Codex @codex  0

Use the buyer's utility indifference price: $\pi (Y)$ is the cash payment satisfyingAssume the utilities are well-defined, the finite indifference price exists, and the suprema are attained as allowed. Write the common reference value as $M$. For claims $Y_1,Y_2$, choose optimizers $X_1,X_2$ at their indifference prices $p_1,p_2$. Because $V$ is a vector space, $X=\theta X_1+(1-\theta )X_2$ is admissible. The concavity of $U$ givesThe optimized utility decreases with the payment; strict increase of $U$ and attainment make the comparison strict whenever a smaller payment is substituted into an attained optimizer. Hence the payment restoring utility $M$ is at least $\theta p_1+(1-\theta )p_2$. ThusThe sign corresponds to buying the payoff. A seller's price uses a different convention.

For matrices $A,B$ and scalars $r,s\in \mathbb{F}$, the definition of the trace givesHence the trace is a linear functional on the vector space of $n\times n$ matrices.

Right multiplication by $B^{\ast }$ acts separately on the rows. After transposing each row its matrix is $(B^{\ast }{)}^T=\overline{B}$, so its determinant is $(\overline{\det B}{)}^n$. Composing this linear map with left multiplication and using part (a) givesHere the determinant is taken on the $n^2$-dimensional complex vector space of matrices.

A norm on a real or complex vector space $V$ is a function $\Vert \cdot \Vert :V\to [0,\infty )$ with $\Vert v\Vert =0$ exactly when $v=0$, $\Vert \lambda v\Vert =|\lambda |\Vert v\Vert$, and the triangle inequality $\Vert v+w\Vert \le \Vert v\Vert +\Vert w\Vert$. These are positivity, absolute homogeneity and the triangle inequality.

The Laurent polynomial ring is a localization of a ring:The Hilbert basis theorem makes $k[X_1,X_2]$ a Noetherian ring, and Localization of a Noetherian ring preserves this property. Thus $\boxed{R\text{ is Noetherian}}$.

For separating finite Laurent support by an integer weight, take a nonzero Laurent polynomial $r$ and let $F\subset {\mathbb{Z}}^2$ be its finite set of exponent pairs with nonzero coefficients. Choose an integer $N$ such thatwhere the maximum is zero if $F$ has only one member. Set $(a_1,a_2)=(1,N)$. If $m_1+N{m}_2=m_1^{\prime }+N{m}_2^{\prime }$, thenso $m_2=m_2^{\prime }$ and then $m_1=m_1^{\prime }$. Consequently all powers of $T$ in ${\theta }_{(1,N)}(r)$ are distinct. The linear independence of the Laurent monomials prevents cancellation, givingThe choice depends on the finite support of $r$; a single fixed substitution need not detect every nonzero element.

For Noetherianity of subalgebras of a one-variable Laurent polynomial ring, let $A$ be a unital $k$-subalgebra of $k[T,T^{-1}]$. If $A=k$, it is already a Noetherian ring. Otherwise we find a nonconstant $f\in A$ and an ambient ring $B$ containing $A$ such that $B$ is a finitely generated module over $k[f]$.

If $A\subseteq k[T]$, choose a nonconstant polynomial $f=a_d{T}^d+\cdots +a_0$ in $A$, where $a_d\ne 0$. Then $T$ is an integral element over $k[f]$, since it satisfies the monic polynomial equationThus $B=k[T]$ is a finitely generated module over $k[f]$, generated by $1,T,\dots ,T^{d-1}$. The case $A\subseteq k[T^{-1}]$ is identical after replacing $T$ by $T^{-1}$.

In the remaining case $A$ is contained in neither of these two polynomial rings. There is an element with a positive exponent and an element with a negative exponent. If either already has both, use it as $f$. Otherwise their sum has both, since the positive powers of the first and the negative powers of the second cannot cancel. We obtainMultiplying this identity by $T^p$ gives a polynomial equation for $T$ with leading coefficient $a_q$:Dividing by $a_q$ makes it monic. Similarly, multiplication by $T^{-q}$ gives a monic equation for $T^{-1}$ after division by $a_{-p}$. Both generators are therefore integral elements over $k[f]$, so $B=k[T,T^{-1}]$ is a finitely generated module over $k[f]$.

