Collinear subsets of lattice point sequences—An analog of Szemerédi's theorem

Szemerédi's theorem states that given any positive number B and natural number k, there is a number n(k, B) such that if n ? n(k, B) and 0 < a₁ < … < a_n is a sequence of integers with a_n ? Bn, then some k of the a_i form an arithmetic progression. We prove that given any B and k, there is a number m(k, B) such that if m ? m(k, B) and u₀, u₁, …, u_m is a sequence of plane lattice points with ∑_i=1^m…u_i ? u_i?1… ? Bm, then some k of the u_i are collinear. Our result, while similar to Szemerédi's theorem, does not appear to imply it, nor does Szemerédi's theorem appear to imply our result.     

Ordered sums of group elements

The following theorem is proved. If a₁, … a_k are distinct elements of a group, written additively, though not necessarily Abelian, and the sums a_i1 + … + a_im, 1 ? i₁ < … < i_m ? k do not represent 0, then they represent at least 2k ? 1 distinct elements, and this bound 2k ? 1 is attained only when k ? 3 or when the elements a₁, …, a_k generate a dihedral group.     

A subdeterminant inequality for normal matrices

Let A be an n × n normal matrix over $\text{C}$, and Q_m, _n be the set of strictly increasing integer sequences of length m chosen from 1,…,n. For α, β ? Q_m, _n denote by A[α|β] the submatrix obtained from A by using rows numbered α and columns numbered β. For k ? {0, 1,…, m} we write |α∩β| = k if there exists a rearrangement of 1,…, m, say i₁,…, i_k, i_k+1,…, i_m, such that α(i_j) = β(i_j), i = 1,…, k, and {α(i_k+1),…, α(i_m) } ∩ {β(i_k+1),…, β(i_m) } = ?. A new bound for |detA[α|β ]| is obtained in terms of the eigenvalues of A when 2m = n and |α∩β| = 0.Let $\text{U}$_n be the group of n × n unitary matrices. Define the nonnegative number

where | α ∩ β| = k. It is proved that

Let A be semidefinite hermitian. We conjecture that ρ₀(A) ? ρ₁(A) ? ··· ? ρ_m(A). These inequalities have been tested by machine calculations.     

A generalization of the Kruskal-Katona theorem

Let k_n ? k_n?1 ? … ? k₁ be positive integers and let ($\text{i}\text{j}$) denote the coefficient of xⁱ in $\text{Π}\text{r=1}\text{j}\text{(1 + x + x}{}^2\text{+ … + x}{}^{\mathrm{kr}}\text{)}$. For given integers l, m, where 1 ? l ? k_n + k_n?1 + … + k₁ and $\text{1 ? m ? (}\text{n}\text{n}\text{)}$, it is shown that there exist unique integers m(l), m(l ? 1),…, m(t), satisfying certain conditions, for which $\text{m = (}\text{m(l)}\text{l}\text{+ (}\text{m(l?1)}\text{l?1}\text{) + … + (}\text{m(t)}\text{t}\text{)}$. Moreover, any m l-subsets of a multiset with k_i elements of type i, i = 1, 2,…, n, will contain at least $\text{(}\text{m(l)}\text{l?1}\text{) + (}\text{m(l?1)}\text{l?2}\text{) + … + (}\text{m(t)}\text{t?1}$ different (l ? 1)-subsets. This result has been anticipated by Greene and Kleitman, but the formulation there is not completely correct. If k₁ = 1, the numbers ($\text{j}\text{i}$) are binomial coefficients and the result is the Kruskal-Katona theorem.     

Langford sequences: perfect and hooked

A sequence {d, d+1,…, d+m?1} of m consecutive positive integers is said to be perfect if the integers {1, 2,…, 2m} can be arranged in disjoint pairs {(a_i, b_i): 1?i?m} so that {b_i?a_i: 1?i?m}={d,d+1,…,d+m?1}. A sequence is hooked if the set {1, 2,…, 2m?1 2m+1} can be arranged in pairs to satisfy the same condition. Well known necessary conditions for perfect sequences are herein shown to be sufficient. Similar necessary and sufficient conditions for hooked sequences are given.     

