Family of Sets

Family of sets
en.wikipedia.org
Chapter 1
Abstract simplicial complex
In mathematics, an abstract simplicial complex is a purely combinatorial description of the geometric notion of a
simplicial complex, consisting of a family of non-empty nite sets closed under the operation of taking non-empty
subsets.[1] In the context of matroids and greedoids, abstract simplicial complexes are also called independence
systems.[2]
An abstract simplex can be studied algebraically by forming its StanleyReisner ring; this sets up a powerful relation
between combinatorics and commutative algebra.
1.1 Denitions
A family of non-empty nite subsets of a set S is an abstract simplicial complex if, for every set X in , and
every non-empty subset Y X, Y also belongs to .
The nite sets that belong to are called faces of the complex, and a face Y is said to belong to another face X if Y
X, so the denition of an abstract simplicial complex can be restated as saying that every face of a face of a complex
is itself a face of . The vertex set of is dened as V() = , the union of all faces of . The elements of the
vertex set are called the vertices of the complex. For every vertex v of , the set {v} is a face of the complex, and
every face of the complex is a nite subset of the vertex set.
The maximal faces of (i.e., faces that are not subsets of any other faces) are called facets of the complex. The
dimension of a face X in is dened as dim(X) = |X| 1: faces consisting of a single element are zero-dimensional,
faces consisting of two elements are one-dimensional, etc. The dimension of the complex dim() is dened as the
largest dimension of any of its faces, or innity if there is no nite bound on the dimension of the faces.
The complex is said to be nite if it has nitely many faces, or equivalently if its vertex set is nite. Also, is
said to be pure if it is nite-dimensional (but not necessarily nite) and every facet has the same dimension. In other
words, is pure if dim() is nite and every face is contained in a facet of dimension dim().
One-dimensional abstract simplicial complexes are mathematically equivalent to simple undirected graphs: the vertex
set of the complex can be viewed as the vertex set of a graph, and the two-element facets of the complex correspond
to undirected edges of a graph. In this view, one-element facets of a complex correspond to isolated vertices that do
not have any incident edges.
A subcomplex of is a simplicial complex L such that every face of L belongs to ; that is, L and L is a
simplicial complex. A subcomplex that consists of all of the subsets of a single face of is often called a simplex
of . (However, some authors use the term simplex for a face or, rather ambiguously, for both a face and the
subcomplex associated with a face, by analogy with the non-abstract (geometric) simplicial complex terminology. To
avoid ambiguity, we do not use in this article the term simplex for a face in the context of abstract complexes.)
The d-skeleton of is the subcomplex of consisting of all of the faces of that have dimension at most d. In
particular, the 1-skeleton is called the underlying graph of . The 0-skeleton of can be identied with its vertex
set, although formally it is not quite the same thing (the vertex set is a single set of all of the vertices, while the
0-skeleton is a family of single-element sets).
The link of a face Y in , often denoted /Y or lk(Y), is the subcomplex of dened by
2
1.2. GEOMETRIC REALIZATION 3
/Y := {X | X Y = , X Y }.
Note that the link of the empty set is itself.

Given two abstract simplicial complexes, and , a simplicial map is a function f that maps the vertices of to the
vertices of and that has the property that for any face X of , the image set f (X) is a face of . There is a category
SCpx with abstract simplicial complexes as objects and simplicial maps as morphisms. This is equivalent to a suitable
category dened using non-abstract simplicial complexes.
Moreover, the categorical point of view allows us to tighten the relation between the underlying set S of an abstract
simplicial complex and the vertex set V() S of : for the purposes of dening a category of abstract simplicial
complexes, the elements of S not lying in V() are irrelevant. More precisely, SCpx is equivalent to the category
where:
an object is a set S equipped with a collection of non-empty nite subsets that contains all singletons and
such that if X is in and Y X is non-empty, then Y also belongs to .
a morphism from (S,) to (T,) is a function f : S T such that the image of any element of is an element
of .
1.2 Geometric realization

We can associate to an abstract simplicial complex K a topological space |K|, called its geometric realization, which
is the carrier of a simplicial complex. The construction goes as follows.
First, dene |K| as a subset of [0, 1]S consisting of functions t : S [0, 1] satisfying the two conditions:
ts = 1
sS
{s S : ts > 0} K
Now think of [0, 1]S as the direct limit of [0, 1]A where A ranges over nite subsets of S, and give [0, 1]S the induced
topology. Now give |K| the subspace topology.
Alternatively, let K denote the category whose objects are the faces of K and whose morphisms are inclusions. Next
choose a total order on the vertex set of K and dene a functor F from K to the category of topological spaces as
follows. For any face X K of dimension n, let F(X) = n be the standard n-simplex. The order on the vertex set
then species a unique bijection between the elements of X and vertices of n , ordered in the usual way e0 < e1 < ...
< en. If Y X is a face of dimension m < n, then this bijection species a unique m-dimensional face of n . Dene
F(Y) F(X) to be the unique ane linear embedding of m as that distinguished face of n , such that the map on
vertices is order preserving.
We can then dene the geometric realization |K| as the colimit of the functor F. More specically |K| is the quotient
space of the disjoint union
F (X)
XK
by the equivalence relation which identies a point y F(Y) with its image under the map F(Y) F(X), for every
inclusion Y X.
If K is nite, then we can describe |K| more simply. Choose an embedding of the vertex set of K as an anely
independent subset of some Euclidean space RN of suciently high dimension N. Then any face X K can be
identied with the geometric simplex in RN spanned by the corresponding embedded vertices. Take |K| to be the
union of all such simplices.
If K is the standard combinatorial n-simplex, then |K| can be naturally identied with n .
4 CHAPTER 1. ABSTRACT SIMPLICIAL COMPLEX
1.3 Examples
As an example, let V be a nite subset of S of cardinality n + 1 and let K be the power set of V. Then K is called
a combinatorial n-simplex with vertex set V. If V = S = {0, 1, ..., n}, K is called the standard combinatorial
n-simplex.
The clique complex of an undirected graph has a simplex for each clique (complete subgraph) of the given
graph. Clique complexes form the prototypical example of ag complexes, complexes with the property that
every set of elements that pairwise belong to simplexes of the complex is itself a simplex.
In the theory of partially ordered sets (posets), the order complex of a poset is the set of all nite chains.
Its homology groups and other topological invariants contain important information about the poset.
The VietorisRips complex is dened from any metric space M and distance by forming a simplex for every
nite subset of M with diameter at most . It has applications in homology theory, hyperbolic groups, image
processing, and mobile ad hoc networking. It is another example of a ag complex.
1.4 Enumeration
The number of abstract simplicial complexes on up to n elements is one less than the nth Dedekind number. These
numbers grow very rapidly, and are known only for n 8; they are (starting with n = 0):
1, 2, 5, 19, 167, 7580, 7828353, 2414682040997, 56130437228687557907787 (sequence A014466 in

the OEIS). This corresponds to the number of nonempty antichains of subsets of an n set.
The number of abstract simplicial complexes on exactly n labeled elements is given by the sequence 1, 2, 9, 114,
6894, 7785062, 2414627396434, 56130437209370320359966 (sequence A006126 in the OEIS), starting at n =
1. This corresponds to the number of antichain covers of a labeled n-set; there is a clear bijection between antichain
covers of an n-set and simplicial complexes on n elements described in terms of their maximal faces.
The number of abstract simplicial complexes on exactly n unlabeled elements is given by the sequence 1, 2, 5, 20,
180, 16143 (sequence A006602 in the OEIS) , starting at n = 1.
1.5 See also

KruskalKatona theorem
1.6 References
[1] Lee, JM, Introduction to Topological Manifolds, Springer 2011, ISBN 1-4419-7939-5, p153
[2] Korte, Bernhard; Lovsz, Lszl; Schrader, Rainer (1991). Greedoids. Springer-Verlag. p. 9. ISBN 3-540-18190-3.
1.6. REFERENCES 5
A geometrical representation of an abstract simplicial complex that is not a valid simplicial complex.
Chapter 2
Almost disjoint sets
In mathematics, two sets are almost disjoint [1][2] if their intersection is small in some sense; dierent denitions of
small will result in dierent denitions of almost disjoint.
2.1 Denition
The most common choice is to take small to mean nite. In this case, two sets are almost disjoint if their intersection
is nite, i.e. if
|A B| < .
(Here, '|X|' denotes the cardinality of X, and '< ' means 'nite'.) For example, the closed intervals [0, 1] and [1,
2] are almost disjoint, because their intersection is the nite set {1}. However, the unit interval [0, 1] and the set of
rational numbers Q are not almost disjoint, because their intersection is innite.
This denition extends to any collection of sets. A collection of sets is pairwise almost disjoint or mutually almost
disjoint if any two distinct sets in the collection are almost disjoint. Often the prex pairwise is dropped, and a
pairwise almost disjoint collection is simply called almost disjoint.
Formally, let I be an index set, and for each i in I, let Ai be a set. Then the collection of sets {Ai : i in I} is almost
disjoint if for any i and j in I,
Ai = Aj |Ai Aj | < .
For example, the collection of all lines through the origin in R2 is almost disjoint, because any two of them only meet
at the origin. If {Ai} is an almost disjoint collection consisting of more than one set, then clearly its intersection is
nite:
Ai < .
iI
However, the converse is not truethe intersection of the collection
{{1, 2, 3, . . .}, {2, 3, 4, . . .}, {3, 4, 5, . . .}, . . .}

is empty, but the collection is not almost disjoint; in fact, the intersection of any two distinct sets in this collection is
innite.
The possible cardinalities of a maximal almost disjoint family on the set of the natural numbers has been the
object of intense study.[3][2] The minimum of such cardinalities is one of the classical Cardinal characteristics of the
continuum.[4][5]
6
2.2. OTHER MEANINGS 7
2.2 Other meanings

Sometimes almost disjoint is used in some other sense, or in the sense of measure theory or topological category.
Here are some alternative denitions of almost disjoint that are sometimes used (similar denitions apply to innite
collections):
Let be any cardinal number. Then two sets A and B are almost disjoint if the cardinality of their intersection
is less than , i.e. if
|A B| < .
The case of = 1 is simply the denition of disjoint sets; the case of
= 0
is simply the denition of almost disjoint given above, where the intersection of A and B is nite.
Let m be a complete measure on a measure space X. Then two subsets A and B of X are almost disjoint if their
intersection is a null-set, i.e. if
m(A B) = 0.
Let X be a topological space. Then two subsets A and B of X are almost disjoint if their intersection is meagre
in X.
2.3 References
[1] Kunen, K. (1980), Set Theory; an introduction to independence proofs, North Holland, p. 47
[2] Jech, R. (2006) Set Theory (the third millennium edition, revised and expanded)", Springer, p. 118
[3] Eric van Douwen. The Integers and Topology. In K. Kunen and J.E. Vaughan (eds) Handbook of Set-Theoretic Topology.
North-Holland, Amsterdam, 1984.
[4] Vaughan, Jerry E. (1990). Chapter 11: Small uncountable cardinals and topology. In van Mill, Jan; Reed, George M.
Open Problems in Topology (PDF). Amsterdam: North-Holland Publishing Company. pp. 196218. ISBN 0-444-88768-
7.
[5] Blass, Andreas (January 12, 2010). Chapter 6 : Combinatorial Cardinal Characteristics of the Continuum. In Foreman,
Matthew; Kanamori, Akihiro. Handbook of Set Theory (PDF). 1. Springer. pp. 395490. ISBN 1-4020-4843-2.
Chapter 3
Antimatroid
{a,b,c,d}

a
ab
{a,b,c} abc {a,b,c,d}
abcd
ac
acb
{a,b} {a,c} {b,c} acbd {a,b} {b,c}
c
ca
cab
{a} {c} cabd {a} {c}
cb
cba
cbad

Three views of an antimatroid: an inclusion ordering on its family of feasible sets, a formal language, and the corresponding path
poset.
In mathematics, an antimatroid is a formal system that describes processes in which a set is built up by including
elements one at a time, and in which an element, once available for inclusion, remains available until it is included.
Antimatroids are commonly axiomatized in two equivalent ways, either as a set system modeling the possible states
of such a process, or as a formal language modeling the dierent sequences in which elements may be included.
Dilworth (1940) was the rst to study antimatroids, using yet another axiomatization based on lattice theory, and
they have been frequently rediscovered in other contexts;[1] see Korte et al. (1991) for a comprehensive survey of
antimatroid theory with many additional references.
The axioms dening antimatroids as set systems are very similar to those of matroids, but whereas matroids are dened
by an exchange axiom (e.g., the basis exchange, or independent set exchange axioms), antimatroids are dened instead
by an anti-exchange axiom, from which their name derives. Antimatroids can be viewed as a special case of greedoids
and of semimodular lattices, and as a generalization of partial orders and of distributive lattices. Antimatroids are
equivalent, by complementation, to convex geometries, a combinatorial abstraction of convex sets in geometry.
8
3.1. DEFINITIONS 9
Antimatroids have been applied to model precedence constraints in scheduling problems, potential event sequences
in simulations, task planning in articial intelligence, and the states of knowledge of human learners.
3.1 Denitions
An antimatroid can be dened as a nite family F of sets, called feasible sets, with the following two properties:
The union of any two feasible sets is also feasible. That is, F is closed under unions.
If S is a nonempty feasible set, then there exists some x in S such that S \ {x} (the set formed by removing x
from S) is also feasible. That is, F is an accessible set system.
Antimatroids also have an equivalent denition as a formal language, that is, as a set of strings dened from a nite
alphabet of symbols. A language L dening an antimatroid must satisfy the following properties:
Every symbol of the alphabet occurs in at least one word of L.
Each word of L contains at most one copy of any symbol.
Every prex of a string in L is also in L.
If s and t are strings in L, and s contains at least one symbol that is not in t, then there is a symbol x in s such
that tx is another string in L.
If L is an antimatroid dened as a formal language, then the sets of symbols in strings of L form an accessible union-
closed set system. In the other direction, if F is an accessible union-closed set system, and L is the language of strings
s with the property that the set of symbols in each prex of s is feasible, then L denes an antimatroid. Thus, these
two denitions lead to mathematically equivalent classes of objects.[2]
3.2 Examples
A chain antimatroid has as its formal language the prexes of a single word, and as its feasible sets the sets
of symbols in these prexes. For instance the chain antimatroid dened by the word abcd has as its formal
language the strings {, a, ab, abc, abcd"} and as its feasible sets the sets , {a}, {a,b}, {a,b,c}, and
{a,b,c,d}.[3]
A poset antimatroid has as its feasible sets the lower sets of a nite partially ordered set. By Birkhos rep-
resentation theorem for distributive lattices, the feasible sets in a poset antimatroid (ordered by set inclusion)
form a distributive lattice, and any distributive lattice can be formed in this way. Thus, antimatroids can be
seen as generalizations of distributive lattices. A chain antimatroid is the special case of a poset antimatroid
for a total order.[3]
A shelling sequence of a nite set U of points in the Euclidean plane or a higher-dimensional Euclidean space
is an ordering on the points such that, for each point p, there is a line (in the Euclidean plane, or a hyperplane
in a Euclidean space) that separates p from all later points in the sequence. Equivalently, p must be a vertex
of the convex hull of it and all later points. The partial shelling sequences of a point set form an antimatroid,
called a shelling antimatroid. The feasible sets of the shelling antimatroid are the intersections of U with
the complement of a convex set.[3] Every antimatroid is isomorphic to a shelling antimatroid of points in a
suciently high-dimensional space.[4]
A perfect elimination ordering of a chordal graph is an ordering of its vertices such that, for each vertex v,
the neighbors of v that occur later than v in the ordering form a clique. The prexes of perfect elimination
orderings of a chordal graph form an antimatroid.[3] Antimatroids also describe some other kinds of vertex
removal orderings in graphs, such as the dismantling orders of cop-win graphs.
10 CHAPTER 3. ANTIMATROID
1 4 16
6
13
19
20
14
7 18
9
12
17
10
11 15
5 8
2
A shelling sequence of a planar point set. The line segments show edges of the convex hulls after some of the points have been
removed.
3.3 Paths and basic words
In the set theoretic axiomatization of an antimatroid there are certain special sets called paths that determine the
whole antimatroid, in the sense that the sets of the antimatroid are exactly the unions of paths. If S is any feasible set
of the antimatroid, an element x that can be removed from S to form another feasible set is called an endpoint of S,
and a feasible set that has only one endpoint is called a path of the antimatroid. The family of paths can be partially
ordered by set inclusion, forming the path poset of the antimatroid.
For every feasible set S in the antimatroid, and every element x of S, one may nd a path subset of S for which x
is an endpoint: to do so, remove one at a time elements other than x until no such removal leaves a feasible subset.
Therefore, each feasible set in an antimatroid is the union of its path subsets. If S is not a path, each subset in this
union is a proper subset of S. But, if S is itself a path with endpoint x, each proper subset of S that belongs to the
antimatroid excludes x. Therefore, the paths of an antimatroid are exactly the sets that do not equal the unions of
their proper subsets in the antimatroid. Equivalently, a given family of sets P forms the set of paths of an antimatroid
if and only if, for each S in P, the union of subsets of S in P has one fewer element than S itself. If so, F itself is the
family of unions of subsets of P.
In the formal language formalization of an antimatroid we may also identify a subset of words that determine the whole
language, the basic words. The longest strings in L are called basic words; each basic word forms a permutation of
the whole alphabet. For instance, the basic words of a poset antimatroid are the linear extensions of the given partial
order. If B is the set of basic words, L can be dened from B as the set of prexes of words in B. It is often convenient
to dene antimatroids from basic words in this way, but it is not straightforward to write an axiomatic denition of
3.4. CONVEX GEOMETRIES 11
antimatroids in terms of their basic words.
3.4 Convex geometries

See also: Convex set, Convex geometry, and Closure operator
If F is the set system dening an antimatroid, with U equal to the union of the sets in F, then the family of sets
G = {U \ S | S F }
complementary to the sets in F is sometimes called a convex geometry and the sets in G are called convex sets. For
instance, in a shelling antimatroid, the convex sets are intersections of U with convex subsets of the Euclidean space
into which U is embedded.
Complementarily to the properties of set systems that dene antimatroids, the set system dening a convex geometry
should be closed under intersections, and for any set S in G that is not equal to U there must be an element x not in S
that can be added to S to form another set in G.
A convex geometry can also be dened in terms of a closure operator that maps any subset of U to its minimal
closed superset. To be a closure operator, should have the following properties:
() = : the closure of the empty set is empty.
Any set S is a subset of (S).
If S is a subset of T, then (S) must be a subset of (T).
For any set S, (S) = ((S)).
The family of closed sets resulting from a closure operation of this type is necessarily closed under intersections. The
closure operators that dene convex geometries also satisfy an additional anti-exchange axiom:
If neither y nor z belong to (S), but z belongs to (S {y}), then y does not belong to (S {z}).
A closure operation satisfying this axiom is called an anti-exchange closure. If S is a closed set in an anti-exchange
closure, then the anti-exchange axiom determines a partial order on the elements not belonging to S, where x y in
the partial order when x belongs to (S {y}). If x is a minimal element of this partial order, then S {x} is closed.
That is, the family of closed sets of an anti-exchange closure has the property that for any set other than the universal
set there is an element x that can be added to it to produce another closed set. This property is complementary to
the accessibility property of antimatroids, and the fact that intersections of closed sets are closed is complementary
to the property that unions of feasible sets in an antimatroid are feasible. Therefore, the complements of the closed
sets of any anti-exchange closure form an antimatroid.[5]
The undirected graphs in which the convex sets (subsets of vertices that contain all shortest paths between vertices in
the subset) form a convex geometry are exactly the Ptolemaic graphs.[6]
3.5 Join-distributive lattices

Any two sets in an antimatroid have a unique least upper bound (their union) and a unique greatest lower bound
(the union of the sets in the antimatroid that are contained in both of them). Therefore, the sets of an antimatroid,
partially ordered by set inclusion, form a lattice. Various important features of an antimatroid can be interpreted in
lattice-theoretic terms; for instance the paths of an antimatroid are the join-irreducible elements of the corresponding
lattice, and the basic words of the antimatroid correspond to maximal chains in the lattice. The lattices that arise from
antimatroids in this way generalize the nite distributive lattices, and can be characterized in several dierent ways.
The description originally considered by Dilworth (1940) concerns meet-irreducible elements of the lattice.
For each element x of an antimatroid, there exists a unique maximal feasible set Sx that does not contain x (Sx
is the union of all feasible sets not containing x). Sx is meet-irreducible, meaning that it is not the meet of any
two larger lattice elements: any larger feasible set, and any intersection of larger feasible sets, contains x and so
does not equal Sx. Any element of any lattice can be decomposed as a meet of meet-irreducible sets, often in
multiple ways, but in the lattice corresponding to an antimatroid each element T has a unique minimal family
of meet-irreducible sets Sx whose meet is T; this family consists of the sets Sx such that T {x} belongs to the
antimatroid. That is, the lattice has unique meet-irreducible decompositions.
A second characterization concerns the intervals in the lattice, the sublattices dened by a pair of lattice elements
x y and consisting of all lattice elements z with x z y. An interval is atomistic if every element in it is the
join of atoms (the minimal elements above the bottom element x), and it is Boolean if it is isomorphic to the
lattice of all subsets of a nite set. For an antimatroid, every interval that is atomistic is also boolean.
Thirdly, the lattices arising from antimatroids are semimodular lattices, lattices that satisfy the upper semimod-
ular law that for any two elements x and y, if y covers x y then x y covers x. Translating this condition
into the sets of an antimatroid, if a set Y has only one element not belonging to X then that one element may
be added to X to form another set in the antimatroid. Additionally, the lattice of an antimatroid has the meet-
semidistributive property: for all lattice elements x, y, and z, if x y and x z are both equal then they also
equal x (y z). A semimodular and meet-semidistributive lattice is called a join-distributive lattice.
These three characterizations are equivalent: any lattice with unique meet-irreducible decompositions has boolean
atomistic intervals and is join-distributive, any lattice with boolean atomistic intervals has unique meet-irreducible
decompositions and is join-distributive, and any join-distributive lattice has unique meet-irreducible decompositions
and boolean atomistic intervals.[7] Thus, we may refer to a lattice with any of these three properties as join-distributive.
Any antimatroid gives rise to a nite join-distributive lattice, and any nite join-distributive lattice comes from an
antimatroid in this way.[8] Another equivalent characterization of nite join-distributive lattices is that they are graded
(any two maximal chains have the same length), and the length of a maximal chain equals the number of meet-
irreducible elements of the lattice.[9] The antimatroid representing a nite join-distributive lattice can be recovered
from the lattice: the elements of the antimatroid can be taken to be the meet-irreducible elements of the lattice, and
the feasible set corresponding to any element x of the lattice consists of the set of meet-irreducible elements y such
that y is not greater than or equal to x in the lattice.
This representation of any nite join-distributive lattice as an accessible family of sets closed under unions (that is, as
an antimatroid) may be viewed as an analogue of Birkhos representation theorem under which any nite distributive
lattice has a representation as a family of sets closed under unions and intersections.
3.6 Supersolvable antimatroids

Motivated by a problem of dening partial orders on the elements of a Coxeter group, Armstrong (2007) studied an-
timatroids which are also supersolvable lattices. A supersolvable antimatroid is dened by a totally ordered collection
of elements, and a family of sets of these elements. The family must include the empty set. Additionally, it must
have the property that if two sets A and B belong to the family, the set-theoretic dierence B \ A is nonempty, and x
is the smallest element of B \ A, then A {x} also belongs to the family. As Armstrong observes, any family of sets
of this type forms an antimatroid. Armstrong also provides a lattice-theoretic characterization of the antimatroids
that this construction can form.
3.7 Join operation and convex dimension

If A and B are two antimatroids, both described as a family of sets, and if the maximal sets in A and B are equal, we
can form another antimatroid, the join of A and B, as follows:
A B = {S T | S A T B}.
This is a dierent operation than the join considered in the lattice-theoretic characterizations of antimatroids: it
combines two antimatroids to form another antimatroid, rather than combining two sets in an antimatroid to form
another set. The family of all antimatroids that have a given maximal set forms a semilattice with this join operation.
3.8. ENUMERATION 13
Joins are closely related to a closure operation that maps formal languages to antimatroids, where the closure of a
language L is the intersection of all antimatroids containing L as a sublanguage. This closure has as its feasible sets
the unions of prexes of strings in L. In terms of this closure operation, the join is the closure of the union of the
languages of A and B.
Every antimatroid can be represented as a join of a family of chain antimatroids, or equivalently as the closure of
a set of basic words; the convex dimension of an antimatroid A is the minimum number of chain antimatroids (or
equivalently the minimum number of basic words) in such a representation. If F is a family of chain antimatroids
whose basic words all belong to A, then F generates A if and only if the feasible sets of F include all paths of A. The
paths of A belonging to a single chain antimatroid must form a chain in the path poset of A, so the convex dimension
of an antimatroid equals the minimum number of chains needed to cover the path poset, which by Dilworths theorem
equals the width of the path poset.[10]
If one has a representation of an antimatroid as the closure of a set of d basic words, then this representation can
be used to map the feasible sets of the antimatroid into d-dimensional Euclidean space: assign one coordinate per
basic word w, and make the coordinate value of a feasible set S be the length of the longest prex of w that is a
subset of S. With this embedding, S is a subset of T if and only if the coordinates for S are all less than or equal to
the corresponding coordinates of T. Therefore, the order dimension of the inclusion ordering of the feasible sets is
at most equal to the convex dimension of the antimatroid.[11] However, in general these two dimensions may be very
dierent: there exist antimatroids with order dimension three but with arbitrarily large convex dimension.
3.8 Enumeration
The number of possible antimatroids on a set of elements grows rapidly with the number of elements in the set. For
sets of one, two, three, etc. elements, the number of distinct antimatroids is
1, 3, 22, 485, 59386, 133059751, ... (sequence A119770 in the OEIS).
3.9 Applications
Both the precedence and release time constraints in the standard notation for theoretic scheduling problems may
be modeled by antimatroids. Boyd & Faigle (1990) use antimatroids to generalize a greedy algorithm of Eugene
Lawler for optimally solving single-processor scheduling problems with precedence constraints in which the goal is
to minimize the maximum penalty incurred by the late scheduling of a task.
Glasserman & Yao (1994) use antimatroids to model the ordering of events in discrete event simulation systems.
Parmar (2003) uses antimatroids to model progress towards a goal in articial intelligence planning problems.
In Optimality Theory, grammars are logically equivalent to antimatroids (Merchant & Riggle (2016)).
In mathematical psychology, antimatroids have been used to describe feasible states of knowledge of a human learner.
Each element of the antimatroid represents a concept that is to be understood by the learner, or a class of problems that
he or she might be able to solve correctly, and the sets of elements that form the antimatroid represent possible sets of
concepts that could be understood by a single person. The axioms dening an antimatroid may be phrased informally
as stating that learning one concept can never prevent the learner from learning another concept, and that any feasible
state of knowledge can be reached by learning a single concept at a time. The task of a knowledge assessment system
is to infer the set of concepts known by a given learner by analyzing his or her responses to a small and well-chosen
set of problems. In this context antimatroids have also been called learning spaces and well-graded knowledge
spaces.[12]
3.10 Notes
[1] Two early references are Edelman (1980) and Jamison (1980); Jamison was the rst to use the term antimatroid.
Monjardet (1985) surveys the history of rediscovery of antimatroids.
[2] Korte et al., Theorem 1.4.

[3] Gordon (1997) describes several results related to antimatroids of this type, but these antimatroids were mentioned earlier
e.g. by Korte et al. Chandran et al. (2003) use the connection to antimatroids as part of an algorithm for eciently listing
all perfect elimination orderings of a given chordal graph.
[4] Kashiwabara, Nakamura & Okamoto (2005).
[5] Korte et al., Theorem 1.1.
[6] Farber & Jamison (1986).
[7] Adaricheva, Gorbunov & Tumanov (2003), Theorems 1.7 and 1.9; Armstrong (2007), Theorem 2.7.
[8] Edelman (1980), Theorem 3.3; Armstrong (2007), Theorem 2.8.
[9] Monjardet (1985) credits a dual form of this characterization to several papers from the 1960s by S. P. Avann.
[10] Edelman & Saks (1988); Korte et al., Theorem 6.9.
[11] Korte et al., Corollary 6.10.
[12] Doignon & Falmagne (1999).
3.11 References
Adaricheva, K. V.; Gorbunov, V. A.; Tumanov, V. I. (2003), Join-semidistributive lattices and convex ge-
ometries, Advances in Mathematics, 173 (1): 149, doi:10.1016/S0001-8708(02)00011-7.
Armstrong, Drew (2007), The sorting order on a Coxeter group, arXiv:0712.1047 .

Birkho, Garrett; Bennett, M. K. (1985), The convexity lattice of a poset, Order, 2 (3): 223242, doi:10.1007/BF00333128.
Bjrner, Anders; Ziegler, Gnter M. (1992), Introduction to greedoids, in White, Neil, Matroid Applications,
Encyclopedia of Mathematics and its Applications, 40, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, pp. 284357,
ISBN 0-521-38165-7, MR 1165537, doi:10.1017/CBO9780511662041.009
Boyd, E. Andrew; Faigle, Ulrich (1990), An algorithmic characterization of antimatroids, Discrete Applied
Mathematics, 28 (3): 197205, doi:10.1016/0166-218X(90)90002-T.
Chandran, L. S.; Ibarra, L.; Ruskey, F.; Sawada, J. (2003), Generating and characterizing the perfect elimina-
tion orderings of a chordal graph (PDF), Theoretical Computer Science, 307 (2): 303317, doi:10.1016/S0304-
3975(03)00221-4.
Dilworth, Robert P. (1940), Lattices with unique irreducible decompositions, Annals of Mathematics, 41 (4):
771777, JSTOR 1968857, doi:10.2307/1968857.
Doignon, Jean-Paul; Falmagne, Jean-Claude (1999), Knowledge Spaces, Springer-Verlag, ISBN 3-540-64501-
2.
Edelman, Paul H. (1980), Meet-distributive lattices and the anti-exchange closure, Algebra Universalis, 10
(1): 290299, doi:10.1007/BF02482912.
Edelman, Paul H.; Saks, Michael E. (1988), Combinatorial representation and convex dimension of convex
geometries, Order, 5 (1): 2332, doi:10.1007/BF00143895.
Farber, Martin; Jamison, Robert E. (1986), Convexity in graphs and hypergraphs, Society for Industrial and
Applied Mathematics, 7 (3): 433444, MR 844046, doi:10.1137/0607049.
Glasserman, Paul; Yao, David D. (1994), Monotone Structure in Discrete Event Systems, Wiley Series in Prob-
ability and Statistics, Wiley Interscience, ISBN 978-0-471-58041-6.
Gordon, Gary (1997), A invariant for greedoids and antimatroids, Electronic Journal of Combinatorics, 4
(1): Research Paper 13, MR 1445628.
Jamison, Robert (1980), Copoints in antimatroids, Proceedings of the Eleventh Southeastern Conference on
Combinatorics, Graph Theory and Computing (Florida Atlantic Univ., Boca Raton, Fla., 1980), Vol. II, Con-
gressus Numerantium, 29, pp. 535544, MR 608454.
3.11. REFERENCES 15
Kashiwabara, Kenji; Nakamura, Masataka; Okamoto, Yoshio (2005), The ane representation theorem for
abstract convex geometries, Computational Geometry, 30 (2): 129144, MR 2107032, doi:10.1016/j.comgeo.2004.05.001.
Korte, Bernhard; Lovsz, Lszl; Schrader, Rainer (1991), Greedoids, Springer-Verlag, pp. 1943, ISBN
3-540-18190-3.
Merchant, Nazarre; Riggle, Jason (2016), OT grammars, beyond partial orders: ERC sets and antimatroids,
Nat Lang Linguist Theory, 34: 241, doi:10.1007/s11049-015-9297-5.
Monjardet, Bernard (1985), A use for frequently rediscovering a concept, Order, 1 (4): 415417, doi:10.1007/BF00582748.
Parmar, Aarati (2003), Some Mathematical Structures Underlying Ecient Planning, AAAI Spring Sympo-
sium on Logical Formalization of Commonsense Reasoning (PDF).
Chapter 4
Block design
This article is about block designs with xed block size (uniform). For block designs with variable block sizes, see
Combinatorial design. For experimental designs in statistics, see randomized block design.
In combinatorial mathematics, a block design is a set together with a family of subsets (repeated subsets are allowed
at times) whose members are chosen to satisfy some set of properties that are deemed useful for a particular appli-
cation. These applications come from many areas, including experimental design, nite geometry, software testing,
cryptography, and algebraic geometry. Many variations have been examined, but the most intensely studied are the
balanced incomplete block designs (BIBDs or 2-designs) which historically were related to statistical issues in the
design of experiments.[1][2]
A block design in which all the blocks have the same size is called uniform. The designs discussed in this article are
all uniform. Pairwise balanced designs (PBDs) are examples of block designs that are not necessarily uniform.
4.1 Denition of a BIBD (or 2-design)

Given a nite set X (of elements called points) and integers k, r, 1, we dene a 2-design (or BIBD, standing for
balanced incomplete block design) B to be a family of k-element subsets of X, called blocks, such that any x in X is
contained in r blocks, and any pair of distinct points x and y in X is contained in blocks.
Family in the above denition can be replaced by set if repeated blocks are not allowed. Designs in which repeated
blocks are not allowed are called simple.
Here v (the number of elements of X, called points), b (the number of blocks), k, r, and are the parameters of the
design. (To avoid degenerate examples, it is also assumed that v > k, so that no block contains all the elements of the
set. This is the meaning of incomplete in the name of these designs.) In a table:
The design is called a (v, k, )-design or a (v, b, r, k, )-design. The parameters are not all independent; v, k, and
determine b and r, and not all combinations of v, k, and are possible. The two basic equations connecting these
parameters are
bk = vr,
obtained by counting the number of pairs (B, p) where B is a block and p is a point in that block, and
(v 1) = r(k 1),
obtained from the count of triples (p, q, B) where p and q are distinct points and B is a block that contains them both,
and dividing this count by v.
16
4.2. EXAMPLES 17
These conditions are not sucient as, for example, a (43,7,1)-design does not exist.[3]
The order of a 2-design is dened to be n = r . The complement of a 2-design is obtained by replacing each block
with its complement in the point set X. It is also a 2-design and has parameters v = v, b = b, r = b r, k = v k,
= + b 2r. A 2-design and its complement have the same order.
A fundamental theorem, Fishers inequality, named after the statistician Ronald Fisher, is that b v in any 2-design.
4.2 Examples
The unique (6,3,2)-design has 10 blocks (b = 10) and each element is repeated 5 times (r = 5).[4] Using the symbols
0 5, the blocks are the following triples:
012 013 024 035 045 125 134 145 234 235.
One of four nonisomorphic (8,4,3)-designs has 14 blocks with each element repeated 7 times. Using the symbols 0
7 the blocks are the following 4-tuples:[4]
0123 0124 0156 0257 0345 0367 0467 1267 1346 1357 1457 2347 2356 2456.
The unique (7,3,1)-design has 7 blocks with each element repeated 3 times. Using the symbols 0 6, the blocks are
the following triples:[4]
013 026 045 124 156 235 346. If the elements are thought as points on a Fano plane, then these blocks
are the lines.
4.3 Symmetric BIBDs