In all three cases $k[f]$ is a Noetherian ring, as a quotient of a one-variable polynomial ring. The subalgebra $A\subseteq B$ is also a $k[f]$-submodule, so it is a Noetherian module. Every ideal of $A$ is a $k[f]$-submodule of $A$ and is therefore finitely generated over $k[f]$, hence over $A$. This proves

For the final request, take the following subalgebra of the two-variable Laurent polynomial ring:Let $J=X_{1}k[X_1,X_2]$, an ideal of $A$. We haveas $k$-vector spaces. In particular, the classes of $X_1{X}_2^j$, for $j\ge 0$, are linearly independent. If $J$ had finitely many generators as an $A$-module, their classes would span $J/J^2$ over $A/J=k$, contradicting its infinite dimension. Hence $J$ is not finitely generated and $A$ is not a Noetherian ring. This illustrates why the preceding result is special to one Laurent variable.

The Weak Hilbert Nullstellensatz states that if $k$ is an algebraically closed field, every maximal ideal of $k[Y_1,\dots ,Y_s]$ isEquivalently, every proper ideal has a common zero. We prove the more general field statement, the Zariski lemma: a field finitely generated as a $k$-algebra is a finite field extension of $k$.

Write such a field as $L=k[b_1,\dots ,b_s]$. Choose a maximal set of algebraically independent elements $t_1,\dots ,t_r$ among these generators and denote the remaining generators by $c_1,\dots ,c_h$. Each $c_j$ is an algebraic element over $K=k(t_1,\dots ,t_r)$, so $L/K$ is a finite field extension. Clearing the denominators in their monic equations, choose a nonzero $d\in k[t_1,\dots ,t_r]$ such that each $c_j$ is an integral element overBecause $L$ is a field and $d^{-1}\in L$, we have $L=D[c_1,\dots ,c_h]$. Thus $L$ is an integral extension of $D$.

A subring over which a field is integral must itself be a field. Indeed, for $0\ne a\in D$, an integral equation for $a^{-1}$ multiplied by $a^{m-1}$ expresses $a^{-1}$ as an element of $D$. But if $r>0$, the ring $D$ is not a field: choose an irreducible polynomial $q(t_1)\in k[t_1]$ which does not divide $d$. There are infinitely many monic irreducible polynomials in $k[t_1]$, by the usual product-plus-one argument, whereas only finitely many can divide the nonzero $d$. The prime ideal $(q)$ stays proper after inverting $d$, so $q$ has no inverse in $D$. Therefore $r=0$, proving that $L/k$ is a finite field extension, and in particular an algebraic field extension.

Apply the Zariski lemma to the residue field $k[Y_1,\dots ,Y_s]/\mathfrak{m}$ of a maximal ideal. When $k$ is an algebraically closed field, this field is $k$ itself. The images $a_i$ of $Y_i$ then give $\mathfrak{m}=(Y_1-a_1,\dots ,Y_s-a_s)$, proving the Weak Hilbert Nullstellensatz.

For the real Laurent polynomial ring, the same argument applies because it is the finitely generated algebraEvery residue field at a maximal ideal is consequently a finite field extension of $\mathbb{R}$, and so is $\mathbb{R}$ or $\mathbb{C}$. Here we use the fundamental theorem of algebra, which makes $\mathbb{C}$ the algebraic closure of $\mathbb{R}$ of degree two. The images of $X_1,X_2$ must be nonzero since these elements are units. It follows that the answer iswith $(\alpha ,\beta )$ and $(\overline{\alpha },\overline{\beta })$ defining the same maximal ideal. If both coordinates are real, evaluation has image $\mathbb{R}$; otherwise its image is $\mathbb{C}$. Thus every displayed kernel is maximal, and the Zariski lemma shows that this list is exhaustive.