Decomposable bilinear numerical radii

Let A be an n-square normal matrix over $\text{C}$, and Q_{m, n} be the set of strictly increasing integer sequences of length m chosen from 1,…, n. For α,β∈Q_{m, n} denote by A[α|β] the submatrix obtained from A by using rows numbered α and columns numbered β. For k∈{0,1,…,m} write z.sfnc;α∩β|=k if there exists a rearrangement of 1,…,m, say i₁,…,i_k, i_k+1,…,i_m, such that α(i_j)=β(i_j), j=1,…,k, and {α(i_k+1),…,α(i_m)};∩{β(i_k+1),…,β(i_m)}=ø. Let

be the group of n-square unitary matrices. Define the nonnegative number

$\text{?}{}_{\mathrm{k}}\text{(A)=}\text{max}\text{U∈}\textcolor{red}{}\text{|}\text{det}\text{(U}{}^1\text{AU) [α|β]|}$

, where |α∩β|=k. Theorem 1 establishes a bound for ?_k(A), 0?k<m?1, in terms of a classical variational inequality due to Fermat. Let A be positive semidefinite Hermitian, n?2m. Theorem 2 leads to an interlacing inequality which, in the case n=4, m=2, resolves in the affirmative the conjecture that

$\text{?}{}_{\mathrm{m}}\text{(A)??}{}_{\mathrm{m?1}}\text{(A)????}{}_0\text{(A)}$

.     

On maximal antichains consisting of sets and their complements

Let 1 ? k₁ ? k₂ ? … ? k_n be integers and let S denote the set of all vectors x = (x₁, x₂, …, x_n) with integral coordinates satisfying 0 ? x_i ? k_i, i = 1, 2, …, n. The complement of x is (k₁ ? x₁, k₂ ? x₂, …, k_n ? x_n) and a subset X of S is an antichain provided that for any two distinct elements x, y of X, the inequalities x_i ? y_i, i = 1, 2, …, n, do not all hold. We determine an LYM inequality and the maximal cardinality of an antichain consisting of vectors and its complements. Also a generalization of the Erdös-Ko-Rado theorem is given.     

Intersection properties of finite sets

Let X₁, X₂, …, X_m be finite sets. The present paper is concerned with the m² ? m intersection numbers |X_i ∩ X_j| (i ≠ j). We prove several theorems on families of sets with the same prescribed intersection numbers. We state here one of our conclusions that requires no further terminology. Let T₁, T₂, …, T_m be finite sets and let m ? 3. We assume that each of the elements in the set union T₁ ∪ T₂ ∪ … ∪ T_m occurs in at least two of the subsets T₁, T₂, …, T_m. We further assume that every pair of sets T_i and T_j (i ≠ j) intersect in at most one element and that for every such pair of sets there exists exactly one set T_k (k ≠ i, k ≠ j) such that T_k intersects both T_i and T_j. Then it follows that the integer m = 2m′ + 1 is odd and apart from the labeling of sets and elements there exist exactly m′ + 1 such families of sets. The unique family with the minimal number of elements is {1}, {2}, …, {m′}, {1}, {2}, …, {m′}, {1, 2, …, m′}.     

On separating systems whose elements are sets of at most k elements

A system A₁,…,A_m of subsets of X?{1,…,n} is called a separating system if for any two distinct elements of X there is a set A_i (1?i?m) that contains exactly one of the two elements. We investigate separating systems where each set A_i has at most k elements and we are looking for minimal separating systems, that means separating systems with the least number of subsets. We call this least number m(n,k). Katona has proved good bounds on m(n,k) but his proof is very complicated. We give a shorter and easier proof. In doing so we slightly improve the upper bound of Katona.     

Periods of some nonlinear shift registers

We determine the set of all possible least periods of shift register sequences for non-linear feedback functions of the form f(x₀,…,x_m?1) = x₀ + Π_i=1^k (x_i + b_i) where m ? k + 1 ? 3 and the least period of the k-block b₁…b_k itself.     

