 5, the facets of Γ 3 are the facets of Γ 1 together with the p 1 edges {i 1,i 2 } for which i 1 is odd, i 2 0 is even, and i 2 2i 1 mod 2p. (b) L(A s ) is a graded poset. In particular, L(A 2 ) is of rank 2; and L(A 1 ) and L(A 3 ) are each of rank 3. (c) The characteristic polynomial of A s is x 2p 1 x p (p 1)x 2 +(p 1)x : s = 1 χ As (x) = x 2p 2 p x 2 +p 1 : s = 2 x 2p 1 x p 2(p 1)x 2 +2(p 1)x : s = 3 (a) The set of odd vertices is a face of Γ 1 by Lemma 4.2. A vertex i is adjacent to an vertex j if and only if the critical equivalence r(i)+(2p 1 r)(j) 0 mod 2p 16

17 has no solution 1 r 2p 1. By Lemma 4.4, i odd and j even, a solution to this equivalence exists if and only if i j mod p. Thus, an odd vertex i is adjacent to an even vertex j if and only if i j mod p. Note that by Lemma 4.3, we also have that no even vertices are adjacent in Γ 1. Two vertices i and j are adjacent in Γ 2 if and only if the critical equivalence r(i)+(2p 2 r)(j) 0 mod 2p has no solution 1 r 2p 2. Observe that if r 1 mod 2p, then 1(i j) 2j mod 2p = j i 2j mod 2p and so i j mod 2p. In particular, r 1 mod 2p is never a solution if i is odd and j is even. Therefore, by Lemma 4.4, an odd vertex i is adjacent to an even vertex j if and only if i j mod p. Finally, by Lemma 4.3, no two even vertices are adjacent in Γ 2 and no two odd vertices are adjacent in Γ 2 either. By Lemma 4.2, the set of odd vertices forms a face in Γ 3, and by Lemma 4.3, no even vertices in Γ 3 are adjacent. Note that any vertex i is adjacent to a vertex j if and only if the critical equivalence r(i)+(2p 3 r)(j) 0 mod 2p has no solution 1 r 2p 3. This equivalence holds only when r(i j) 3j mod 2p. For i odd and j even, by Lemma 4.4 these vertices are adjacent when i j mod p since no solution to the equation exists in this case. Now, suppose that i j mod p. Then by Lemma 4.4, it follows that a solution to the critical equivalence exists. Note that if a solution satisfies, for any two vertices i and j, 1 r 2p 3 mod 2p, then by Lemma 4.4 it follows that i and j are disconnected. Now, suppose our solution satisfies Then this implies that r 1 mod 2p. 1(i j) 3j mod 2p j i 3j mod 2p i 2j mod 2p which is a contradiction as i is assumed to be odd. For the case that a solution exists that satisfies r 2 mod p, this implies that 2(i j) 3j mod 2p 2j 2i 3j mod 2p 2i j mod 2p 17

18 Thus, a solution satisfies r 2 mod 2p if and only if j 2i mod 2p. Thus, since an odd vertex v is disconnected from an even vertex w only when a solution exists satisfying 1 r 2p 3 mod 2p, it follows that the vertices i and j are connected when j 2i mod 2p. Thus, an odd vertex i is connected to an even vertex j if and only if either i j mod p or j 2i mod 2p. Now consider the lattice L(A 1 ). Recall that 2p,2p s s {1,3} contains exactly one facet, F 0, such that F 0 is a (p 1)-simplex with odd vertices, v {1,3,...,2p 1}. Now, for all facets F F 0, recall that F = {λ 1,λ 2 } where λ 1 odd and λ 2 even. The corresponding subspace for each facet is S F = {x K 2p 1 : x i = 0, i F}. Furthermore, notice that for any F F 0, F 0 F = {λ 1 }, λ 1 odd and λ 1 p. So, the corresponding subspace is S λ1 = {x K 2p 1 : x i = 0, i V \{λ 1 }}, with λ 1 odd and λ 1 p. For s = 1, there are p many facets, thus there are p many S F. Since all S F S F0 are disjoint, we have that there are p 1 S λ1. Now, since each λ 1 is distinct, the intersection of any S λ1 is {0} = ˆ1, so we are done. For s = 2, we also have that for each even λ 2 V, there exists facets F 1,F 2 F 0 such that F 1 F 2 = {λ 2 } where λ 2 2λ 1 mod 2p. So, along with the previous subspaces S λ1, we have that there are p 1 subspaces S λ2 = {x : x i = 0, i V \ {λ 2 }} with λ 2 even. Since for each even λ 2 V and each odd λ 1 V \{p}, there exists correspodning subspace S λ, for all λ V \{p}, then the intersection of any two subspaces S λ, is {0} = ˆ1. Therefore, any maximal chain of L(A s ) for either s = 1 or s = 3 has the form K 2p 1 S F S λ {0}, for some facet F and some λ F. Moreover, every L(A s ) has the same length, thus L(A s ) is graded of rank 3 when s {1,3}. Note that µ(ˆ0,ˆ0) = +1. Since each S F is an atom in L(A s ), s {1,3}, then µ(ˆ0,s F0 ) = 1 and µ(ˆ0,s F ) = 1. Moreover, each S λ is the intersection of any two S F. So, µ(ˆ0,s λ ) = +1. Finally, the intersection of any S λ is {0} = ˆ1. Thus, µ(ˆ0,ˆ1) = 1. Since for s = 1 there are p many facets, then there are p many S F, with p 1 of dimension 2 and one of dimension p, which corresponds to the (p 1)-simplex. Furthermore, each S λ has dimension 1 and there are (p 1) odd vertices in V, then there are p 1 S λ. Thus, χ A1 = x 2p 1 x p (p 1)x 2 +(p 1)x. For s = 3 in addition to the facets and intersections contained in the L(A 1 ) there are p 1 many S F with dimension 2, which gives us p 1 more S λ of dimension 1. Therefore, χ A3 = x 2p 1 x p 2(p 1)x 2 +2(p 1)x Finally, let L(A 2 ) be the corresponding intersection lattice of subspaces. Since Γ on a vertex set V is a collection of p many edges, then by Proposition 2.7, L(A 2 ) is graded of rank 2. Now, notice that V = 2p 2 and for each facet F Γ, F = 2. So, by Corollary 2.9, χ A (x) = x 2p 2 p x 2 +p 1. 18

19 References [1] Christos A. Athanasiadis. Characteristic polynomials of subspace arrangements and finite fields. Advances in Mathematics, 122(2): , [2] Béla Bajnok and Ryan Matzke. The maximum size of (k, l)-sum-free sets in cyclic groups. Sept preprint, [3] Béla Bajnok. Additive Combinatorics. Chapman and Hall/CRC, [4] T. Bier and A. Y. M. Chin. On (k, l)-sets in cyclic groups of odd prime order. Bulletin of the Australian Mathematical Society, 63(1): , [5] Neil J Calkin and Jan McDonald Thomson. Counting generalized sum-free sets. Journal of Number Theory, 68(2): , [6] P. Cameron and P. Erdős. On the number of sets of integers with various properties. Number Theory: Proceedings of the 1988 Canadian Number Theory Conference at Banff, pages 61 80, [7] Ben Green. The Cameron-Erdős conjecture. Bulletin of the London Mathematical Society, 36(6): , [8] Yahya Hamidoune and Alain Plagne. A new critical pair theorem applied to sum-free sets in abelian groups. Commentarii Mathematici Helvetici, 79(1): , Jan [9] Alexander A. Sapozhenko. The Cameron-Erdős conjecture. Discrete Mathematics, 308(19): , Simonovits