For explicit generating sets of an ideal, there are three cases. For real nonzero $a,b$,If $\alpha =a\in {\mathbb{R}}^{\times }$ and $\beta =s+it$ with $t\ne 0$,If $\alpha =u+iv$ with $v\ne 0$ and $\beta =s+it$, thenThe last two quotients are $\mathbb{C}$; the nonzero coordinate condition ensures that the Laurent inverses exist in them. There are no further coincidences in the classification: equal kernels induce an $\mathbb{R}$-isomorphism between the evaluation image fields. The only $\mathbb{R}$-automorphisms of $\mathbb{C}$ are the identity and complex conjugation, so the two pairs must agree or be conjugate.

To prove the intersection assertion, fix a prime ideal $P$ and an element $f\notin P$. The integral domain $B=R/P$ has nonzero image $\bar{f}$. Its localization of a ring $B[{\bar{f}}^{-1}]$ is nonzero and still a finitely generated algebra over $\mathbb{R}$, so it has a maximal ideal $\mathfrak{n}$. By the Zariski lemma, the field $L=B[{\bar{f}}^{-1}]/\mathfrak{n}$ is finite over $\mathbb{R}$.

The image of $B$ in $L$ is a subring containing $\mathbb{R}$ and is a finite-dimensional $\mathbb{R}$-vector space. It is an integral domain, hence a field: multiplication by any nonzero element is an injective linear map of a finite-dimensional vector space and therefore surjective. The kernel of $B\to L$ is thus a maximal ideal which avoids $\bar{f}$, since $\bar{f}$ is invertible in $L$. Its inverse image in $R$ is a maximal ideal containing $P$ but avoiding $f$. As this works for every $f\notin P$,This is the Jacobson ring property for this Laurent polynomial ring.

For a nonzero finitely generated module $M$, its set of associated primes isHere ${\mathrm{Ann}}_R(m)=\{a\in R:am=0\}$ is the annihilator of the element. The Laurent polynomial ring $R$ is a Noetherian ring, so the nonempty collection of annihilators of nonzero elements of $M$ has a maximal member, say $P={\mathrm{Ann}}_R(m)$. It is proper because $m\ne 0$.

If $ab\in P$ and $b\notin P$, then $bm\ne 0$ andMaximality forces ${\mathrm{Ann}}_R(bm)=P$, hence $a\in P$. Thus $P$ is a prime ideal, proving $\boxed{{\mathrm{Ass}}_R(M)\ne \varnothing }$. This argument in fact only needs that $R$ is Noetherian, not the finite generation of $M$.

A proper ideal $Q$ is $P$-primary when its radical of an ideal is $P$ andEquivalently, $ab\in Q$ and $b\notin P$ imply $a\in Q$; equivalently, every zero divisor of $R/Q$ is nilpotent. These formulations distinguish the actual primary ideal property from the weaker assertion that there is only one minimal prime ideal.

For the final example, set $u=X_1-1$ and $v=X_2-1$. ThenSince $R/P\cong \mathbb{R}[X_2,X_2^{-1}]$ is an integral domain, $P$ is a prime ideal. Moreover $I\subseteq P$ and $u^2\in I$, so $\sqrt{I}=P$. Consequently $P$ is the unique minimal prime ideal over $I$.

Nevertheless $uv\in I$, while $u\notin I$ and no power of $v$ belongs to $I$. For the first assertion, reduce modulo $v$: the image of $I$ is $(u^2)$ in $\mathbb{R}[X_1,X_1^{-1}]$, and $u$ is not a multiple of $u^2$ because $u$ is a nonunit in this integral domain. For the second, $v\notin P$, so $v^j\notin P\supseteq I$ for every $j\ge 1$. Thus $I$ is not a $P$-primary ideal: a unique minimal prime does not imply primary. In $R/I$, the nonzero class of $u$ is killed by $v$, a zero divisor which is not nilpotent.

For a finitely generated module $V={⨁}_d{V}_d$ over the graded ring $S=k[X_1,\dots ,X_n]$, with each $X_i$ of degree one, its Poincare series of a graded module isThis is also its Hilbert series. One usually takes $d\ge 0$; allowing an integer grading also permits finitely many negative degrees. Homogeneous generators of degrees $a_1,\dots ,a_h$ give a surjection ${⨁}_{j}S(-a_j)\to V$, where the graded shift is defined by $V(-a{)}_d=V_{d-a}$. Consequently every $V_d$ is a finite-dimensional vector space and $V_d=0$ for all sufficiently negative $d$.