The case of equality in Fishers inequality, that is, a 2-design with an equal number of points and blocks, is called
a symmetric design.[5] Symmetric designs have the smallest number of blocks amongst all the 2-designs with the
same number of points.
In a symmetric design r = k holds as well as b = v, and, while it is generally not true in arbitrary 2-designs, in a
symmetric design every two distinct blocks meet in points.[6] A theorem of Ryser provides the converse. If X is
a v-element set, and B is a v-element set of k-element subsets (the blocks), such that any two distinct blocks have
exactly points in common, then (X, B) is a symmetric block design.[7]
The parameters of a symmetric design satisfy
(v 1) = k(k 1).
This imposes strong restrictions on v, so the number of points is far from arbitrary. The BruckRyserChowla
theorem gives necessary, but not sucient, conditions for the existence of a symmetric design in terms of these
parameters.
The following are important examples of symmetric 2-designs:
4.3.1 Projective planes

Main article: Projective plane
Finite projective planes are symmetric 2-designs with = 1 and order n > 1. For these designs the symmetric design
equation becomes:
18 CHAPTER 4. BLOCK DESIGN
v 1 = k(k 1).
Since k = r we can write the order of a projective plane as n = k 1 and, from the displayed equation above, we obtain
v = (n + 1)n + 1 = n2 + n + 1 points in a projective plane of order n.
As a projective plane is a symmetric design, we have b = v, meaning that b = n2 + n + 1 also. The number b is the
number of lines of the projective plane. There can be no repeated lines since = 1, so a projective plane is a simple
2-design in which the number of lines and the number of points are always the same. For a projective plane, k is the
number of points on each line and it is equal to n + 1. Similarly, r = n + 1 is the number of lines with which a given
point is incident.
For n = 2 we get a projective plane of order 2, also called the Fano plane, with v = 4 + 2 + 1 = 7 points and 7 lines.
In the Fano plane, each line has n + 1 = 3 points and each point belongs to n + 1 = 3 lines.
Projective planes are known to exist for all orders which are prime numbers or powers of primes. They form the only
known innite family (with respect to having a constant value) of symmetric block designs.[8]
4.3.2 Biplanes
A biplane or biplane geometry is a symmetric 2-design with = 2; that is, every set of two points is contained in
two blocks (lines), while any two lines intersect in two points.[8] They are similar to nite projective planes, except
that rather than two points determining one line (and two lines determining one point), two points determine two
lines (respectively, points). A biplane of order n is one whose blocks have k = n + 2 points; it has v = 1 + (n + 2)(n +
1)/2 points (since r = k).
The 18 known examples[9] are listed below.
(Trivial) The order 0 biplane has 2 points (and lines of size 2; a 2-(2,2,2) design); it is two points, with two
blocks, each consisting of both points. Geometrically, it is the digon.
The order 1 biplane has 4 points (and lines of size 3; a 2-(4,3,2) design); it is the complete design with v = 4
and k = 3. Geometrically, the points are the vertices and the blocks are the faces of a tetrahedron.
The order 2 biplane is the complement of the Fano plane: it has 7 points (and lines of size 4; a 2-(7,4,2)),
where the lines are given as the complements of the (3-point) lines in the Fano plane.[10]
The order 3 biplane has 11 points (and lines of size 5; a 2-(11,5,2)), and is also known as the Paley biplane
after Raymond Paley; it is associated to the Paley digraph of order 11, which is constructed using the eld with
11 elements, and is the Hadamard 2-design associated to the size 12 Hadamard matrix; see Paley construction
I.
Algebraically this corresponds to the exceptional embedding of the projective special linear group PSL(2,5)
in PSL(2,11) see projective linear group: action on p points for details.[11]
There are three biplanes of order 4 (and 16 points, lines of size 6; a 2-(16,6,2)). These three designs are also
Menon designs.
There are four biplanes of order 7 (and 37 points, lines of size 9; a 2-(37,9,2)).[12]
There are ve biplanes of order 9 (and 56 points, lines of size 11; a 2-(56,11,2)).[13]
Two biplanes are known of order 11 (and 79 points, lines of size 13; a 2-(79,13,2)).[14]
4.3.3 Hadamard 2-designs

An Hadamard matrix of size m is an m m matrix H whose entries are 1 such that HH = mI , where H is the
transpose of H and Im is the m m identity matrix. An Hadamard matrix can be put into standardized form (that is,
converted to an equivalent Hadamard matrix) where the rst row and rst column entries are all +1. If the size m >
2 then m must be a multiple of 4.
4.4. RESOLVABLE 2-DESIGNS 19
Given an Hadamard matrix of size 4a in standardized form, remove the rst row and rst column and convert every
1 to a 0. The resulting 01 matrix M is the incidence matrix of a symmetric 2-(4a 1, 2a 1, a 1) design called
an Hadamard 2-design.[15] It contains 4a 1 blocks/points; each contains/is contained in 2a 1 points/blocks.
Each pair of points is contained in exactly a 1 blocks.
This construction is reversible, and the incidence matrix of a symmetric 2-design with these parameters can be used
to form an Hadamard matrix of size 4a.
4.4 Resolvable 2-designs

A resolvable 2-design is a BIBD whose blocks can be partitioned into sets (called parallel classes), each of which
forms a partition of the point set of the BIBD. The set of parallel classes is called a resolution of the design.
If a 2-(v,k,) resolvable design has c parallel classes, then b v + c 1.[16]
Consequently, a symmetric design can not have a non-trivial (more than one parallel class) resolution.[17]
Archetypical resolvable 2-designs are the nite ane planes. A solution of the famous 15 schoolgirl problem is a
resolution of a 2-(15,3,1) design.[18]
4.5 Generalization: t-designs

Given any positive integer t, a t-design B is a class of k-element subsets of X, called blocks, such that every point x in
X appears in exactly r blocks, and every t-element subset T appears in exactly blocks. The numbers v (the number
of elements of X), b (the number of blocks), k, r, , and t are the parameters of the design. The design may be called
a t-(v,k,)-design. Again, these four numbers determine b and r and the four numbers themselves cannot be chosen
arbitrarily. The equations are
( )/ ( )
vi ki
i = for i = 0, 1, . . . , t,
ti ti
where i is the number of blocks that contain any i-element set of points.
( ) ( )
Note that b = 0 = vt / kt .
Theorem:[19] Any t-(v,k,)-design is also an s-(v,k, )-design for any s with 1 s t. (Note that the lambda value
changes as above and depends on s.)
A consequence of this theorem is that every t-design with t 2 is also a 2-design.
A t-(v,k,1)-design is called a Steiner system.
The term block design by itself usually means a 2-design.
4.5.1 Derived and extendable t-designs

Let D = (X, B) be a t-(v,k,) design and p a point of X. The derived design Dp has point set X {p} and as block set
all the blocks of D which contain p with p removed. It is a (t 1)-(v 1, k 1, ) design. Note that derived designs
with respect to dierent points may not be isomorphic. A design E is called an extension of D if E has a point p such
that E is isomorphic to D; we call D extendable if it has an extension.
Theorem:[20] If a t-(v,k,) design has an extension, then k + 1 divides b(v + 1).
The only extendable projective planes (symmetric 2-(n2 + n + 1, n + 1, 1) designs) are those of orders 2 and 4.[21]
Every Hadamard 2-design is extendable (to an Hadamard 3-design).[22]
Theorem:.[23] If D, a symmetric 2-(v,k,) design, is extendable, then one of the following holds:
1. D is an Hadamard 2-design,
2. v = ( + 2)(2 + 4 + 2), k = 2 + 3 + 1,
3. v = 495, k = 39, = 3.
Note that the projective plane of order two is an Hadamard 2-design; the projective plane of order four has parameters
which fall in case 2; the only other known symmetric 2-designs with parameters in case 2 are the order 9 biplanes,
but none of them are extendable; and there is no known symmetric 2-design with the parameters of case 3.[24]
Inversive planes
A design with the parameters of the extension of an ane plane, i.e., a 3-(n2 + 1, n + 1, 1) design, is called a nite
inversive plane, or Mbius plane, of order n.
It is possible to give a geometric description of some inversive planes, indeed, of all known inversive planes. An
ovoid in PG(3,q) is a set of q2 + 1 points, no three collinear. It can be shown that every plane (which is a hyperplane
since the geometric dimension is 3) of PG(3,q) meets an ovoid O in either 1 or q + 1 points. The plane sections of
size q + 1 of O are the blocks of an inversive plane of order q. Any inversive plane arising this way is called egglike.
All known inversive planes are egglike.
An example of an ovoid is the elliptic quadric, the set of zeros of the quadratic form
x1 x2 + f(x3 , x4 ),
where f is an irreducible quadratic form in two variables over GF(q). [f(x,y) = x2 + xy + y2 for example].
If q is an odd power of 2, another type of ovoid is known the SuzukiTits ovoid.
Theorem. Let q be a positive integer, at least 2. (a) If q is odd, then any ovoid is projectively equivalent to the elliptic
quadric in a projective geometry PG(3,q); so q is a prime power and there is a unique egglike inversive plane of order
q. (But it is unknown if non-egglike ones exist.) (b) if q is even, then q is a power of 2 and any inversive plane of
order q is egglike (but there may be some unknown ovoids).
4.6 Partially balanced designs (PBIBDs)

An n-class association scheme consists of a set X of size v together with a partition S of X X into n + 1 binary
relations, R0 , R1 , ..., R . A pair of elements in relation R are said to be ithassociates. Each element of X has n ith
associates. Furthermore:
R0 = {(x, x) : x X} and is called the Identity relation.
Dening R := {(x, y)|(y, x) R} , if R in S, then R* in S
If (x, y) Rk , the number of z X such that (x, z) Ri and (z, y) Rj is a constant pkij depending on i,
j, k but not on the particular choice of x and y.
An association scheme is commutative if pkij = pkji for all i, j and k. Most authors assume this property.
A partially balanced incomplete block design with n associate classes (PBIBD(n)) is a block design based on a
v-set X with b blocks each of size k and with each element appearing in r blocks, such that there is an association
scheme with n classes dened on X where, if elements x and y are ith associates, 1 i n, then they are together in
precisely blocks.
A PBIBD(n) determines an association scheme but the converse is false.[25]
4.6.1 Example
Let A(3) be the following association scheme with three associate classes on the set X = {1,2,3,4,5,6}. The (i,j) entry
is s if elements i and j are in relation R .
4.7. APPLICATIONS 21
The blocks of a PBIBD(3) based on A(3) are:
The parameters of this PBIBD(3) are: v = 6, b = 8, k = 3, r = 4 and 1 = 2 = 2 and 3 = 1. Also, for the association
scheme we have n0 = n2 = 1 and n1 = n3 = 2.[26]
4.6.2 Properties
The parameters of a PBIBD(m) satisfy:[27]
1. vr = bk
m
2. i=1 ni = v 1
m
3. i=1 ni i = r(k 1)
m
4. u=0 phju = nj
5. ni pijh = nj pjih
A PBIBD(1) is a BIBD and a PBIBD(2) in which 1 = 2 is a BIBD.[28]
4.6.3 Two associate class PBIBDs
PBIBD(2)s have been studied the most since they are the simplest and most useful of the PBIBDs.[29] They fall into
six types[30] based on a classication of the then known PBIBD(2)s by Bose & Shimamoto (1952):[31]
1. group divisible;
2. triangular;
3. Latin square type;
4. cyclic;
5. partial geometry type;
6. miscellaneous.
4.7 Applications
The mathematical subject of block designs originated in the statistical framework of design of experiments. These
designs were especially useful in applications of the technique of analysis of variance (ANOVA). This remains a
signicant area for the use of block designs.
While the origins of the subject are grounded in biological applications (as is some of the existing terminology), the
designs are used in many applications where systematic comparisons are being made, such as in software testing.
The incidence matrix of block designs provide a natural source of interesting block codes that are used as error
correcting codes. The rows of their incidence matrices are also used as the symbols in a form of pulse-position
modulation.[32]
4.7.1 Statistical application

Suppose that skin cancer researchers want to test three dierent sunscreens. They coat two dierent sunscreens on
the upper sides of the hands of a test person. After a UV radiation they record the skin irritation in terms of sunburn.
The number of treatments is 3 (sunscreens) and the block size is 2 (hands per person).
A corresponding BIBD can be generated by the R-function design.bib of the R-package agricolae and is specied in
the following table:
The investigator chooses the parameters v = 3, k = 2 and = 1 for the block design which are then inserted into the
R-function. Subsequently, the remaining parameters b and r are determined automatically.
Using the basic relations we calculate that we need b = 3 blocks, that is, 3 test people in order to obtain a balanced
incomplete block design. Labeling the blocks A, B and C, to avoid confusion, we have the block design,
A = {2, 3}, B = {1, 3} and C = {1, 2}.
A corresponding incidence matrix is specied in the following table:

Each treatment occurs in 2 blocks, so r = 2.
Just one block (C) contains the treatments 1 and 2 simultaneously and the same applies to the pairs of treatments
(1,3) and (2,3). Therefore, = 1.
It is impossible to use a complete design (all treatments in each block) in this example because there are 3 sunscreens
to test, but only 2 hands on each person.
4.8 See also

Incidence geometry
Steiner system
4.9 Notes
[1] Colbourn & Dinitz 2007, pp.1719
[2] Stinson 2003, p.1
[3] Proved by Tarry in 1900 who showed that there was no pair of orthogonal Latin squares of order six. The 2-design with
the indicated parameters is equivalent to the existence of ve mutually orthogonal Latin squares of order six.
[4] Colburn & Dinitz, p. 27
[5] They have also been referred to as projective designs or square designs. These alternatives have been used in an attempt to
replace the term symmetric, since there is nothing symmetric (in the usual meaning of the term) about these designs. The
use of projective is due to P.Dembowski (Finite Geometries, Springer, 1968), in analogy with the most common example,
projective planes, while square is due to P. Cameron (Designs, Graphs, Codes and their Links, Cambridge, 1991) and
captures the implication of v = b on the incidence matrix. Neither term has caught on as a replacement and these designs
are still universally referred to as symmetric.
[6] Stinson 2003, pg.23, Theorem 2.2
[7] Ryser 1963, pp. 102104
[8] Hughes & Piper 1985, pg.109
[9] Hall 1986, pp.320-335
[10] Assmus & Key 1992, pg.55
[11] Martin, Pablo; Singerman, David (April 17, 2008), From Biplanes to the Klein quartic and the Buckyball (PDF), p. 4
[12] Salwach & Mezzaroba 1978

4.10. REFERENCES 23
[13] Kaski & stergrd 2008
[14] Aschbacher 1971, pp. 279281
[15] Stinson 2003, pg. 74, Theorem 4.5
[16] Hughes & Piper 1985, pg. 156, Theorem 5.4
[17] Hughes & Piper 1985, pg. 158, Corollary 5.5
[18] Beth, Jungnickel & Lenz 1986, pg. 40 Example 5.8
[19] Stinson 2003, pg.203, Corollary 9.6
[20] Hughes & Piper 1985, pg.29
[21] Cameron & van Lint 1991, pg. 11, Proposition 1.34
[22] Hughes & Piper 1985, pg. 132, Theorem 4.5
[23] Cameron & van Lint 1991, pg. 11, Theorem 1.35
[24] Colbourn & Dinitz 2007, pg. 114, Remarks 6.35
[25] Street & Street 1987, pg. 237
[27] Street & Street 1987, pg. 240, Lemma 4
[28] Colburn & Dinitz 2007, pg. 562, Remark 42.3 (4)
[30] Not a mathematical classication since one of the types is a catch-all and everything else.
[31] Raghavarao 1988, pg. 127
[32] Noshad, Mohammad; Brandt-Pearce, Maite (Jul 2012). Expurgated PPM Using Symmetric Balanced Incomplete Block
Designs. IEEE Communications Letters. 16 (7): 968971. doi:10.1109/LCOMM.2012.042512.120457.
4.10 References
Aschbacher, Michael (1971). On collineation groups of symmetric block designs. Journal of Combinatorial
Theory, Series A. 11 (3): 272281. doi:10.1016/0097-3165(71)90054-9.
Assmus, E.F.; Key, J.D. (1992), Designs and Their Codes, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, ISBN
0-521-41361-3
Beth, Thomas; Jungnickel, Dieter; Lenz, Hanfried (1986), Design Theory, Cambridge: Cambridge University
Press. 2nd ed. (1999) ISBN 978-0-521-44432-3.
R. C. Bose, A Note on Fishers Inequality for Balanced Incomplete Block Designs, Annals of Mathematical
Statistics, 1949, pages 619620.
Bose, R. C.; Shimamoto, T. (1952), Classication and analysis of partially balanced incomplete block designs
with two associate classes, Journal of the American Statistical Association, 47: 151184, doi:10.1080/01621459.1952.10501161
Cameron, P. J.; van Lint, J. H. (1991), Designs, Graphs, Codes and their Links, Cambridge: Cambridge Uni-
versity Press, ISBN 0-521-42385-6
Colbourn, Charles J.; Dinitz, Jerey H. (2007), Handbook of Combinatorial Designs (2nd ed.), Boca Raton:
Chapman & Hall/ CRC, ISBN 1-58488-506-8
R. A. Fisher, An examination of the dierent possible solutions of a problem in incomplete blocks, Annals
of Eugenics, volume 10, 1940, pages 5275.
Hall, Jr., Marshall (1986), Combinatorial Theory (2nd ed.), New York: Wiley-Interscience, ISBN 0-471-
09138-3
Hughes, D.R.; Piper, E.C. (1985), Design theory, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, ISBN 0-521-
25754-9
Kaski, Petteri & stergrd, Patric (2008). There Are Exactly Five Biplanes with k = 11. Journal of Combi-
natorial Designs. 16 (2): 117127. MR 2384014. doi:10.1002/jcd.20145.
Lander, E. S. (1983), Symmetric Designs: An Algebraic Approach, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press
Lindner, C.C.; Rodger, C.A. (1997), Design Theory, Boca Raton: CRC Press, ISBN 0-8493-3986-3
Raghavarao, Damaraju (1988). Constructions and Combinatorial Problems in Design of Experiments (corrected
reprint of the 1971 Wiley ed.). New York: Dover.
Raghavarao, Damaraju & Padgett, L.V. (2005). Block Designs: Analysis, Combinatorics and Applications.
World Scientic.
Ryser, Herbert John (1963), Chapter 8: Combinatorial Designs, Combinatorial Mathematics (Carus Mono-
graph #14), Mathematical Association of America
Salwach, Chester J.; Mezzaroba, Joseph A. (1978). The four biplanes with k = 9. Journal of Combinatorial
Theory, Series A. 24 (2): 141145. doi:10.1016/0097-3165(78)90002-X.
S. S. Shrikhande, and Vasanti N. Bhat-Nayak, Non-isomorphic solutions of some balanced incomplete block
designs I Journal of Combinatorial Theory, 1970
Stinson, Douglas R. (2003), Combinatorial Designs: Constructions and Analysis, New York: Springer, ISBN
0-387-95487-2
Street, Anne Penfold & Street, Deborah J. (1987). Combinatorics of Experimental Design. Oxford U. P.
[Clarendon]. pp. 400+xiv. ISBN 0-19-853256-3.
van Lint, J.H.; Wilson, R.M. (1992). A Course in Combinatorics. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
4.11 External links

DesignTheory.Org: Databases of combinatorial, statistical, and experimental block designs. Software and
other resources hosted by the School of Mathematical Sciences at Queen Mary College, University of London.
Design Theory Resources: Peter Cameron's page of web based design theory resources.
Weisstein, Eric W. Block Designs. MathWorld.

Chapter 5
Clique complex
Whitney complex redirects here. For the Mississippi sports facility, see Davey Whitney Complex.
Clique complexes, ag complexes, and conformal hypergraphs are closely related mathematical objects in graph
The clique complex of a graph. Cliques of size one are shown as small red disks; cliques of size two are shown as black line segments;
cliques of size three are shown as light blue triangles; and cliques of size four are shown as dark blue tetrahedra.
theory and geometric topology that each describe the cliques (complete subgraphs) of an undirected graph.
The clique complex X(G) of an undirected graph G is an abstract simplicial complex (that is, a family of nite sets
closed under the operation of taking subsets), formed by the sets of vertices in the cliques of G. Any subset of a clique
is itself a clique, so this family of sets meets the requirement of an abstract simplicial complex that every subset of a
set in the family should also be in the family. The clique complex can also be viewed as a topological space in which
each clique of k vertices is represented by a simplex of dimension k 1. The 1-skeleton of X(G) (also known as the
25
26 CHAPTER 5. CLIQUE COMPLEX
underlying graph of the complex) is an undirected graph with a vertex for every 1-element set in the family and an
edge for every 2-element set in the family; it is isomorphic to G.[1]
Clique complexes are also known as Whitney complexes. A Whitney triangulation or clean triangulation of a two-
dimensional manifold is an embedding of a graph G onto the manifold in such a way that every face is a triangle and
every triangle is a face. If a graph G has a Whitney triangulation, it must form a cell complex that is isomorphic to the
Whitney complex of G. In this case, the complex (viewed as a topological space) is homeomorphic to the underlying
manifold. A graph G has a 2-manifold clique complex, and can be embedded as a Whitney triangulation, if and only
if G is locally cyclic; this means that, for every vertex v in the graph, the induced subgraph formed by the neighbors
of v forms a single cycle.[2]
5.1 Independence complex

The independence complex I(G) of a graph G is formed in the same way as the clique complex from the independent
sets of G. It is the clique complex of the complement graph of G.
5.2 Flag complex

In an abstract simplicial complex, a set S of vertices that is not itself part of the complex, but such that each pair
of vertices in S belongs to some simplex in the complex, is called an empty simplex. Mikhail Gromov dened the
no- condition to be the condition that a complex have no empty simplices. A ag complex is an abstract simplicial
complex that has no empty simplices; that is, it is a complex satisfying Gromovs no- condition. Any ag complex
is the clique complex of its 1-skeleton. Thus, ag complexes and clique complexes are essentially the same thing.
However, in many cases it may be convenient to dene a ag complex directly from some data other than a graph,
rather than indirectly as the clique complex of a graph derived from that data.[3]
5.3 Conformal hypergraph

The primal graph G(H) of a hypergraph is the graph on the same vertex set that has as its edges the pairs of vertices
appearing together in the same hyperedge. A hypergraph is said to be conformal if every maximal clique of its primal
graph is a hyperedge, or equivalently, if every clique of its primal graph is contained in some hyperedge.[4] If the
hypergraph is required to be downward-closed (so it contains all hyperedges that are contained in some hyperedge)
then the hypergraph is conformal precisely when it is a ag complex. This relates the language of hypergraphs to the
language of simplicial complexes.
5.4 Examples and applications

The barycentric subdivision of any cell complex C is a ag complex having one vertex per cell of C. A collection of
vertices of the barycentric subdivision form a simplex if and only if the corresponding collection of cells of C form
a ag (a chain in the inclusion ordering of the cells).[3] In particular, the barycentric subdivision of a cell complex on
a 2-manifold gives rise to a Whitney triangulation of the manifold.
The order complex of a partially ordered set consists of the chains (totally ordered subsets) of the partial order. If
every pair of some subset is itself ordered, then the whole subset is a chain, so the order complex satises the no-
condition. It may be interpreted as the clique complex of the comparability graph of the partial order.[3]
The matching complex of a graph consists of the sets of edges no two of which share an endpoint; again, this family
of sets satises the no- condition. It may be viewed as the clique complex of the complement graph of the line graph
of the given graph. When the matching complex is referred to without any particular graph as context, it means the
matching complex of a complete graph. The matching complex of a complete bipartite graph Km,n is known as a
chessboard complex. It is the clique graph of the complement graph of a rooks graph,[5] and each of its simplices
represents a placement of rooks on an m n chess board such that no two of the rooks attack each other. When m =
n 1, the chessboard complex forms a pseudo-manifold.
5.5. SEE ALSO 27
The VietorisRips complex of a set of points in a metric space is a special case of a clique complex, formed from the
unit disk graph of the points; however, every clique complex X(G) may be interpreted as the VietorisRips complex
of the shortest path metric on the underlying graph G.
Hodkinson & Otto (2003) describe an application of conformal hypergraphs in the logics of relational structures.
In that context, the Gaifman graph of a relational structure is the same as the underlying graph of the hypergraph
representing the structure, and a structure is guarded if it corresponds to a conformal hypergraph.
Gromov showed that a cubical complex (that is, a family of hypercubes intersecting face-to-face) forms a CAT(0)
space if and only if the complex is simply connected and the link of every vertex forms a ag complex. A cubical
complex meeting these conditions is sometimes called a cubing or a space with walls.[1][6]
5.5 See also

Simplex graph, a graph having one node for every clique of the underlying graph
Partition matroid, a class of matroids whose intersections form clique complexes
5.6 Notes
[1] Bandelt & Chepoi (2008).
[2] Hartsfeld & Ringel (1991); Larrin, Neumann-Lara & Pizaa (2002); Malni & Mohar (1992).
[3] Davis (2002).
[4] Berge (1989); Hodkinson & Otto (2003).
[5] Dong & Wachs (2002).
[6] Chatterji & Niblo (2005).
5.7 References
Bandelt, H.-J.; Chepoi, V. (2008), Metric graph theory and geometry: a survey, in Goodman, J. E.; Pach,
J.; Pollack, R., Surveys on Discrete and Computational Geometry: Twenty Years Later (PDF), Contemporary
Mathematics, 453, Providence, RI: AMS, pp. 4986.
Berge, C. (1989), Hypergraphs: Combinatorics of Finite Sets, North-Holland, ISBN 0-444-87489-5.

Chatterji, I.; Niblo, G. (2005), From wall spaces to CAT(0) cube complexes, International Journal of Algebra
and Computation, 15 (56): 875885, arXiv:math.GT/0309036 , doi:10.1142/S0218196705002669.
Davis, M. W. (2002), Nonpositive curvature and reection groups, in Daverman, R. J.; Sher, R. B., Handbook
of Geometric Topology, Elsevier, pp. 373422.
Dong, X.; Wachs, M. L. (2002), Combinatorial Laplacian of the matching complex, Electronic Journal of
Combinatorics, 9: R17.
Hartsfeld, N.; Ringel, Gerhard (1991), Clean triangulations, Combinatorica, 11 (2): 145155, doi:10.1007/BF01206358.
Hodkinson, I.; Otto, M. (2003), Finite conformal hypergraph covers and Gaifman cliques in nite structures,
The Bulletin of Symbolic Logic, 9 (3): 387405, doi:10.2178/bsl/1058448678.
Larrin, F.; Neumann-Lara, V.; Pizaa, M. A. (2002), Whitney triangulations, local girth and iterated clique
graphs, Discrete Mathematics, 258: 123135, doi:10.1016/S0012-365X(02)00266-2.
Malni, A.; Mohar, B. (1992), Generating locally cyclic triangulations of surfaces, Journal of Combinatorial
Theory, Series B, 56 (2): 147164, doi:10.1016/0095-8956(92)90015-P.
Chapter 6
Combinatorial design
Combinatorial design theory is the part of combinatorial mathematics that deals with the existence, construction
and properties of systems of nite sets whose arrangements satisfy generalized concepts of balance and/or symmetry.
These concepts are not made precise so that a wide range of objects can be thought of as being under the same
umbrella. At times this might involve the numerical sizes of set intersections as in block designs, while at other times
it could involve the spatial arrangement of entries in an array as in sudoku grids.
Combinatorial design theory can be applied to the area of design of experiments. Some of the basic theory of
combinatorial designs originated in the statistician Ronald Fisher's work on the design of biological experiments.
Modern applications are also found in a wide gamut of areas including; Finite geometry, tournament scheduling,
lotteries, mathematical biology, algorithm design and analysis, networking, group testing and cryptography.[1]
6.1 Example
Given a certain number n of people, is it possible to assign them to sets so that each person is in at least one set, each
pair of people is in exactly one set together, every two sets have exactly one person in common, and no set contains
everyone, all but one person, or exactly one person? The answer depends on n.
This has a solution only if n has the form q2 + q + 1. It is less simple to prove that a solution exists if q is a prime
power. It is conjectured that these are the only solutions. It has been further shown that if a solution exists for q
congruent to 1 or 2 mod 4, then q is a sum of two square numbers. This last result, the BruckRyser theorem, is
proved by a combination of constructive methods based on nite elds and an application of quadratic forms.
When such a structure does exist, it is called a nite projective plane; thus showing how nite geometry and combi-
natorics intersect. When q = 2, the projective plane is called the Fano plane.
6.2 History
Combinatorial designs date to antiquity, with the Lo Shu Square being an early magic square. They developed along
with the general growth of combinatorics from the 18th century, for example with Latin squares in the 18th cen-
tury and Steiner systems in the 19th century. Designs have also been popular in recreational mathematics, such as
Kirkmans schoolgirl problem (1850), and in practical problems, such as the scheduling of round-robin tournaments
(solution published 1880s). In the 20th century designs were applied to the design of experiments, notably Latin
squares, nite geometry, and association schemes, yielding the eld of algebraic statistics.
6.3 Fundamental combinatorial designs

The classical core of the subject of combinatorial designs is built around balanced incomplete block designs (BIBDs),
Hadamard matrices and Hadamard designs, symmetric BIBDs, Latin squares, resolvable BIBDs, dierence sets, and
pairwise balanced designs (PBDs).[2] Other combinatorial designs are related to or have been developed from the
28
6.3. FUNDAMENTAL COMBINATORIAL DESIGNS 29
The Fano plane
study of these fundamental ones.
A balanced incomplete block design or BIBD (usually called for short a block design) is a collection B of
b subsets (called blocks) of a nite set X of v elements, such that any element of X is contained in the same
number r of blocks, every block has the same number k of elements, and each pair of distinct elements appear
together in the same number of blocks. BIBDs are also known as 2-designs and are often denoted as 2-(v,k,)
designs. As an example, when = 1 and b = v, we have a projective plane: X is the point set of the plane and
the blocks are the lines.
A symmetric balanced incomplete block design or SBIBD is a BIBD in which v = b (the number of points
equals the number of blocks). They are the single most important and well studied subclass of BIBDs. Pro-
jective planes, biplanes and Hadamard 2-designs are all SBIBDs. They are of particular interest since they are
the extremal examples of Fishers inequality (b v).
A resolvable BIBD is a BIBD whose blocks can be partitioned into sets (called parallel classes), each of which
forms a partition of the point set of the BIBD. The set of parallel classes is called a resolution of the design. A
solution of the famous 15 schoolgirl problem is a resolution of a BIBD with v = 15, k = 3 and = 1.[3]
A Latin rectangle is an r n matrix that has the numbers 1, 2, 3, ..., n as its entries (or any other set of n
distinct symbols) with no number occurring more than once in any row or column where r n. An n n Latin
30 CHAPTER 6. COMBINATORIAL DESIGN
rectangle is called a Latin square. If r < n, then it is possible to append n r rows to an r n Latin rectangle
to form a Latin square, using Halls marriage theorem.[4]
Two Latin squares of order n are said to be orthogonal if the set of all ordered pairs consisting of the
corresponding entries in the two squares has n2 distinct members (all possible ordered pairs occur). A
set of Latin squares of the same order forms a set of mutually orthogonal Latin squares (MOLS)
if every pair of Latin squares in the set are orthogonal. There can be at most n 1 squares in a set of
MOLS of order n. A set of n 1 MOLS of order n can be used to construct a projective plane of order
n (and conversely).
A (v, k, ) dierence set is a subset D of a group G such that the order of G is v, the size of D is k, and every
nonidentity element of G can be expressed as a product d1 d2 1 of elements of D in exactly ways (when G is
written with a multiplicative operation).[5]
If D is a dierence set, and g in G, then g D = {gd: d in D} is also a dierence set, and is called a
translate of D. The set of all translates of a dierence set D forms a symmetric block design. In such
a design there are v elements and v blocks. Each block of the design consists of k points, each point is
contained in k blocks. Any two blocks have exactly elements in common and any two points appear
together in blocks. This SBIBD is called the development of D.[6]
In particular, if = 1, then the dierence set gives rise to a projective plane. An example of a (7,3,1)
dierence set in the group Z/7Z (an abelian group written additively) is the subset {1,2,4}. The devel-
opment of this dierence set gives the Fano plane.
Since every dierence set gives an SBIBD, the parameter set must satisfy the BruckRyserChowla
theorem, but not every SBIBD gives a dierence set.
An Hadamard matrix of order m is an m m matrix H whose entries are 1 such that HH = mI , where H
is the transpose of H and I is the m m identity matrix. An Hadamard matrix can be put into standardized
form (that is, converted to an equivalent Hadamard matrix) where the rst row and rst column entries are all
+1. If the order m > 2 then m must be a multiple of 4.
Given an Hadamard matrix of order 4a in standardized form, remove the rst row and rst column and
convert every 1 to a 0. The resulting 01 matrix M is the incidence matrix of a symmetric 2 (4a 1,
2a 1, a 1) design called an Hadamard 2-design.[7] This construction is reversible, and the incidence
matrix of a symmetric 2-design with these parameters can be used to form an Hadamard matrix of order
4a. When a = 2 we obtain the, by now familiar, Fano plane as an Hadamard 2-design.
A pairwise balanced design (or PBD) is a set X together with a family of subsets of X (which need not have
the same size and may contain repeats) such that every pair of distinct elements of X is contained in exactly
(a positive integer) subsets. The set X is allowed to be one of the subsets, and if all the subsets are copies of X,
the PBD is called trivial. The size of X is v and the number of subsets in the family (counted with multiplicity)
is b.
Fishers inequality holds for PBDs:[8] For any non-trivial PBD, v b.
This result also generalizes the famous ErdsDe Bruijn theorem: For a PBD with = 1 having no blocks
of size 1 or size v, v b, with equality if and only if the PBD is a projective plane or a near-pencil.[9]
6.4 Other combinatorial designs

The Handbook of Combinatorial Designs (Colbourn & Dinitz 2007) has, amongst others, 65 chapters, each devoted
to a combinatorial design other than those given above. A partial listing is given below:
Association schemes
6.4. OTHER COMBINATORIAL DESIGNS 31
A balanced ternary design BTD(V, B; 1 , 2 , R; K, ) is an arrangement of V elements into B multisets

(blocks), each of cardinality K (K V), satisfying:
1. Each element appears R = 1 + 22 times altogether, with multiplicity one in exactly 1 blocks and multiplicity
two in exactly 2 blocks.
2. Every pair of distinct elements appears times (counted with multiplicity); that is, if mvb is the multiplicity
B
of the element v in block b, then for every pair of distinct elements v and w, b=1 mvb mwb = .
For example, one of the only two nonisomorphic BTD(4,8;2,3,8;4,6)s (blocks are columns) is:[10]
The incidence matrix of a BTD (where the entries are the multiplicities of the elements in the blocks)
can be used to form a ternary error-correcting code analogous to the way binary codes are formed from
the incidence matrices of BIBDs.[11]
A balanced tournament design of order n (a BTD(n)) is an arrangement of all the distinct unordered pairs
of a 2n-set V into an n (2n 1) array such that
1. every element of V appears precisely once in each column, and

2. every element of V appears at most twice in each row.
An example of a BTD(3) is given by
The columns of a BTD(n) provide a 1-factorization of the complete graph on 2n vertices, K .[12]
BTD(n)s can be used to schedule round-robin tournaments: the rows represent the locations, the columns
the rounds of play and the entries are the competing players or teams.
Bent functions
Costas arrays
Factorial designs
A frequency square (F-square) is a higher order generalization of a Latin square. Let S = {s1 ,s2 , ..., s } be a
set of distinct symbols and (1 , 2 , ..., ) a frequency vector of positive integers. A frequency square of order
n is an n n array in which each symbol s occurs i times, i = 1,2,...,m, in each row and column. The order
n = 1 + 2 + ... + m. An F-square is in standard form if in the rst row and column, all occurrences of si
precede those of sj whenever i < j.
A frequency square F 1 of order n based on the set {s1 ,s2 , ..., sm} with frequency vector (1 , 2 , ...,m)
and a frequency square F 2 , also of order n, based on the set {t 1 ,t 2 , ..., tk} with frequency vector (1 ,
2 , ...,k) are orthogonal if every ordered pair (si, tj) appears precisely ij times when F 1 and F 2 are
superimposed.
Hall triple systems (HTSs) are Steiner triple systems (STSs) (but the blocks are called lines) with the property
that the substructure generated by two intersecting lines is isomorphic to the nite ane plane AG(2,3).
Any ane space AG(n,3) gives an example of an HTS. Such an HTS is an ane HTS. Nonane HTSs
also exist.
The number of points of an HTS is 3m for some integer m 2. Nonane HTSs exist for any m 4 and
do not exist for m = 2 or 3.[13]
Every Steiner triple system is equivalent to a Steiner quasigroup (idempotent, commutative and satisfying
(xy)y = x for all x and y). A Hall triple system is equivalent to a Steiner quasigroup which is distributive,
that is, satises a(xy) = (ax)(ay) for all a,x,y in the quasigroup.[14]
Let S be a set of 2n elements. A Howell design, H(s,2n) (on symbol set S) is an s s array such that:
1. Each cell of the array is either empty or contains an unordered pair from S,
2. Each symbol occurs exactly once in each row and column of the array, and
3. Every unordered pair of symbols occurs in at most one cell of the array.
An example of an H(4,6) is
An H(2n 1, 2n) is a Room square of side 2n 1, and thus the Howell designs generalize the concept
of Room squares.
The pairs of symbols in the cells of a Howell design can be thought of as the edges of an s regular graph
on 2n vertices, called the underlying graph of the Howell design.
Cyclic Howell designs are used as Howell movements in duplicate bridge tournaments. The rows of the
design represent the rounds, the columns represent the boards, and the diagonals represent the tables.[15]
Linear spaces
An (n,k,p,t)-lotto design is an n-set V of elements together with a set of k-element subsets of V (blocks),
so that for any p-subset P of V, there is a block B in for which |P B | t. L(n,k,p,t) denotes the smallest
number of blocks in any (n,k,p,t)-lotto design. The following is a (7,5,4,3)-lotto design with the smallest
possible number of blocks:[16]
{1,2,3,4,7} {1,2,5,6,7} {3,4,5,6,7}.