A partition identity

Let n₁+n₂+?+n_m=n where the n_i's are integers (possibly negative or greater than n). Let p=(k₁,…,k_m), where k₁+k₂+?+k_m=k, be a partition of the nonnegative integer k into m nonnegative integers and let P denote the set of all such partitions. For m?2, we prove the combinatorial identity

$\text{∑}\text{p∈P}\text{∏}\text{i=1}\text{m}\text{n}{}_{\mathrm{i}}\text{+1?k}{}_{\mathrm{i}}\text{k}{}_{\mathrm{i}}\text{=}\text{∑}\text{i?0}\text{j+m?2}\text{m?2}\text{n+1?k?2}{}_{\mathrm{j}}\text{k?2}{}_{\mathrm{j}}$

which implies the surprising result that the left side of the above equation depends on n but not on the n_i's.     

Applications of the Wronskian and Gram matrices of {tieλkt}

A review is made of some of the fundamental properties of the sequence of functions {tⁱe^λ_k^t}, k = 1,…,s, i = 0,…,m_k?1, distinct λ _i. In particular it is shown how the Wronskian and Gram matrices of this sequence of functions appear naturally in such fields as spectral matrix theory, controllability, and Lyapunov stability theory.     

Multicommodity flows in graphs

Suppose that G is a graph, and (s_i,t_i) (1≤i≤k) are pairs of vertices; and that each edge has a integer-valued capacity (≥0), and that q_i≥0 (1≤i≤k) are integer-valued demands. When is there a flow for each i, between s_i and t_i and of value q_i, such that the total flow through each edge does not exceed its capacity? Ford and Fulkerson solved this when k=1, and Hu when k=2. We solve it for general values of k, when G is planar and can be drawn so that s₁,…, s_l, t₁, …, t_l,…,t_l are all on the boundary of a face and s_l+1, …,S_k, t_l+1,…,t_k are all on the boundary of the infinite face or when t₁=?=t_l and G is planar and can be drawn so that s_l+1,…,s_k, t₁,…,t_k are all on the boundary of the infinite face. This extends a theorem of Okamura and Seymour.     

A polynomial dual of partitions

Let P(x) = Σ_i=0ⁿa_ixⁱ be a nonnegative integral polynomial. The polynomial P(x) is m-graphical, and a multi-graph G a realization of P(x), provided there exists a multi-graph G containing exactly P(1) points where a_i of these points have degree i for 0≤i≤n. For multigraphs G, H having polynomials P(x), Q(x) and number-theoretic partitions (degree sequences) π, ?, the usual product P(x)Q(x) is shown to be the polynomial of the Cartesian product G × H, thus inducing a natural product π? which extends that of juxtaposing integral multiple copies of ?. Skeletal results are given on synthesizing a multi-graph G via a natural Cartesian product G₁ × … × G_k having the same polynomial (partition) as G. Other results include an elementary sufficient condition for arbitrary nonnegative integral polynomials to be graphical.     

More on the Erdös-Ko-Rado theorem for integer sequences

For positive integers n, k₁, k₂,…, k_n, t the probem: how many integer sequences (x₁, x₂,…, x_n) does it take such that 0 ? x_i ? k_i for 1 ? i ? n and any two sequences agree in at least t positions is investigated. Moreover all maximal systems of sequences are described. Results of Livingston and Frankl and Füredi are generalized also.     

Relation between frobenius and 2-frobenius groups with order components of finite groups

IfG is a finite group, we define its prime graph Г(G), as follows: its vertices are the primes dividing the order ofG and two verticesp, q are joined by an edge, if there is an element inG of orderpq. We denote the set of all the connected components of the graph Г(G) by T(G)= {π_i(G), fori = 1,2, …,t(G)}, where t(G) is the number of connected components of Г(G). We also denote by π(n) the set of all primes dividingn, wheren is a natural number. Then ¦G¦ can be expressed as a product of m₁, m₂, …, m_t(G), where m_i’s are positive integers with π(m_i) = π_i. Thesem _i ’s are called the order components ofG. LetOC(G) := {m ₁,m ₂, …,m _t (G)} be the set of order components ofG. In this paper we prove that, if G is a finite group andOC(G) =OC(M), where M is a finite simple group witht(M) ≥ 2, thenG is neither Frobenius nor 2-Frobenius.     