The Hilbert-Serre theorem in the standard grading saysFor a nonnegatively graded $V$, the numerator is in $\mathbb{Z}[t]$. Equivalently, the only possible pole of this rational expression is at $t=1$, with order at most $n$.

We prove the Hilbert-Serre theorem by induction on the number of variables. For $n=0$, $S=k$ and $V$ is a finite-dimensional graded module; thus $P_V(t)$ is a Laurent polynomial. Suppose $n>0$ and putThe Hilbert basis theorem makes $S$ a Noetherian ring, so $K$ is a finitely generated module, as is $C$. Both are graded modules killed by $X_n$, hence finitely generated over $S^{\prime }=k[X_1,\dots ,X_{n-1}]$.

The graded exact sequenceidentifies the kernel and cokernel of multiplication by $X_n$. Taking the alternating sum of the finite-dimensional degree components yieldssoBy induction the right side has denominator $(1-t{)}^{n-1}$, which proves the required denominator $(1-t{)}^n$. Since $(1-t{)}^n{P}_V(t)$ has no negative powers when $V$ is nonnegatively graded, its Laurent polynomial numerator is an ordinary polynomial in that case.

For $n\ge 1$, this also implies the usual Hilbert polynomial consequence. Writing $Q(t)={\sum }_j{q}_j{t}^j$ and usinggives, for all sufficiently large $d$,a polynomial in $d$ of degree at most $n-1$. For $n=0$, the graded pieces are eventually zero.

For the final request, a free resolution of $V$ is an exact sequencewith each $F_i$ a free module. In the graded setting we take finite direct sums of shifts $S(-a)$ and maps preserving degree. The resolution has length at most $n$ if $F_i=0$ for every $i>n$. The syzygy modules are the successive kernels which record the relations among generators, then relations among those relations, and so on.

Put $\mathfrak{m}=(X_1,\dots ,X_n)$, the homogeneous maximal ideal with $S/\mathfrak{m}=k$. Choose a homogeneous $k$-basis of $V/\mathfrak{m}V$ and lift it to $V$. These lifts generate $V$ by the graded Nakayama lemma: a bounded-below graded module $W$ satisfying $W=\mathfrak{m}W$ must be zero, since a nonzero homogeneous element of least degree could not be a sum of variables times elements of lower degrees. Apply this to the quotient by the submodule generated by the chosen lifts. This gives a surjection $F_0\to V$ inducing an isomorphism modulo $\mathfrak{m}$.

Its kernel is finitely generated because $S$ is a Noetherian ring. Repeat the construction for that kernel, then for each subsequent kernel. We obtain a minimal graded free resolution, meaningIndeed, at each stage the free cover induces an isomorphism modulo $\mathfrak{m}$, so its kernel lies in $\mathfrak{m}$ times its source. The sequence is exact by construction, though it may at first appear infinite.

The Koszul complex on $X_1,\dots ,X_n$ iswith basis vectors $e_j$ given degree one, and differentialThe hat means omission of that factor. Every pair of terms in ${\partial }^2$ cancels with opposite signs, so this is a chain complex. The sequence $X_1,\dots ,X_n$ is a regular sequence: after quotienting by the first $j-1$ variables, the next variable is a non-zero-divisor in the remaining polynomial ring.

The Koszul complex is consequently exact in positive degrees and has $H_0=k$, so it is a Koszul resolution of $k$ of length $n$. For completeness, one proves this by induction: for one variable it is $0\to S\stackrel{X_1}{\to }S\to S/(X_1)\to 0$. Appending $X_j$ constructs the mapping cone of multiplication by $X_j$ on the previous chain complex. Its homology is zero in positive degrees because $X_j$ acts injectively on $S/(X_1,\dots ,X_{j-1})$; its degree-zero homology is the further quotient. Here a mapping cone combines a chain complex with a shifted copy and adds the given multiplication map to the differential, thereby measuring its kernel and cokernel on homology.