Lotto designs model any lottery that is run in the following way: Individuals purchase tickets consisting
of k numbers chosen from a set of n numbers. At a certain point the sale of tickets is stopped and a
set of p numbers is randomly selected from the n numbers. These are the winning numbers. If any sold
ticket contains t or more of the winning numbers, a prize is given to the ticket holder. Larger prizes go
to tickets with more matches. The value of L(n,k,p,t) is of interest to both gamblers and researchers, as
this is the smallest number of tickets that are needed to be purchased in order to guarantee a prize.
The Hungarian Lottery is a (90,5,5,t)-lotto design and it is known that L(90,5,5,2) = 100. Lotteries
with parameters (49,6,6,t) are also popular worldwide and it is known that L(49,6,6,2) = 19. In general
though, these numbers are hard to calculate and remain unknown.[17]
A geometric construction of one such design is given in Transylvanian lottery.
Magic squares
A (v,k,)-Mendelsohn design, or MD(v,k,),is a v-set V and a collection of ordered k-tuples of distinct
elements of V (called blocks), such that each ordered pair (x,y) with x y of elements of V is cyclically
adjacent in blocks. The ordered pair (x,y) of distinct elements is cyclically adjacent in a block if the elements
appear in the block as (...,x,y,...) or (y,...,x). An MD(v,3,) is a Mendelsohn triple system, MTS(v,). An
example of an MTS(4,1) on V = {0,1,2,3} is:
(0,1,2) (1,0,3) (2,1,3) (0,2,3)

Any triple system can be made into a Mendelson triple system by replacing the unordered triple {a,b,c}
with the pair of ordered triples (a,b,c) and (a,c,b), but as the example shows, the converse of this state-
ment is not true.
If (Q,) is an idempotent semisymmetric quasigroup, that is, x x = x (idempotent) and x (y x) = y
(semisymmetric) for all x, y in Q, let = {(x,y,x y): x, y in Q}. Then (Q, ) is a Mendelsohn triple
system MTS(|Q|,1). This construction is reversible.[18]
6.4. OTHER COMBINATORIAL DESIGNS 33
Orthogonal arrays
A quasi-3 design is a symmetric design (SBIBD) in which each triple of blocks intersect in either x or y points,
for xed x and y called the triple intersection numbers (x < y). Any symmetric design with 2 is a quasi-3
design with x = 0 and y = 1. The point-hyperplane design of PG(n,q) is a quasi-3 design with x = (qn2 1)/(q
1) and y = = (qn1 1)/(q 1). If y = for a quasi-3 design, the design is isomorphic to PG(n,q) or a
projective plane.[19]
A t-(v,k,) design D is quasi-symmetric with intersection numbers x and y (x < y) if every two distinct blocks
intersect in either x or y points. These designs naturally arise in the investigation of the duals of designs with
= 1. A non-symmetric (b > v) 2-(v,k,1) design is quasisymmetric with x = 0 and y = 1. A multiple (repeat
all blocks a certain number of times) of a symmetric 2-(v,k,) design is quasisymmetric with x = and y = k.
Hadamard 3-designs (extensions of Hadamard 2-designs) are quasisymmetric.[20]
Every quasisymmetric block design gives rise to a strongly regular graph (as its block graph), but not all
SRGs arise in this way.[21]
The incidence matrix of a quasisymmetric 2-(v,k,) design with k x y (mod 2) generates a binary
self-orthogonal code (when bordered if k is odd).[22]
Room squares
A spherical design is a nite set X of points in a (d 1)-dimensional sphere such that, for some integer t, the
average value on X of every polynomial
f (x1 , . . . , xd )
of total degree at most t is equal to the average value of f on the whole sphere, i.e., the integral of f
divided by the area of the sphere.
Turn systems
An r n tuscan-k rectangle on n symbols has r rows and n columns such that:
1. each row is a permutation of the n symbols and

2. for any two distinct symbols a and b and for each m from 1 to k, there is at most one row in which b is m steps
to the right of a.
If r = n and k = 1 these are referred to as Tuscan squares, while if r = n and k = n - 1 they are Florentine
squares. A Roman square is a tuscan square which is also a latin square (these are also known as row
complete latin squares). A Vatican square is a orentine square which is also a latin square.
The following example is a tuscan-1 square on 7 symbols which is not tuscan-2:[23]
A tuscan square on n symbols is equivalent to a decomposition of the complete graph with n vertices
into n hamiltonian directed paths.[24]
In a sequence of visual impressions, one ash card may have some eect on the impression given by the
next. This bias can be cancelled by using n sequences corresponding to the rows of an n n tuscan-1
square.[25]
A t-wise balanced design (or t BD) of type t (v,K,) is a v-set X together with a family of subsets of X
(called blocks) whose sizes are in the set K, such that every t-subset of distinct elements of X is contained in
exactly blocks. If K is a set of positive integers strictly between t and v, then the t BD is proper. If all the
k-subsets of X for some k are blocks, the t BD is a trivial design.[26]
Notice that in the following example of a 3-{12,{4,6},1) design based on the set X = {1,2,...,12}, some
pairs appear four times (such as 1,2) while others appear ve times (6,12 for instance).[27]
1 2 3 4 5 6 1 2 7 8 1 2 9 11 1 2 10 12 3 5 7 8 3 5 9 11 3 5 10 12 4 6 7 8 4 6 9 11 4 6 10 12
7 8 9 10 11 12 2 3 8 9 2 3 10 7 2 3 11 12 4 1 8 9 4 1 10 7 4 1 11 12 5 6 8 9 5 6 10 7 5 6 11
12
3 4 9 10 3 4 11 8 3 4 7 12 5 2 9 10 5 2 11 8 5 2 7 12 1 6 9 10 1 6 11 8 1 6 7 12
4 5 10 11 4 5 7 9 4 5 8 12 1 3 10 11 1 3 7 9 1 3 8 12 2 6 10 11 2 6 7 9 2 6 8 12
5 1 11 7 5 1 8 10 5 1 9 12 2 4 11 7 2 4 8 10 2 4 9 12 3 6 11 7 3 6 8 10 3 6 9 12
A Youden square is a k v rectangular array (k < v) of v symbols such that each symbol appears exactly once
in each row and the symbols appearing in any column form a block of a symmetric (v, k, ) design, all the
blocks of which occur in this manner. A Youden square is a Latin rectangle. The term square in the name
comes from an older denition which did use a square array.[28] An example of a 4 7 Youden square is given
by:
The seven blocks (columns) form the order 2 biplane (a symmetric (7,4,2)-design).
6.5 See also

Algebraic statistics
Hypergraph
6.6 Notes
[1] Stinson 2003, pg.1
[2] Stinson 2003, pg. IX
[3] Beth, Jungnickel & Lenz 1986, pg. 40 Example 5.8
[4] Ryser 1963, pg. 52, Theorem 3.1
[5] When the group G is an abelian group (or written additively) the dening property looks like d1 d2 from which the term
dierence set comes from.
[6] Beth, Jungnickel & Lenz 1986, pg. 262, Theorem 1.6
[10] Colbourn & Dinitz 2007, pg. 331, Example 2.2
[11] Colbourn & Dinitz 2007, pg. 331, Remark 2.8
[13] Colbourn & Dinitz 2007, pg. 496, Theorem 28.5

6.7. REFERENCES 35
[20] Colbourn & Dinitz 2007, pp. 578-579
[22] Colbourn & Dinitz 2007, pg. 580, Lemma 48.22
[23] Colbourn & Dinitz 2007, pg. 652, Examples 62.4
[26] Colbourn & Dinitz 2007, pg. 657
6.7 References
0-521-41361-3
Press. 2nd ed. (1999) ISBN 978-0-521-44432-3.
Caliski, Tadeusz; Kageyama, Sanpei (2003). Block designs: A Randomization approach, Volume II: Design.
Lecture Notes in Statistics. 170. New York: Springer-Verlag. ISBN 0-387-95470-8.
Hall, Jr., Marshall (1986), Combinatorial Theory (2nd ed.), New York: Wiley-Interscience, ISBN 0-471-
09138-3
Hughes, D.R.; Piper, E.C. (1985), Design theory, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, ISBN 0-521-
25754-9
Lander, E. S. (1983), Symmetric Designs: An Algebraic Approach, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press
Raghavarao, Damaraju (1988). Constructions and Combinatorial Problems in Design of Experiments (corrected
reprint of the 1971 Wiley ed.). New York: Dover.
Raghavarao, Damaraju and Padgett, L.V. (2005). Block Designs: Analysis, Combinatorics and Applications.
World Scientic.
Ryser, Herbert John (1963), Chapter 8: Combinatorial Designs, Combinatorial Mathematics (Carus Mono-
graph #14), Mathematical Association of America
S. S. Shrikhande, and Vasanti N. Bhat-Nayak, Non-isomorphic solutions of some balanced incomplete block
designs I Journal of Combinatorial Theory, 1970
0-387-95487-2
Street, Anne Penfold; Street, Deborah J. (1987). Combinatorics of Experimental Design. Oxford U. P. [Claren-
don]. pp. 400+xiv. ISBN 0-19-853256-3.
van Lint, J.H., and R.M. Wilson (1992), A Course in Combinatorics. Cambridge, Eng.: Cambridge University
Press.
Chapter 7
Conguration (geometry)
Congurations (43 62 ) (a complete quadrangle, at left) and (62 43 ) (a complete quadrilateral, at right).
In mathematics, specically projective geometry, a conguration in the plane consists of a nite set of points, and a
nite arrangement of lines, such that each point is incident to the same number of lines and each line is incident to
the same number of points.[1]
Although certain specic congurations had been studied earlier (for instance by Thomas Kirkman in 1849), the
formal study of congurations was rst introduced by Theodor Reye in 1876, in the second edition of his book
Geometrie der Lage, in the context of a discussion of Desargues theorem. Ernst Steinitz wrote his dissertation on
the subject in 1894, and they were popularized by Hilbert and Cohn-Vossens 1932 book Anschauliche Geometrie,
reprinted in English (Hilbert & Cohn-Vossen 1952).
Congurations may be studied either as concrete sets of points and lines in a specic geometry, such as the Euclidean
or projective planes (these are said to be realizable in that geometry), or as a type of abstract incidence geometry. In
the latter case they are closely related to regular hypergraphs and biregular bipartite graphs, but with some additional
restrictions: every two points of the incidence structure can be associated with at most one line, and every two lines
can be associated with at most one point. That is, the girth of the corresponding bipartite graph (the Levi graph of
the conguration) must be at least six.
7.1 Notation
A conguration in the plane is denoted by (p ), where p is the number of points, the number of lines, the
number of lines per point, and the number of points per line. These numbers necessarily satisfy the equation
p =
37
38 CHAPTER 7. CONFIGURATION (GEOMETRY)
as this product is the number of point-line incidences (ags).

Congurations having the same symbol, say (p ), need not be isomorphic as incidence structures. For instance,
there exist three dierent (93 93 ) congurations: the Pappus conguration and two less notable congurations.
In some congurations, p = and consequently, = . These are called symmetric or balanced (Grnbaum 2009)
congurations and the notation is often condensed to avoid repetition. For example (93 93 ) abbreviates to (93 ).
7.2 Examples
A (103 ) conguration that is not incidence-isomorphic to a Desargues conguration
Notable projective congurations include the following:
(11 ), the simplest possible conguration, consisting of a point incident to a line. Often excluded as being trivial.
(32 ), the triangle. Each of its three sides meets two of its three vertices, and vice versa. More generally any
polygon of n sides forms a conguration of type (n2 )
(43 62 ) and (62 43 ), the complete quadrangle and complete quadrilateral respectively.
(73 ), the Fano plane. This conguration exists as an abstract incidence geometry, but cannot be constructed in
the Euclidean plane.
7.3. DUALITY OF CONFIGURATIONS 39
(83 ), the MbiusKantor conguration. This conguration describes two quadrilaterals that are simultaneously
inscribed and circumscribed in each other. It cannot be constructed in Euclidean plane geometry but the
equations dening it have nontrivial solutions in complex numbers.
(93 ), the Pappus conguration.
(94 123 ), the Hesse conguration of nine inection points of a cubic curve in the complex projective plane
and the twelve lines determined by pairs of these points. This conguration shares with the Fano plane the
property that it contains every line through its points; congurations with this property are known as Sylvester
Gallai congurations due to the SylvesterGallai theorem that shows that they cannot be given real-number
coordinates (Kelly 1986).
(103 ), the Desargues conguration.
(125 302 ), the Schli double six, formed by 12 of the 27 lines on a cubic surface
(153 ), the CremonaRichmond conguration, formed by the 15 lines complementary to a double six and their
15 tangent planes
(124 163 ), the Reye conguration.
(166 ), the Kummer conguration.
(273 ), the Gray conguration
(6015 ), the Klein conguration.
7.3 Duality of congurations

The projective dual of a conguration (p l) is a (l p) conguration in which the roles of point and line are
exchanged. Types of congurations therefore come in dual pairs, except when taking the dual results in an isomorphic
conguration. These exceptions are called self-dual congurations and in such cases p = l.[2]
7.4 The number of (n3 ) congurations

The number of nonisomorphic congurations of type (n3 ), starting at n = 7, is given by the sequence
1, 1, 3, 10, 31, 229, 2036, 21399, 245342, ... (sequence A001403 in the OEIS)
These numbers count congurations as abstract incidence structures, regardless of realizability (Betten, Brinkmann
& Pisanski 2000). As Gropp (1997) discusses, nine of the ten (103 ) congurations, and all of the (113 ) and (123 )
congurations, are realizable in the Euclidean plane, but for each n 16 there is at least one nonrealizable (n3 )
conguration. Gropp also points out a long-lasting error in this sequence: an 1895 paper attempted to list all (123 )
congurations, and found 228 of them, but the 229th conguration was not discovered until 1988.
7.5 Constructions of symmetric congurations

There are several techniques for constructing congurations, generally starting from known congurations. Some of
the simplest of these techniques construct symmetric (p) congurations.
Any nite projective plane of order n is an ((n2 + n + 1)n ) conguration. Let be a projective plane of order
n. Remove from a point P and all the lines of which pass through P (but not the points which lie on those
lines except for P) and remove a line l not passing through P and all the points that are on line l. The result is a
conguration of type ((n2 - 1)n). If, in this construction, the line l is chosen to be a line which does pass through
P, then the construction results in a conguration of type ((n2 )n). Since projective planes are known to exist for all
orders n which are powers of primes, these constructions provide innite families of symmetric congurations.
Not all congurations are realizable, for instance, a (437 ) conguration does not exist.[3] However, Gropp (1990) has
provided a construction which shows that for k 3, a (p ) conguration exists for all p 2 lk + 1, where lk is the
length of an optimal Golomb ruler of order k.
40 CHAPTER 7. CONFIGURATION (GEOMETRY)
7.6 Higher dimensions
The Schli double six.
The concept of a conguration may be generalized to higher dimensions, for instance to points and lines or planes in
space. In such cases, the restrictions that no two points belong to more than one line may be relaxed, because it is
possible for two points to belong to more than one plane.
Notable three-dimensional congurations are the Mbius conguration, consisting of two mutually inscribed tetrahe-
dra, Reyes conguration, consisting of twelve points and twelve planes, with six points per plane and six planes per
point, the Gray conguration consisting of a 333 grid of 27 points and the 27 orthogonal lines through them, and
the Schli double six, a conguration with 30 points, 12 lines, two lines per point, and ve points per line.
A further generalization is obtained in three dimensions by considering incidences of points, lines and planes, or
j-spaces (0 j < 3), where each j-space is incident with Njk k-spaces (j k). Writing Njj for the number of j-spaces
present, a given conguration may be represented by the matrix:

N00 N01 N02

N10 N11 N12

N20 N21 N22
The principle extends generally to n dimensions, where 0 j < n. Such congurations are related mathematically to
regular polytopes.[4]
7.7. SEE ALSO 41
7.7 See also

Complex polytope (which could be better called complex congurations)
Perles conguration, a set of 9 points and 9 lines which do not all have equal numbers of incidences to each
other
7.8 Notes
[1] In the literature, the terms projective conguration (Hilbert & Cohn-Vossen 1952) and tactical conguration of type (1,1)
(Dembowski 1968) are also used to describe congurations as dened here.
[2] Coxeter 1999, pp. 106-149
[3] This conguration would be a projective plane of order 6 which does not exist by the Bruck-Ryser theorem.
[4] (Coxeter 1948)
7.9 References
Berman, Leah W., Movable (n4 ) congurations, The Electronic Journal of Combinatorics, 13 (1): R104.
Betten, A; Brinkmann, G.; Pisanski, T. (2000), Counting symmetric congurations, Discrete Applied Math-
ematics, 99 (13): 331338, doi:10.1016/S0166-218X(99)00143-2.
Coxeter, H.S.M. (1948), Regular Polytopes, Methuen and Co.
Coxeter, H.S.M. (1999), Self-dual congurations and regular graphs, The Beauty of Geometry, Dover, ISBN
0-486-40919-8
Dembowski, Peter (1968), Finite geometries, Ergebnisse der Mathematik und ihrer Grenzgebiete, Band 44,
Berlin, New York: Springer-Verlag, ISBN 3-540-61786-8, MR 0233275
Gropp, Harald (1990), On the existence and non-existence of congurations nk", Journal of Combinatorics
and Information System Science, 15: 3448
Gropp, Harald (1997), Congurations and their realization, Discrete Mathematics, 174 (13): 137151,
doi:10.1016/S0012-365X(96)00327-5.
Grnbaum, Branko (2006), Congurations of points and lines, in Davis, Chandler; Ellers, Erich W., The
Coxeter Legacy: Reections and Projections, American Mathematical Society, pp. 179225.
Grnbaum, Branko (2009), Congurations of Points and Lines, Graduate Studies in Mathematics, 103, Amer-
ican Mathematical Society, ISBN 978-0-8218-4308-6.
Hilbert, David; Cohn-Vossen, Stephan (1952), Geometry and the Imagination (2nd ed.), Chelsea, pp. 94170,
ISBN 0-8284-1087-9.
Kelly, L. M. (1986), A resolution of the SylvesterGallai problem of J. P. Serre, Discrete and Computational
Geometry, 1 (1): 101104, doi:10.1007/BF02187687.
Pisanski, Toma; Servatius, Brigitte (2013), Congurations from a Graphical Viewpoint, Springer, ISBN
9780817683641.
7.10 External links

Weisstein, Eric W. Conguration. MathWorld.
Chapter 8
Content (measure theory)
In mathematics, a content is a set function like a measure but a content need not be countably additive, but must only
be nitely additive. A content is a real function dened on a eld of sets A such that
1. (A) [0, ] whenever A A.

2. () = 0.
3. (A1 A2 ) = (A1 ) + (A2 ) whenever A1 , A2 A and A1 A2 = .
An example of a content is a measure, which is a -additive content dened on a -eld. Every (real-valued) measure
is a content, but not vice versa. Contents give a good notion of integrating bounded functions on a space but can
behave badly when integrating unbounded functions, while measures give a good notion of integrating unbounded
functions.
8.1 Examples
An example of a content that is not a measure on a -algebra is the content on all subsets of the positive integers that
has value 1/2n on the integer n and is innite on any innite subset.
An example of a content on the positive integers that is always nite but is not a measure can be given as follows. Take
a positive linear functional on the bounded sequences that is 0 if the sequence has only a nite number of nonzero
elements and takes value 1 on the sequence 1, 1, 1, ...., so the functional in some sense gives an average value of
any bounded sequence. (Such a functional cannot be constructed explicitly, but exists by the HahnBanach theorem.)
Then the content of a set of positive integers is the average value of the sequence that is 1 on this set and 0 elsewhere.
Informally, one can think of the content of a subset of integers as the chance that a randomly chosen integer lies
in this subset (though this is not compatible with the usual denitions of chance in probability theory, which assume
countable additivity).
8.2 Integration of bounded functions

In general integration of functions with respect to a content does not behave well. However there is a well-behaved
notion of integration provided that the function is bounded and the total content of the space is nite, given as follows.
Suppose that the total content of a space is nite. If f is a bounded function on the space such that the inverse image
of any open subset of the reals has a content, then we can dene the integral of f with respect to the content as

n
f d = lim f (i )(f 1 (Ai ))
i=1
where the Ai form a nite collections of disjoint half-open sets whose union covers the range of f, and i is any
element of Ai, and where the limit is taken as the diameters of the sets Ai tend to 0.
42
8.3. DUALS OF SPACES OF BOUNDED FUNCTIONS 43
8.3 Duals of spaces of bounded functions

Suppose that is a measure on some space X. The bounded measurable functions on X form a Banach space with
respect to the supremum norm. The positive elements of the dual of this space correspond to bounded contents
, with the value of on f given by the integral fd. Similarly one can form the space of essentially bounded
functions, with the norm given by the essential supremum, and the positive elements of the dual of this space are
given by bounded contents that vanish on sets of measure 0.
8.4 Construction of a measure from a content

There are several ways to construct a measure from a content on a topological space. This section gives one such
method for locally compact Hausdor spaces such that the content is dened on all compact subsets. In general the
measure is not an extension of the content, as the content may fail to be countably additive, and the measure may
even be identically zero even if the content is not.
First restrict the content to compact sets. This gives a function of compact sets C with the following properties:
1. (C) [0, ] for all compact sets C

2. () = 0.
3. (C1 ) (C2 ) whenever C1 C2
4. (C1 C2 ) (C1 ) + (C2 ) for all pairs of compact sets
5. (C1 C2 ) = (C1 ) + (C2 ) for all pairs of disjoint compact sets.
There are also examples of functions as above not constructed from contents. An example is given by the construc-
tion of Haar measure on a locally compact group. One method of constructing such a Haar measure is to produce a
left-invariant function as above on the compact subsets of the group, which can then be extended to a left-invariant
measure.
8.4.1 Denition on open sets

Given as above, we dene a function on all open sets by
(U ) = sup (C)
CU
This has the following properties:
1. (U ) [0, ]
2. () = 0.
3. (U1 ) (U2 ) whenever U1 U2

4. ( n Un ) n (Un ) for any collection of open sets.

5. ( n Un ) = n (Un ) for any collection of disjoint open sets
8.4.2 Denition on all sets

Given as above, we extend the function to all subsets of the topological space by
(A) = inf (U ).
AU
This is an outer measure, in other words it has the following properties:

44 CHAPTER 8. CONTENT (MEASURE THEORY)
1. (A) [0, ]
2. () = 0.
3. (A1 ) (A2 ) whenever A1 A2

4. ( n An ) n (An ) for any countable collection of sets.
8.4.3 Construction of a measure

The function above is an outer measure on the family of all subsets. Therefore it becomes a measure when restricted
to the measurable subsets for the outer measure, which are the subsets E such that (X) = (XE) + (X\E) for all
subsets X. If the space is locally compact then every open set is measurable for this measure.
The measure does not necessarily coincide with the content on compact sets, However it does if is regular in
the sense that for any compact C, (C) is the inf of (D) for compact sets D containing C in their interiors.
8.5 See also

Minkowski content
8.6 References
Halmos, Paul (1950), Measure Theory, Van Nostrand and Co.
Mayrhofer, Karl (1952), Inhalt und Mass (Content and measure), Springer-Verlag, MR 0053185
Chapter 9
Dedekind number
The free distributive lattices of monotonic Boolean functions on 0, 1, 2, and 3 arguments, with 2, 3, 6, and 20 ele-
ments respectively (move mouse over right diagram to see description)
In mathematics, the Dedekind numbers are a rapidly growing sequence of integers named after Richard Dedekind,
who dened them in 1897. The Dedekind number M(n) counts the number of monotonic Boolean functions of n
variables. Equivalently, it counts the number of antichains of subsets of an n-element set, the number of elements in
a free distributive lattice with n generators, or the number of abstract simplicial complexes with n elements.
Accurate asymptotic estimates of M(n)[1] and an exact expression as a summation,[2] are known. However Dedekinds
problem of computing the values of M(n) remains dicult: no closed-form expression for M(n) is known, and exact
values of M(n) have been found only for n 8.[3]
9.1 Denitions
A Boolean function is a function that takes as input n Boolean variables (that is, values that can be either false or
true, or equivalently binary values that can be either 0 or 1), and produces as output another Boolean variable. It
is monotonic if, for every combination of inputs, switching one of the inputs from false to true can only cause the
output to switch from false to true and not from true to false. The Dedekind number M(n) is the number of dierent
monotonic Boolean functions on n variables.
An antichain of sets (also known as a Sperner family) is a family of sets, none of which is contained in any other set.
If V is a set of n Boolean variables, an antichain A of subsets of V denes a monotone Boolean function f, where
the value of f is true for a given set of inputs if some subset of the true inputs to f belongs to A and false otherwise.
Conversely every monotone Boolean function denes in this way an antichain, of the minimal subsets of Boolean
variables that can force the function value to be true. Therefore, the Dedekind number M(n) equals the number of
dierent antichains of subsets of an n-element set.[4]
A third, equivalent way of describing the same class of objects uses lattice theory. From any two monotone Boolean
functions f and g we can nd two other monotone Boolean functions f g and f g, their logical conjunction
and logical disjunction respectively. The family of all monotone Boolean functions on n inputs, together with these
two operations, forms a distributive lattice, the lattice given by Birkhos representation theorem from the partially
ordered set of subsets of the n variables with set inclusion as the partial order. This construction produces the free
distributive lattice with n generators.[5] Thus, the Dedekind numbers count the number of elements in free distributive
lattices.[6]
The Dedekind numbers also count the number of abstract simplicial complexes on n elements, families of sets with
the property that any subset of a set in the family also belongs to the family. Any antichain determines a simplicial
complex, the family of subsets of antichain members, and conversely the maximal simplices in a complex form an
antichain.[7]
45
46 CHAPTER 9. DEDEKIND NUMBER
9.2 Example
For n = 2, there are six monotonic Boolean functions and six antichains of subsets of the two-element set {x,y}:
The function f(x,y) = false that ignores its input values and always returns false corresponds to the empty
antichain .
The logical conjunction f(x,y) = x y corresponds to the antichain { {x,y} } containing the single set {x,y}.
The function f(x,y) = x that ignores its second argument and returns the rst argument corresponds to the
antichain { {x} } containing the single set {x}
The function f(x,y) = y that ignores its rst argument and returns the second argument corresponds to the
antichain { {y} } containing the single set {y}
The logical disjunction f(x,y) = x y corresponds to the antichain { {x}, {y} } containing the two sets {x} and
{y}.
The function f(x,y) = true that ignores its input values and always returns true corresponds to the antichain {}
containing only the empty set.
9.3 Values
The exact values of the Dedekind numbers are known for 0 n 8:
2, 3, 6, 20, 168, 7581, 7828354, 2414682040998, 56130437228687557907788 (sequence A000372 in

the OEIS).
The rst six of these numbers are given by Church (1940). M(6) was calculated by Ward (1946), M(7) was calculated
by Church (1965) and Berman & Khler (1976), and M(8) by Wiedemann (1991).
If n is even, then M(n) must also be even.[8] The calculation of the fth Dedekind number M(5) = 7581 disproved a
conjecture by Garrett Birkho that M(n) is always divisible by (2n 1)(2n 2).[9]
9.4 Summation formula

Kisielewicz (1988) rewrote the logical denition of antichains into the following arithmetic formula for the Dedekind
numbers:
2n

1 j1 log2 i
2
n
2
M (n) = 1 bki bkj (1 bim + bim bjm ) ,
k=1 j=1 i=0 m=0
where bki is the i th bit of the number k , which can be written using the oor function as

k k
bki = i 2 i+1 .
2 2
However, this formula is not helpful for computing the values of M(n) for large n due to the large number of terms
in the summation.
9.5. ASYMPTOTICS 47
9.5 Asymptotics
The logarithm of the Dedekind numbers can be estimated accurately via the bounds
( ) ( )( ( ))
n n log n
log2 M (n) 1+O .
n/2 n/2 n
Here the left inequality counts the number of antichains in which each set has exactly n/2 elements, and the right
inequality was proven by Kleitman & Markowsky (1975).
Korshunov (1981) provided the even more accurate estimates[10]
n
M (n) = (1 + o(1))2(n/2) exp a(n)
for even n, and
n
M (n) = (1 + o(1))2(n/2+1) exp(b(n) + c(n))
for odd n, where
( )
n
a(n) = (2n/2 + n2 2n5 n2n4 ),
n/2 1
( )
n
b(n) = (2(n+3)/2 + n2 2n6 n2n3 ),
(n 3)/2
and
( )
n
c(n) = (2(n+1)/2 + n2 2n4 ).
(n 1)/2
The main idea behind these estimates is that, in most antichains, all the sets have sizes that are very close to n/2.[10]
For n = 2, 4, 6, 8 Korshunovs formula provides an estimate that is inaccurate by a factor of 9.8%, 10.2%, 4.1%, and
3.3%, respectively.[11]
9.6 Notes
[1] Kleitman & Markowsky (1975); Korshunov (1981); Kahn (2002).
[2] Kisielewicz (1988).
[3] Wiedemann (1991).
[4] Kahn (2002).
[5] The denition of free distributive lattices used here allows as lattice operations any nite meet and join, including the
empty meet and empty join. For the free distributive lattice in which only pairwise meets and joins are allowed, one should
eliminate the top and bottom lattice elements and subtract two from the Dedekind numbers.
[6] Church (1940); Church (1965); Zaguia (1993).
[7] Kisielewicz (1988).
[8] Yamamoto (1953).
[9] Church (1940).
[10] Zaguia (1993).
[11] Brown, K. S., Generating the monotone Boolean functions

48 CHAPTER 9. DEDEKIND NUMBER
9.7 References
Berman, Joel; Khler, Peter (1976), Cardinalities of nite distributive lattices, Mitt. Math. Sem. Giessen,
121: 103124, MR 0485609.
Church, Randolph (1940), Numerical analysis of certain free distributive structures, Duke Mathematical
Journal, 6: 732734, MR 0002842, doi:10.1215/s0012-7094-40-00655-x.
Church, Randolph (1965), Enumeration by rank of the free distributive lattice with 7 generators, Notices of
the American Mathematical Society, 11: 724. As cited by Wiedemann (1991).
Dedekind, Richard (1897), "ber Zerlegungen von Zahlen durch ihre grten gemeinsamen Teiler, Gesam-
melte Werke, 2, pp. 103148.
Kahn, Je (2002), Entropy, independent sets and antichains: a new approach to Dedekinds problem, Pro-
ceedings of the American Mathematical Society, 130 (2): 371378, MR 1862115, doi:10.1090/S0002-9939-
01-06058-0.
Kisielewicz, Andrzej (1988), A solution of Dedekinds problem on the number of isotone Boolean functions,
Journal fr die Reine und Angewandte Mathematik, 386: 139144, MR 936995, doi:10.1515/crll.1988.386.139
Kleitman, D.; Markowsky, G. (1975), On Dedekinds problem: the number of isotone Boolean functions. II,
Transactions of the American Mathematical Society, 213: 373390, MR 0382107, doi:10.2307/1998052.
Korshunov, A. D. (1981), The number of monotone Boolean functions, Problemy Kibernet., 38: 5108, MR
0640855.
Ward, Morgan (1946), Note on the order of free distributive lattices, Bulletin of the American Mathematical
Society, 52: 423, doi:10.1090/S0002-9904-1946-08568-7.
Wiedemann, Doug (1991), A computation of the eighth Dedekind number, Order, 8 (1): 56, MR 1129608,
doi:10.1007/BF00385808.
Yamamoto, Koichi (1953), Note on the order of free distributive lattices, Science Reports of the Kanazawa
University, 2 (1): 56, MR 0070608.
Zaguia, Nejib (1993), Isotone maps: enumeration and structure, in Sauer, N. W.; Woodrow, R. E.; Sands, B.,
Finite and Innite Combinatorics in Sets and Logic (Proc. NATO Advanced Study Inst., Ban, Alberta, Canada,
May 4, 1991), Kluwer Academic Publishers, pp. 421430, MR 1261220.
Chapter 10
Delta-ring
In mathematics, a nonempty collection of sets R is called a -ring (pronounced delta-ring) if it is closed under union,
relative complementation, and countable intersection:
1. A B R if A, B R
2. A B R if A, B R

