Let be the smallest supporting prefix for a maximum left-compressed set family of -sets that is t-intersecting, and set . The maximum-support generator fibre gives exclusive count for a size- generator containing . By tight pairs of left-compressed generators, only classes with can conflict after deleting . For unequal such sizes, replacing both classes by the shortened generators of either class would implyWhen and the classes have positive fibres, the reverse inequality is strict. For the remaining central class , , some earlier coordinate is absent from at least of its shortened generators. Those generators are mutually t-intersecting. Replacing the central class by that subfamily has gain-to-loss ratio at leastwhich exceeds one exactly when . This forces the support bound in the small-support generating lemma for extremal intersecting families.
Past exam of the mathematics course of the University of Cambridge 2003 iii Paper 13 2 Solution Created 2026-10-03 Updated 2026-10-14
For , define the complete-intersection candidate familiesEach is a t-intersecting family, since two members have at least common points in the distinguished block. The cardinality form of the Ahlswede-Khachatrian theorem isA binomial coefficient with lower argument outside its usual range is zero. For , or , the answer is ; in the latter case every pair of -sets already intersects in at least points. The displayed candidate formula also attains this value: its largest allowed index is at least , so every -set has enough points in that candidate's block. For the answer is one. We prove the remaining cases without assuming the complete intersection theorem as an auxiliary result.
We first record the case of the Erdős-Ko-Rado theorem. For , put the ground set in a cyclic ordering. An intersecting family contains at most of its length- intervals. To see this, rotate a selected interval to end at position . Intervals ending at miss it. The other possible endpoints, except , are paired as , , and the two intervals in each pair are disjoint. Thus at most intervals are selected. Averaging over all cyclic orders, each -set has the same chance to occur among the intervals, yieldingFor the whole layer works. This proves the case, including without any uniqueness assertion.
We may now suppose and . If , complementation of uniform intersecting families changes the problem to an intersecting family of -sets. The just-proved case gives . This is , the family of all -sets avoiding the last coordinate. Hence it remains to treat .
Apply coordinate shifts of a set family with . They preserve cardinality and t-intersection. The only way a moved member could lose an intersection point with an unmoved member is that the former moves to while the latter contains and avoids . The latter's shifted partner must already belong to the original family, since otherwise it too would move; that partner would have had an intersection of size less than with the original moved member, a contradiction. If both members move, their intersection size is unchanged. Every nontrivial shift decreases the sum of all coordinates in all members, so repeated shifts terminate at a left-compressed set family. We can therefore choose a maximum family left-compressed.
We prove the small-support generating lemma for extremal intersecting families, including the replacement argument responsible for the threshold. A generating family for a uniform set family is a family of sets of size at most whose -element supersets are exactly . Start with . A left shift of a generator still has every -element extension in : if the extension contains the removed coordinate it already contains the old generator; otherwise reverse that shift in the extension and use left-compression of . Taking all left shifts of generators, then deleting inclusion-redundant generators, therefore gives an antichain of generators with the following property: every left shift of a generator contains a generator. This normalization never enlarges the support. Choose a normalized generating family whose largest support coordinate is as small as possible.
The generators themselves are t-intersecting. Indeed, if two generators intersect in fewer than points, they can be extended to -sets with intersection size : fill their two residual quotas with disjoint points as far as possible. This contradicts the defining property of the generated family. A generator containing has the maximum-support generator fibreas its exclusively generated members. In fact, any extra coordinate in the prefix supplies a generator inside , which avoids and also generates that member. An exact prefix contains no other generator by the antichain property.
If two generators containing have intersection exactly , they must have union : any earlier coordinate missing from both permits shifting out of one generator and lowers their intersection below . Thus tight pairs of left-compressed generators have sizes summing to . Write for the generators of size containing , and put . Generators avoiding still meet a shortened generator in at least points, and shortened generators in classes still meet in at least unless .
SupposeWe will contradict extremality or the minimality of . If all the nonempty classes have , no two of them can have sizes summing to : for any partner of size at most , their sum is at most , since . We may therefore shorten every generator containing , preserving t-intersection and generating a family containing . By maximal cardinality it generates exactly , with support at most , a contradiction. There must be a class with .
If such a class has , put . Remove classes and insert all shortened generators from class , or instead all shortened generators from class . Both replacements remain t-intersecting. The first loses exactly exclusively generated members and gains at least new members with shortened exact prefixes and tails beyond ; the second gives the reversed comparison. If class is empty, the first gain is positive and contradicts extremality. Otherwise and , so all four binomial coefficients are positive. If neither replacement increases cardinality, multiplication of their two inequalities givesBut the ratio of the left side to the right side isIndeed, using , the numerator factors exceed the opposite denominator factors by . This contradiction excludes every noncentral class with positive fibre.
Consequently any class with is central: and for an integer . Shorten the central generators. Each shortened set misses exactly of the earlier coordinates, so some coordinate is absent from at least of them. Call that subfamily . Its members are t-intersecting: a bad pair would have arisen from a tight pair whose union was , whereas both shortened sets avoid . They also meet all unchanged generators in at least points; a conflicting class would have to be the central class itself. Remove the entire central class and insert . The loss relative to the unaffected generators is exactly . Each selected shortened prefix may be extended using the coordinates ; these extensions are distinct and not generated by an unaffected generator, by the original antichain property. The number restored or added is at least . Their gain-to-loss ratio is therefore at leastThe last inequality is equivalent, by multiplying out, to , which follows from and the assumed strict threshold. This finishes the generator replacement proof of the small-support intersection lemma:Reflection gives the analogous supporting suffix for a right-compressed optimum.
The second ingredient is the compatibility bound for complementary generating families. Let generate , a -intersecting family of -sets. For any , ,If not, put their union in a set of size , which is at least both and . Extend within to a -set and within to an -set . Then , but , a contradiction.
SetFirst suppose . These intervals cover the non-boundary parameters in our remaining range, with . The support lemma gives generators on the prefix . Write , and . Direct rearrangement givesAfter multiplication by , the strict inequality becomes . For this is exactly ; for it is . Thus the reflected support lemma gives generators for on a suffix of length , disjoint from the prefix.
If every prefix generator has size at least , then . If every suffix generator has size at least , every complemented member contains that many suffix points, and its original member has at least prefix points; again . At least one of these alternatives holds: otherwise generators of sizes at most and would have union of size at most , violating compatibility. Since itself is t-intersecting and is maximum,
Finally suppose . The support lemma, now with index , places in . For the complement, the strict support inequality still places in the suffix beginning at . These supports overlap in two coordinates, which is harmless for the union bound in compatibility. Either every has size at least , placing inside , or every has size at least , placing inside . If neither held, a pair of generators would have union of size at most , again impossible.
The two candidate sizes agree at this boundary. In passing from to , the gained sets have points in the old block and both new points; the lost sets have old-block points and neither new point. Their counts areThe ratio is one exactly when , that is, . Therefore there. The full-level cases, the elementary proof, the complementary borderline case, and these strict-interval and boundary arguments establish the boxed cardinality theorem for every admissible parameter.