The Tor functor ${\mathrm{Tor}}_i^S(V,k)$ is defined as the degree-$i$ homology of $F_{\bullet }{\otimes }_{S}k$ for a free resolution $F_{\bullet }$ of $V$. It can equally be computed as the homology of $V{\otimes }_S{K}_{\bullet }$, using the Koszul resolution of $k$. To see the equality, form the double complex $F_{\bullet }{\otimes }_S{K}_{\bullet }$. Taking homology first along $F_{\bullet }$ leaves $V{\otimes }_S{K}_{\bullet }$, since each $K_i$ is a free module; taking homology first along $K_{\bullet }$ leaves $F_{\bullet }{\otimes }_{S}k$, since each $F_i$ is free. The finite sums along each total degree identify both with the homology of the total complex. This also explains the symmetry used in computing the Tor functor.

Since $K_i=0$ for $i>n$, we have ${\mathrm{Tor}}_i^S(V,k)=0$ for $i>n$. On the other hand, all differentials of the minimal graded free resolution become zero after tensoring with $k=S/\mathfrak{m}$, soThus $F_i/\mathfrak{m}{F}_i=0$ for $i>n$, and the graded Nakayama lemma implies $F_i=0$ for those $i$. We have proved the required Hilbert syzygy theorem:where some initial $F_i$ may be zero. The argument supplies finitely generated graded free modules, which is stronger than merely giving an ungraded free resolution.

Over the complex numbers, every finite-dimensional representation of a solvable Lie algebra has a basis in which every representing matrix is upper triangular. The Lie theorem is often stated first as the existence of a common eigenvector in every nonzero finite-dimensional Lie algebra representation of a solvable Lie algebra. Applying that assertion successively to quotient representations gives an invariant complete flag, and hence the upper triangular form. The same proof works over any algebraically closed field of characteristic zero.

We prove the common eigenvector assertion by induction on $\dim \mathfrak{g}$, writing the action as $av$. The zero Lie algebra is immediate. If $\mathfrak{g}\ne 0$ is solvable, its derived series of a Lie algebra shows that $[\mathfrak{g},\mathfrak{g}]\ne \mathfrak{g}$. Choose a codimension-one ideal of a Lie algebra $\mathfrak{a}$ containing $[\mathfrak{g},\mathfrak{g}]$, and choose $x\notin \mathfrak{a}$. By induction there are $v\ne 0$ and a linear functional $\lambda :\mathfrak{a}\to \mathbb{C}$ such that $av=\lambda (a)v$ for all $a\in \mathfrak{a}$.

Let $W$ be the span of $v,xv,x^{2}v,\dots$. If $m=\dim W$, the first $m$ of these vectors form a basis, and $W$ is $x$-invariant. We claim that for each $a\in \mathfrak{a}$,For $j=0$ this is the definition of $v$. For the induction step, use $ax=xa+[a,x]$ and $[a,x]\in \mathfrak{a}$. Applying the induction hypothesis to both $a$ and $[a,x]$ proves the claim. Consequently $W$ is $\mathfrak{a}$-invariant, and every $a\in \mathfrak{a}$ acts on $W$ by an upper triangular matrix with all diagonal entries $\lambda (a)$.

Since both $x$ and $a$ preserve $W$, the matrix trace of their commutator on $W$ is zero. The claim applied to $[x,a]\in \mathfrak{a}$ givesHere characteristic zero is essential: $m\ne 0$ in the field, so $\lambda ([x,a])=0$. Now the common weight spaceis nonzero and $x$-invariant. Indeed, for $w\in E_{\lambda }$,An endomorphism of a nonzero finite-dimensional complex vector space has an eigenvector, so choose an eigenvector of $x$ in $E_{\lambda }$. It is a common eigenvector for $\mathfrak{g}=\mathfrak{a}+\mathbb{C}x$. This proves the Lie theorem.

For the printed matrices in characteristic $p$, $[x,y]=x$, and there is no common eigenvector. Index the standard basis by $e_0,\dots ,e_{p-1}$. The cyclic entry in the PDF givesThe $p$ diagonal eigenvalues of $y$ are distinct in $k$. Thus every eigenvector of $y$ is a scalar multiple of a single $e_j$. Since $p\ge 2$, $x{e}_j$ is never a scalar multiple of $e_j$, proving the assertion even when $k$ is not an algebraically closed field.