3. n=1 An R if An R for all n N
If only the rst two properties are satised, then R is a ring but not a -ring. Every -ring is a -ring, but not every
-ring is a -ring.
-rings can be used instead of -elds in the development of measure theory if one does not wish to allow sets of
innite measure.
10.1 See also

Ring of sets
Sigma eld
Sigma ring
10.2 References
Cortzen, Allan. Delta-Ring. From MathWorldA Wolfram Web Resource, created by Eric W. Weisstein.
http://mathworld.wolfram.com/Delta-Ring.html
49
Chapter 11
Disjoint sets
This article is about the mathematical concept. For the data structure, see Disjoint-set data structure.
In mathematics, two sets are said to be disjoint if they have no element in common. Equivalently, disjoint sets are
A B
Two disjoint sets.
sets whose intersection is the empty set.[1] For example, {1, 2, 3} and {4, 5, 6} are disjoint sets, while {1, 2, 3} and
{3, 4, 5} are not.
11.1 Generalizations
This denition of disjoint sets can be extended to any family of sets. A family of sets is pairwise disjoint or mutually
disjoint if every two dierent sets in the family are disjoint.[1] For example, the collection of sets { {1}, {2}, {3}, ...
} is pairwise disjoint.
Two sets are said to be almost disjoint sets if their intersection is small in some sense. For instance, two innite sets
whose intersection is a nite set may be said to be almost disjoint.[2]
In topology, there are various notions of separated sets with more strict conditions than disjointness. For instance,
two sets may be considered to be separated when they have disjoint closures or disjoint neighborhoods. Similarly, in
a metric space, positively separated sets are sets separated by a nonzero distance.[3]
50
11.2. EXAMPLES 51
B
C
A pairwise disjoint family of sets
11.2 Examples
The set of the drum and the guitar is disjoint to the set of the card and the book
52 CHAPTER 11. DISJOINT SETS
C
A
B
D E
A pairwise disjoint family of sets
A B
C D E
A non-pairwise-disjoint family of sets
11.3 Intersections
Disjointness of two sets, or of a family of sets, may be expressed in terms of their intersections.
Two sets A and B are disjoint if and only if their intersection A B is the empty set.[1] It follows from this denition
that every set is disjoint from the empty set, and that the empty set is the only set that is disjoint from itself.[4]
A family F of sets is pairwise disjoint if, for every two sets in the family, their intersection is empty.[1] If the family
contains more than one set, this implies that the intersection of the whole family is also empty. However, a family
of only one set is pairwise disjoint, regardless of whether that set is empty, and may have a non-empty intersection.
Additionally, a family of sets may have an empty intersection without being pairwise disjoint.[5] For instance, the
three sets { {1, 2}, {2, 3}, {1, 3} } have an empty intersection but are not pairwise disjoint. In fact, there are no two
disjoint sets in this collection. Also the empty family of sets is pairwise disjoint.[6]
A Helly family is a system of sets within which the only subfamilies with empty intersections are the ones that are
pairwise disjoint. For instance, the closed intervals of the real numbers form a Helly family: if a family of closed
intervals has an empty intersection and is minimal (i.e. no subfamily of the family has an empty intersection), it must
be pairwise disjoint.[7]
11.4 Disjoint unions and partitions

A partition of a set X is any collection of mutually disjoint non-empty sets whose union is X.[8] Every partition can
equivalently be described by an equivalence relation, a binary relation that describes whether two elements belong
to the same set in the partition.[8] Disjoint-set data structures[9] and partition renement[10] are two techniques in
computer science for eciently maintaining partitions of a set subject to, respectively, union operations that merge
two sets or renement operations that split one set into two.
A disjoint union may mean one of two things. Most simply, it may mean the union of sets that are disjoint.[11] But
if two or more sets are not already disjoint, their disjoint union may be formed by modifying the sets to make them
disjoint before forming the union of the modied sets.[12] For instance two sets may be made disjoint by replacing
each element by an ordered pair of the element and a binary value indicating whether it belongs to the rst or second
set.[13] For families of more than two sets, one may similarly replace each element by an ordered pair of the element
and the index of the set that contains it.[14]
11.5 See also

Hyperplane separation theorem for disjoint convex sets
11.6. REFERENCES 53
Mutually exclusive events
Relatively prime, numbers with disjoint sets of prime divisors

Set packing, the problem of nding the largest disjoint subfamily of a family of sets
11.6 References
[1] Halmos, P. R. (1960), Naive Set Theory, Undergraduate Texts in Mathematics, Springer, p. 15, ISBN 9780387900926.
[2] Halbeisen, Lorenz J. (2011), Combinatorial Set Theory: With a Gentle Introduction to Forcing, Springer monographs in
mathematics, Springer, p. 184, ISBN 9781447121732.
[3] Copson, Edward Thomas (1988), Metric Spaces, Cambridge Tracts in Mathematics, 57, Cambridge University Press, p.
62, ISBN 9780521357326.
[4] Oberste-Vorth, Ralph W.; Mouzakitis, Aristides; Lawrence, Bonita A. (2012), Bridge to Abstract Mathematics, MAA
textbooks, Mathematical Association of America, p. 59, ISBN 9780883857793.
[5] Smith, Douglas; Eggen, Maurice; St. Andre, Richard (2010), A Transition to Advanced Mathematics, Cengage Learning,
p. 95, ISBN 978-0-495-56202-3.
[6] See answers to the question Is the empty family of sets pairwise disjoint?
[7] Bollobs, Bla (1986), Combinatorics: Set Systems, Hypergraphs, Families of Vectors, and Combinatorial Probability, Cam-
bridge University Press, p. 82, ISBN 9780521337038.
[8] Halmos (1960), p. 28.
[9] Cormen, Thomas H.; Leiserson, Charles E.; Rivest, Ronald L.; Stein, Cliord (2001), Chapter 21: Data structures for
Disjoint Sets, Introduction to Algorithms (Second ed.), MIT Press, pp. 498524, ISBN 0-262-03293-7.
[10] Paige, Robert; Tarjan, Robert E. (1987), Three partition renement algorithms, SIAM Journal on Computing, 16 (6):
973989, MR 917035, doi:10.1137/0216062.
[11] Ferland, Kevin (2008), Discrete Mathematics: An Introduction to Proofs and Combinatorics, Cengage Learning, p. 45,
ISBN 9780618415380.
[12] Arbib, Michael A.; Kfoury, A. J.; Moll, Robert N. (1981), A Basis for Theoretical Computer Science, The AKM series in
Theoretical Computer Science: Texts and monographs in computer science, Springer-Verlag, p. 9, ISBN 9783540905738.
[13] Monin, Jean Franois; Hinchey, Michael Gerard (2003), Understanding Formal Methods, Springer, p. 21, ISBN 9781852332471.
[14] Lee, John M. (2010), Introduction to Topological Manifolds, Graduate Texts in Mathematics, 202 (2nd ed.), Springer, p.
64, ISBN 9781441979407.
11.7 External links

Weisstein, Eric W. Disjoint Sets. MathWorld.
Chapter 12
Dynkin system
A Dynkin system, named after Eugene Dynkin, is a collection of subsets of another universal set satisfying a set
of axioms weaker than those of -algebra. Dynkin systems are sometimes referred to as -systems (Dynkin himself
used this term) or d-system.[1] These set families have applications in measure theory and probability.
A major application of -systems is the - theorem, see below.
12.1 Denitions
Let be a nonempty set, and let D be a collection of subsets of (i.e., D is a subset of the power set of ). Then
D is a Dynkin system if
1. D ,
2. if A, B D and A B, then B \ A D ,

3. if A1 , A2 , A3 , ... is a sequence of subsets in D and An An for all n 1, then n=1 An D .
Equivalently, D is a Dynkin system if
1. D ,
2. if A D, then Ac D,

3. if A1 , A2 , A3 , ... is a sequence of subsets in D such that Ai Aj = for all i j, then n=1 An D .
The second denition is generally preferred as it usually is easier to check.

An important fact is that a Dynkin system which is also a -system (i.e., closed under nite intersection) is a -algebra.
This can be veried by noting that condition 3 and closure under nite intersection implies closure under countable
unions.
Given any collection J of subsets of , there exists a unique Dynkin system denoted D{J } which is minimal with
respect to containing J . That is, if D is any Dynkin system containing J , then D{J } D . D{J } is called the
Dynkin system generated by J . Note D{} = {, } . For another example, let = {1, 2, 3, 4} and J = {1} ;
then D{J } = {, {1}, {2, 3, 4}, } .
12.2 Dynkins - theorem

If P is a -system and D is a Dynkin system with P D , then {P } D . In other words, the -algebra generated
by P is contained in D .
One application of Dynkins - theorem is the uniqueness of a measure that evaluates the length of an interval
(known as the Lebesgue measure):
54
12.3. NOTES 55
Let (, B, ) be the unit interval [0,1] with the Lebesgue measure on Borel sets. Let be another measure on
satisfying [(a,b)] = b a, and let D be the family of sets S such that [S] = [S]. Let I = { (a,b),[a,b),(a,b],[a,b] : 0 <
a b < 1 }, and observe that I is closed under nite intersections, that I D, and that B is the -algebra generated by
I. It may be shown that D satises the above conditions for a Dynkin-system. From Dynkins - Theorem it follows
that D in fact includes all of B, which is equivalent to showing that the Lebesgue measure is unique on B.
Additional applications are in the article on -systems.
12.3 Notes
[1] Aliprantis, Charalambos; Border, Kim C. (2006). Innite Dimensional Analysis: a Hitchhikers Guide (Third ed.). Springer.
Retrieved August 23, 2010.
12.4 References
Gut, Allan (2005). Probability: A Graduate Course. New York: Springer. ISBN 0-387-22833-0. doi:10.1007/b138932.
Billingsley, Patrick (1995). Probability and Measure. New York: John Wiley & Sons, Inc. ISBN 0-471-
00710-2.
Williams, David (2007). Probability with Martingales. Cambridge University Press. p. 193. ISBN 0-521-
40605-6.
This article incorporates material from Dynkin system on PlanetMath, which is licensed under the Creative Commons
Attribution/Share-Alike License.
Chapter 13
ErdsKoRado theorem
In combinatorics, the ErdsKoRado theorem of Paul Erds, Chao Ko, and Richard Rado is a theorem on
intersecting set families. It is part of the theory of hypergraphs, specically, uniform hypergraphs of rank r.
The theorem is as follows. Suppose that A is a family of distinct subsets of {1, 2, ..., n} such that each subset is of
size r and each pair of subsets has a nonempty intersection, and suppose that n 2r. Then the number of sets in A
is less than or equal to the binomial coecient
( )
n1
.
r1
A family of sets may also be called a hypergraph, and when all the sets are the same size it is called a uniform
hypergraph. Since every set in A has size r, A is an r-uniform hypergraph.
According to Erds (1987) the theorem was proved in 1938, but was not published until 1961 in an apparently more
general form. The subsets in question were only required to be size at most r, and with the additional requirement
that no subset be contained in any other.
13.1 Proof
The original proof of 1961 used induction on n. In 1972, Gyula O. H. Katona gave the following short proof using
double counting.
Suppose we have some such family of subsets A. Arrange the elements of {1, 2, ..., n} in any cyclic order, and consider
the sets from A that form intervals of length r within this cyclic order. For example if n = 8 and r = 3, we could
arrange the numbers {1, 2, ..., 8} into the cyclic order (3,1,5,4,2,7,6,8), which has eight intervals:
(3,1,5), (1,5,4), (5,4,2), (4,2,7), (2,7,6), (7,6,8), (6,8,3), and (8,3,1).
However, it is not possible for all of the intervals of the cyclic order to belong to A, because some pairs of them are
disjoint. Katonas key observation is that at most r of the intervals for a single cyclic order may belong to A. To see
this, note that if (a1 , a2 , ..., ar) is one of these intervals in A, then every other interval of the same cyclic order that
belongs to A separates ai and ai for some i (that is, it contains precisely one of these two elements). The two intervals
that separate these elements are disjoint, so at most one of them can belong to A. Thus, the number of intervals in A
is one plus the number of separated pairs, which is at most (r - 1).
Based on this idea, we may count the number of pairs (S,C), where S is a set in A and C is a cyclic order for which S
is an interval, in two ways. First, for each set S one may generate C by choosing one of r! permutations of S and (n
r)! permutations of the remaining elements, showing that the number of pairs is |A|r!(n r)!. And second, there
are (n 1)! cyclic orders, each of which has at most r intervals of A, so the number of pairs is at most r(n 1)!.
Combining these two counts gives the inequality
|A|r!(n r)! r(n 1)!
56
13.2. FAMILIES OF MAXIMUM SIZE 57
and dividing both sides by r!(n r)! gives the result
( )
r(n 1)! n1
|A| = .
r!(n r)! r1
Two constructions for an intersecting family of r-sets: x one element and choose the remaining elements in all possible ways, or
(when n = 2r) exclude one element and choose all subsets of the remaining elements. Here n = 4 and r = 2.
13.2 Families of maximum size

There are two dierent and straightforward constructions for an intersecting family of r-element sets achieving
the ErdsKoRado bound on cardinality. First, choose any xed element x, and let A consist of all r-subsets of
{1, 2, ..., n} that include x. For instance, if n = 4, r = 2, and x = 1, this produces the family of three 2-sets
{1,2}, {1,3}, {1,4}.
Any two sets in this family intersect, because they both include x. Second, when n = 2r and with x as above, let A
consist of all r-subsets of {1, 2, ..., n} that do not include x. For the same parameters as above, this produces the
family
{2,3}, {2,4}, {3,4}.
Any two sets in this family have a total of 2r = n elements among them, chosen from the n 1 elements that are
unequal to x, so by the pigeonhole principle they must have an element in common.
When n > 2r, families of the rst type (variously known as sunowers, stars, dictatorships, centred families, principal
families) are the unique maximum families. Friedgut (2008) proved that in this case, a family which is almost of
maximum size has an element which is common to almost all of its sets. This property is known as stability.
13.3 Maximal intersecting families

An intersecting family of r-element sets may be maximal, in that no further set can be added without destroying the
intersection property, but not of maximum size. An example with n = 7 and r = 3 is the set of 7 lines of the Fano
plane, much less than the ErdsKoRado bound of 15.
58 CHAPTER 13. ERDSKORADO THEOREM
The seven points and seven lines (one drawn as a circle) of the Fano plane form a maximal intersecting family.
13.4 Intersecting families of subspaces

There is a q-analog of the ErdsKoRado theorem for intersecting families of subspaces over nite elds.
If S is an intersecting family of k -dimensional subspaces of an n -dimensional vector space over a nite eld of order
q , and n > 2k , then
( )
n1
|S| .
k1 q
13.5 Relation to graphs in association schemes

The ErdsKoRado theorem gives a bound on the maximum size of an independent set in Kneser graphs contained
in Johnson schemes.
Similarly, the analog of the ErdsKoRado theorem for intersecting families of subspaces over nite elds gives a
bound on the maximum size of an independent set in q-Kneser graphs contained in Grassmann schemes.
13.6. REFERENCES 59
13.6 References
Erds, P. (1987), My joint work with Richard Rado, in Whitehead, C., Surveys in combinatorics, 1987:
Invited Papers for the Eleventh British Combinatorial Conference (PDF), London Mathematical Society Lecture
Note Series, 123, Cambridge University Press, pp. 5380, ISBN 978-0-521-34805-8.
Erds, P.; Ko, C.; Rado, R. (1961), Intersection theorems for systems of nite sets (PDF), Quarterly Journal
of Mathematics. Oxford. Second Series, 12: 313320, doi:10.1093/qmath/12.1.313.
Friedgut, Ehud (2008), On the measure of intersecting families, uniqueness and stability (PDF), Combinatorica,
28 (5): 503528, doi:10.1007/s00493-008-2318-9
Katona, G. O. H. (1972), A simple proof of the Erds-Chao Ko-Rado theorem, Journal of Combinatorial
Theory, Series B, 13 (2): 183184, doi:10.1016/0095-8956(72)90054-8.
Godsil, Christopher; Karen, Meagher (2015), ErdsKoRado Theorems: Algebraic Approaches, Cambridge
Studies in Advanced Mathematics, Cambridge University Press, ISBN 9781107128446.
Chapter 14
Family of sets
In set theory and related branches of mathematics, a collection F of subsets of a given set S is called a family of
subsets of S, or a family of sets over S. More generally, a collection of any sets whatsoever is called a family of sets.
The term collection is used here because, in some contexts, a family of sets may be allowed to contain repeated
copies of any given member,[1][2][3] and in other contexts it may form a proper class rather than a set.
14.1 Examples
The power set P(S) is a family of sets over S.
The k-subsets S (k) of a set S form a family of sets.
Let S = {a,b,c,1,2}, an example of a family of sets over S (in the multiset sense) is given by F = {A1 , A2 , A3 ,
A4 } where A1 = {a,b,c}, A2 = {1,2}, A3 = {1,2} and A4 = {a,b,1}.
The class Ord of all ordinal numbers is a large family of sets; that is, it is not itself a set but instead a proper
class.
14.2 Special types of set family

A Sperner family is a family of sets in which none of the sets contains any of the others. Sperners theorem
bounds the maximum size of a Sperner family.
A Helly family is a family of sets such that any minimal subfamily with empty intersection has bounded size.
Hellys theorem states that convex sets in Euclidean spaces of bounded dimension form Helly families.
14.3 Properties
Any family of subsets of S is itself a subset of the power set P(S) if it has no repeated members.
Any family of sets without repetitions is a subclass of the proper class V of all sets (the universe).
Halls marriage theorem, due to Philip Hall gives necessary and sucient conditions for a nite family of
non-empty sets (repetitions allowed) to have a system of distinct representatives.
14.4 Related concepts

Certain types of objects from other areas of mathematics are equivalent to families of sets, in that they can be described
purely as a collection of sets of objects of some type:
60
14.5. SEE ALSO 61
A hypergraph, also called a set system, is formed by a set of vertices together with another set of hyperedges,
each of which may be an arbitrary set. The hyperedges of a hypergraph form a family of sets, and any family
of sets can be interpreted as a hypergraph that has the union of the sets as its vertices.
An abstract simplicial complex is a combinatorial abstraction of the notion of a simplicial complex, a shape
formed by unions of line segments, triangles, tetrahedra, and higher-dimensional simplices, joined face to face.
In an abstract simplicial complex, each simplex is represented simply as the set of its vertices. Any family of
nite sets without repetitions in which the subsets of any set in the family also belong to the family forms an
abstract simplicial complex.
An incidence structure consists of a set of points, a set of lines, and an (arbitrary) binary relation, called the
incidence relation, specifying which points belong to which lines. An incidence structure can be specied by
a family of sets (even if two distinct lines contain the same set of points), the sets of points belonging to each
line, and any family of sets can be interpreted as an incidence structure in this way.
A binary block code consists of a set of codewords, each of which is a string of 0s and 1s, all the same length.
When each pair of codewords has large Hamming distance, it can be used as an error-correcting code. A block
code can also be described as a family of sets, by describing each codeword as the set of positions at which it
contains a 1.
14.5 See also

Indexed family
Class (set theory)
Combinatorial design
Russells paradox (or Set of sets that do not contain themselves)
14.6 Notes
[1] Brualdi 2010, pg. 322
[2] Roberts & Tesman 2009, pg. 692
[3] Biggs 1985, pg. 89
14.7 References
Biggs, Norman L. (1985), Discrete Mathematics, Oxford: Clarendon Press, ISBN 0-19-853252-0
Brualdi, Richard A. (2010), Introductory Combinatorics (5th ed.), Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall, ISBN
0-13-602040-2
Roberts, Fred S.; Tesman, Barry (2009), Applied Combinatorics (2nd ed.), Boca Raton: CRC Press, ISBN
978-1-4200-9982-9
Chapter 15
Field of sets
Set algebra redirects here. For the basic properties and laws of sets, see Algebra of sets.
In mathematics a eld of sets is a pair X, F where X is a set and F is an algebra over X i.e., a non-empty subset
of the power set of X closed under the intersection and union of pairs of sets and under complements of individual
sets. In other words, F forms a subalgebra of the power set Boolean algebra of X . (Many authors refer to F itself
as a eld of sets. The word eld in eld of sets is not used with the meaning of eld from eld theory.) Elements
of X are called points and those of F are called complexes and are said to be the admissible sets of X .
Fields of sets play an essential role in the representation theory of Boolean algebras. Every Boolean algebra can be
represented as a eld of sets.
15.1 Fields of sets in the representation theory of Boolean algebras
15.1.1 Stone representation

Every nite Boolean algebra can be represented as a whole power set - the power set of its set of atoms; each element
of the Boolean algebra corresponds to the set of atoms below it (the join of which is the element). This power set
representation can be constructed more generally for any complete atomic Boolean algebra.
In the case of Boolean algebras which are not complete and atomic we can still generalize the power set representation
by considering elds of sets instead of whole power sets. To do this we rst observe that the atoms of a nite Boolean
algebra correspond to its ultralters and that an atom is below an element of a nite Boolean algebra if and only if
that element is contained in the ultralter corresponding to the atom. This leads us to construct a representation of a
Boolean algebra by taking its set of ultralters and forming complexes by associating with each element of the Boolean
algebra the set of ultralters containing that element. This construction does indeed produce a representation of the
Boolean algebra as a eld of sets and is known as the Stone representation. It is the basis of Stones representation
theorem for Boolean algebras and an example of a completion procedure in order theory based on ideals or lters,
similar to Dedekind cuts.
Alternatively one can consider the set of homomorphisms onto the two element Boolean algebra and form complexes
by associating each element of the Boolean algebra with the set of such homomorphisms that map it to the top
element. (The approach is equivalent as the ultralters of a Boolean algebra are precisely the pre-images of the top
elements under these homomorphisms.) With this approach one sees that Stone representation can also be regarded
as a generalization of the representation of nite Boolean algebras by truth tables.
15.1.2 Separative and compact elds of sets: towards Stone duality

A eld of sets is called separative (or dierentiated) if and only if for every pair of distinct points there is a
complex containing one and not the other.
A eld of sets is called compact if and only if for every proper lter over X the intersection of all the complexes
contained in the lter is non-empty.
62
15.2. FIELDS OF SETS WITH ADDITIONAL STRUCTURE 63
These denitions arise from considering the topology generated by the complexes of a eld of sets. Given a eld of
sets X = X, F the complexes form a base for a topology, we denote the corresponding topological space by T (X)
. Then
T (X) is always a zero-dimensional space.
T (X) is a Hausdor space if and only if X is separative.
T (X) is a compact space with compact open sets F if and only if X is compact.
T (X) is a Boolean space with clopen sets F if and only if X is both separative and compact (in which case it
is described as being descriptive)
The Stone representation of a Boolean algebra is always separative and compact; the corresponding Boolean space is
known as the Stone space of the Boolean algebra. The clopen sets of the Stone space are then precisely the complexes
of the Stone representation. The area of mathematics known as Stone duality is founded on the fact that the Stone
representation of a Boolean algebra can be recovered purely from the corresponding Stone space whence a duality
exists between Boolean algebras and Boolean spaces.
15.2 Fields of sets with additional structure
15.2.1 Sigma algebras and measure spaces

If an algebra over a set is closed under countable intersections and countable unions, it is called a sigma algebra
and the corresponding eld of sets is called a measurable space. The complexes of a measurable space are called
measurable sets.
A measure space is a triple X, F, where X, F is a measurable space and is a measure dened on it. If
is in fact a probability measure we speak of a probability space and call its underlying measurable space a sample
space. The points of a sample space are called samples and represent potential outcomes while the measurable sets
(complexes) are called events and represent properties of outcomes for which we wish to assign probabilities. (Many
use the term sample space simply for the underlying set of a probability space, particularly in the case where every
subset is an event.) Measure spaces and probability spaces play a foundational role in measure theory and probability
theory respectively.
The Loomis-Sikorski theorem provides a Stone-type duality between abstract sigma algebras and measurable spaces.
15.2.2 Topological elds of sets

A topological eld of sets is a triple X, T , F where X, T is a topological space and X, F is a eld of sets
which is closed under the closure operator of T or equivalently under the interior operator i.e. the closure and interior
of every complex is also a complex. In other words, F forms a subalgebra of the power set interior algebra on X, T
.
Every interior algebra can be represented as a topological eld of sets with its interior and closure operators corre-
sponding to those of the topological space.
Given a topological space the clopen sets trivially form a topological eld of sets as each clopen set is its own interior
and closure. The Stone representation of a Boolean algebra can be regarded as such a topological eld of sets.
Algebraic elds of sets and Stone elds
A topological eld of sets is called algebraic if and only if there is a base for its topology consisting of complexes.
If a topological eld of sets is both compact and algebraic then its topology is compact and its compact open sets are
precisely the open complexes. Moreover, the open complexes form a base for the topology.
Topological elds of sets that are separative, compact and algebraic are called Stone elds and provide a generalization
of the Stone representation of Boolean algebras. Given an interior algebra we can form the Stone representation of
64 CHAPTER 15. FIELD OF SETS
its underlying Boolean algebra and then extend this to a topological eld of sets by taking the topology generated by
the complexes corresponding to the open elements of the interior algebra (which form a base for a topology). These
complexes are then precisely the open complexes and the construction produces a Stone eld representing the interior
algebra - the Stone representation.
15.2.3 Preorder elds

A preorder eld is a triple X, , F where X, is a preordered set and X, F is a eld of sets.
Like the topological elds of sets, preorder elds play an important role in the representation theory of interior alge-
bras. Every interior algebra can be represented as a preorder eld with its interior and closure operators corresponding
to those of the Alexandrov topology induced by the preorder. In other words,
Int(S) = {x X : there exists a y S with y x} and

Cl(S) = {x X : there exists a y S with x y} for all S F
Preorder elds arise naturally in modal logic where the points represent the possible worlds in the Kripke semantics
of a theory in the modal logic S4 (a formal mathematical abstraction of epistemic logic), the preorder represents the
accessibility relation on these possible worlds in this semantics, and the complexes represent sets of possible worlds
in which individual sentences in the theory hold, providing a representation of the Lindenbaum-Tarski algebra of the
theory.
Algebraic and canonical preorder elds
A preorder eld is called algebraic if and only if it has a set of complexes A which determines the preorder in the
following manner: x y if and only if for every complex S A , x S implies y S . The preorder elds
obtained from S4 theories are always algebraic, the complexes determining the preorder being the sets of possible
worlds in which the sentences of the theory closed under necessity hold.
A separative compact algebraic preorder eld is said to be canonical. Given an interior algebra, by replacing the
topology of its Stone representation with the corresponding canonical preorder (specialization preorder) we obtain a
representation of the interior algebra as a canonical preorder eld. By replacing the preorder by its corresponding
Alexandrov topology we obtain an alternative representation of the interior algebra as a topological eld of sets. (The
topology of this "Alexandrov representation" is just the Alexandrov bi-coreection of the topology of the Stone
representation.)
15.2.4 Complex algebras and elds of sets on relational structures

The representation of interior algebras by preorder elds can be generalized to a representation theorem for arbi-
trary (normal) Boolean algebras with operators. For this we consider structures X, (Ri )I , F where X, (Ri )I is a
relational structure i.e. a set with an indexed family of relations dened on it, and X, F is a eld of sets. The com-
plex algebra (or algebra of complexes) determined by a eld of sets X = X, (Ri )I , F on a relational structure,
is the Boolean algebra with operators
C(X) = F, , , , , X, (fi )I
where for all i I , if Ri is a relation of arity n + 1 , then fi is an operator of arity n and for all S1 , ..., Sn F
fi (S1 , ..., Sn ) = {x X : there exist x1 S1 , ..., xn Sn such that Ri (x1 , ..., xn , x)}
This construction can be generalized to elds of sets on arbitrary algebraic structures having both operators and
relations as operators can be viewed as a special case of relations. If F is the whole power set of X then C(X) is
called a full complex algebra or power algebra.
Every (normal) Boolean algebra with operators can be represented as a eld of sets on a relational structure in the
sense that it is isomorphic to the complex algebra corresponding to the eld.
(Historically the term complex was rst used in the case where the algebraic structure was a group and has its origins
in 19th century group theory where a subset of a group was called a complex.)
15.3. SEE ALSO 65
15.3 See also

List of Boolean algebra topics
Algebra of sets
Sigma algebra
Measure theory
Probability theory
Interior algebra
Alexandrov topology
Stones representation theorem for Boolean algebras
Stone duality
Boolean ring
Preordered eld
15.4 References
Goldblatt, R., Algebraic Polymodal Logic: A Survey, Logic Journal of the IGPL, Volume 8, Issue 4, p. 393-450,
July 2000
Goldblatt, R., Varieties of complex algebras, Annals of Pure and Applied Logic, 44, p. 173-242, 1989
Johnstone, Peter T. (1982). Stone spaces (3rd ed.). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. ISBN 0-521-
33779-8.
Naturman, C.A., Interior Algebras and Topology, Ph.D. thesis, University of Cape Town Department of Math-
ematics, 1991
Patrick Blackburn, Johan F.A.K. van Benthem, Frank Wolter ed., Handbook of Modal Logic, Volume 3 of
Studies in Logic and Practical Reasoning, Elsevier, 2006
15.5 External links

Hazewinkel, Michiel, ed. (2001) [1994], Algebra of sets, Encyclopedia of Mathematics, Springer Sci-
ence+Business Media B.V. / Kluwer Academic Publishers, ISBN 978-1-55608-010-4
Chapter 16
Finite character
In mathematics, a family F of sets is of nite character provided it has the following properties:
1. For each A F , every nite subset of A belongs to F .
2. If every nite subset of a given set A belongs to F , then A belongs to F .
16.1 Properties
A family F of sets of nite character enjoys the following properties:
1. For each A F , every (nite or innite) subset of A belongs to F .
2. Tukeys lemma: In F , partially ordered by inclusion, the union of every chain of elements of F also belong to
F , therefore, by Zorns lemma, F contains at least one maximal element.
16.2 Example
Let V be a vector space, and let F be the family of linearly independent subsets of V. Then F is a family of nite
character (because a subset X V is linearly dependent i X has a nite subset which is linearly dependent). There-
fore, in every vector space, there exists a maximal family of linearly independent elements. As a maximal family is
a vector basis, every vector space has a (possibly innite) vector basis.
This article incorporates material from nite character on PlanetMath, which is licensed under the Creative Commons
Attribution/Share-Alike License.
66
Chapter 17
Finite intersection property
In general topology, a branch of mathematics, a collection A of subsets of a set X is said to have the nite intersection
property (FIP) if the intersection over any nite subcollection of A is nonempty. It has the strong nite intersection
property (SFIP) if the intersection over any nite subcollection of A is innite.
A centered system of sets is a collection of sets with the nite intersection property.
17.1 Denition
Let X be a set with A = {Ai }iI a family of subsets of X . Then the
collection A has the nite intersection property
(FIP), if any nite subcollection J I has non-empty intersection iJ Ai .
17.2 Discussion
Clearly the empty set cannot belong to any collection with the nite intersection property. The condition is trivially
satised if the intersection over the entire collection is nonempty (in particular, if the collection itself is empty), and
it is also trivially satised if the collection is nested, meaning that the collection is totally ordered by inclusion (equiv-
alently, for any nite subcollection, a particular element of the subcollection is contained in all the other elements of
the subcollection), e.g. the nested sequence of intervals (0, 1/n). These are not the only possibilities however. For
example, if X = (0, 1) and for each positive integer i, Xi is the set of elements of X having a decimal expansion with
digit 0 in the i'th decimal place, then any nite intersection is nonempty (just take 0 in those nitely many places and
1 in the rest), but the intersection of all Xi for i 1 is empty, since no element of (0, 1) has all zero digits.
The nite intersection property is useful in formulating an alternative denition of compactness: a space is compact
if and only if every collection of closed sets having the nite intersection property has nonempty intersection.[1][2]
This formulation of compactness is used in some proofs of Tychonos theorem and the uncountability of the real
numbers (see next section)
17.3 Applications
Theorem. Let X be a non-empty compact Hausdor space that satises the property that no one-point set is open.
Then X is uncountable.
Proof. We will show that if U X is nonempty and open, and if x is a point of X, then there is a neighbourhood V
U whose closure doesnt contain x (x may or may not be in U). Choose y in U dierent from x (if x is in U, then
there must exist such a y for otherwise U would be an open one point set; if x isnt in U, this is possible since U is
nonempty). Then by the Hausdor condition, choose disjoint neighbourhoods W and K of x and y respectively. Then
K U will be a neighbourhood of y contained in U whose closure doesnt contain x as desired.
Now suppose f : N X is a bijection, and let {xi : i N} denote the image of f. Let X be the rst open set
and choose a neighbourhood U 1 X whose closure doesnt contain x1 . Secondly, choose a neighbourhood U 2
67
68 CHAPTER 17. FINITE INTERSECTION PROPERTY
U 1 whose closure doesnt contain x2 . Continue this process whereby choosing a neighbourhood Un Un whose
closure doesnt contain xn. Then the collection {Ui : i N} satises the nite intersection property and hence the
intersection of their closures is nonempty (by the compactness of X). Therefore, there is a point x in this intersection.
No xi can belong to this intersection because xi doesnt belong to the closure of Ui. This means that x is not equal to
xi for all i and f is not surjective; a contradiction. Therefore, X is uncountable.
All the conditions in the statement of the theorem are necessary:
1. We cannot eliminate the Hausdor condition; a countable set with the indiscrete topology is compact, has more
than one point, and satises the property that no one point sets are open, but is not uncountable.
2. We cannot eliminate the compactness condition as the set of all rational numbers shows.
3. We cannot eliminate the condition that one point sets cannot be open as a nite space as the discrete topology
shows.
Corollary. Every closed interval [a, b] with a < b is uncountable. Therefore, R is uncountable.
Corollary. Every perfect, locally compact Hausdor space is uncountable.
Proof. Let X be a perfect, compact, Hausdor space, then the theorem immediately implies that X is uncountable.
If X is a perfect, locally compact Hausdor space which is not compact, then the one-point compactication of X is
a perfect, compact Hausdor space. Therefore, the one point compactication of X is uncountable. Since removing
a point from an uncountable set still leaves an uncountable set, X is uncountable as well.
17.4 Examples
A lter has the nite intersection property by denition.
17.5 Theorems
Let X be nonempty, F 2X , F having the nite intersection property. Then there exists an F ultralter (in 2X ) such
that F F.
See details and proof in Csirmaz & Hajnal (1994).[3] This result is known as ultralter lemma.
17.6 Variants
A family of sets A has the strong nite intersection property (sp), if every nite subfamily of A has innite
intersection.
17.7 References
[1] Munkres, James (2004). Topology. New Dehli: Prentice-Hall of India. p. 169. ISBN 978-81-203-2046-8.
[2] A space is compact i any family of closed sets having p has non-empty intersection. PlanetMath.
[3] Csirmaz, Lszl; Hajnal, Andrs (1994), Matematikai logika (In Hungarian), Budapest: Etvs Lornd University.
Finite intersection property. PlanetMath.

