Write for the rank- uniform layer of the Boolean cube. For a uniform set family , with , let be its lower shadow. The Local LYM inequality isFor its proof, count incidences with , , and . Each member of contributes incidences, while each member of the lower shadow contributes at most . Thus , which is the displayed bound by the ratio of consecutive binomial coefficients. Complementing every set gives the corresponding upper shadow bound, for .
For an antichain in the Boolean lattice, the LYM inequality isHere is the proof using the Local LYM inequality. Denote the rank- part by , and let consist of the -sets containing some member of of size at most . These families satisfyThe union is disjoint because a member of the antichain cannot contain a strictly smaller member. Apply the upper shadow form of the Local LYM inequality to :Iterating gives a bound for the entire sum by . This also covers the empty antichain and an antichain containing the empty set.
For the second proof, each permutation of specifies a maximal chain in a Boolean lattice by taking its successive prefixes. There are such maximal chains in a Boolean lattice, and a fixed -set belongs to of them. A maximal chain in a Boolean lattice meets an antichain at most once. Double counting these incidences therefore gives , exactly the LYM inequality.
The Sperner theorem says that an antichain in has at most members; a full middle rank attains this bound. Indeed, every binomial coefficient is at most the central one, so the LYM inequality givesNow let be an intersection-free uniform set family. If it is empty, there is nothing to prove. Fix and consider the tracesIf are distinct and , then . This contradicts the defining restriction on the three distinct members . The intersection has size less than , so it is a proper subset of even if the printed subset symbol is interpreted strictly. In particular, equal traces are impossible, and the traces form an antichain. Thus . Applying the Sperner theorem to the -element ground set proves the antichain trace bound for intersection-free familiesThe argument also handles : a uniform set family then has at most one member.
Articles by others on the same topic
There are currently no matching articles.