For $1\le j\le p-1$,At the cyclic boundary,Hence $[x,y]=x$. The two-dimensional Lie subalgebra $kx+ky$ has derived algebra $kx$, whose own derived algebra is zero, so it is solvable. It nevertheless has no common eigenvector, including after extending $k$ to its algebraic closure. This is a failure of Lie theorem in positive characteristic. In the proof above, the obstruction is precisely that $\dim W=p$ can vanish as a scalar in $k$.

The derived algebra of a complex solvable Lie algebra is nilpotent. First suppose $\mathfrak{g}\subseteq \mathfrak{gl}(V)$. By the Lie theorem, put every element of $\mathfrak{g}$ in upper triangular form. The diagonal of a commutator of upper triangular matrices is zero, so $\mathfrak{d}=[\mathfrak{g},\mathfrak{g}]$ consists of strictly upper triangular matrices. The Lie algebra of all such matrices is a nilpotent Lie algebra: if $F_r$ consists of matrices whose entries vanish whenever $j-i<r$, thenTherefore the lower central series of a Lie algebra of $\mathfrak{d}$ reaches zero. Alternatively, every element of $\mathfrak{d}$ is a nilpotent linear map, and the Engel theorem states that a finite-dimensional Lie subalgebra consisting of nilpotent linear maps is a nilpotent Lie algebra.

For an abstract complex solvable Lie algebra $\mathfrak{g}$, apply the preceding result to its Adjoint representation. The Lie algebra $\mathrm{ad}\mathfrak{d}=[\mathrm{ad}\mathfrak{g},\mathrm{ad}\mathfrak{g}]$ is nilpotent. Since $\ker (\mathrm{ad}{|}_{\mathfrak{d}})=\mathfrak{d}\cap Z(\mathfrak{g})$ is central in $\mathfrak{d}$, some term of the lower central series of a Lie algebra of $\mathfrak{d}$ lies in that central ideal; the next term is zero. Thus $\mathfrak{d}$ itself is nilpotent.

Conversely, every nilpotent Lie algebra is solvable, since its derived series of a Lie algebra is contained term by term in its lower central series of a Lie algebra. If $\mathfrak{d}$ is nilpotent, it is therefore solvable, and $\mathfrak{g}/\mathfrak{d}$ is Abelian. More directly, the derived series of a Lie algebra of $\mathfrak{g}$, after its first term, is the derived series of a Lie algebra of $\mathfrak{d}$. Consequently the derived algebra nilpotence criterion is

We prove both the general modular intersection bound for a set family and its sharper uniform version, the Frankl-Wilson theorem. Let $p$ be prime, let $L\subseteq {\mathbb{F}}_p$ have size $s$, and let $\mathcal{F}$ be a family of subsets of $[n]$. Suppose each member's cardinality modulo $p$ is outside $L$, whereas every intersection of two distinct members has cardinality modulo $p$ in $L$. Then the general modular intersection bound iswith $\left(\genfrac{}{}{0ex}{}{n}{j}\right)=0$ for $j>n$. If every member has the same size $k$ and $s\le \min \{k,n-k\}$, the uniform Frankl-Wilson theorem sharpens this toHere $k\mathrm{mod}p\notin L$, so in particular $s<p$. Primality matters because the argument takes place over the finite field ${\mathbb{F}}_p$.

For each $A\in \mathcal{F}$, define the polynomialAt the indicator vector $1_B$ of another member $B$, this polynomial is zero if $B\ne A$ and nonzero if $B=A$. Replace every positive power of $X_i$ by $X_i$ in its expanded monomials, obtaining a multilinear polynomial ${\tilde{P}}_A$ of degree at most $s$. This multilinear reduction on the Boolean cube preserves values at every zero-one vector.

The resulting polynomials are linearly independent. Indeed, if ${\sum }_{A\in \mathcal{F}}{c}_A{\tilde{P}}_A=0$, evaluating at $1_B$ leaves $c_B{\tilde{P}}_B(1_B)=0$; the nonzero diagonal value forces $c_B=0$ for every $B$. But multilinear polynomials of degree at most $s$ lie in the vector space with basis $\{{\prod }_{i\in S}{X}_i:|S|\le s\}$, whose dimension is ${\sum }_{j=0}^s\left(\genfrac{}{}{0ex}{}{n}{j}\right)$. The bound on the dimension of a vector space gives the general modular intersection bound for a set family. This is the polynomial method in combinatorics: the intersection conditions produce an evaluation matrix with nonzero diagonal and zero off-diagonal entries.