Chapter 18
Fishers inequality
Fishers inequality, is a necessary condition for the existence of a balanced incomplete block design, that is, a system
of subsets that satisfy certain prescribed conditions in combinatorial mathematics. Outlined by Ronald Fisher, a
population geneticist and statistician, who was concerned with the design of experiments; studying the dierences
among several dierent varieties of plants, under each of a number of dierent growing conditions, called blocks.
Let:
v be the number of varieties of plants;
b be the number of blocks.
To be a balanced incomplete block design it is required that:
k dierent varieties are in each block, k < v; no variety occurs twice in any one block;
any two varieties occur together in exactly blocks;
each variety occurs in exactly r blocks.
Fishers inequality states simply that
b v.
18.1 Proof
Let the incidence matrix M be a v b matrix dened so that M, is 1 if element i is in block j and 0 otherwise. Then
B = MMT is a v v matrix such that B, = r and B, = for i j. Since r , det(B) 0, so rank(B) = v; on the
other hand, rank(B) = rank(M) b, so v b.
18.2 Generalization
Fishers inequality is valid for more general classes of designs. A pairwise balanced design (or PBD) is a set X together
with a family of subsets of X (which need not have the same size and may contain repeats) such that every pair of
distinct elements of X is contained in exactly (a positive integer) subsets. The set X is allowed to be one of the
subsets, and if all the subsets are copies of X, the PBD is called trivial. The size of X is v and the number of subsets
in the family (counted with multiplicity) is b.
Theorem: For any non-trivial PBD, v b.[1]
This result also generalizes the ErdsDe Bruijn theorem:
69
70 CHAPTER 18. FISHERS INEQUALITY
Ronald Fisher
For a PBD with = 1 having no blocks of size 1 or size v, v b, with equality if and only if the PBD is a projective
plane or a near-pencil (meaning that exactly n 1 of the points are collinear).[2]
In another
( )direction, Ray-Chaudhuri and Wilson proved in 1975 that in a 2s-(v, k, ) design, the number of blocks is
at least vs .[3]
18.3 Notes
[1] Stinson 2003, pg.193
[2] Stinson 2003, pg.183

18.4. REFERENCES 71
[3] Ray-Chaudhuri, Dijen K.; Wilson, Richard M. (1975), On t-designs, Osaka Journal of Mathematics, 12: 737744, MR
0592624, Zbl 0342.05018
18.4 References
0-387-95487-2
Street, Anne Penfold; Street, Deborah J. (1987). Combinatorics of Experimental Design. Oxford U. P. [Claren-
don]. pp. 400+xiv. ISBN 0-19-853256-3.
Chapter 19
Generalized quadrangle
GQ(2,2), the Doily
In geometry, a generalized quadrangle is an incidence structure whose main feature is the lack of any triangles (yet
containing many quadrangles). A generalized quadrangle is by denition a polar space of rank two. They are the
generalized n-gons with n = 4 and near 2n-gons with n = 2. They are also precisely the partial geometries pg(s,t,)
72
19.1. DEFINITION 73
with = 1.
19.1 Denition
A generalized quadrangle is an incidence structure (P,B,I), with I P B an incidence relation, satisfying certain
axioms. Elements of P are by denition the points of the generalized quadrangle, elements of B the lines. The axioms
are the following:
There is an s (s 1) such that on every line there are exactly s + 1 points. There is at most one point on two
distinct lines.
There is a t (t 1) such that through every point there are exactly t + 1 lines. There is at most one line through
two distinct points.
For every point p not on a line L, there is a unique line M and a unique point q, such that p is on M, and q on
M and L.
(s,t) are the parameters of the generalized quadrangle. The parameters are allowed to be innite. If either s or t is
one, the generalized quadrangle is called trivial. For example, the 3x3 grid with P = {1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9} and B =
{123, 456, 789, 147, 258, 369} is a trivial GQ with s = 2 and t = 1. A generalized quadrangle with parameters (s,t)
is often denoted by GQ(s,t).
The smallest non-trivial generalized quadrangle is GQ(2,2), whose representation has been dubbed the doily by
Stan Payne in 1973.
19.2 Properties
|P | = (st + 1)(s + 1)
|B| = (st + 1)(t + 1)
(s + t)|st(s + 1)(t + 1)
s = 1 = t s2
t = 1 = s t2
19.3 Graphs
There are two interesting graphs that can be obtained from a generalized quadrangle.
The collinearity graph having as vertices the points of a generalized quadrangle, with the collinear points
connected. This graph is a strongly regular graph with parameters ((s+1)(st+1), s(t+1), s-1, t+1) where (s,t) is
the order of the GQ.
The incidence graph whose vertices are the points and lines of the generalized quadrangle and two vertices are
adjacent if one is a point, the other a line and the point lies on the line. The incidence graph of a generalized
quadrangle is characterized by being a connected, bipartite graph with diameter four and girth eight. Therefore
it is an example of a Cage. Incidence graphs of congurations are today generally called Levi graphs, but the
original Levi graph was the incidence graph of the GQ(2,2).
19.4 Duality
If (P,B,I) is a generalized quadrangle with parameters (s,t), then (B,P,I1 ), with I1 the inverse incidence relation, is
also a generalized quadrangle. This is the dual generalized quadrangle. Its parameters are (t,s). Even if s = t, the dual
structure need not be isomorphic with the original structure.
74 CHAPTER 19. GENERALIZED QUADRANGLE
Line graph of generalized quadrangle GQ(2,4)
19.5 Generalized quadrangles with lines of size 3

There are precisely ve (possible degenerate) generalized quadrangles where each line has three points incident with
it, the quadrangle with empty line set, the quadrangle with all lines through a xed point corresponding to the windmill
graph Wd(3,n), grid of size 3x3, the W(2) quadrangle and the unique GQ(2,4). These ve quadrangles corresponds
to the ve root systems in the ADE classes An, Dn, E6, E7 and E8 , i.e., the simply laced root systems. See [1] and.[2]
19.6 Classical generalized quadrangles

When looking at the dierent cases for polar spaces of rank at least three, and extrapolating them to rank 2, one nds
these (nite) generalized quadrangles :
A hyperbolic quadric Q+ (3, q) , a parabolic quadric Q(4, q) and an elliptic quadric Q (5, q) are the only
possible quadrics in projective spaces over nite elds with projective index 1. We nd these parameters
respectively :
Q(3, q) : s = q, t = 1
19.7. NON-CLASSICAL EXAMPLES 75
Q(4, q) : s = q, t = q
Q(5, q) : s = q, t = q 2
A hermitian variety H(n, q 2 ) has projective index 1 if and only if n is 3 or 4. We nd :
H(3, q 2 ) : s = q 2 , t = q
H(4, q 2 ) : s = q 2 , t = q 3
A symplectic polarity in P G(2d + 1, q) has a maximal isotropic subspace of dimension 1 if and only if d = 1
. Here, we nd a generalized quadrangle W (3, q) , with s = q, t = q .
The generalized quadrangle derived from Q(4, q) is always isomorphic with the dual of W (3, q) , and they are both
self-dual and thus isomorphic to each other if and only if q is even.
19.7 Non-classical examples

Let O be a hyperoval in P G(2, q) with q an even prime power, and embed that projective (desarguesian) plane
into P G(3, q) . Now consider the incidence structure T2 (O) where the points are all points not in ,
the lines are those not on , intersecting in a point of O, and the incidence is the natural one. This is a
(q-1,q+1)-generalized quadrangle.
Let q be a prime power (odd or even) and consider a symplectic polarity in P G(3, q) . Choose a random
point p and dene = p . Let the lines of our incidence structure be all absolute lines not on together with
all lines through p which are not on , and let the points be all points of P G(3, q) except those in . The
incidence is again the natural one. We obtain once again a (q-1,q+1)-generalized quadrangle
19.8 Restrictions on parameters

By using grids and dual grids, any integer z, z 1 allows generalized quadrangles with parameters (1,z) and (z,1).
Apart from that, only the following parameters have been found possible until now, with q an arbitrary prime power :
(q, q)
(q, q 2 ) and (q 2 , q)
(q 2 , q 3 ) and (q 3 , q 2 )
(q 1, q + 1) and (q + 1, q 1)
19.9 References
[1] Cameron P.J.; Goethals, J.M.; Seidel, J.J; Shult, E. E. Line graphs, root systems and elliptic geometry
[2] http://www.win.tue.nl/~{}aeb/2WF02/genq.pdf
S. E. Payne and J. A. Thas. Finite generalized quadrangles. Research Notes in Mathematics, 110. Pitman
(Advanced Publishing Program), Boston, MA, 1984. vi+312 pp. ISBN 0-273-08655-3, link http://cage.ugent.
be/~{}bamberg/FGQ.pdf
Chapter 20
Greedoid
In combinatorics, a greedoid is a type of set system. It arises from the notion of the matroid, which was originally
introduced by Whitney in 1935 to study planar graphs and was later used by Edmonds to characterize a class of opti-
mization problems that can be solved by greedy algorithms. Around 1980, Korte and Lovsz introduced the greedoid
to further generalize this characterization of greedy algorithms; hence the name greedoid. Besides mathematical
optimization, greedoids have also been connected to graph theory, language theory, poset theory, and other areas of
mathematics.
20.1 Denitions
A set system (F, E) is a collection F of subsets of a ground set E (i.e. F is a subset of the power set of E). When
considering a greedoid, a member of F is called a feasible set. When considering a matroid, a feasible set is also
known as an independent set.
An accessible set system (F, E) is a set system in which every nonempty feasible set X contains an element x such
that X\{x} is feasible. This implies that any nonempty, nite, accessible set system necessarily contains the empty
set .[1]
A greedoid (F, E) is an accessible set system that satises the exchange property:
for all X,Y F with |X| > |Y|, there is some x X\Y such that Y{x} F
(Note: Some people reserve the term exchange property for a condition on the bases of a greedoid, and prefer to call
the above condition the Augmentation Property.)
A basis of a greedoid is a maximal feasible set, meaning it is a feasible set but not contained in any other one. A
basis of a subset X of E is a maximal feasible set contained in X.
The rank of a greedoid is the size of a basis. By the exchange property, all bases have the same size. Thus, the rank
function is well dened. The rank of a subset X of E is the size of a basis of X.
20.2 Classes of greedoids

Most classes of greedoids have many equivalent denitions in terms of set system, language, poset, simplicial complex,
and so on. The following description takes the traditional route of listing only a couple of the more well-known
characterizations.
An interval greedoid (F, E) is a greedoid that satises the Interval Property:
if A, B, C F with A B C, then, for all x E\C, (A{x} F and C{x} F) implies B{x} F
Equivalently, an interval greedoid is a greedoid such that the union of any two feasible sets is feasible if it is contained
in another feasible set.
76
20.3. EXAMPLES 77
An antimatroid (F, E) is a greedoid that satises the Interval Property without Upper Bounds:
if A, B F with A B, then, for all x E\B, A{x} F implies B{x} F
Equivalently, an antimatroid is (i) a greedoid with a unique basis; or (ii) an accessible set system closed under union.
It is easy to see that an antimatroid is also an interval greedoid.
A matroid (F, E) is a non-empty greedoid that satises the Interval Property without Lower Bounds:
if B, C F with B C, then, for all x E\C, C{x} F implies B{x} F
It is easy to see that a matroid is also an interval greedoid.
20.3 Examples
Consider an undirected graph G. Let the ground set be the edges of G and the feasible sets be the edge set of
each forest (i.e. subgraph containing no cycle) of G. This set system is called the cycle matroid. A set system
is said to be a graphic matroid if it is the cycle matroid of some graph. (Originally cycle matroid was dened
on circuits, or minimal dependent sets. Hence the name cycle.)
Consider a nite, undirected graph G rooted at the vertex r. Let the ground set be the vertices of G and the
feasible sets be the vertex subsets containing r that induce connected subgraphs of G. This is called the vertex
search greedoid and is a kind of antimatroid.
Consider a nite, directed graph D rooted at r. Let the ground set be the (directed) edges of D and the feasible
sets be the edge sets of each directed subtree rooted at r with all edges pointing away from r. This is called the
line search greedoid, or directed branching greedoid. It is an interval greedoid, but neither an antimatroid
nor a matroid.
Consider an m-by-n matrix M. Let the ground set E be the indices of the columns from 1 to n and the feasible
sets be F = {X E: submatrix M{,...,|X|},X is an invertible matrix}. This is called the Gaussian elimination
greedoid because this structure underlies the Gaussian elimination algorithm. It is a greedoid, but not an
interval greedoid.
20.4 Greedy algorithm

In general, a greedy algorithm is just an iterative process in which a locally best choice, usually an input of minimum
weight, is chosen each round until all available choices have been exhausted. In order to describe a greedoid-based
condition in which a greedy algorithm is optimal, we need some more common terminologies in greedoid theory.
Without loss of generality, we consider a greedoid G = (F, E) with E nite.
A subset X of E is rank feasible if the largest intersection of X with any feasible set has size equal to the rank of X.
In a matroid, every subset of E is rank feasible. But the equality does not hold for greedoids in general.
A function w: E is R-compatible if {x E: w(x) c} is rank feasible for all real numbers c.
An objective function f: 2S is linear over a set S if, for all X S, we have f(X) = X w(x) for some weight
function w: S .
Proposition. A greedy algorithm is optimal for every R-compatible linear objective function over a greedoid.
The intuition behind this proposition is that, during the iterative process, each optimal exchange of minimum weight
is made possible by the exchange property, and optimal results are obtainable from the feasible sets in the underlying
greedoid. This result guarantees the optimality of many well-known algorithms. For example, a minimum spanning
tree of a weighted graph may be obtained using Kruskals algorithm, which is a greedy algorithm for the cycle matroid.
78 CHAPTER 20. GREEDOID
20.5 See also

Matroid
Polymatroid
20.6 References
[1] Note that the accessibility property is strictly weaker than the hereditary property of a matroid, which requires that every
subset of an independent set be independent.
Bjrner, Anders; Ziegler, Gnter M. (1992), White, Neil, ed., Matroid Applications, Matroid applications,
Encyclopedia of Mathematics and its Applications, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 40, pp. 284
357, ISBN 0-521-38165-7, MR 1165537, Zbl 0772.05026, doi:10.1017/CBO9780511662041.009 |chapter=
ignored (help)
Edmonds, Jack (1971), Matroids and the greedy algorithm, Mathematical Programming, 1: 127136, Zbl
0253.90027, doi:10.1007/BF01584082.
Helman, Paul; Moret, Bernard M. E.; Shapiro, Henry D. (1993), An exact characterization of greedy struc-
tures, SIAM Journal on Discrete Mathematics, 6 (2): 274283, Zbl 0798.68061, doi:10.1137/0406021.
Korte, Bernhard; Lovsz, Lszl (1981), Mathematical structures underlying greedy algorithms, in Gecseg,
Ferenc, Fundamentals of Computation Theory: Proceedings of the 1981 International FCT-Conference, Szeged,
Hungaria, August 2428, 1981, Lecture Notes in Computer Science, 117, Berlin: Springer-Verlag, pp. 205
209, Zbl 0473.68019, doi:10.1007/3-540-10854-8_22.
Korte, Bernhard; Lovsz, Lszl; Schrader, Rainer (1991), Greedoids, Algorithms and Combinatorics, 4, New
York, Berlin: Springer-Verlag, ISBN 3-540-18190-3, Zbl 0733.05023.
Oxley, James G. (1992), Matroid theory, Oxford Science Publications, Oxford: Oxford University Press, ISBN
0-19-853563-5, Zbl 0784.05002.
Whitney, Hassler (1935), On the abstract properties of linear independence, American Journal of Mathe-
matics, 57 (3): 509533, JSTOR 2371182, Zbl 0012.00404, doi:10.2307/2371182.
20.7 External links

Introduction to Greedoids
Theory of Greedy Algorithms

Submodular Functions and Optimization
Matchings, Matroids and Submodular Functions

Chapter 21
Growth function
The growth function, also called the shatter coecient or the shattering number, measures the richness of a
set family. It is especially used in the context of statistical learning theory, where it measures the complexity of a
hypothesis class. The term 'growth function' was coined by Vapnik and Chervonenkis in their 1968 paper, where
they also proved many of its properties.[1] It is a basic concept in machine learning.[2] [3]
21.1 Denitions
21.1.1 Set-family denition

Let H be a set family (a set of sets) and C a set. Their intersection is dened as the following set-family:
H C := {h C | h H}
The intersection-size (also called the index) of H with respect to C is |H C| . Obviously, if a set Cm has m
elements then the index is at most 2m .
The growth function measures the size of H C as a function of |C| . Formally:
Growth(H, m) := max |H C|
C:|C|=m
21.1.2 Hypothesis-class denition

Equivalently, let H be a hypothesis-class (a set of binary functions) and C a set with m elements. The restriction of
H to C is the set of binary functions on C that can be derived from H :[3]:45
HC := {(h(x1 ), . . . , h(xm )) | h H, xi C}
The growth function measures the size of HC as a function of |C| :[3]:49
Growth(H, m) := max |H C|(H, m) := max |HC |

C:|C|=m C:|C|=m
21.2 Examples
1. The domain is the real line R . The set-family H contains all the half-lines (rays) from a given number to positive
innity, i.e., all sets of the form {x > x0 | x R} for some x0 R . For any set C of m real numbers, the
79
80 CHAPTER 21. GROWTH FUNCTION
intersection H C contains m + 1 sets: the empty set, the set containing the largest element of C , the set containing
the two largest elements of C , and so on. Therefore: Growth(H, m) = m + 1 .[1]:Ex.1 The same is true whether H
contains open half-lines, closed half-lines, or both.
2. The domain is the segment [0, 1] . The set-family H contains all the open sets. For any set C of m real numbers,
the intersection H C contains all possible subsets of C . There are 2m such subsets, so Growth(H, m) = 2m .
[1]:Ex.2
3. The domain is the Euclidean space Rn . The set-family H contains all the half-spaces of the form: x 1 , where
is a xed vector. Then Growth(H, m) = Comp(n, m) , where Comp is the number of number of components in
a partitioning of an n-dimensional space by m hyperplanes.[1]:Ex.3
4. The domain is the real line R . The set-family H contains all the real intervals, i.e., all sets of the form {x
[x0 , x1 ]|x R} for some x0 , x1 R . For any set C of m real numbers,(the intersection
) H C contains (all runs
) of
between 0 and m consecutive elements of C . The number of such runs is m+1 2 +1 , so Growth(H, m) = m+1 2 +1
.
21.3 Polynomial or exponential

The main property that makes the growth function interesting is that it can be either polynomial or exponential -
nothing in-between.
The following is a property of the intersection-size:[1]:Lem.1
If, for some set Cm of size m , and for some number n m , |H Cm | Comp(n, m) -
then, there exists a subset Cn Cm of size n such that |H Cn | = 2n .
This implies the following property of the Growth function.[1]:Th.1 For every family H there are two cases:
The exponential case: Growth(H, m) = 2m identically.

The polynomial case: Growth(H, m) is majorized by Comp(n, m) mn + 1 , where n is the smallest integer
for which Growth(H, n) < 2n .
21.4 Other properties
21.4.1 Trivial upper bound

For any nite H :
Growth(H, m) |H|
since for every C , the number of elements in H C is at most |H| . Therefore, the growth function is mainly
interesting when H is innite.
21.4.2 Exponential upper bound

For any nonempty H :
Growth(H, m) 2m
I.e, the growth function has an exponential upper-bound.

We say that a set-family H shatters a set C if their intersection contains all possible subsets of C , i.e. H C = 2C
. If H shatters C of size m , then Growth(H, C) = 2m , which is the upper bound.
21.4. OTHER PROPERTIES 81
21.4.3 Cartesian intersection
Dene the Cartesian intersection of two set-families as:

H1 H2 := {h1 h2 | h1 H1 , h2 H2 }
Then:[2]:57

Growth(H1 H2 , m) Growth(H1 , m) Growth(H2 , m)
21.4.4 Union
For every two set-families:[2]:58
Growth(H1 H2 , m) Growth(H1 , m) + Growth(H2 , m)
21.4.5 VC dimension
The VC dimension of H is dened according to these two cases:
In the polynomial case, VCDim(H) = n 1 = the largest integer d for which Growth(H, d) = 2d .
In the exponential case VCDim(H) = .
So VCDim(H) d if-and-only-if Growth(H, d) = 2d .

The growth function can be regarded as a renement of the concept of VC dimension. The VC dimension only tells us
whether Growth(H, d) is equal to or smaller than 2d , while the growth function tells us exactly how Growth(H, m)
changes as a function of m .
Another connection between the growth function and the VC dimension is given by the SauerShelah lemma:[3]:49
If VCDim(H) = d , then:
d ( m)
for all m : Growth(H, m) i=0 i
In particular,
for all m > d + 1 : Growth(H, m) (em/d)d = O(md )

so when the VC dimension is nite, the growth function grows polynomially with m .
This upper bound is tight, i.e, for all m > d there exists H with VC dimension d such that:[2]:56
d ( )
m
Growth(H, m) =
i=0
i
82 CHAPTER 21. GROWTH FUNCTION
21.4.6 Entropy
While the growth-function is related to the maximum intersection-size, the entropy is related to the average inter-
section size:[1]:272273
[ ]
Entropy(H, m) = E|Cm |=m log2 (|H Cm |)
The intersection-size has the following property. For every set-family H :
|H (C1 C2 )| |H C1 | |H C2 |
Hence:
Entropy(H, m1 + m2 ) Entropy(H, m1 ) + Entropy(H, m2 )
Moreover, the sequence Entropy(H, m)/m converges to a constant c [0, 1] when m .

Moreover, the random-variable log2 |H Cm |/m is concentrated near c .
21.5 Applications in probability theory

Let be a set on which a probability measure Pr is dened. Let H be family of subsets of (= a family of events).
Suppose we choose a set Cm that contains m elements of , where each element is chosen at random according to
the probability measure P , independently of the others (i.e, with replacements). For each event h H , we compare
the following two quantities:
Its relative frequency in Cm , i.e, |h Cm |/m ;
Its probability Pr[h] .

We are interested in the dierence, D(h, Cm ) := |h Cm |/m Pr[h] . This dierence satises the following
upper bound:

[ 8(ln Growth(H, 2m) + ln(4/)) ]
Pr h H : D(h, Cm ) > 1
m
which is equivalent to:[1]:Th.2
[ ]
Pr h H : D(h, Cm ) > 1 4 Growth(H, 2m) exp(2 m/8)
In words: the probability that for all events in H , the relative-frequency is near the probability, is lower-bounded by
an expression that depends on the growth-function of H .
A corollary of this is that, i the growth function is polynomial in m (i.e, there exists some n such that Growth(H, m)
mn + 1 ), then the above probability approaches 1 as m . I.e, the family H enjoys uniform convergence in
probability.
21.6. REFERENCES 83
21.6 References
[1] Vapnik, V. N.; Chervonenkis, A. Ya. (1971). On the Uniform Convergence of Relative Frequencies of Events to Their
Probabilities. Theory of Probability & Its Applications. 16 (2): 264. doi:10.1137/1116025. This is an English translation,
by B. Seckler, of the Russian paper: On the Uniform Convergence of Relative Frequencies of Events to Their Probabil-
ities. Dokl. Akad. Nauk. 181 (4): 781. 1968. The translation was reproduced as: Vapnik, V. N.; Chervonenkis, A. Ya.
(2015). On the Uniform Convergence of Relative Frequencies of Events to Their Probabilities. Measures of Complexity.
p. 11. ISBN 978-3-319-21851-9. doi:10.1007/978-3-319-21852-6_3.
[2] Mohri, Mehryar; Rostamizadeh, Afshin; Talwalkar, Ameet (2012). Foundations of Machine Learning. USA, Mas-
sachusetts: MIT Press. ISBN 9780262018258., especially Section 3.2
[3] Shalev-Shwartz, Shai; Ben-David, Shai (2014). Understanding Machine Learning - from Theory to Algorithms. Cambridge
university press. ISBN 9781107057135.
Chapter 22
Incidence structure
In mathematics, an abstract system consisting of two types of objects and a single relationship between these types
of objects is called an incidence structure. Consider the points and lines of the Euclidean plane as the two types of
objects and ignore all the properties of this geometry except for the relation of which points are on which lines for all
points and lines. What is left is the incidence structure of the Euclidean plane.
Incidence structures are most often considered in the geometrical context where they are abstracted from, and hence
generalize, planes (such as ane, projective, and Mbius planes), but the concept is very broad and not limited to
geometric settings. Even in a geometric setting, incidence structures are not limited to just points and lines; higher-
dimensional objects (planes, solids, n-spaces, conics, etc.) can be used. The study of nite structures is sometimes
called nite geometry.[1]
22.1 Formal denition and terminology

An incidence structure is a triple (P, L, I) where P is a set whose elements are called points, L is a disjoint set whose
elements are called lines and I P L is the incidence relation. The elements of I are called ags. If (p, l) is in I
then it was typical to say that point p lies on line l or that the line l passes through point p. However, today a more
symmetric terminology is preferred to reect the symmetric nature of this relation, so one says that "p is incident
with l" or that "l is incident with p" and uses the notation p I l in lieu of (p, l) I.[2]
In some common situations L may be a set of subsets of P in which case incidence I will be containment (p I l if and
only if p is a member of l). Incidence structures of this type are called set-theoretic.[3] This is not always the case, for
example, if P is a set of vectors and L a set of square matrices, we may dene I = {(v, M) : vector v is an eigenvector
of matrix M }. This example also shows that while the geometric language of points and lines is used, the object
types need not be these geometric objects.
22.2 Examples
Main article: Incidence geometry
An incidence structure is uniform if each line is incident with the same number of points. Each of these examples,
except the second, is uniform with three points per line.
Any graph (need not be simple, loops and multiple edges are allowed) is a uniform incidence structure with two points
per line. For these examples, the vertices of the graph form the point set, the edges of the graph form the line set,
and incidence means that a vertex is an endpoint of an edge.
Incidence structures are seldom studied in their full generality; it is typical to study incidence structures that satisfy
some additional axioms. For instance, a partial linear space is an incidence structure that satises:
1. Any two distinct points are incident with at most one common line, and
2. Every line is incident with at least two points.
84
22.3. DUAL STRUCTURE 85
If the rst axiom above is replaced by the stronger:
1. Any two distinct points are incident with exactly one common line,
the incidence structure is called a linear space.[4][5]
22.3 Dual structure

If we interchange the role of points and lines in
C = (P, L, I)
we obtain the dual structure,
C = (L, P, I ),
where I is the inverse relation of I. It follows immediately from the denition that:
C = C.
This is an abstract version of projective duality.[2]

A structure C that is isomorphic to its dual C is called self-dual. The Fano plane above is a self-dual incidence
structure.
22.4 Other terminology

The concept of an incidence structure is very simple and has arisen in several disciplines, each introducing its own
vocabulary and specifying the types of questions that are typically asked about these structures. Incidence structures
use a geometric terminology, but in graph theoretic terms they are called hypergraphs and in design theoretic terms
they are called block designs. They are also known as a set system or family of sets in a general context.
22.4.1 Hypergraphs
Main article: Hypergraph

Each hypergraph or set system can be regarded as an incidence structure in which the universal set plays the role of
points, the corresponding family of sets plays the role of lines and the incidence relation is set membership "".
Conversely, every incidence structure can be viewed as a hypergraph by identifying the lines with the sets of points
that are incident with them.
22.4.2 Block designs
Main article: Block design
A (general) block design is a set X together with a family of subsets (repeated subsets are allowed), F of X. As an
incidence structure, X is the set of points, F the set of lines, usually called blocks in this context (repeated blocks
must have distinct names, so F is actually a set and not a multiset). If all the subsets in F have the same size, the
block design is called uniform. If each element of X appears in the same number of subsets, the block design is said
to be regular. The dual of a uniform design is a regular design and vice versa.
86 CHAPTER 22. INCIDENCE STRUCTURE
Example: Fano plane
Consider the block design/hypergraph given by:
P = {1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7}
L = {{1, 2, 3}, {1, 4, 5}, {1, 6, 7}, {2, 4, 6}, {2, 5, 7}, {3, 4, 7}, {3, 5, 6}}
This incidence structure is called the Fano plane. As a block design it is both uniform and regular.
In the labeling given, the lines are precisely the subsets of the points that consist of three points whose labels add up
to zero using nim addition. Alternatively, each number, when written in binary, can be identied with a non-zero
vector of length three over the binary eld. Three vectors that generate a subspace form a line; in this case, that is
equivalent to their vector sum being the zero vector.
22.5 Representations
Incidence structures may be represented in many ways. If the sets P and L are nite these representations can com-
pactly encode all the relevant information concerning the structure.
22.5.1 Incidence matrix
Main article: Incidence matrix
The incidence matrix of a (nite) incidence structure is a matrix with entries 0 or 1 that has its rows indexed by the
points { p } and columns indexed by the lines {l } where the ij-th entry is a 1 if p I l and 0 otherwise.[6] An incidence
matrix is not uniquely determined since it depends upon the arbitrary ordering of the points and the lines.[7]
The non-uniform incidence structure pictured above (#2 of the examples) is given by:
P = { A, B, C, D, E, P }
L = { l = { C, P, E }, m = { P }, n = { P, D }, o = { P, A }, p = { A, B }, q = { P, B } }.
An incidence matrix for this structure is :

0 0 0 1 1 0
0 0 0 0 1 1

1 0 0 0 0 0

0 0 1 0 0 0

1 0 0 0 0 0
1 1 1 1 0 1
which corresponds to the incidence table:
If an incidence structure C has an incidence matrix M, then the dual structure C has the transpose matrix M T as its
incidence matrix (and is dened by that matrix).
An incidence structure is self-dual if there exists an ordering of the points and lines so that the incidence matrix
constructed with that ordering is a symmetric matrix.
With the labels as given in example #1 above and with points ordered A, B, C, D, G, F, E and lines ordered l, p, n, s,
r, m, q, the Fano plane has the incidence matrix:
22.5. REPRESENTATIONS 87

1 1 1 0 0 0 0
1 0 0 1 1 0 0

1 0 0 0 0 1 1

0 1 0 1 0 1 0
.
0 1 0 0 1 0 1

0 0 1 1 0 0 1
0 0 1 0 1 1 0
Since this is a symmetric matrix, the Fano plane is a self-dual incidence structure.
22.5.2 Pictorial representations
An incidence gure (that is, a depiction of an incidence structure), is constructed by representing the points by dots
in a plane and having some visual means of joining the dots to correspond to lines.[7] The dots may be placed in any
manner, there are no restrictions on distances between points or any relationships between points. In an incidence
structure there is no concept of a point being between two other points; the order of points on a line is undened.
Compare this with ordered geometry, which does have a notion of betweenness. The same statements can be made
about the depictions of the lines. In particular, lines need not be depicted by straight line segments (see examples
1, 3 and 4 above). As with the pictorial representation of graphs, the crossing of two lines at anyplace other than a
dot, has no meaning in terms of the incidence structure, it is only an accident of the representation. These incidence
gures may at times resemble graphs, but they aren't graphs unless the incidence structure is a graph.
Realizability
Incidence structures can be modelled by points and curves in the Euclidean plane with the usual geometric meaning
of incidence. Some incidence structures admit representation by points and (straight) lines. Structures that can be are
called realizable. If no ambient space is mentioned then the Euclidean plane is assumed. The Fano plane (#1 above)
is not realizable since it needs at least one curve. The Mbius-Kantor conguration (#4 above) is not realizable in
the Euclidean plane, but it is realizable in the complex plane.[8] On the other hand, examples #2 and #5 above are
realizable and the incidence gures given there demonstrate this. Steinitz (1894)[9] has shown that n3 -congurations
(incidence structures with n points and n lines, three points per line and three lines through each point) are either
realizable or require the use of only one curved line in their representations.[10] The Fano plane is the unique (73 ) and
the Mbius-Kantor conguration is the unique (83 ).
22.5.3 Incidence graph (Levi graph)
Each incidence structure C corresponds to a bipartite graph called the Levi graph or incidence graph of the structure.
As any bipartite graph is two colorable, the Levi graph can be given a black and white vertex coloring, where black
vertices correspond to points and white vertices correspond to lines of C. The edges of this graph correspond to the
ags (incident point/line pairs) of the incidence structure. The original Levi graph was the incidence graph of the
generalized quadrangle of order two (example #3 above),[11] but the term has been extended by H.S.M. Coxeter[12]
to refer to an incidence graph of any incidence structure.[13]
Levi graph examples
The Levi graph of the Fano plane is the Heawood graph. Since the Heawood graph is connected and vertex-transitive,
there exists an automorphism (such as the one dened by a reection about the vertical axis in the gure of the
Heawood graph) interchanging black and white vertices. This, in turn, implies that the Fano plane is self-dual.
The specic representation, on the left, of the Levi graph of the Mbius-Kantor conguration (example #4 above)
illustrates that a rotation of /4 about the center (either clockwise or counterclockwise) of the diagram interchanges
the blue and red vertices and maps edges to edges. That is to say that there exists a color interchanging automorphism
of this graph. Consequently, the incidence structure known as the Mbius-Kantor conguration is self-dual.
22.6 Generalization
It is possible to generalize the notion of an incidence structure to include more than two types of objects. A structure
with k types of objects is called an incidence structure of rank k or a rank k geometry.[13] Formally these are dened
as k + 1 tuples S = (P 1 , P 2 , ..., P , I) with P P = and

