Solution

ID: past-exam-of-the-mathematics-course-of-the-university-of-cambridge/2012/iii/paper-82/4/solution

Use the uniform probability measure on the Boolean hypercube. The influence of a variable is the flip probability
The polynomial defining is interpreted over . Flipping the first coordinate adds modulo two. This nonempty parity is balanced for , so
An explicit Tribes function works for every . Choose the largest integer with , let , and take the OR of disjoint ANDs of coordinates. Ignore the unused coordinates. Its zero probability is , between and , and a used coordinate has influence
Here by maximality. For the balance claim, gives probability ; for , gives zero probability at most , while for gives a lower bound . Only the example was requested, but these checks fix its parameters unambiguously.
For the lower bound we prove the required consequence of Beckner's inequality with constants. Write the Fourier-Walsh transform as , where and . The discrete derivative of a Boolean function is . Since takes values zero and one, takes values . Consequently Parseval's identity gives
The factor four is required for the printed convention. Also under the balance hypothesis.
The true Beckner's inequality states for , , with . Apply it with , , to , a function independent of coordinate . Its nonzero values still have magnitude . We obtain
Let . For an integer , the low-degree Fourier weight satisfies
For the high-degree part the total influence identity gives
Together these imply .
Suppose, seeking a contradiction, that , with natural logarithms. Then and . Hence . Put . The first term on the right is bounded by
the middle expression is maximized at . Moreover , since . Thus
We would have , contradicting . Therefore
This derives the stated Kahn-Kalai-Linial theorem bound from the actual noise operator on the Boolean hypercube inequality, rather than using the desired conclusion as an input.

New to topics? Read the docs here!