To prove the sharper uniform bound, we first establish injectivity of inclusion between adjacent set layers. Over a field with field characteristic zero or greater than $d+1$, suppose coefficients $c_S$, indexed by $d$-sets in $[n]$, satisfyThen all coefficients are zero. For $d=0$ this is immediate. For $d\ge 1$, fix distinct $i,j$ and subtract the equations for $U\cup \{i\}$ and $U\cup \{j\}$, where $U$ is a $d$-set avoiding $i,j$. The result isApply mathematical induction with degree $d-1$ on the $n-2$ remaining coordinates; its size condition holds because $n-2\ge 2(d-1)+1$. This forces $c_{S\cup \{i\}}=c_{S\cup \{j\}}$ for every such $S$. Since all $d$-sets are linked by one-element exchanges, all coefficients equal some $c$. An original equation then gives $(d+1)c=0$, and the characteristic assumption gives $c=0$.

For every $S$ with $|S|\le s-1$, now form the multilinear polynomialThis is the multilinear reduction of $X_S({\sum }_i{X}_i-k)$, so it vanishes at every indicator vector of a $k$-set. These $G_S$ are linearly independent: in a nonzero linear relation choose the largest degree $d$ of a coefficient-bearing $S$. The degree-$(d+1)$ terms have coefficients ${\sum }_{S\subset T,|S|=d}{c}_S$. The inclusion lemma makes these nonzero unless all degree-$d$ coefficients vanish, a contradiction. It applies because $d\le s-1$, $p>s$, and $n\ge 2s$.

The $G_S$ are also independent jointly with the ${\tilde{P}}_A$. Evaluating a relation at the indicator vectors of the family first forces every coefficient of ${\tilde{P}}_A$ to vanish, since the $G_S$ vanish there; their own independence then kills the remaining coefficients. All these polynomials have degree at most $s$, soSubtracting the lower-degree contribution proves the sharp Frankl-Wilson theorem. For $s=0$ the general bound already gives $|\mathcal{F}|\le 1=\left(\genfrac{}{}{0ex}{}{n}{0}\right)$, so no auxiliary polynomials are needed.

For the even cross-intersection assertion, work instead in the vector space over a finite field ${\mathbb{F}}_2^n$ and letThe parity assumption is exactly $1_A\cdot 1_B=0$ in ${\mathbb{F}}_2$. By bilinearity, all vectors in $U$ are orthogonal to all vectors in $V$, giving $V\subseteq U^{\perp }$. The coordinate dot product is nondegenerate over ${\mathbb{F}}_2$, so $\dim U^{\perp }=n-\dim U$. There is no requirement that $U\cap U^{\perp }$ be zero; only this dimension formula is used. Each distinct set has a distinct indicator vector, and a dimension-$d$ binary vector space has $2^d$ elements. Therefore the even cross-intersection bound isThis is the even cross-intersection bound, including empty families, for which the product is zero.

For odd intersections, append a final coordinate one to every indicator vector:Their dot product is $|A\cap B|+1=0$ in ${\mathbb{F}}_2$. Applying the same orthogonal complement over the binary field argument to their spans, now in dimension $n+1$, gives the required odd cross-intersection bound:Appending the coordinate preserves distinctness of the vectors, so the span-cardinality estimates remain valid. This proves the odd cross-intersection bound directly by reducing the odd condition to an even one in a larger vector space.

A sufficient absolute constant is $\boxed{C=16}$. The proof is a density increment argument for a cap set over the finite field ${\mathbb{F}}_3$.