I Pi Pj .
i<j
The Levi graph for these structures is dened as a multipartite graph with vertices corresponding to each type being
colored the same.
22.7 See also
Binary relation
Incidence (geometry)
Incidence geometry
Projective conguration
22.8 Notes
[1] Colbourn & Dinitz 2007, p. 702
[2] Dembowski 1968, pp. 12
[3] Biliotti, Jha & Johnson 2001, p. 508
[4] The term linear space is also used to refer to vector spaces, but this will rarely cause confusion.
[5] Moorhouse 2007, p. 5
[6] The other convention of indexing the rows by lines and the columns by points is also widely used.
[7] Beth, Jungnickel & Lenz 1986, p. 17
[8] Pisanski & Servatius 2014, p. 222
[9] E. Steinitz (1894), ber die Construction der Congurationen n3 , Dissertation, Breslau
[10] Gropp, Harald (1997), Congurations and their realizations, Discrete Mathematics, 174: 137151, doi:10.1016/s0012-
365x(96)00327-5
[11] Levi, F. W. (1942), Finite Geometrical Systems, Calcutta: University of Calcutta, MR 0006834
[12] Coxeter, H.S.M. (1950), Self-dual congurations and regular graphs, Bulletin of the American Mathematical Society, 56:
413455, doi:10.1090/s0002-9904-1950-09407-5
[13] Pisanski & Servatius 2014, p. 158

22.9. REFERENCES 89
22.9 References
Beth, Thomas; Jungnickel, Dieter; Lenz, Hanfried (1986), Design Theory, Cambridge University Press, ISBN
3-411-01675-2
Biliotti, Mauro; Jha, Vikram; Johnson, Norman L. (2001), Foundations of Translation Planes, Marcel Dekker,
ISBN 0-8247-0609-9
Dembowski, Peter (1968), Finite geometries, Ergebnisse der Mathematik und ihrer Grenzgebiete, Band 44,
Berlin, New York: Springer-Verlag, ISBN 3-540-61786-8, MR 0233275
Incidence Geometry (2007) by Eric Moorhouse

Pisanski, Toma; Servatius, Brigitte (2013), Congurations from a Graphical Viewpoint, Springer, ISBN 978-
0-8176-8363-4, doi:10.1007/978-0-8176-8364-1
22.10 Further reading

CRC Press (2000). Handbook of discrete and combinatorial mathematics, (Chapter 12.2), ISBN 0-8493-0149-
1
Harold L. Dorwart (1966) The Geometry of Incidence, Prentice Hall
A B C D E F
a 1 0 0 1 1 0
b 1 1 0 0 0 1
22.10. FURTHER READING 91
3 5
2 6 4
Seven points are elements of seven lines in the Fano plane

1,7,6
1 1,3,2
6
2,6,4
4 2,7,5
7
1,5,4
5
3 3,7,4
3,5,6
Heawood graph with labeling
22.10. FURTHER READING 93
Levi graph of the Mbius-Kantor conguration (#4)

Chapter 23
Kirkmans schoolgirl problem
Original publication of the problem
Kirkmans schoolgirl problem is a problem in combinatorics proposed by Rev. Thomas Penyngton Kirkman in
1850 as Query VI in The Ladys and Gentlemans Diary (pg.48). The problem states:
Fifteen young ladies in a school walk out three abreast for seven days in succession: it is required to
arrange them daily so that no two shall walk twice abreast.[1]
23.1 Solution
If the girls are numbered from 01 to 15, the following arrangement is one solution:[2]
94
23.2. HISTORY 95
A solution to this problem is an example of a Kirkman triple system,[3] which is a Steiner triple system having a
parallelism, that is, a partition of the blocks of the triple system into parallel classes which are themselves partitions
of the points into disjoint blocks.
There are seven non-isomorphic solutions to the schoolgirl problem.[4] Two of these can be visualized as relations
between a tetrahedron and its vertices, edges, and faces.[5] An approach using projective geometry of three dimensions
over GF(2) is given below.
23.2 History
The rst solution was published by Arthur Cayley.[6] This was shortly followed by Kirkmans own solution[7] which
was given as a special case of his considerations on combinatorial arrangements published three years prior.[8] J. J.
Sylvester also investigated the problem and ended up declaring that Kirkman stole the idea from him. The puzzle
appeared in several recreational mathematics books at the turn of the century by Lucas,[9] Rouse Ball,[10] Ahrens,[11]
and Dudeney.[12]
Kirkman often complained about the fact that his substantial paper (Kirkman 1847) was totally eclipsed by the popular
interest in the schoolgirl problem.[13]
23.3 Galois geometry

In 1910 the problem was addressed using Galois geometry by George Conwell[14]
The Galois eld GF(2) with two elements is used with four homogeneous coordinates to form PG(3,2) which has 15
points, 3 points to a line, 7 points and 7 lines in a plane. A plane can be considered a complete quadrilateral together
with the line through its diagonal points. Each point is on 7 lines, and there are 35 lines in all.
The lines of PG(3,2) are identied by their Plcker coordinates in PG(5,2) with 63 points, 35 of which represent
lines of PG(3,2). These 35 points form the surface S known as the Klein quadric. For each of the 28 points o S
there are 6 lines through it which do not intersect S.[14]:67
As there are seven days in a week, the heptad is an important part of the solution:
When two points as A and B of the line ABC are chosen, each of the ve other lines through A is met
by only one of the ve other lines through B. The ve points determined by the intersections of these
pairs of lines, together with the two points A and B we designate a heptad.[14]:68
A heptad is determined by any two of its points. Each of the 28 points o S lies in two heptads. There are 8 heptads.
The projective linear group PGL(3,2) is isomorphic the alternating group on the 8 heptads.[14]:69
The schoolgirl problem consists in nding seven lines in the 5-space which do not intersect and such that any two
lines always have a heptad in common.[14]:74
23.3.1 Spreads and packing

A partition of points into lines is called a spread, and the partition of the spreads of a geometry is called a packing.[15]:66
When Hirschfeld considered the problem in his Finite Projective Spaces of Three Dimensions (1985), he noted that a
solution corresponds to a packing of PG(3,2), essentially as described by Conwell above.[15]:69
23.4 Generalization
The problem can be generalized to n girls, where n must be an odd multiple of 3 (that is n 3 (mod 6) ), walking
in triplets for 12 (n 1) days, with the requirement, again, that no pair of girls walk in the same row twice. The
solution to this generalisation is a Steiner triple system, an S(2, 3, 6t + 3) with parallelism (that is, one in which each
of the 6t + 3 elements occurs exactly once in each block of 3-element sets), known as a Kirkman triple system.[2] It
is this generalization of the problem that Kirkman discussed rst, while the famous special case n = 15 was only
96 CHAPTER 23. KIRKMANS SCHOOLGIRL PROBLEM
proposed later.[8] A complete solution to the general case was published by D. K. Ray-Chaudhuri and R. M. Wilson
in 1968,[16] though it had already been solved by Lu Jiaxi in 1965,[17] but had not been published at that time.[18]
Many variations of the basic problem can be considered. Alan Hartman solves a problem of this type with the
requirement that no trio walks in a row of four more than once[19] using Steiner quadruple systems.
More recently a similar problem known as the Social Golfer Problem has gained interest that deals with 20 golfers
who want to get to play with dierent people each day in groups of 4.
As this is a regrouping strategy where all groups are orthogonal, this process within the problem of organising a
large group into smaller groups where no two people share the same group twice can be referred to as orthogonal
regrouping. However, this term is currently not commonly used and evidence suggests that there is no common name
for the process.
23.5 Other applications

Progressive dinner party designs
Speed Networking events
Cooperative learning strategy for increasing interaction within classroom teaching
Sports Competitions
23.6 Notes
[1] Graham, Grtschel & Lovsz 1995
[2] Ball, W.W. Rouse; Coxeter, H.S.M. (1974), Mathematical Recreations & Essays, University of Toronto Press, ISBN 0-
8020-1844-0
[3] Weisstein, Eric W. Kirkmans Schoolgirl Problem. MathWorld.
[4] Cole, F.W. (1922), Kirkman parades, Bulletin of the American Mathematical Society, 28: 435437, doi:10.1090/S0002-
9904-1922-03599-9
[5] Falcone, Giovanni; Pavone, Marco (2011), Kirkmans Tetrahedron and the Fifteen Schoolgirl Problem, American Math-
ematical Monthly, 118: 887900, doi:10.4169/amer.math.monthly.118.10.887
[6] Cayley, A. (1850), On the triadic arrangements of seven and fteen things, Philosophical Magazine, 37: 5053, doi:10.1080/147864450086465
[7] Kirkman 1850
[8] Kirkman 1847
[9] Lucas 1883
[10] Rouse Ball 1892
[11] Ahrens 1901
[12] Dudeney 1917
[13] Cummings 1918
[14] George M. Conwell (1910) The 3-space PG(3,2) and its Groups, Annals of Mathematics 11:6076 doi:10.2307/1967582
[15] Hirschfeld, J.W.P. (1985), Finite Projective Spaces of Three Dimensions, Oxford University Press, ISBN 0-19-853536-8
[16] Ray-Chaudhuri & Wilson 1971
[17] Jiaxi 1990
[18] Colbourn & Dinitz 2007, p. 13
[19] Hartman 1980

23.7. REFERENCES 97
23.7 References
Ahrens, W. (1901), Mathematische Unterhaltungen und Spiele, Leipzig: Teubner
Cummings, L.D. (1918), An undervalued Kirkman paper, Bulletin of the American Mathematical Society,
24: 336339, doi:10.1090/S0002-9904-1918-03086-3
Dudeney, H.E. (1917), Amusements in Mathematics, New York: Dover
Graham, Ronald L.; Grtschel, Martin; Lovsz, Lszl (1995), Handbook of Combinatorics, Volume 2, Cambridge,
MA: The MIT Press, ISBN 0-262-07171-1 More than one of |author2-link= and |author-link2= specied (help)
Hartman, Alan (1980), Kirkmans trombone player problem, Ars Combinatoria, 10: 1926
Jiaxi, Lu (1990), Collected Works of Lu Jiaxi on Combinatorial Designs, Huhhot: Inner Mongolia Peoples
Press
Kirkman, Thomas P. (1847), On a Problem in Combinations, The Cambridge and Dublin Mathematical
Journal, Macmillan, Barclay, and Macmillan, II: 191204
Kirkman, Thomas P. (1850), Note on an unanswered prize question, The Cambridge and Dublin Mathemat-
ical Journal, Macmillan, Barclay and Macmillan, 5: 255262
Lucas, . (1883), Rcrations Mathmatiques, 2, Paris: Gauthier-Villars
Ray-Chaudhuri, D.K.; Wilson, R.M. (1971), Solution of Kirkmans schoolgirl problem, in Combinatorics,
University of California, Los Angeles, 1968", Proc. Sympos. Pure Math., Providence, R.I.: American Mathe-
matical Society, XIX: 187203
Rouse Ball, W.W. (1892), Mathematical Recreations and Essays, London: Macmillan
Chapter 24
KruskalKatona theorem
In algebraic combinatorics, the KruskalKatona theorem gives a complete characterization of the f-vectors of
abstract simplicial complexes. It includes as a special case the ErdsKoRado theorem and can be restated in terms
of uniform hypergraphs. The theorem is named after Joseph Kruskal and Gyula O. H. Katona. It was independently
proved by Marcel-Paul Schtzenberger, but his contribution escaped notice for several years.
24.1 Statement
Given two positive integers N and i, there is a unique way to expand N as a sum of binomial coecients as follows:
( ) ( ) ( )
ni ni1 nj
N= + + ... + , ni > ni1 > . . . > nj j 1.
i i1 j
(n)
This expansion can be constructed by applying the greedy algorithm: set ni to be the maximal n such that N i ,
replace N with the dierence, i with i 1, and repeat until the dierence becomes zero. Dene
( ) ( ) ( )
ni ni1 nj
N (i) = + + ... + .
i+1 i j+1
24.1.1 Statement for simplicial complexes

An integral vector (f0 , f1 , ..., fd1 ) is the f-vector of some (d 1) -dimensional simplicial complex if and only if
(i)
0 fi fi1 , 1 i d 1.
24.1.2 Statement for uniform hypergraphs

Let A be a set consisting of N distinct i-element subsets of a xed set U (the universe) and B be the set of all (i r)
-element subsets of the sets in A. Expand N as above. Then the cardinality of B is bounded below as follows:
( ) ( ) ( )
ni ni1 nj
|B| + + ... + .
ir ir1 jr
24.2 Ingredients of the proof

For every positive i, list all i-element subsets a1 < a2 < ai of the set N of natural numbers in the colexicographical
order. For example, for i = 3, the list begins
98
24.3. SEE ALSO 99
123, 124, 134, 234, 125, 135, 235, 145, 245, 345, . . . .
Given a vector f = (f0 , f1 , ..., fd1 ) with positive integer components, let f be the subset of the power set 2N
consisting of the empty set together with the rst fi1 i-element subsets of N in the list for i = 1, , d. Then the
following conditions are equivalent:
1. Vector f is the f-vector of a simplicial complex .

2. f is a simplicial complex.
(i)
3. fi fi1 , 1 i d 1.
The dicult implication is 1 2.
24.3 See also

Sperners theorem
24.4 References
Kruskal, J. B. (1963), The number of simplices in a complex, in Bellman, R., Mathematical Optimization
Techniques, University of California Press.
Katona, G. O. H. (1968), A theorem of nite sets, in Erds, P.; Katona, G. O. H., Theory of Graphs,
Akadmiai Kiad and Academic Press.
Knuth, D., The Art of Computer Programming, pre-fascicle 3a: Generating all combinations External link in
|title= (help). Contains a proof via a more general theorem in discrete geometry.
Stanley, Richard (1996), Combinatorics and commutative algebra, Progress in Mathematics, 41 (2nd ed.),
Boston, MA: Birkhuser Boston, Inc., ISBN 0-8176-3836-9.
24.5 External links

Kruskal-Katona theorem on the polymath1 wiki
Chapter 25
Levi graph
In combinatorial mathematics, a Levi graph or incidence graph is a bipartite graph associated with an incidence
structure.[1][2] From a collection of points and lines in an incidence geometry or a projective conguration, we form
a graph with one vertex per point, one vertex per line, and an edge for every incidence between a point and a line.
They are named for F. W. Levi, who wrote about them in 1942.[1][3]
The Levi graph of a system of points and lines usually has girth at least six: Any 4-cycles would correspond to two
lines through the same two points. Conversely any bipartite graph with girth at least six can be viewed as the Levi
graph of an abstract incidence structure.[1] Levi graphs of congurations are biregular, and every biregular graph with
girth at least six can be viewed as the Levi graph of an abstract conguration.[4]
Levi graphs may also be dened for other types of incidence structure, such as the incidences between points and
planes in Euclidean space. For every Levi graph, there is an equivalent hypergraph, and vice versa.
25.1 Examples
The Desargues graph is the Levi graph of the Desargues conguration, composed of 10 points and 10 lines.
There are 3 points on each line, and 3 lines passing through each point. The Desargues graph can also be viewed
as the generalized Petersen graph G(10,3) or the bipartite Kneser graph with parameters 5,2. It is 3-regular
with 20 vertices.
The Heawood graph is the Levi graph of the Fano plane. It is also known as the (3,6)-cage, and is 3-regular
with 14 vertices.
The MbiusKantor graph is the Levi graph of the MbiusKantor conguration, a system of 8 points and 8
lines that cannot be realized by straight lines in the Euclidean plane. It is 3-regular with 16 vertices.
The Pappus graph is the Levi graph of the Pappus conguration, composed of 9 points and 9 lines. Like the
Desargues conguration there are 3 points on each line and 3 lines passing through each point. It is 3-regular
with 18 vertices.
The Gray graph is the Levi graph of a conguration that can be realized in R3 as a 333 grid of 27 points
and the 27 orthogonal lines through them.
The Tutte eight-cage is the Levi graph of the CremonaRichmond conguration. It is also known as the (3,8)-
cage, and is 3-regular with 30 vertices.
The four-dimensional hypercube graph Q4 is the Levi graph of the Mbius conguration formed by the points
and planes of two mutually incident tetrahedra.
The Ljubljana graph on 112 vertices is the Levi graph of the Ljubljana conguration.[5]
100
25.2. REFERENCES 101
25.2 References
[1] Grnbaum, Branko (2006), Congurations of points and lines, The Coxeter Legacy, Providence, RI: American Mathe-
matical Society, pp. 179225, MR 2209028. See in particular p. 181.
[2] Polster, Burkard (1998), A Geometrical Picture Book, Universitext, New York: Springer-Verlag, p. 5, ISBN 0-387-98437-
2, MR 1640615, doi:10.1007/978-1-4419-8526-2.
[3] Levi, F. W. (1942), Finite Geometrical Systems, Calcutta: University of Calcutta, MR 0006834.
[4] Gropp, Harald (2007), VI.7 Congurations, in Colbourn, Charles J.; Dinitz, Jerey H., Handbook of combinatorial
designs, Discrete Mathematics and its Applications (Boca Raton) (Second ed.), Chapman & Hall/CRC, Boca Raton, FL,
pp. 353355.
[5] Conder, M.; Malni, A.; Marui, D.; Pisanski, T.; Potonik, P. (2002), The Ljubljana Graph (PDF), IMFM Preprint
40-845, University of Ljubljana Department of Mathematics.
25.3 External links

Weisstein, Eric W. Levi Graph. MathWorld.
Chapter 26
Matroid
In combinatorics, a branch of mathematics, a matroid /metrd/ is a structure that abstracts and generalizes the no-
tion of linear independence in vector spaces. There are many equivalent ways to dene a matroid, the most signicant
being in terms of independent sets, bases, circuits, closed sets or ats, closure operators, and rank functions.
Matroid theory borrows extensively from the terminology of linear algebra and graph theory, largely because it is the
abstraction of various notions of central importance in these elds. Matroids have found applications in geometry,
topology, combinatorial optimization, network theory and coding theory.[1][2]
26.1 Denition
There are many equivalent (cryptomorphic) ways to dene a (nite) matroid.[3]
26.1.1 Independent sets

In terms of independence, a nite matroid M is a pair (E, I) , where E is a nite set (called the ground set) and I
is a family of subsets of E (called the independent sets) with the following properties:[4]
1. The empty set is independent, i.e., I . Alternatively, at least one subset of E is independent, i.e., I = .
2. Every subset of an independent set is independent, i.e., for each A A E , if A I then A I . This
is sometimes called the hereditary property.
3. If A and B are two independent sets (i.e., each set is independent) of I and A has more elements than B ,
then there exists x A\B such that B {x} is in I . This is sometimes called the augmentation property
or the independent set exchange property.
The rst two properties dene a combinatorial structure known as an independence system.
26.1.2 Bases and circuits

A subset of the ground set E that is not independent is called dependent. A maximal independent setthat is,
an independent set which becomes dependent on adding any element of E is called a basis for the matroid. A
circuit in a matroid M is a minimal dependent subset of E that is, a dependent set whose proper subsets are
all independent. The terminology arises because the circuits of graphic matroids are cycles in the corresponding
graphs.[4]
The dependent sets, the bases, or the circuits of a matroid characterize the matroid completely: a set is independent
if and only if it is not dependent, if and only if it is a subset of a basis, and if and only if it does not contain a circuit.
The collection of dependent sets, or of bases, or of circuits each has simple properties that may be taken as axioms
for a matroid. For instance, one may dene a matroid M to be a pair (E, B) , where E is a nite set as before and B
is a collection of subsets of E , called bases, with the following properties:[4]
102
26.1. DEFINITION 103
1. B is nonempty.
2. If A and B are distinct members of B and a A \ B , then there exists an element b B \ A such that
A \ {a} {b} B . (Here the backslash symbol stands for the dierence of sets. This property is called the
basis exchange property.)
It follows from the basis exchange property that no member of B can be a proper subset of another.
26.1.3 Rank functions
It is a basic result of matroid theory, directly analogous to a similar theorem of bases in linear algebra, that any two
bases of a matroid M have the same number of elements. This number is called the rank of M . If M is a matroid
on E , and A is a subset of E , then a matroid on A can be dened by considering a subset of A to be independent if
and only if it is independent in M . This allows us to talk about submatroids and about the rank of any subset of E
. The rank of a subset A is given by the rank function r(A) of the matroid, which has the following properties:[4]
The value of the rank function is always a non-negative integer.
For any subset A of E , r(A) |A| .
For any two subsets A and B of E , r(A B) + r(A B) r(A) + r(B) . That is, the rank is a submodular
function.
For any set A and element x , r(A) r(A {x}) r(A) + 1 . From the rst of these two inequalities it
follows more generally that, if A B E , then r(A) r(B) r(E) . That is, the rank is a monotonic
function.
These properties can be used as one of the alternative denitions of a nite matroid: if (E, r) satises these properties,
then the independent sets of a matroid over E can be dened as those subsets A of E with r(A) = |A| .
The dierence |A| r(A) is called the nullity or corank of the subset A . It is the minimum number of elements
that must be removed from A to obtain an independent set. The nullity of E in M is called the nullity or corank of
M.
26.1.4 Closure operators
Let M be a matroid on a nite set E , with rank function r as above. The closure cl(A) of a subset A of E is the set
{ ( )}
cl(A) = x E | r(A) = r A {x}
This denes a closure operator cl : P(E) P(E) where P denotes the power set, with the following properties:
For all subsets X of E , X cl(X) .
For all subsets X of E , cl(X) = cl(cl(X)) .
For all subsets X and Y of E with X Y , cl(X) cl(Y ) .
For all elements a , and b of E and all subsets Y of E , if a cl(Y {b}) \ cl(Y ) then b cl(Y {a}) \ cl(Y )
.
The rst three of these properties are the dening properties of a closure operator. The fourth is sometimes called
the Mac LaneSteinitz exchange property. These properties may be taken as another denition of matroid: every
function cl : P(E) P(E) that obeys these properties determines a matroid.[4]
104 CHAPTER 26. MATROID
26.1.5 Flats
A set whose closure equals itself is said to be closed, or a at or subspace of the matroid.[5] A set is closed if it is
maximal for its rank, meaning that the addition of any other element to the set would increase the rank. The closed
sets of a matroid are characterized by a covering partition property:
The whole point set E is closed.

If S and T are ats, then S T is a at.
If S is a at, then the ats T that cover S (meaning that T properly contains S but there is no at U between
S and T ), partition the elements of E \ S .
The class L(M ) of all ats, partially ordered by set inclusion, forms a matroid lattice. Conversely, every matroid
lattice
L forms a matroid over its set E of atoms under the following closure operator: for a set S of atoms with join
S,

cl(S) = {x E | x S}
The ats of this matroid correspond one-for-one with the elements of the lattice; the at corresponding to lattice
element y is the set
{x E | x y}
Thus, the lattice of ats of this matroid is naturally isomorphic to L .
26.1.6 Hyperplanes
In a matroid of rank r , a at of rank r1 is called a hyperplane. (Hyperplanes are also called coatoms or copoints.)
These are the maximal proper ats; that is, the only superset of a hyperplane that is also a at is the set E of all the
elements of the matroid. An equivalent denition: A coatom is a subset of E that does not span M, but such that
adding any other element to it does make a spanning set.[6]
The family H of hyperplanes of a matroid has the following properties, which may be taken as yet another axioma-
tization of matroids:[6]
There do not exist distinct sets X and Y in H with X Y . That is, the hyperplanes form a Sperner family.
For every x E and distinct Y, Z H with x
/ Y Z , there exists X H with (Y Z) {x} X .
26.1.7 Graphoids
Minty (1966) dened a graphoid as a triple (L, C, D) in which C and D are classes of nonempty subsets of L such
that
no element of C (called a circuit) contains another,

no element of D (called a cocircuit) contains another,
no set in C and set in D intersect in exactly one element, and
whenever L is represented as the disjoint union of subsets R, G, B with G = {g} (a singleton set), then either
an XC exists such that g X R G or a YD exists such that g Y B G.
He proved that there is a matroid for which C is the class of circuits and D is the class of cocircuits. Conversely, if
C and D are the circuit and cocircuit classes of a matroid M with ground set E, then (E, C, D) is a graphoid. Thus,
graphoids give a self-dual cryptomorphic axiomatization of matroids.
26.2. EXAMPLES 105
26.2 Examples
26.2.1 Uniform matroids
Let E be a nite set and k a natural number. One may dene a matroid on E by taking every k-element subset of E
to be a basis. This is known as the uniform matroid of rank k. A uniform matroid with rank k and with n elements
is denoted Uk,n . All uniform matroids of rank at least 2 are simple. The uniform matroid of rank 2 on n points is
called the n-point line. A matroid is uniform if and only if it has no circuits of size less than one plus the rank of the
matroid. The direct sums of uniform matroids are called partition matroids.
In the uniform matroid U0,n , every element is a loop (an element that does not belong to any independent set), and
in the uniform matroid Un,n , every element is a coloop (an element that belongs to all bases). The direct sum of
matroids of these two types is a partition matroid in which every element is a loop or a coloop; it is called a discrete
matroid. An equivalent denition of a discrete matroid is a matroid in which every proper, non-empty subset of the
ground set E is a separator.
26.2.2 Matroids from linear algebra
The Fano matroid, derived from the Fano plane. It is GF(2)-linear but not real-linear.
The Vmos matroid, not linear over any eld
Matroid theory developed mainly out of a deep examination of the properties of independence and dimension in
vector spaces. There are two ways to present the matroids dened in this way:
If E is any nite subset of a vector space V, then we can dene a matroid M on E by taking the independent sets
26.2. EXAMPLES 107
of M to be the linearly independent subsets of E. The validity of the independent set axioms for this matroid
follows from the Steinitz exchange lemma. If M is a matroid that can be dened in this way, we say the set E
represents M. Matroids of this kind are called vector matroids. An important example of a matroid dened
in this way is the Fano matroid, a rank-three matroid derived from the Fano plane, a nite geometry with seven
points (the seven elements of the matroid) and seven lines (the nontrivial ats of the matroid). It is a linear
matroid whose elements may be described as the seven nonzero points in a three-dimensional vector space over
the nite eld GF(2). However, it is not possible to provide a similar representation for the Fano matroid using
the real numbers in place of GF(2).
A matrix A with entries in a eld gives rise to a matroid M on its set of columns. The dependent sets of columns
in the matroid are those that are linearly dependent as vectors. This matroid is called the column matroid of
A, and A is said to represent M. For instance, the Fano matroid can be represented in this way as a 3 7 (0,1)-
matrix. Column matroids are just vector matroids under another name, but there are often reasons to favor the
matrix representation. (There is one technical dierence: a column matroid can have distinct elements that are
the same vector, but a vector matroid as dened above cannot. Usually this dierence is insignicant and can
be ignored, but by letting E be a multiset of vectors one brings the two denitions into complete agreement.)
A matroid that is equivalent to a vector matroid, although it may be presented dierently, is called representable or
linear. If M is equivalent to a vector matroid over a eld F, then we say M is representable over F ; in particular,
M is real-representable if it is representable over the real numbers. For instance, although a graphic matroid (see
below) is presented in terms of a graph, it is also representable by vectors over any eld. A basic problem in matroid
theory is to characterize the matroids that may be represented over a given eld F; Rotas conjecture describes a
possible characterization for every nite eld. The main results so far are characterizations of binary matroids (those
representable over GF(2)) due to Tutte (1950s), of ternary matroids (representable over the 3-element eld) due to
Reid and Bixby, and separately to Seymour (1970s), and of quaternary matroids (representable over the 4-element
eld) due to Geelen, Gerards, and Kapoor (2000). This is very much an open area.
A regular matroid is a matroid that is representable over all possible elds. The Vmos matroid is the simplest example
of a matroid that is not representable over any eld.
26.2.3 Matroids from graph theory

A second original source for the theory of matroids is graph theory.
Every nite graph (or multigraph) G gives rise to a matroid M(G) as follows: take as E the set of all edges in G and
consider a set of edges independent if and only if it is a forest; that is, if it does not contain a simple cycle. Then
M(G) is called a cycle matroid. Matroids derived in this way are graphic matroids. Not every matroid is graphic,
but all matroids on three elements are graphic.[7] Every graphic matroid is regular.
Other matroids on graphs were discovered subsequently:
The bicircular matroid of a graph is dened by calling a set of edges independent if every connected subset
contains at most one cycle.
In any directed or undirected graph G let E and F be two distinguished sets of vertices. In the set E, dene a
subset U to be independent if there are |U| vertex-disjoint paths from F onto U. This denes a matroid on E
called a gammoid:[8] a strict gammoid is one for which the set E is the whole vertex set of G.[9]
In a bipartite graph G = (U,V,E), one may form a matroid in which the elements are vertices on one side U
of the bipartition, and the independent subsets are sets of endpoints of matchings of the graph. This is called
a transversal matroid,[10][11] and it is a special case of a gammoid.[8] The transversal matroids are the dual
matroids to the strict gammoids.[9]
Graphic matroids have been generalized to matroids from signed graphs, gain graphs, and biased graphs. A
graph G with a distinguished linear class B of cycles, known as a biased graph (G,B), has two matroids, known
as the frame matroid and the lift matroid of the biased graph. If every cycle belongs to the distinguished
class, these matroids coincide with the cycle matroid of G. If no cycle is distinguished, the frame matroid is the
bicircular matroid of G. A signed graph, whose edges are labeled by signs, and a gain graph, which is a graph
whose edges are labeled orientably from a group, each give rise to a biased graph and therefore have frame and
lift matroids.
The Laman graphs form the bases of the two-dimensional rigidity matroid, a matroid dened in the theory of
structural rigidity.
Let G be a connected graph and E be its edge set. Let I be the collection of subsets F of E such that G F is
still connected. Then M (G) , whose element set is E and with I as its class of independent sets, is a matroid
called the bond matroid of G. The rank function r(F) is the cyclomatic number of the subgraph induced on
the edge subset F, which equals the number of edges outside a maximal forest of that subgraph, and also the
number of independent cycles in it.
26.2.4 Matroids from eld extensions

A third original source of matroid theory is eld theory.
An extension of a eld gives rise to a matroid. Suppose F and K are elds with K containing F. Let E be any nite
subset of K. Dene a subset S of E to be algebraically independent if the extension eld F(S) has transcendence degree
equal to |S|.[12]
A matroid that is equivalent to a matroid of this kind is called an algebraic matroid.[13] The problem of characterizing
algebraic matroids is extremely dicult; little is known about it. The Vmos matroid provides an example of a matroid
that is not algebraic.
26.3 Basic constructions

There are some standard ways to make new matroids out of old ones.
26.3.1 Duality
If M is a nite matroid, we can dene the orthogonal or dual matroid M* by taking the same underlying set and
calling a set a basis in M* if and only if its complement is a basis in M. It is not dicult to verify that M* is a matroid
and that the dual of M* is M.[14]
The dual can be described equally well in terms of other ways to dene a matroid. For instance:
A set is independent in M* if and only if its complement spans M.

