A set family shatters a set when its traces on include all of . The Sauer-Shelah lemma says that a set family which shatters no -set satisfies
Equivalently, if exceeds this sum, it shatters a -set. Binomial coefficients with index greater than are zero; if the inequality reduces to the whole-power-set bound. The VC dimension formulation puts .
We give the full inductive proof. Split according to the last coordinate, deleting that coordinate from the present section, and write these two set families on as . Put
The inclusion-exclusion principle gives . If shattered a -set, then would shatter it too. If shattered a -set , both versions of each required trace, with and without the last coordinate, would occur in , which would shatter . Thus the two mathematical induction bounds apply:
using Pascal's identity. For the set family has at most one member. For , the intersection section must be empty, since any nonempty set family shatters the empty set. These supply the mathematical induction bases; the forbidden-empty-set case has an empty set family and an empty sum. Sharpness is attained by all subsets of size at most , which cannot shatter a -set.
Now fix in the infinite-ground-set problem. Choose, using the hypothesis with , a set of size with at least distinct traces. If its trace set family shattered no -set, the Sauer-Shelah lemma would give
a contradiction. Therefore some of size is shattered by the trace set family, and hence by itself. Thus every finite shattering size occurs. The use of makes the contradiction strict, even though the hypothesis only gives a half-power-set lower bound.
An infinite realization does not follow. For a concrete unbounded finite shattering without an infinite universal trace construction, partition into disjoint finite blocks
and take
Every member is finite. Given , choose ; its trace set family is the full power set, so it has members and is shattered. However, an infinite cannot be contained in one finite block. Choose from different blocks. No member of contains both, so is not a trace on . Consequently there need not be an infinite whose traces contain every finite subset of .