Past exam of the mathematics course of the University of Cambridge 2005 iii Paper 10 3 Solution Created 2026-10-03 Updated 2026-10-14
Use the uniform Frankl-Wilson theorem: if is a prime number, has distinct residues, , and an -uniform set family has distinct-member intersection sizes in modulo while , thenHere is a polynomial method in combinatorics proof. For each , form the intersection polynomialover , and use multilinear reduction on the Boolean cube so its degree is at most . At the characteristic vector of , this evaluates to zero for and is nonzero for . Consequently these evaluation functions are linearly independent.
The low-degree evaluation rank on a uniform layer bounds their space by . To justify that step without division by a possibly zero residue, form the integer incidence matrix with rows , , columns -sets , and entries . Over the rational numbers, a row with equals times the sum of the rows of all -sets containing . Thus its rational matrix rank is at most . Every larger minor is an integer determinant equal to zero and stays zero modulo , so the same upper bound holds over . This proves the theorem.
For the forbidden midpoint problem, split according to whether its members contain coordinate 1. Leave the containing half unchanged; complement every member of the avoiding half. Both resulting families consist of -sets containing 1, and complementation preserves their internal intersection sizes becauseWithin either transformed family, distinct intersections lie between 1 and and are not . Their residues are therefore in , whereas the set-size residue is . Apply the Frankl-Wilson theorem to each half and add:The factor 2 comes from splitting into two families. The unsplit family can contain disjoint sets, whose intersection residue zero equals the set-size residue and prevents this direct application. Removing the shared coordinate after splitting also gives the stronger complement splitting for forbidden midpoint intersections bound .
For the construction, fix a -set and let , of size . The fixed-core construction avoiding midpoint intersections isTwo members of intersect in at least points; the same is true for two complements. An intersection across the two halves has size . No intersection is . The halves are disjoint because one contains all of and the other none, so
Past exam of the mathematics course of the University of Cambridge 2006 iii Paper 12 4 Solution Created 2026-10-03 Updated 2026-10-14
The uniform modular Frankl-Wilson theorem states the following. Let be prime, let have size , and let be a rank- family on , with . Assume and for every distinct . ThenThe restrictions concern distinct pairs; the diagonal size residue is explicitly excluded from .
For each member , over form the intersection polynomialAt the characteristic vector , its value vanishes when and is nonzero when . Thus these functions are linearly independent on the whole rank- layer: evaluate any linear relation at each family member in turn. Replacing every positive power of by preserves all Boolean evaluations, so the functions are restrictions of multilinear polynomials of degree at most .
We need the sharp low-degree evaluation rank on a uniform layer, not the larger whole-cube dimension . Let be the integer incidence matrix with rows indexed by subsets of size at most , columns by rank- sets , and entries . Over the rationals, if , thenThis coefficient counts the possible inside each containing column set and is positive because . Consequently the degree- rows span all rows over , giving rank at most . Every larger square minor is therefore the integer zero. Reducing those minors modulo shows the rank over is also at most . This transfer avoids dividing by a binomial coefficient that might vanish modulo . The independent functions lie in this row space, so their number is at most its rank. This proves the theorem in full.
For the requested forbidden-intersection application, split into sets containing coordinate one and sets avoiding it. In the first part, delete one. Distinct original sets have intersection size between one and , excluding . Their reduced intersections therefore lie between zero and , excluding , so their residues belong to . The reduced set size is , whose residue is . Frankl-Wilson on the ground set of size bounds this part by .
For the avoiding part, first complement every set. The complements contain one, retain size , and satisfyDelete one and apply the same argument. The complement splitting for forbidden midpoint intersections yields the stronger boundThe split is essential: a family may contain complementary pairs with intersection zero, preventing direct use of on the original layer.
The Borsuk conjecture asserted that a bounded subset of of positive diameter can be partitioned into subsets of strictly smaller diameter. Here is the Kahn-Kalai counterexample to the Borsuk conjecture, implemented by balanced cut vectors. For each , define whose coordinate indexed by an unordered pair is one when exactly one endpoint lies in , and zero otherwise. Complementary sets give the same cut. Choose the representative with , obtaining exactlydistinct points: a cut determines its two parts, and fixing the side containing one removes its only ambiguity. Every cut has occupied coordinates, so all points lie in the affine hyperplane with coordinate sum . Its dimension isWe can identify this hyperplane isometrically with ; no claim of full affine span is needed.
For two side sets with , their symmetric difference has points. The two cuts disagree exactly on pairs with one endpoint in that symmetric difference, giving the balanced cut-vector distance formulaThe diameter is , attained exactly when ; such pairs exist even among representatives containing one. Thus a smaller-diameter part contains no pair with side intersection . Since all representative sets already contain one, deleting that common coordinate and applying the preceding Frankl-Wilson argument bounds each part by . There is no extra factor two at this step. This is the cut construction described in the original Kahn-Kalai paper; the distance and part-size calculations above give the required justification directly.
An explicit choice is . The point set lies in dimensionThe exact counts areTheir ratio requires at least smaller-diameter parts, exceeding . In particular,Rescaling the point set to diameter one changes none of these partition counts. Therefore the Borsuk counterexample in dimension 1325 is fully explicit. This is a concrete dimension, not a claim that it is the smallest possible counterexample dimension.