A set is a circuit of M* if and only if its complement is a coatom in M.
The rank function of the dual is r (S) = |S| r(M ) + r (E \ S) .
According to a matroid version of Kuratowskis theorem, the dual of a graphic matroid M is a graphic matroid if and
only if M is the matroid of a planar graph. In this case, the dual of M is the matroid of the dual graph of G.[15] The
dual of a vector matroid representable over a particular eld F is also representable over F. The dual of a transversal
matroid is a strict gammoid and vice versa.
Example
The cycle matroid of a graph is the dual matroid of its bond matroid.
26.3.2 Minors
If M is a matroid with element set E, and S is a subset of E, the restriction of M to S, written M |S, is the matroid on
the set S whose independent sets are the independent sets of M that are contained in S. Its circuits are the circuits of M
that are contained in S and its rank function is that of M restricted to subsets of S. In linear algebra, this corresponds
to restricting to the subspace generated by the vectors in S. Equivalently if T = MS this may be termed the deletion
of T, written M\T or MT. The submatroids of M are precisely the results of a sequence of deletions: the order is
irrelevant.[16][17]
The dual operation of restriction is contraction.[18] If T is a subset of E, the contraction of M by T, written M/T, is
the matroid on the underlying set E T whose rank function is r (A) = r(A T ) r(T ). [19] In linear algebra,
26.4. ADDITIONAL TERMINOLOGY 109
this corresponds to looking at the quotient space by the linear space generated by the vectors in T, together with the
images of the vectors in E - T.
A matroid N that is obtained from M by a sequence of restriction and contraction operations is called a minor of
M.[17][20] We say M contains N as a minor. Many important families of matroids may be characterized by the
minor-minimal matroids that do not belong to the family; these are called forbidden or excluded minors.[21]
26.3.3 Sums and unions

Let M be a matroid with an underlying set of elements E, and let N be another matroid on an underlying set F. The
direct sum of matroids M and N is the matroid whose underlying set is the disjoint union of E and F, and whose
independent sets are the disjoint unions of an independent set of M with an independent set of N.
The union of M and N is the matroid whose underlying set is the union (not the disjoint union) of E and F, and whose
independent sets are those subsets which are the union of an independent set in M and one in N. Usually the term
union is applied when E = F, but that assumption is not essential. If E and F are disjoint, the union is the direct
sum.
26.4 Additional terminology

Let M be a matroid with an underlying set of elements E.
E may be called the ground set of M. Its elements may be called the points of M.
A subset of E spans M if its closure is E. A set is said to span a closed set K if its closure is K.
The girth of a matroid is the size of its smallest circuit or dependent set.
An element that forms a single-element circuit of M is called a loop. Equivalently, an element is a loop if it
belongs to no basis.[7][22]
An element that belongs to no circuit is called a coloop or isthmus. Equivalently, an element is a coloop if it
belongs to every basis. Loop and coloops are mutually dual.[22]
If a two-element set {f, g} is a circuit of M, then f and g are parallel in M.[7]
A matroid is called simple if it has no circuits consisting of 1 or 2 elements. That is, it has no loops and no
parallel elements. The term combinatorial geometry is also used.[7] A simple matroid obtained from another
matroid M by deleting all loops and deleting one element from each 2-element circuit until no 2-element circuits
remain is called a simplication of M.[23] A matroid is co-simple if its dual matroid is simple.[24]
A union of circuits is sometimes called a cycle of M. A cycle is therefore the complement of a at of the dual
matroid. (This usage conicts with the common meaning of cycle in graph theory.)
A separator of M is a subset S of E such that r(S) + r(E S) = r(M ) . A proper or non-trivial separator
is a separator that is neither E nor the empty set.[25] An irreducible separator is a separator that contains no
other non-empty separator. The irreducible separators partition the ground set E.
A matroid which cannot be written as the direct sum of two nonempty matroids, or equivalently which has
no proper separators, is called connected or irreducible. A matroid is connected if and only if its dual is
connected.[26]
A maximal irreducible submatroid of M is called a component of M. A component is the restriction of M to
an irreducible separator, and contrariwise, the restriction of M to an irreducible separator is a component. A
separator is a union of components.[25]
A matroid M is called a frame matroid if it, or a matroid that contains it, has a basis such that all the points
of M are contained in the lines that join pairs of basis elements.[27]
A matroid is called a paving matroid if all of its circuits have size at least equal to its rank.[28]
The matroid polytope PM is the convex hull of the indicator vectors of the bases of M .
26.5 Algorithms
26.5.1 Greedy algorithm

A weighted matroid is a matroid together with a function from its elements to the nonnegative real numbers. The
weight of a subset of elements is dened to be the sum of the weights of the elements in the subset. The greedy
algorithm can be used to nd a maximum-weight basis of the matroid, by starting from the empty set and repeatedly
adding one element at a time, at each step choosing a maximum-weight element among the elements whose addition
would preserve the independence of the augmented set.[29] This algorithm does not need to know anything about the
details of the matroids denition, as long as it has access to the matroid through an independence oracle, a subroutine
for testing whether a set is independent.
This optimization algorithm may be used to characterize matroids: if a family F of sets, closed under taking subsets,
has the property that, no matter how the sets are weighted, the greedy algorithm nds a maximum-weight set in the
family, then F must be the family of independent sets of a matroid.[30]
The notion of matroid has been generalized to allow for other types of sets on which a greedy algorithm gives optimal
solutions; see greedoid and matroid embedding for more information.
26.5.2 Matroid partitioning

The matroid partitioning problem is to partition the elements of a matroid into as few independent sets as possible, and
the matroid packing problem is to nd as many disjoint spanning sets as possible. Both can be solved in polynomial
time, and can be generalized to the problem of computing the rank or nding an independent set in a matroid sum.
26.5.3 Matroid intersection

The intersection of two or more matroids is the family of sets that are simultaneously independent in each of the
matroids. The problem of nding the largest set, or the maximum weighted set, in the intersection of two matroids can
be found in polynomial time, and provides a solution to many other important combinatorial optimization problems.
For instance, maximum matching in bipartite graphs can be expressed as a problem of intersecting two partition
matroids. However, nding the largest set in an intersection of three or more matroids is NP-complete.
26.5.4 Matroid software

Two standalone systems for calculations with matroids are Kingans Oid and Hlinenys Macek. Both of them are open
sourced packages. Oid is an interactive, extensible software system for experimenting with matroids. Macek
is a specialized software system with tools and routines for reasonably ecient combinatorial computations with
representable matroids.
SAGE, the open source mathematics software system, contains a matroid package.
26.6 Polynomial invariants

There are two especially signicant polynomials associated to a nite matroid M on the ground set E. Each is a
matroid invariant, which means that isomorphic matroids have the same polynomial.
26.6.1 Characteristic polynomial

The characteristic polynomial of M (which is sometimes called the chromatic polynomial,[31] although it does not
count colorings), is dened to be

pM () := (1)|S| r(M )r(S) ,
SE
26.6. POLYNOMIAL INVARIANTS 111
or equivalently (as long as the empty set is closed in M) as

pM () := (, A)r(M )r(A) ,
A
where denotes the Mbius function of the geometric lattice of the matroid.[32]
When M is the cycle matroid M(G) of a graph G, the characteristic polynomial is a slight transformation of the
chromatic polynomial, which is given by G () = c pMG (), where c is the number of connected components of
G.
When M is the bond matroid M*(G) of a graph G, the characteristic polynomial equals the ow polynomial of G.
When M is the matroid M(A) of an arrangement A of linear hyperplanes in Rn (or F n where F is any eld), the
characteristic polynomial of the arrangement is given by pA () = nr(M) pMA ().
Beta invariant
The beta invariant of a matroid, introduced by Crapo (1967), may be expressed in terms of the characteristic
polynomial p as an evaluation of the derivative[33]
(M ) = (1)r(M )1 pM (1)
or directly as[34]

(M ) = (1)r(M ) (1)|X| r(X) .
XE
The beta invariant is non-negative, and is zero if and only if M is disconnected, or empty, or a loop. Otherwise it
depends only on the lattice of ats of M. If M has no loops and coloops then (M) = (M ).[34]
26.6.2 Tutte polynomial

The Tutte polynomial of a matroid, TM (x,y), generalizes the characteristic polynomial to two variables. This gives
it more combinatorial interpretations, and also gives it the duality property
TM (x, y) = TM (y, x),
which implies a number of dualities between properties of M and properties of M *. One denition of the Tutte
polynomial is

TM (x, y) = (x 1)r(M )r(S) (y 1)|S|r(S) .
SE
This expresses the Tutte polynomial as an evaluation of the corank-nullity or rank generating polynomial,[35]

RM (u, v) = ur(M )r(S) v |S|r(S) .
SE
From this denition it is easy to see that the characteristic polynomial is, up to a simple factor, an evaluation of TM,
specically,
pM () = (1)r(M ) TM (1 , 0).
Another denition is in terms of internal and external activities and a sum over bases, reecting the fact that T(1,1)
is the number of bases.[36] This, which sums over fewer subsets but has more complicated terms, was Tuttes original
denition.
There is a further denition in terms of recursion by deletion and contraction.[37] The deletion-contraction identity is
F (M ) = F (M e) + F (M /e) when e is neither a loop nor a coloop.
An invariant of matroids (i.e., a function that takes the same value on isomorphic matroids) satisfying this recursion
and the multiplicative condition
F (M M ) = F (M )F (M )
is said to be a Tutte-Grothendieck invariant.[35] The Tutte polynomial is the most general such invariant; that
is, the Tutte polynomial is a Tutte-Grothendieck invariant and every such invariant is an evaluation of the Tutte
polynomial.[31]
The Tutte polynomial TG of a graph is the Tutte polynomial TMG of its cycle matroid.
26.7 Innite matroids

The theory of innite matroids is much more complicated than that of nite matroids and forms a subject of its own.
For a long time, one of the diculties has been that there were many reasonable and useful denitions, none of which
appeared to capture all the important aspects of nite matroid theory. For instance, it seemed to be hard to have
bases, circuits, and duality together in one notion of innite matroids.
The simplest denition of an innite matroid is to require nite rank; that is, the rank of E is nite. This theory is
similar to that of nite matroids except for the failure of duality due to the fact that the dual of an innite matroid
of nite rank does not have nite rank. Finite-rank matroids include any subsets of nite-dimensional vector spaces
and of eld extensions of nite transcendence degree.
The next simplest innite generalization is nitary matroids. A matroid is nitary if it has the property that
x cl(Y ) (Y Y )Y and nite is x cl(Y ).

Equivalently, every dependent set contains a nite dependent set. Examples are linear dependence of arbitrary subsets
of innite-dimensional vector spaces (but not innite dependencies as in Hilbert and Banach spaces), and algebraic
dependence in arbitrary subsets of eld extensions of possibly innite transcendence degree. Again, the class of
nitary matroid is not self-dual, because the dual of a nitary matroid is not nitary. Finitary innite matroids are
studied in model theory, a branch of mathematical logic with strong ties to algebra.
In the late 1960s matroid theorists asked for a more general notion that shares the dierent aspects of nite matroids
and generalizes their duality. Many notions of innite matroids were dened in response to this challenge, but the
question remained open. One of the approaches examined by D.A. Higgs became known as B-matroids and was
studied by Higgs, Oxley and others in the 1960s and 1970s. According to a recent result by Bruhn, Diestel, and
Kriesell et al. (2013), it solves the problem: Arriving at the same notion independently, they provided ve equivalent
systems of axioms in terms of independence, bases, circuits, closure and rank. The duality of B-matroids generalizes
dualities that can be observed in innite graphs.
The independence axioms are as follows:
1. The empty set is independent.

2. Every subset of an independent set is independent.
3. For every nonmaximal (under set inclusion) independent set I and maximal independent set J, there is x J \I
such that I {x} is independent.
4. For every subset X of the base space, every independent subset I of X can be extended to a maximal independent
subset of X.
With these axioms, every matroid has a dual.

26.8. HISTORY 113
26.8 History
Matroid theory was introduced by Hassler Whitney (1935). It was also independently discovered by Takeo Nakasawa,
whose work was forgotten for many years (Nishimura & Kuroda 2009).
In his seminal paper, Whitney provided two axioms for independence, and dened any structure adhering to these
axioms to be matroids. (Although it was perhaps implied, he did not include an axiom requiring at least one subset
to be independent.) His key observation was that these axioms provide an abstraction of independence that is
common to both graphs and matrices. Because of this, many of the terms used in matroid theory resemble the terms
for their analogous concepts in linear algebra or graph theory.
Almost immediately after Whitney rst wrote about matroids, an important article was written by Saunders Mac
Lane (1936) on the relation of matroids to projective geometry. A year later, B. L. van der Waerden (1937) noted
similarities between algebraic and linear dependence in his classic textbook on Modern Algebra.
In the 1940s Richard Rado developed further theory under the name independence systems with an eye towards
transversal theory, where his name for the subject is still sometimes used.
In the 1950s W. T. Tutte became the foremost gure in matroid theory, a position he retained for many years.
His contributions were plentiful, including the characterization of binary, regular, and graphic matroids by excluded
minors; the regular-matroid representability theorem; the theory of chain groups and their matroids; and the tools he
used to prove many of his results, the Path theorem and "Homotopy theorem" (see, e.g., Tutte 1965), which are
so complex that later theorists have gone to great trouble to eliminate the necessity of using them in proofs. (A ne
example is A. M. H. Gerards' short proof (1989) of Tuttes characterization of regular matroids.)
Henry Crapo (1969) and Thomas Brylawski (1972) generalized to matroids Tuttes dichromate, a graphic polyno-
mial now known as the Tutte polynomial (named by Crapo). Their work has recently (especially in the 2000s) been
followed by a ood of papersthough not as many as on the Tutte polynomial of a graph.
In 1976 Dominic Welsh published the rst comprehensive book on matroid theory.
Paul Seymour's decomposition theorem for regular matroids (1980) was the most signicant and inuential work of
the late 1970s and the 1980s. Another fundamental contribution, by Kahn & Kung (1982), showed why projective
geometries and Dowling geometries play such an important role in matroid theory.
By this time there were many other important contributors, but one should not omit to mention Geo Whittle's
extension to ternary matroids of Tuttes characterization of binary matroids that are representable over the rationals
(Whittle 1995), perhaps the biggest single contribution of the 1990s. In the current period (since around 2000) the
Matroid Minors Project of Jim Geelen, Gerards, Whittle, and others, which attempts to duplicate for matroids that
are representable over a nite eld the success of the RobertsonSeymour Graph Minors Project (see Robertson
Seymour theorem), has produced substantial advances in the structure theory of matroids. Many others have also
contributed to that part of matroid theory, which (in the rst and second decades of the 21st century) is ourishing.
26.9 Researchers
Mathematicians who pioneered the study of matroids include Takeo Nakasawa,[38] Saunders Mac Lane, Richard
Rado, W. T. Tutte, B. L. van der Waerden, and Hassler Whitney. Other major contributors include Jack Edmonds,
Jim Geelen, Eugene Lawler, Lszl Lovsz, Gian-Carlo Rota, P. D. Seymour, and Dominic Welsh.
26.10 See also

Antimatroid
Coxeter matroid
Oriented matroid
Pregeometry (model theory)
Polymatroid
Greedoid
26.11 Notes
[1] Neel, David L.; Neudauer, Nancy Ann (2009). Matroids you have known (PDF). Mathematics Magazine. 82 (1): 2641.
doi:10.4169/193009809x469020. Retrieved 4 October 2014.
[2] Kashyap, Navin; Soljanin, Emina; Vontobel, Pascal. Applications of Matroid Theory and Combinatorial Optimization to
Information and Coding Theory (PDF). www.birs.ca. Retrieved 4 October 2014.
[3] A standard source for basic denitions and results about matroids is Oxley (1992). An older standard source is Welsh
(1976). See Brylawskis appendix in White (1986), pp. 298302, for a list of equivalent axiom systems.
[4] Welsh (1976), Section 1.2, Axiom Systems for a Matroid, pp. 79.
[5] Welsh (1976), Section 1.8, Closed sets = Flats = Subspaces, pp. 2122.
[6] Welsh (1976), Section 2.2, The Hyperplanes of a Matroid, pp. 3839.
[7] Oxley 1992, p. 13
[8] Oxley 1992, pp. 115
[9] Oxley 1992, p. 100
[10] Oxley 1992, pp. 4648
[11] 1987
[12] Oxley 1992, p. 215
[13] Oxley 1992, p. 216
[14] White 1986, p. 32
[15] White 1986, p. 105
[16] White 1986, p. 131
[17] White 1986, p. 224
[18] White 1986, p. 139
[19] White 1986, p. 140
[20] White 1986, p. 150
[21] White 1986, pp. 146147
[22] White 1986, p. 130
[23] Oxley 1992, p. 52
[24] Oxley 1992, p. 347
[25] Oxley 1992, p. 128
[26] White 1986, p. 110
[27] Zaslavsky, Thomas (1994). Frame matroids and biased graphs. Eur. J. Comb. 15 (3): 303307. ISSN 0195-6698. Zbl
0797.05027. doi:10.1006/eujc.1994.1034.
[28] Oxley 1992, p. 26
[29] Oxley 1992, p. 63
[30] Oxley 1992, p. 64
[31] White 1987, p. 127
[32] White 1987, p. 120
[33] White 1987, p. 123
[34] White 1987, p. 124

[35] White 1987, p. 126
[36] White 1992, p. 188
[37] White 1986, p. 260
[38] Nishimura & Kuroda (2009).
26.12 References
Bruhn, Henning; Diestel, Reinhard; Kriesell, Matthias; Pendavingh, Rudi; Wollan, Paul (2013), Axioms for
innite matroids, Advances in Mathematics, 239: 1846, MR 3045140, arXiv:1003.3919 , doi:10.1016/j.aim.2013.01.011.
Bryant, Victor; Perfect, Hazel (1980), Independence Theory in Combinatorics, London and New York: Chap-
man and Hall, ISBN 0-412-22430-5.
Brylawski, Thomas H. (1972), A decomposition for combinatorial geometries, Transactions of the American
Mathematical Society, American Mathematical Society, 171: 235282, JSTOR 1996381, doi:10.2307/1996381.
Crapo, Henry H. (1969), The Tutte polynomial, Aequationes Mathematicae, 3 (3): 211229, doi:10.1007/BF01817442.
Crapo, Henry H.; Rota, Gian-Carlo (1970), On the Foundations of Combinatorial Theory: Combinatorial Ge-
ometries, Cambridge, Mass.: M.I.T. Press, ISBN 978-0-262-53016-3, MR 0290980.
Geelen, Jim; Gerards, A. M. H.; Whittle, Geo (2007), Towards a matroid-minor structure theory, in Grim-
mett, Georey (ed.); et al., Combinatorics, Complexity, and Chance: A Tribute to Dominic Welsh, Oxford
Lecture Series in Mathematics and its Applications, 34, Oxford: Oxford University Press, pp. 7282.
Gerards, A. M. H. (1989), A short proof of Tuttes characterization of totally unimodular matrices, Linear
Algebra and its Applications, 114/115: 207212, doi:10.1016/0024-3795(89)90461-8.
Kahn, Je; Kung, Joseph P. S. (1982), Varieties of combinatorial geometries, Transactions of the American
Mathematical Society, American Mathematical Society, 271 (2): 485499, JSTOR 1998894, doi:10.2307/1998894.
Kingan, Robert; Kingan, Sandra (2005), A software system for matroids, Graphs and Discovery, DIMACS
Series in Discrete Mathematics and Theoretical Computer Science, pp. 287296.
Kung, Joseph P. S., ed. (1986), A Source Book in Matroid Theory, Boston: Birkhuser, ISBN 0-8176-3173-9,
MR 0890330.
Mac Lane, Saunders (1936), Some interpretations of abstract linear dependence in terms of projective ge-
ometry, American Journal of Mathematics, The Johns Hopkins University Press, 58 (1): 236240, JSTOR
2371070, doi:10.2307/2371070.
Minty, George J. (1966), On the axiomatic foundations of the theories of directed linear graphs, electrical
networks and network-programming, Journal of Mathematics and Mechanics, 15: 485520, MR 0188102.
Nishimura, Hirokazu; Kuroda, Susumu, eds. (2009), A lost mathematician, Takeo Nakasawa. The forgotten
father of matroid theory, Basel: Birkhuser Verlag, ISBN 978-3-7643-8572-9, MR 2516551, Zbl 1163.01001.
Oxley, James (1992), Matroid Theory, Oxford: Oxford University Press, ISBN 0-19-853563-5, MR 1207587,
Zbl 0784.05002.
Recski, Andrs (1989), Matroid Theory and its Applications in Electric Network Theory and in Statics, Berlin
and Budapest: Springer-Verlag and Akademiai Kiado, ISBN 3-540-15285-7, MR 1027839.
Sapozhenko, A.A. (2001) [1994], M/m062870, in Hazewinkel, Michiel, Encyclopedia of Mathematics, Springer
Science+Business Media B.V. / Kluwer Academic Publishers, ISBN 978-1-55608-010-4
Seymour, Paul D. (1980), Decomposition of regular matroids, Journal of Combinatorial Theory, Series B,
28 (3): 305359, Zbl 0443.05027, doi:10.1016/0095-8956(80)90075-1.
Truemper, Klaus (1992), Matroid Decomposition, Boston: Academic Press, ISBN 0-12-701225-7, MR 1170126.
Tutte, W. T. (1959), Matroids and graphs, Transactions of the American Mathematical Society, American
Mathematical Society, 90 (3): 527552, JSTOR 1993185, MR 0101527, doi:10.2307/1993185.
Tutte, W. T. (1965), Lectures on matroids, Journal of Research of the National Bureau of Standards Section
B, 69: 147.
Tutte, W.T. (1971), Introduction to the theory of matroids, Modern Analytic and Computational Methods in
Science and Mathematics, 37, New York: American Elsevier Publishing Company, Zbl 0231.05027.
Vmos, Peter (1978), The missing axiom of matroid theory is lost forever, Journal of the London Mathemat-
ical Society, 18 (3): 403408, doi:10.1112/jlms/s2-18.3.403.
van der Waerden, B. L. (1937), Moderne Algebra.
Welsh, D. J. A. (1976), Matroid Theory, L.M.S. Monographs, 8, Academic Press, ISBN 0-12-744050-X, Zbl
0343.05002.
White, Neil, ed. (1986), Theory of Matroids, Encyclopedia of Mathematics and its Applications, 26, Cam-
bridge: Cambridge University Press, ISBN 978-0-521-30937-0, Zbl 0579.00001.
White, Neil, ed. (1987), Combinatorial geometries, Encyclopedia of Mathematics and its Applications, 29,
Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, ISBN 0-521-33339-3, Zbl 0626.00007
White, Neil, ed. (1992), Matroid Applications, Encyclopedia of Mathematics and its Applications, 40, Cam-
bridge: Cambridge University Press, ISBN 978-0-521-38165-9, Zbl 0742.00052.
Whitney, Hassler (1935), On the abstract properties of linear dependence, American Journal of Mathematics,
The Johns Hopkins University Press, 57 (3): 509533, JSTOR 2371182, MR 1507091, doi:10.2307/2371182.
Reprinted in Kung (1986), pp. 5579.
Whittle, Geo (1995), A characterization of the matroids representable over GF(3) and the rationals (PDF),
Journal of Combinatorial Theory Series B, 65 (2): 222261, doi:10.1006/jctb.1995.1052.
26.13 External links

Hazewinkel, Michiel, ed. (2001) [1994], Matroid, Encyclopedia of Mathematics, Springer Science+Business
Media B.V. / Kluwer Academic Publishers, ISBN 978-1-55608-010-4
Kingan, Sandra : Matroid theory. A large bibliography of matroid papers, matroid software, and links.
Locke, S. C. : Greedy Algorithms.
Pagano, Steven R. : Matroids and Signed Graphs.
Mark Hubenthal: A Brief Look At Matroids (pdf) (contain proofs for statements of this article)
James Oxley : What is a matroid? (pdf)
Neil White : Matroid Applications

Chapter 27
Maximum coverage problem
The maximum coverage problem is a classical question in computer science, computational complexity theory, and
operations research. It is a problem that is widely taught in approximation algorithms.
As input you are given several sets and a number k . The sets may have some elements in common. You must select
at most k of these sets such that the maximum number of elements are covered, i.e. the union of the selected sets
has maximal size.
Formally, (unweighted) Maximum Coverage
Instance: A number k and a collection of sets S = {S1 , S2 , . . . , Sm } .

Objective: Find a subset S S of sets, such that S k and the number of covered elements

Si S Si is maximized.
The maximum coverage problem is NP-hard, and cannot be approximated within 1 1e +o(1) 0.632 under standard
assumptions. This result essentially matches the approximation ratio achieved by the generic greedy algorithm used
for maximization of submodular functions with a cardinality constraint.[1]
27.1 ILP formulation

The maximum coverage problem can be formulated as the following integer linear program.

The greedy algorithm for maximum coverage chooses sets according to one rule: at each stage, choose a set which
contains the largest number of uncovered elements. It can be shown that this algorithm achieves an approximation
ratio of 1 1e .[2] Inapproximability results show that the greedy algorithm is essentially the best-possible polynomial
time approximation algorithm for maximum coverage.[3]
27.3 Known extensions

The inapproximability results apply to all extensions of the maximum coverage problem since they hold the maximum
coverage problem as a special case.
The Maximum Coverage Problem can be applied to road trac situations; one such example is selecting which bus
routes in a public transportation network should be installed with pothole detectors to maximise coverage, when only
a limited number of sensors is available. This problem is a known extension of the Maximum Coverage Problem and
was rst explored in literature by Junade Ali and Vladimir Dyo.[4]
117
118 CHAPTER 27. MAXIMUM COVERAGE PROBLEM
27.4 Weighted version

In the weighted version every element ej has a weight w(ej ) . The task is to nd a maximum coverage which has
maximum weight. The basic version is a special case when all weights are 1 .

maximize eE w(ej ) yj . (maximizing the weighted sum of covered elements).

subject to xi k ; (no more than k sets are selected).

ej Si xi yj ; (if yj > 0 then at least one set ej Si is selected).
yj {0, 1} ; (if yj = 1 then ej is covered)
xi {0, 1} (if xi = 1 then Si is selected for the cover).
The greedy algorithm for the weighted maximum coverage at each stage chooses a set that contains the maximum
weight of uncovered elements. This algorithm achieves an approximation ratio of 1 1e .[1]
27.5 Budgeted maximum coverage

In the budgeted maximum coverage version, not only does every element ej have a weight w(ej ) , but also every set
Si has a cost c(Si ) . Instead of k that limits the number of sets in the cover a budget B is given. This budget B limits
the total cost of the cover that can be chosen.

maximize eE w(ej ) yj . (maximizing the weighted sum of covered elements).

subject to c(Si ) xi B ; (the cost of the selected sets cannot exceed B ).

ej Si xi yj ; (if yj > 0 then at least one set ej Si is selected).
yj {0, 1} ; (if yj = 1 then ej is covered)
A greedy algorithm will no longer produce solutions with a performance guarantee. Namely, the worst case behavior
of this algorithm might be very far from the optimal solution. The approximation algorithm is extended by the
following way. First, dene a modied greedy algorithm, that selects the set Si that has the best ratio of weighted
uncovered elements to cost. Second, among covers of cardinality 1, 2, ..., k 1 , nd the best cover that does not
violate the budget. Call this cover H1 . Third, nd all covers of cardinality k that do not violate the budget. Using
these covers of cardinality k as starting points, apply the modied greedy algorithm, maintaining the best cover found
so far. Call this cover H2 . At the end of the process, the approximate best cover will be either H1 or H2 . This
algorithm achieves an approximation ratio of 1 1e for values of k 3 . This is the best possible approximation
ratio unless N P DT IM E(nO(log log n) ) .[5]
27.6 Generalized maximum coverage

In the generalized maximum coverage version every set Si has a cost c(Si ) , element ej has a dierent weight and
cost depending on which set covers it. Namely, if ej is covered by set Si the weight of ej is wi (ej ) and its cost is
ci (ej ) . A budget B is given for the total cost of the solution.

maximize eE,Si wi (ej )yij . (maximizing the weighted sum of covered elements in the sets in which
they are covered).

subject to ci (ej ) yij + c(Si ) xi B ; (the cost of the selected sets cannot exceed B ).

yij 1 ; (element ej = 1 can only be covered by at most one set).
i
Si xi yij ; (if yj > 0 then at least one set ej Si is selected).
yij {0, 1} ; (if yij = 1 then ej is covered by set Si )
27.7. RELATED PROBLEMS 119
27.6.1 Generalized maximum coverage algorithm

The algorithm uses the concept of residual cost/weight. The residual cost/weight is measured against a tentative
solution and it is the dierence of the cost/weight from the cost/weight gained by a tentative solution.
The algorithm has several stages. First, nd a solution using greedy algorithm. In each iteration of the greedy
algorithm the tentative solution is added the set which contains the maximum residual weight of elements divided by
the residual cost of these elements along with the residual cost of the set. Second, compare the solution gained by the
rst step to the best solution which uses a small number of sets. Third, return the best out of all examined solutions.
This algorithm achieves an approximation ratio of 1 1/e o(1) .[6]
27.7 Related problems

Set cover problem is to cover all elements with as few sets as possible.
27.8 Notes
[1] G. L. Nemhauser, L. A. Wolsey and M. L. Fisher. An analysis of approximations for maximizing submodular set functions
I, Mathematical Programming 14 (1978), 265294
[2] Hochbaum, Dorit S. (1997). Approximating Covering and Packing Problems: Set Cover, Vertex Cover, Independent Set,
and Related Problems. In Hochbaum, Dorit S. Approximation Algorithms for NP-Hard Problems. Boston: PWS Publishing
Company. pp. 94143. ISBN 053494968-1.
[3] Feige, Uriel (July 1998). A Threshold of ln n for Approximating Set Cover. Journal of the ACM. 45 (4). New York, NY,
USA: Association for Computing Machinery. pp. 634652. ISSN 0004-5411. doi:10.1145/285055.285059.
[4] Ali, Junade; Dyo, Vladimir (2017). Coverage and Mobile Sensor Placement for Vehicles on Predetermined Routes: A
Greedy Heuristic Approach. Proceedings of the 14th International Joint Conference on e-Business and Telecommunications.
Volume 2: WINSYS: 8388. doi:10.5220/0006469800830088.
[5] Khuller, S., Moss, A., and Naor, J. 1999. The budgeted maximum coverage problem. Inf. Process. Lett. 70, 1 (Apr.
1999), 39-45.
[6] Cohen, R. and Katzir, L. 2008. The Generalized Maximum Coverage Problem. Inf. Process. Lett. 108, 1 (Sep. 2008),
15-22.
27.9 References
Vazirani, Vijay V. (2001). Approximation Algorithms. Springer-Verlag. ISBN 3-540-65367-8.

Chapter 28
Monotone class theorem
In measure theory and probability, the monotone class theorem connects monotone classes and sigma-algebras.
The theorem says that the smallest monotone class containing an algebra of sets G is precisely the smallest -algebra
containing G. It is used as a type of transnite induction to prove many other theorems, such as Fubinis theorem.
28.1 Denition of a monotone class

A monotone class is a collection M of sets which is closed under countable monotone unions and intersections, i.e.
if Ai M and A1 A2 . . . then i=1 Ai M , and similarly in the other direction.
28.2 Monotone class theorem for sets
28.2.1 Statement
Let G be an algebra of sets and dene M(G) to be the smallest monotone class containing G. Then M(G) is precisely
the -algebra generated by G, i.e. (G) = M(G)
28.3 Monotone class theorem for functions
28.3.1 Statement
Let A be a -system that contains and let H be a collection of functions from to R with the following properties:
(1) If A A , then 1A H
(2) If f, g H , then f + g and cf H for any real number c
(3) If fn H is a sequence of non-negative functions that increase to a bounded function f , then f H
Then H contains all bounded functions that are measurable with respect to (A) , the sigma-algebra generated by A
28.3.2 Proof
[1]
The following argument originates in Rick Durrett's Probability: Theory and Examples.
The assumption A , (2) and (3) imply that G = {A : 1A H} is a -system. By (1) and the theorem,
(A) G . (2) implies H contains all simple functions, and then (3) implies that H contains all bounded functions
measurable with respect to (A) .
120
28.4. RESULTS AND APPLICATIONS 121
28.4 Results and Applications

As a corollary, if G is a ring of sets, then the smallest monotone class containing it coincides with the sigma-ring of
G.
By invoking this theorem, one can use monotone classes to help verify that a certain collection of subsets is a sigma-
algebra.
The monotone class theorem for functions can be a powerful tool that allows statements about particularly simple
classes of functions to be generalized to arbitrary bounded and measurable functions.
28.5 References
[1] Durrett, Rick (2010). Probability: Theory and Examples (4th ed.). Cambridge University Press. p. 100. ISBN 978-
0521765398.
Chapter 29
Near polygon
A dense near polygon with diameter d = 2
In mathematics, a near polygon is an incidence geometry introduced by Ernest E. Shult and Arthur Yanushka in
1980.[1] Shult and Yanushka showed the connection between the so-called tetrahedrally closed line-systems in Eu-
clidean spaces and a class of point-line geometries which they called near polygons. These structures generalise the
122
29.1. DEFINITION 123
notion of generalized polygon as every generalized 2n-gon is a near 2n-gon of a particular kind. Near polygons were
extensively studied and connection between them and dual polar space [2] was shown in 1980s and early 1990s. Some
sporadic simple groups, for example the Hall-Janko group and the Mathieu groups, act as automorphism groups of
near polygons.
29.1 Denition
A near 2d-gon is an incidence structure ( P, L, I ), where P is the set of points, L is the set of lines and I P L
is the incidence relation, such that:
The maximum distance between two points (the so-called diameter) is d.
For every point x and every line L there exists a unique point on L which is nearest to x .
Note that the distance are measure in the collinearity graph of points, i.e., the graph formed by taking points as
vertices and joining a pair of vertices if they are incident with a common line. We can also give an alternate graph
theoretic denition, a near 2d-gon is a connected graph of nite diameter d with the property that for every vertex x
and every maximal clique M there exists a unique vertex x' in M nearest to x. The maximal cliques of such a graph
correspond to the lines in the incidence structure denition. A near 0-gon (d = 0) is a single point while a near 2-gon
(d = 1) is just a single line, i.e., a complete graph. A near quadrangle (d = 2) is same as a (possibly degenerate)
generalized quadrangle. In fact, it can be shown that every generalized 2d-gon is a near 2d-gon that satises the
following two additional conditions:
Every point is incident with at least two lines.
For every two points x, y at distance i < d, there exists a unique neighbour of y at distance i 1 from x.
A near polygon is called dense if every line is incident with at least three points and if every two points at distance
two have at least two common neighbours. It is said to have order (s, t) if every line is incident with precisely s +
1 points and every point is incident with precisely t + 1 lines. Dense near polygons have a rich theory and several
classes of them (like the slim dense near polygons) have been completely classied.[3]
29.2 Examples
All connected bipartite graphs are near polygons. In fact any near polygon which has precisely two points per
line must be a connected bipartite graph.
All nite generalized polygons except the projective planes.
All dual polar spaces.
The HallJanko near octagon, also known as the Cohen-Tits near octagon[4] associated with the HallJanko
group. It can be constructed by choosing the conjugacy class of 315 central involutions of the Hall-Janko group
as points and lines as three element subsets {x,y,xy} whenever x and y commute.
The M24 near hexagon related to the Mathieu group M24 and the extended binary Golay code. It is constructed
by taking the 759 octads (blocks) in the Witt design S(5, 8, 24) corresponding to the Golay code as points and
a triple of three pairwise disjoint octads as lines.[5]
Take the partitions of {1, 2,..., 2n + 2} into n + 1 2-subsets as points and the partitions into n 1 2-subsets
and one 4-subset as lines. A point is incident to a line if as a partition it is a renement of the line. This gives
us a near 2n-gon with three points on each line, usually denoted as Hn. Its full automorphism group is Sn.[6]
124 CHAPTER 29. NEAR POLYGON
29.3 Regular near polygons

A nite near 2d -gon S is called regular if it has an order (s, t) and if there exist constants ti , i {1, . . . , d} , such
that for every two points x and y at distance i , there are precisely ti + 1 lines through y containing a (necessarily
unique) point at distance i 1 from x . It turns out that regular near 2d -gons are precisely those near 2d -gons whose
point graph (also known as a collinearity graph) is a distance-regular graph. A generalized 2d -gon of order (s, t) is
a regular near 2d -gon with parameters t1 = 0, t2 = 0, . . . , td = t
29.4 See also

Finite geometry
Polar space
Partial linear space
Association scheme
HallJanko graph
29.5 Notes
[1] Shult, Ernest; Yanushka, Arthur. Near n-gons and line systems.
[2] Cameron, Peter J. Dual polar spaces.
[3] De Bruyn, Bart. Near Polygons
[4] http://www.win.tue.nl/~{}aeb/graphs/HJ315.html
[5] https://www.win.tue.nl/~{}aeb/2WF02/Witt.pdf
[6] De Bruyn, Bart, Isometric embeddings between the near polygon Hn and Gn (PDF)
29.6 References
Brouwer, A.E.; Cohen, A. M.; Wilbrink, H. A.; Hall, J. J. (1994), Near polygons and Fischer spaces, Geom.
Dedicata, 49 (3): 349368, doi:10.1007/BF01264034.
Brouwer, A.E.; Cohen, A.M. (1989), Distance Regular Graphs, Berlin, New York: Springer-Verlag., ISBN
3-540-50619-5, MR 1002568.
Cameron, Peter J. (1982), Dual polar spaces, Geom. Dedicata, 12: 7585, MR 645040, doi:10.1007/bf00147332.
Cameron, Peter J. (1991), Projective and polar spaces, QMW Maths Notes, 13, London: Queen Mary and
Westeld College School of Mathematical Sciences, MR 1153019.
De Bruyn, Bart (2006), Near Polygons, Frontiers in Mathematics, Birkhuser Verlag, ISBN 3-7643-7552-3,
MR 2227553, doi:10.1007/978-3-7643-7553-9.
De Clerck, F.; Van Maldeghem, H. (1995), Some classes of rank 2 geometries, Handbook of Incidence
Geometry, Amsterdam: North-Holland, pp. 433475.
Shult, Ernest E. (2011), Points and Lines, Universitext, Springer, ISBN 978-3-642-15626-7, doi:10.1007/978-
3-642-15627-4.
Shult, Ernest; Yanushka, Arthur (1980), Near n-gons and line systems, Geom. Dedicata, 9: 172, MR
566437, doi:10.1007/BF00156473.
Chapter 30
Noncrossing partition
In combinatorial mathematics, the topic of noncrossing partitions has assumed some importance because of (among
other things) its application to the theory of free probability. The set of all noncrossing partitions is one of many sets
enumerated by the Catalan numbers. The number of noncrossing partitions of an n-element set with k blocks is found
in the Narayana number triangle.
30.1 Denition
A partition of a set S is a pairwise disjoint set of non-empty subsets, called parts or blocks, whose union is all of
S. Consider a nite set that is linearly ordered, or (equivalently, for purposes of this denition) arranged in a cyclic
order like the vertices of a regular n-gon. No generality is lost by taking this set to be S = { 1, ..., n }. A noncrossing
partition of S is a partition in which no two blocks cross each other, i.e., if a and b belong to one block and x and
y to another, they are not arranged in the order a x b y. If one draws an arch based at a and b, and another arch based
at x and y, then the two arches cross each other if the order is a x b y but not if it is a x y b or a b x y. In the latter
two orders the partition { { a, b }, { x, y } } is noncrossing.
Equivalently, if we label the vertices of a regular n-gon with the numbers 1 through n, the convex hulls of dierent
blocks of the partition are disjoint from each other, i.e., they also do not cross each other. The set of all non-crossing
partitions of S are denoted NC(S) . There is an obvious order isomorphism between NC(S1 ) and NC(S2 ) for two
nite sets S1 , S2 with the same size. That is, NC(S) depends essentially only on the size of S and we denote by
NC(n) the non-crossing partitions on any set of size n.
30.2 Lattice structure

Like the set of all partitions of the set { 1, ..., n }, the set of all noncrossing partitions is a lattice when partially
ordered by saying that a ner partition is less than a coarser partition. However, although it is a subset of the lattice
of all partitions, it is not a sublattice of the lattice of all partitions, because the join operations do not agree. In other
words, the nest partition that is coarser than both of two noncrossing partitions is not always the nest noncrossing
partition that is coarser than both of them.
Unlike the lattice of all partitions of the set, the lattice of all noncrossing partitions of a set is self-dual, i.e., it is order-
isomorphic to the lattice that results from inverting the partial order (turning it upside-down). This can be seen by
observing that each noncrossing partition has a complement. Indeed, every interval within this lattice is self-dual.
30.3 Role in free probability theory

The lattice of noncrossing partitions plays the same role in dening free cumulants in free probability theory that is
played by the lattice of all partitions in dening joint cumulants in classical probability theory. To be more precise,
let (A, ) be a non-commutative probability space (See free probability for terminology.), a A a non-commutative
random variable with free cumulants (kn )nN . Then
125
126 CHAPTER 30. NONCROSSING PARTITION
Nj ()
(an ) = kj
NC(n) j
where Nj () denotes the number of blocks of length j in the non-crossing partition . That is, the moments of a non-
commutative random variable can be expressed as a sum of free cumulants over the sum non-crossing partitions. This
is the free analogue of the moment-cumulant formula in classical probability. See also Wigner semicircle distribution.
30.4 References
Germain Kreweras, Sur les partitions non croises d'un cycle, Discrete Mathematics, volume 1, number 4,
pages 333350, 1972.
Rodica Simion, Noncrossing partitions, Discrete Mathematics, volume 217, numbers 13, pages 367409,
April 2000.
Roland Speicher, Free probability and noncrossing partitions, Sminaire Lotharingien de Combinatoire, B39c
(1997), 38 pages, 1997
128 CHAPTER 30. NONCROSSING PARTITION
The 14 noncrossing partitions of a 4-element set ordered in a Hasse diagram

Chapter 31
Partition of a set
For the partition calculus of sets, see innitary combinatorics.

