ASYMPTOTIC IMPROVEMENT OF THE SUNFLOWER BOUND arxiv:408.367v4 [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 0.8603796... 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 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}.
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 2.7828... 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 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
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.2 4.. Statement I. We prove Statement I in thi ection. Put then δ 0 3 0.6227..., 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 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.
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. 4.2. 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 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 + + + + 2 2 3 r < + r + + r + + 2 r + r + uch poible B B. Here it truth i confirmed by the following argument.
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..
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,
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
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.
ASYMPTOTIC IMPROVEMENT OF THE SUNFLOWER BOUND 3 Reference. N. Alon and R. B. Boppana, The monotone circuit complexity of Boolean function, Combinatorica 7 987, 22. 2. N. Alon, A. Shpilka, and C. Uman, On unflower and matrix multiplication, Journal of Computational Complexity 22 203, 29 243. 3. D. Coppermith and S. Winograd, Matrix multiplication via arithmetic progreion, Journal of Symbolic Computation 9 990, 26 280. 4. P. Erdö, On the combinatorial problem which i would mot like to ee olved, Combinatorica 98, 25 42. 5. P. Erdö and R. Rado, Interection theorem for ytem of et, Journal of the London Mathematical Society 35 960, 85 90. 6. Z. Füredi, Turán type problem. urvey in combinatoric, London Mathematical Society Lecture Note Serie 66 99, 253 300. 7. S. Jukna, Extremal combinatoric with application in computer cience, Springer, 200. 8. 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. 229 235. 9. A.V.Kotochka, V.Rdl, and L.A.Talyheva, On ytem of mall et with no large -ytem, Combinatoric, Probability and Computing 8 999, 265 268. 0. A. A. Razborov, Lower bound on the monotone complexity of ome Boolean function, Dokl. Akad. Nauk SSSR Ruian 28 985, 798 80.. H. Robbin, A remark of tirling formula, Amer. Math. Monthly 62 955, 26 29. Applied Reearch Laboratory, The Pennylvania State Univerity, PA 6802, USA E-mail addre: xf40@pu.edu