On a problem of Katona on minimal completely separating systems with restrictions

Let S be a set of n elements, and k a fixed positive integer $\text{<}\text{1}\text{2}\text{n}$. Katona's problem is to determine the smallest integer m for which there exists a family $\text{A}$ = {A₁, …, A_m} of subsets of S with the following property: |_i| ? k (i = 1, …, m), and for any ordered pair x_i, x_i ∈ S (i ≠ j) there is A₁ ∈ $\text{A}$ such that x_i ∈ A₁, x_j ? A₁. It is given in this note that $\text{m = ?}\text{2n}\text{k}\text{?}\text{if}\text{1}\text{2}\text{k}{}^2\text{? 2}$.     

A fundamental inequality for the sum of sets of m-tuples

For n a positive integer and A₁, A₂, …, A_k sets of nonnegative integers, sufficient conditions are found which imply that the sum of the cardinalities of the sets $\text{{1, 2, …, n} ? A}{}_{\mathrm{i}}\text{(i = 1, 2, …, k)}$ does not exceed the cardinality of the intersection of {1, 2, …, n} and the number theoretic sum of the k sets. Some of the results are generalized to sets of m-tuples of nonnegative integers.     

On the separation power and the completion of partial latin squares

Let n and m be natural numbers, n ? m. The separation power of order n and degree m is the largest integer k = k(n, m) such that for every (0, 1)-matrix A of order n with constant linesums equal to m and any set of k 1's in A there exist (disjoint) permutation matrices P₁,…, P_m such that A = P₁ + … + P_m and each of the k 1's lies in a different P_i. Almost immediately we have 1 ? k(n, m) ? m ? 1, yet in all cases where the value of k(n, m) is actually known it equals m ? 1 (except under the somewhat trivial circumstances of k(n, m) = 1). This leads to a conjecture about the separation power, namely that k(n, m) = m ? 1 if $\text{m ? [}\text{n}\text{2}\text{] + 1}$. We obtain the bound $\text{k(n, m) ? m ? [}\text{n}\text{2}\text{] + 2}$, so that this conjecture holds for n ? 7. We then move on to latin squares, describing several equivalent formulations of the concept. After establishing a sufficient condition for the completion of a partial latin square in terms of the separation power, we can show that the Evans conjecture follows from this conjecture about the separation power. Finally the lower bound on k(n, m) allows us to show, after some calculations, that the Evans conjecture is true for orders n ? 11.     

On maximal antichains containing no set and its complement

Let 1?k₁?k₂?…?k_n be integers and let S denote the set of all vectors x = (x₁, …, x_n with integral coordinates satisfying 0?x_i?k_i, i = 1,2, …, n; equivalently, S is the set of all subsets of a multiset consisting of k_i elements of type i, i = 1,2, …, n. A subset X of S is an antichain if and only if for any two vectors x and y in X the inequalities x_i?y_i, i = 1,2, …, n, do not all hold. For an arbitrary subset H of S, (i)H denotes the subset of H consisting of vectors with component sum i, i = 0, 1, 2, …, K, where K = k₁ + k₂ + …k_n. |H| denotes the number of vectors in H, and the complement of a vector x?S is (k₁-x₁, k₂-x₂, …, k_n -x_n). What is the maximal cardinality of an antichain containing no vector and its complement? The answer is obtained as a corollary of the following theorem: if X is an antichain, K is even and$\text{|(}\text{1}\text{2}\text{K)X|}$ does not exceed the number of vectors in $\text{(}\text{1}\text{2}\text{K)S}$ with first coordinate different from k₁, then

$\text{∑}\text{i=0}\text{K}\text{i≠}\text{1}\text{2}\text{K}\text{|(i)X|}\text{|(i)S|}\text{+}\text{|(}\text{1}\text{2}\text{K)X|}\text{|(}\text{1}\text{2}\text{K-1)S|}\text{?1}$

.