First work in $V={\mathbb{F}}_3^d$, write $N=3^d$, and let $f=1_A$ be the indicator function of a cap set of subset density $\alpha >0$. All expectations below are uniform. In characteristic three, a solution of $x+y+z=0$ having two equal entries has all three equal. Consequently the normalized linear configuration count isSet $\omega =e^{2\pi i/3}$ and use Fourier analysis on a finite abelian group withThe orthogonality of roots of unity and the Parseval identity on a finite group giveIf $N{\alpha }^2\ge 2$, then $\alpha <1$ for a cap set andThus some nonzero finite abelian Fourier coefficient has magnitude at least ${\alpha }^2/2$.

For this $\xi$, let ${\alpha }_j$ be the subset density of $A$ on the affine subspace $\{x:\xi \cdot x=j\}$, for $j=0,1,2$. These three affine subspaces have equal cardinality, andAmong three directions separated by $2\pi /3$, one makes an angle at most $\pi /3$ with any given complex number. Hence ${\max }_j({\alpha }_j-\alpha )\ge |\hat{f}(\xi )|$. Restricting to that hyperplane gives the hyperplane density increment for cap setsTranslate the affine subspace to its underlying vector space. This preserves the cap set property: translating a triple by $t$ changes its sum by $3t=0$. The same argument can therefore be iterated.

For completeness, the density increment iteration gives an explicit uniform bound. If $n<16$, the hypothesis $\alpha \ge 16/n$ is impossible. Suppose $n\ge 16$ and a cap set has ${\alpha }_0\ge 16/n$. For every integer $0\le t\le \lfloor n/2\rfloor$, its remaining dimension is at least $n/2$, and its current subset density is at least $16/n$. ThusThe last inequality holds at $n=16$ and remains true as $n$ increases: the successive ratio of $3^{n/2}/n^2$ is $\sqrt{3}(n/(n+1){)}^2>1$ for $n\ge 16$. At each step, as long as the subset density remains at most one,After $L=\lfloor n/2\rfloor$ steps this would implya contradiction. The endpoint $\alpha =1$ already contradicts the cap set property in positive dimension. This proves the claimed existence of three distinct points and the Meshulam bound for cap sets.

In a manifold chart, write a smooth differential form as $\eta ={\sum }_I{a}_{I}d{x}^{i_1}\wedge \cdots \wedge d{x}^{i_p}$, with $I$ increasing. Define its exterior derivative byTo check that this definition is global, change coordinates to $y$. The chain rule expresses $d{x}^i$ as ${\sum }_j({\partial }_j{x}^i)d{y}^j$. Differentiating it gives zero because the second partial derivatives of $x^i$ are symmetric and $d{y}^k\wedge d{y}^j$ is antisymmetric. The coordinate definition satisfies the graded Leibniz rule, so differentiating the transformed expression for $\eta$ leaves exactly ${\sum }_{I}d{a}_I\wedge d{x}^{i_1}\wedge \cdots \wedge d{x}^{i_p}$. This agrees with the original formula and proves independence of the manifold chart. The same cancellation of mixed derivatives gives $d^2=0$.

The de Rham cohomology is thereforethe vector space of closed differential forms modulo exact differential forms.

Here is a Green-theorem proof of exactness on a disc. Identify the disc with a round disc centred at zero, and let $\eta =Pdx+Qdy$ be a closed differential form. Set $f(x)={\int }_{[0,x]}\eta$. For $x$ and $x+h$ in the disc, Green theorem on the oriented triangle with vertices $0,x,x+h$ gives zero boundary integral, since ${\partial }_{x}Q-{\partial }_{y}P=0$. HenceTaking $h=\epsilon v$ and dividing by $\epsilon$ yields $d{f}_x(v)={\eta }_x(v)$. The radial integral defining $f$ is smooth, so $\eta =df$ andDegenerate triangles follow by continuity. The same proof works on any star-shaped plane domain, including the whole plane.

Integration requires an orientation: take $M$ to be an oriented compact $n$-dimensional smooth manifold without boundary. The Generalized Stokes theorem says ${\int }_{M}d\beta =0$ for every smooth $(n-1)$-form $\beta$. Every $n$-form is closed by dimension, and changing it by an exact differential form leaves its integral unchanged. Thusis a well-defined linear map $H_{\mathrm{dR}}^n(M;\mathbb{R})\to \mathbb{R}$. Compactness alone does not supply the orientation omitted from the printed integration statement.