In mathematics, a partition of a set is a grouping of the sets elements into non-empty subsets, in such a way that
A set of stamps partitioned into bundles: No stamp is in two bundles, no bundle is empty, and every stamp is in a bundle.
every element is included in one and only one of the subsets.
129
130 CHAPTER 31. PARTITION OF A SET
31.1 Denition
A partition of a set X is a set of nonempty subsets of X such that every element x in X is in exactly one of these
subsets[2] (i.e., X is a disjoint union of the subsets).
Equivalently, a family of sets P is a partition of X if and only if all of the following conditions hold:[3]
The family P does not contain the empty set (that is

/ P ).

The union of the sets in P is equal to X (that is AP A = X ). The sets in P are said to cover X.
The intersection of any two distinct sets in P is empty (that is (A, B P ) A = B = A B = ). The
elements of P are said to be pairwise disjoint.
The sets in P are called the blocks, parts or cells of the partition.[4]
The rank of P is |X| |P|, if X is nite.
31.2 Examples
Every singleton set {x} has exactly one partition, namely { {x} }.
The empty set has exactly one partition, namely .
For any nonempty set X, P = {X} is a partition of X, called the trivial partition.
For any non-empty proper subset A of a set U, the set A together with its complement form a partition of U,
namely, {A, U \ A}.
The set { 1, 2, 3 } has these ve partitions (one partition per item):
{ {1}, {2}, {3} }, sometimes written 1|2|3.

{ {1, 2}, {3} }, or 12|3.
{ {1, 3}, {2} }, or 13|2.
{ {1}, {2, 3} }, or 1|23.
{ {1, 2, 3} }, or 123 (in contexts where there will be no confusion with the number).
The following are not partitions of { 1, 2, 3 }:
{ {}, {1, 3}, {2} } is not a partition (of any set) because one of its elements is the empty set.
{ {1, 2}, {2, 3} } is not a partition (of any set) because the element 2 is contained in more than one block.
{ {1}, {2} } is not a partition of {1, 2, 3} because none of its blocks contains 3; however, it is a partition
of {1, 2}.
31.3 Partitions and equivalence relations

For any equivalence relation on a set X, the set of its equivalence classes is a partition of X. Conversely, from any
partition P of X, we can dene an equivalence relation on X by setting x ~ y precisely when x and y are in the same
part in P. Thus the notions of equivalence relation and partition are essentially equivalent.[5]
The axiom of choice guarantees for any partition of a set X the existence of a subset of X containing exactly one
element from each part of the partition. This implies that given an equivalence relation on a set one can select a
canonical representative element from every equivalence class.
31.4. REFINEMENT OF PARTITIONS 131
31.4 Renement of partitions

A partition of a set X is a renement of a partition of Xand we say that is ner than and that is coarser
than if every element of is a subset of some element of . Informally, this means that is a further fragmentation
of . In that case, it is written that .
This ner-than relation on the set of partitions of X is a partial order (so the notation "" is appropriate). Each set
of elements has a least upper bound and a greatest lower bound, so that it forms a lattice, and more specically (for
partitions of a nite set) it is a geometric lattice.[6] The partition lattice of a 4-element set has 15 elements and is
depicted in the Hasse diagram on the left.
Based on the cryptomorphism between geometric lattices and matroids, this lattice of partitions of a nite set corre-
sponds to a matroid in which the base set of the matroid consists of the atoms of the lattice, namely, the partitions
with n 2 singleton sets and one two-element set. These atomic partitions correspond one-for-one with the edges of
a complete graph. The matroid closure of a set of atomic partitions is the nest common coarsening of them all; in
graph-theoretic terms, it is the partition of the vertices of the complete graph into the connected components of the
subgraph formed by the given set of edges. In this way, the lattice of partitions corresponds to the lattice of ats of
the graphic matroid of the complete graph.
Another example illustrates the rening of partitions from the perspective of equivalence relations. If D is the set of
cards in a standard 52-card deck, the same-color-as relation on D which can be denoted ~C has two equivalence
classes: the sets {red cards} and {black cards}. The 2-part partition corresponding to ~C has a renement that yields
the same-suit-as relation ~S, which has the four equivalence classes {spades}, {diamonds}, {hearts}, and {clubs}.
31.5 Noncrossing partitions

A partition of the set N = {1, 2, ..., n} with corresponding equivalence relation ~ is noncrossing provided that for
any two 'cells C1 and C2, either all the elements in C1 are < than all the elements in C2 or they are all > than all the
elements in C2. In other words: given distinct numbers a, b, c in N, with a < b < c, if a ~ c (they both are in a cell
called C), it follows that also a ~ b and b ~ c, that is b is also in C. The lattice of noncrossing partitions of a nite set
has recently taken on importance because of its role in free probability theory. These form a subset of the lattice of
all partitions, but not a sublattice, since the join operations of the two lattices do not agree.
31.6 Counting partitions

The total number of partitions of an n-element set is the Bell number Bn. The rst several Bell numbers are B0 = 1,
B1 = 1, B2 = 2, B3 = 5, B4 = 15, B5 = 52, and B6 = 203 (sequence A000110 in the OEIS). Bell numbers satisfy the
recursion
n ( )
n
Bn+1 = Bk
k
k=0
and have the exponential generating function
Bn n
z = ee 1 .
z
n=0
n!
The Bell numbers may also be computed using the Bell triangle in which the rst value in each row is copied from
the end of the previous row, and subsequent values are computed by adding two numbers, the number to the left and
the number to the above left of the position. The Bell numbers are repeated along both sides of this triangle. The
numbers within the triangle count partitions in which a given element is the largest singleton.
The number of partitions of an n-element set into exactly k nonempty parts is the Stirling number of the second kind
S(n, k).
The number of noncrossing partitions of an n-element set is the Catalan number Cn, given by
( )
1 2n
Cn = .
n+1 n
31.7 See also

Exact cover
Cluster analysis
Weak ordering (ordered set partition)
Equivalence relation
Partial equivalence relation
Partition renement
List of partition topics
Lamination (topology)
Rhyme schemes by set partition
31.8 Notes
[1] Knuth, Donald E. (2013), Two thousand years of combinatorics, in Wilson, Robin; Watkins, John J., Combinatorics:
Ancient and Modern, Oxford University Press, pp. 737
[2] Naive Set Theory (1960). Halmos, Paul R. Springer. p. 28. ISBN 9780387900926.
[3] Lucas, John F. (1990). Introduction to Abstract Mathematics. Rowman & Littleeld. p. 187. ISBN 9780912675732.
[4] Brualdi, pp. 4445
[5] Schechter, p. 54
[6] Birkho, Garrett (1995), Lattice Theory, Colloquium Publications, 25 (3rd ed.), American Mathematical Society, p. 95,
ISBN 9780821810255.
31.9 References
Brualdi, Richard A. (2004). Introductory Combinatorics (4th ed.). Pearson Prentice Hall. ISBN 0-13-100119-
1.
Schechter, Eric (1997). Handbook of Analysis and Its Foundations. Academic Press. ISBN 0-12-622760-8.
1 2 3 4 5 6
7 8 9 10 11 12
13 14 15 16 17 18
19 20 21 22 23 24
25 26 27 28 29 30
31 32 33 34 35 36
37 38 39 40 41 42
43 44 45 46 47 48
49 50 51 52 53 54
The traditional Japanese symbols for the chapters of the Tale of Genji are based on the 52 ways of partitioning ve elements.[1]
Partitions of a 4-set ordered by renement

Construction of the Bell triangle

Chapter 32
Partition regularity
In combinatorics, a branch of mathematics, partition regularity is one notion of largeness for a collection of sets.
Given a set X , a collection of subsets S P(X) is called partition regular if every set A in the collection has the
property that, no matter how A is partitioned into nitely many subsets, at least one of the subsets will also belong to
the collection. That is, for any A S , and any nite partition A = C1 C2 Cn , there exists an i n, such
that Ci belongs to S . Ramsey theory is sometimes characterized as the study of which collections S are partition
regular.
32.1 Examples
the collection of all innite subsets of an innite set X is a prototypical example. In this case partition regularity
asserts that every nite partition of an innite set has an innite cell (i.e. the innite pigeonhole principle.)
sets with positive upper density in N : the upper density d(A) of A N is dened as d(A) = lim supn |{1,2,...,n}A|
n .
n
For any ultralter U on a set X , U is partition regular. If U A = 1 Ci , then for exactly one i is Ci U .
sets of recurrence: a set R of integers is called a set of recurrence if for any measure preserving transformation
T of the probability space (, , ) and A of positive measure there is a nonzero n R so that
(A T n A) > 0 .
Call a subset of natural numbers a.p.-rich if it contains arbitrarily long arithmetic progressions. Then the
collection of a.p.-rich subsets is partition regular (Van der Waerden, 1927).

Let [A]n be the set of all n-subsets of A N . Let Sn = AN [A]n . For each n, Sn is partition regular.
(Ramsey, 1930).
For each innite cardinal

, the collection of stationary sets of is partition regular. More is true: if S is
stationary and S = < S for some < , then some S is stationary.
the collection of -sets: A N is a -set if A contains the set of dierences {sm sn : m, n N, n < m}
for some sequence sn n=1 .
the set of barriers on N : call a collection B of nite subsets of N a barrier if:
X, Y B, X Y and
for all innite I B , there is some X B such that the elements of X are the smallest elements of I;
i.e. X I and i I \ X, x X, x < i .
This generalizes Ramseys theorem, as each [A]n is a barrier. (Nash-Williams, 1965)
nite products of innite trees (HalpernLuchli, 1966)
piecewise syndetic sets (Brown, 1968)
137
138 CHAPTER 32. PARTITION REGULARITY
Call a subset of natural numbers i.p.-rich if it contains arbitrarily large nite sets together with all their nite
sums. Then the collection of i.p.-rich subsets is partition regular (FolkmanRadoSanders, 1968).
(m, p, c)-sets (Deuber, 1973)
IP sets (Hindman, 1974, see also Hindman, Strauss, 1998)

MTk sets for each k, i.e. k-tuples of nite sums (MillikenTaylor, 1975)
central sets; i.e. the members of any minimal idempotent in N , the Stoneech compactication of the
integers. (Furstenberg, 1981, see also Hindman, Strauss, 1998)
32.2 References
1. Vitaly Bergelson, N. Hindman Partition regular structures contained in large sets are abundant J. Comb. Theory
(Series A) 93 (2001), 1836.
2. T. Brown, An interesting combinatorial method in the theory of locally nite semigroups, Pacic J. Math. 36,
no. 2 (1971), 285289.
3. W. Deuber, Mathematische Zeitschrift 133, (1973) 109123
4. N. Hindman, Finite sums from sequences within cells of a partition of N, J. Combinatorial Theory (Series A)
17 (1974) 111.
5. C.St.J.A. Nash-Williams, On well-quasi-ordering transnite sequences, Proc. Camb. Phil. Soc. 61 (1965),
3339.
6. N. Hindman, D. Strauss, Algebra in the Stoneech compactication, De Gruyter, 1998

7. J.Sanders, A Generalization of Schurs Theorem, Doctoral Dissertation, Yale University, 1968.
Chapter 33
Pi system
In mathematics, a -system (or pi-system) on a set is a collection P of certain subsets of , such that
P is non-empty.
A B P whenever A and B are in P.
That is, P is a non-empty family of subsets of that is closed under nite intersections. The importance of -systems
arises from the fact that if two probability measures agree on a -system, then they agree on the -algebra generated
by that -system. Moreover, if other properties, such as equality of integrals, hold for the -system, then they hold
for the generated -algebra as well. This is the case whenever the collection of subsets for which the property holds
is a -system. -systems are also useful for checking independence of random variables.
This is desirable because in practice, -systems are often simpler to work with than -algebras. For example, it may
be awkward to work with -algebras generated by innitely many sets (E1 , E2 , . . .) . So instead we may examine
the union of all -algebras generated by nitely many sets n (E1 , . . . , En ) . This forms a -system that generates
the desired -algebra. Another example is the collection of all interval subsets of the real line, along with the empty
set, which is a -system that generates the very important Borel -algebra of subsets of the real line.
33.1 Examples
a, b R , the intervals (, a] form a -system, and the intervals (a, b] form a -system, if the empty set
is also included.
The topology (collection of open subsets) of any topological space is a -system.
For any collection of subsets of , there exists a -system I which is the unique smallest -system of to
contain every element of , and is called the -system generated by .
{ }
For any measurable function f : R , the set If{= f 1 ((, x]) : x R }denes a -system, and is
called the -system generated by f. (Alternatively, f 1 ((a, b]) : a, b R, a < b {} denes a -system
generated by f .)
If P 1 and P 2 are -systems for 1 and 2 , respectively, then {A1 A2 : A1 P1 , A2 P2 } is a -system
for the product space 1 2 .
Any -algebra is a -system.
33.2 Relationship to -systems

A -system on is a set D of subsets of , satisfying
D,
139
140 CHAPTER 33. PI SYSTEM
if A D then Ac D ,
if A1 , A2 , A3 , . . . is a sequence of disjoint subsets in D then
n=1 An D .
Whilst it is true that any -algebra satises the properties of being both a -system and a -system, it is not true
that any -system is a -system, and moreover it is not true that any -system is a -algebra. However, a useful
classication is that any set system which is both a -system and a -system is a -algebra. This is used as a step in
proving the - theorem.
33.2.1 The - theorem

Let D be a -system, and let I D be a -system contained in D . The - Theorem[1] states that the -algebra
(I) generated by I is contained in D : (I) D .
The - theorem can be used to prove many elementary measure theoretic results. For instance, it is used in proving
the uniqueness claim of the Carathodory extension theorem for -nite measures.[2]
The - theorem is closely related to the monotone class theorem, which provides a similar relationship between
monotone classes and algebras, and can be used to derive many of the same results. Since -systems are simpler
classes than algebras, it can be easier to identify the sets that are in them while, on the other hand, checking whether
the property under consideration determines a -system is often relatively easy. Despite the dierence between the
two theorems, the - theorem is sometimes referred to as the monotone class theorem.[1]
Example
Let , 2 : F R be two measures on the -algebra F, and suppose that F = (I) is generated by a -system I. If
1. 1 (A) = 2 (A), A I, and

2. 1 () = 2 () < ,
then = 2 . This is the uniqueness statement of the Carathodory extension theorem for nite measures. If this
result does not seem very remarkable, consider the fact that it usually is very dicult or even impossible to fully
describe every set in the -algebra, and so the problem of equating measures would be completely hopeless without
such a tool.
Idea of Proof[2] Dene the collection of sets
D = {A (I) : 1 (A) = 2 (A)} .
By the rst assumption, 1 and 2 agree on I and thus I D. By the second assumption, D, and it can further
be shown that D is a -system. It follows from the - theorem that (I) D (I), and so D = (I). That is to say,
the measures agree on (I).
33.3 -Systems in probability

-systems are more commonly used in the study of probability theory than in the general eld of measure theory.
This is primarily due to probabilistic notions such as independence, though it may also be a consequence of the fact
that the - theorem was proven by the probabilist Eugene Dynkin. Standard measure theory texts typically prove
the same results via monotone classes, rather than -systems.
33.3.1 Equality in distribution

The - theorem motivates the common denition of the probability distribution of a random variable X : (, F, P)
R in terms of its cumulative distribution function. Recall that the cumulative distribution of a random variable is
dened as
33.3. -SYSTEMS IN PROBABILITY 141
FX (a) = P [X a] , aR
whereas the seemingly more general law of the variable is the probability measure
[ ]
LX (B) = P X 1 (B) , B B(R)
where B(R) is the Borel -algebra. We say that the random variables X : (, F, P) , and Y : (, F, P) R (on
D
two possibly dierent probability spaces) are equal in distribution (or law), X =Y , if they have the same cumulative
distribution functions, FX = FY. The motivation for the denition stems from the observation that if FX = FY, then
that is exactly to say that LX and LY agree on the -system {(, a] : a R} which generates B(R) , and so by
the example above: LX = LY .
A similar result holds for the joint distribution of a random vector. For example, suppose X and Y are two random
variables dened on the same probability space (, F, P) , with respectively generated -systems IX and IY . The
joint cumulative distribution function of (X,Y) is
[ ]
FX,Y (a, b) = P [X a, Y b] = P X 1 ((, a]) Y 1 ((, b]) , a, b R
However, A = X 1 ((, a]) IX and B = Y 1 ((, b]) IY . Since
IX,Y = {A B : A IX , B IY }
is a -system generated by the random pair (X,Y), the - theorem is used to show that the joint cumulative distribu-
tion function suces to determine the joint law of (X,Y). In other words, (X,Y) and (W,Z) have the same distribution
if and only if they have the same joint cumulative distribution function.
In the theory of stochastic processes, two processes (Xt )tT , (Yt )tT are known to be equal in distribution if and
only if they agree on all nite-dimensional distributions. i.e. for all t1 , . . . , tn T, n N .
D
(Xt1 , . . . , Xtn )=(Yt1 , . . . , Ytn )
The proof of this is another application of the - theorem.[3]
33.3.2 Independent random variables

The theory of -system plays an important role in the probabilistic notion of independence. If X and Y are two
random variables dened on the same probability space (, F, P) then the random variables are independent if and
only if their -systems IX , IY satisfy
P [A B] = P [A] P [B] , A IX , B IY ,
which is to say that IX , IY are independent. This actually is a special case of the use of -systems for determining
the distribution of (X,Y).
Example
Let Z = (Z1 , Z2 ) , where Z1 , Z2 N (0, 1) are iid standard normal random variables. Dene the radius and
argument (arctan) variables

R= Z12 + Z22 , = tan1 (Z2 /Z1 )
142 CHAPTER 33. PI SYSTEM
Then R and are independent random variables.

To prove this, it is sucient to show that the -systems IR , I are independent: i.e.
P[R , ] = P[R ]P[ ] [0, ), [0, 2].
Conrming that this is the case is an exercise in changing variables. Fix [0, ), [0, 2] , then the probability
can be expressed as an integral of the probability density function of Z .
( )
1 1 2
P[R , ] = exp (z1 + z2 ) dz1 dz2
2
R, 2 2

1 r2
= e 2 rdrd
2
(0 0
) ( )

1 r2
= d e 2 rdr
0 2 0
= P[ ]P[R ].
33.4 See also

-systems
-algebra
Monotone class theorem

Probability distribution
Independence
33.5 Notes
[1] Kallenberg, Foundations Of Modern Probability, p.2
[2] Durrett, Probability Theory and Examples, p.404
[3] Kallenberg, Foundations Of Modern probability, p. 48
33.6 References
Gut, Allan (2005). Probability: A Graduate Course. New York: Springer. ISBN 0-387-22833-0. doi:10.1007/b138932.
David Williams (1991). Probability with Martingales. Cambridge University Press. ISBN 0-521-40605-6.
Chapter 34
Polar space
In mathematics, in the eld of geometry, a polar space of rank n (n 3), or projective index n 1, consists of a set
P, conventionally the set of points, together with certain subsets of P, called subspaces, that satisfy these axioms:
Every subspace is isomorphic to a projective geometry Rd (K) with 1 d (n 1) and K a division ring. By
denition, for each subspace the corresponding d is its dimension.
The intersection of two subspaces is always a subspace.
For each point p not in a subspace A of dimension of n 1, there is a unique subspace B of dimension n 1
such that A B is (n 2)-dimensional. The points in A B are exactly the points of A that are in a common
subspace of dimension 1 with p.
There are at least two disjoint subspaces of dimension n 1.
It is possible to dene and study a slightly bigger class of objects using only relationship between points and lines:
a polar space is a partial linear space (P,L), so that for each point p P and each line l L, the set of points of l
collinear to p, is either a singleton or the whole l.
A polar space of rank two is a generalized quadrangle; in this case in the latter denition the set of points of a line l
collinear to a point p is the whole l only if p l. One recovers the former denition from the latter under assumptions
that lines have more than 2 points, points lie on more than 2 lines, and there exist a line l and a point p not on l so
that p is collinear to all points of l.
Finite polar spaces (where P is a nite set) are also studied as combinatorial objects.
34.1 Examples
In a nite projective space PG(d, q) over the eld of size q, with d odd and d 3, the set of all points, with as
subspaces the totally isotropic subspaces of an arbitrary symplectic polarity, forms a polar space of rank (d +
1)/2.
Let Q be a nonsingular quadric in PG(n, q) with character . Then the index of Q will be g = (n + w 3)/2.
The set of all points on the quadric, together with the subspaces on the quadric, forms a polar space of rank g
+ 1.
n1
Let H be a nonsingular Hermitian variety in PG(n, q2 ). The index of H will be 2 . The points on H,
n+1
together with the subspaces on it, form a polar space of rank 2 .
34.2 Classication
Jacques Tits proved that a nite polar space of rank at least three, is always isomorphic with one of the three structures
given above. This leaves only the problem of classifying generalized quadrangles.
143
144 CHAPTER 34. POLAR SPACE
34.3 References
Cameron, Peter J. (2015), Projective and polar spaces (PDF), QMW Maths Notes, 13, London: Queen Mary
and Westeld College School of Mathematical Sciences, MR 1153019
Buekenhout, Francois; Cohen, Arjeh M. (2013), Diagram Geometry (Related to classical groups and buildings),
A Series of Modern Surveys in Mathematics, part 3, 57, Heidelberg: Springer, MR 3014979
Buekenhout, Francis, Prehistory and History of Polar Spaces and of Generalized Polygons (PDF)
Chapter 35
Property B
For the B-property in nite group theory, see B-theorem.
In mathematics, Property B is a certain set theoretic property. Formally, given a nite set X, a collection C of subsets
of X, all of size n, has Property B if we can partition X into two disjoint subsets Y and Z such that every set in C
meets both Y and Z. The smallest number of sets in a collection of sets of size n such that C does not have Property
B is denoted by m(n).
The property gets its name from mathematician Felix Bernstein, who rst introduced the property in 1908.
35.1 Values of m(n)

It is known that m(1) = 1, m(2) = 3, and m(3) = 7 (as can by seen by the following examples); the value of m(4) =
23 (stergrd), although nding this result was the result of an exhaustive search. An upper bound of 23 (Seymour,
Toft) and a lower bound of 21 (Manning) have been proven. At the time of this writing (March 2017), there is no
OEIS entry for the sequence m(n) yet, due to the lack of terms known.
m(1) For n = 1, set X = {1}, and C = {{1}}. Then C does not have Property B.
m(2) For n = 2, set X = {1, 2, 3} and C = {{1, 2}, {1, 3}, {2, 3}}. Then C does not have Property B, so m(2) <=
3. However, C' = {{1, 2}, {1, 3}} does (set Y = {1} and Z = {2, 3}), so m(2) >= 3.
m(3) For n = 3, set X = {1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7}, and C = {{1, 2, 4}, {2, 3, 5}, {3, 4, 6}, {4, 5, 7}, {5, 6, 1}, {6, 7, 2},
{7, 1, 3}} (the Steiner triple system S 7 ); C does not have Property B (so m(3) <= 7), but if any element of C is
omitted, then that element can be taken as Y, and the set of remaining elements C' will have Property B (so for
this particular case, m(3) >= 7). One may check all other collections of 6 3-sets to see that all have Property
B.
m(4) stergrd (2014) through an exhaustive search found m(4) = 23. Seymour (1974) constructed a hypergraph
on 11 vertices with 23 edges without Property B, which shows that m(4) <= 23. Manning (1995) narrowed the
oor such that m(4) >= 21.
35.2 Asymptotics of m(n)

Erds (1963) proved that for any collection of fewer than 2n1 sets of size n, there exists a 2-coloring in which
no set is monochromatic. The proof is simple: Consider a random coloring. The probability that an arbitrary set
is monochromatic is 2n+1 . By a union bound, the probability that there exist a monochromatic set is less than
2n1 2n+1 = 1 . Therefore, there exists a good coloring.
Erds (1964) showed the existence of an n-uniform hypergraph with O(2n n2 ) hyperedges which does not have
property B, establishing an upper bound. Schmidt (1963) proved that every collection of at most n/(n + 4) 2n
145
146 CHAPTER 35. PROPERTY B
sets of size n has property B. Erds and Lovsz conjectured that m(n) = (2n n) . Beck in 1978 improved the
lower bound to m(n) = (n1/3 2n ) , where is an arbitrary
small positive number. In 2000, Radhakrishnan and
Srinivasan improved the lower bound to m(n) = (2n n/ log n) . They used a clever probabilistic algorithm.
35.3 References
Bernstein, F. (1908), Zur theorie der trigonometrische Reihen, Leipz. Ber., 60: 325328.
Erds, Paul (1963), On a combinatorial problem, Nordisk Mat. Tidskr., 11: 510
Erds, P. (1964). On a combinatorial problem. II. Acta Mathematica Academiae Scientiarum Hungaricae.
15 (34): 445447. doi:10.1007/BF01897152.
Schmidt, W. M. (1964). Ein kombinatorisches Problem von P. Erds und A. Hajnal. Acta Mathematica
Academiae Scientiarum Hungaricae. 15 (34): 373374. doi:10.1007/BF01897145.
Seymour, Paul (1974), A note on a combinatorial problem of Erds and Hajnal, Bulletin of the London
Mathematical Society, 8: 681682, doi:10.1112/jlms/s2-8.4.681.
Toft, Bjarne (1975), On colour-critical hypergraphs, in Hajnal, A.; Rado, Richard; Ss, Vera T., Innite and
Finite Sets: To Paul Erds on His 60th Birthday, North Holland Publishing Co., pp. 14451457.
Manning, G. M. (1995), Some results on the m(4) problem of Erds and Hajnal, Electronic Research An-
nouncements of the American Mathematical Society, 1: 112113, doi:10.1090/S1079-6762-95-03004-6.
Beck, J. (1978), On 3-chromatic hypergraphs, Discrete Mathematics, 24 (2): 127137, doi:10.1016/0012-
365X(78)90191-7.
Radhakrishnan, J.; Srinivasan, A. (2000), Improved bounds and algorithms for hypergraph 2-coloring, Ran-
dom Structures and Algorithms, 16 (1): 432, doi:10.1002/(SICI)1098-2418(200001)16:1<4::AID-RSA2>3.0.CO;2-
2.
Miller, E. W. (1937), On a property of families of sets, Comp. Rend. Varsovie, 30: 3138.
Erds, P.; Hajnal, A. (1961), On a property of families of sets, Acta Math. Acad. Sci. Hung., 12: 87123,
doi:10.1007/BF02066676.
Abbott, H. L.; Hanson, D. (1969), On a combinatorial problem of Erds, Canadian Mathematical Bulletin,
12: 823829, doi:10.4153/CMB-1969-107-x
stergrd, Patric R. J. (30 January 2014). On the minimum size of 4-uniform hypergraphs without property.
Discrete Applied Mathematics. 163, Part 2: 199204. doi:10.1016/j.dam.2011.11.035. Retrieved 7 March 2017. .
Chapter 36
Ring of sets
Not to be confused with Ring (mathematics).
In mathematics, there are two dierent notions of a ring of sets, both referring to certain families of sets. In order
theory, a nonempty family of sets R is called a ring (of sets) if it is closed under intersection and union. That is, the
following two statements are true for all sets A and B ,
1. A, B R implies A B R and
2. A, B R implies A B R. [1]
In measure theory, a ring of sets R is instead a nonempty family closed under unions and set-theoretic dierences.[2]
That is, the following two statements are true for all sets A and B (including when they are the same set),
1. A, B R implies A \ B R and
2. A, B R implies A B R.
This implies the empty set is in R . It also implies that R is closed under symmetric dierence and intersection,
because of the identities
1. A B = (A \ B) (B \ A) and
2. A B = A \ (A \ B).
(So a ring in the second, measure theory, sense is also a ring in the rst, order theory, sense.) Together, these
operations give R the structure of a boolean ring. Conversely, every family of sets closed under both symmetric
dierence and intersection is also closed under union and dierences. This is due to the identities
1. A B = (A B) (A B) and
2. A \ B = A (A B).
36.1 Examples
If X is any set, then the power set of X (the family of all subsets of X) forms a ring of sets in either sense.
If (X,) is a partially ordered set, then its upper sets (the subsets of X with the additional property that if x belongs
to an upper set U and x y, then y must also belong to U) are closed under both intersections and unions. However,
in general it will not be closed under dierences of sets.
The open sets and closed sets of any topological space are closed under both unions and intersections.[1]
147
148 CHAPTER 36. RING OF SETS
On the real line R, the family of sets consisting of the empty set and all nite unions of intervals of the form (a, b],
a,b in R is a ring in the measure theory sense.
If T is any transformation dened on a space, then the sets that are mapped into themselves by T are closed under
both unions and intersections.[1]
If two rings of sets are both dened on the same elements, then the sets that belong to both rings themselves form a
ring of sets.[1]
36.2 Related structures

A ring of sets (in the order-theoretic sense) forms a distributive lattice in which the intersection and union operations
correspond to the lattices meet and join operations, respectively. Conversely, every distributive lattice is isomorphic
to a ring of sets; in the case of nite distributive lattices, this is Birkhos representation theorem and the sets may
be taken as the lower sets of a partially ordered set.[1]
A eld of subsets of X is a ring that contains X and is closed under relative complement. Every eld, and so also
every -algebra, is a ring of sets in the measure theory sense.
A semi-ring (of sets) is a family of sets S with the properties
1. S,
2. A, B S implies A B S, and
n
3. A, B S implies A \ B = i=1 Ci for some disjoint C1 , . . . , Cn S.
Clearly, every ring (in the measure theory sense) is a semi-ring.

A semi-eld of subsets of X is a semi-ring that contains X.
36.3 References
[1] Birkho, Garrett (1937), Rings of sets, Duke Mathematical Journal, 3 (3): 443454, MR 1546000, doi:10.1215/S0012-
7094-37-00334-X.
[2] De Barra, Gar (2003), Measure Theory and Integration, Horwood Publishing, p. 13, ISBN 9781904275046.
36.4 External links

Ring of sets at Encyclopedia of Mathematics
Chapter 37
SauerShelah lemma
Pajors formulation of the SauerShelah lemma: for every nite family of sets (green) there is another family of equally many sets
(blue outlines) such that each set in the second family is shattered by the rst family
In combinatorial mathematics and extremal set theory, the SauerShelah lemma states that every family of sets
with small VC dimension consists of a small number of sets. It is named after Norbert Sauer and Saharon Shelah,
who published it independently of each other in 1972.[1][2] The same result was also published slightly earlier and
again independently, by Vladimir Vapnik and Alexey Chervonenkis, after whom the VC dimension is named.[3] In
his paper containing the lemma, Shelah gives credit also to Micha Perles, and for this reason the lemma has also been
called the PerlesSauerShelah lemma.[4]
Buzaglo et al. call this lemma one of the most fundamental results on VC-dimension,[4] and it has applications in
many areas. Sauers motivation was in the combinatorics of set systems, while Shelahs was in model theory and that
of Vapnik and Chervonenkis was in statistics. It has also been applied in discrete geometry[5] and graph theory.[6]
149
150 CHAPTER 37. SAUERSHELAH LEMMA
37.1 Denitions and statement

If F = {S1 , S2 , . . . } is a family of sets, and T is another set, then T is said to be shattered by F if every subset of
T (including the empty set and T itself) can be obtained as an intersection T Si between T and a set in the family.
The VC dimension of F is the largest cardinality of a set shattered by F .
In terms of these denitions, the SauerShelah lemma states that if F is a family of sets with n distinct elements such
k1 ( )
that |F| > i=0 ni , then F shatters a set of size k . Equivalently, if the VC dimension of F is k, then F can
k ( )
consist of at most i=0 ni = O(nk ) sets.
The bound of the lemma is tight: Let the family F be composed of all subsets of {1, 2, . . . n} with size less than k .
k1 ( )
Then the size of F is exactly i=0 ni but it does not shatter any set of size k .[7]
37.2 The number of shattered sets

A strengthening of the SauerShelah lemma, due to Pajor (1985), states that every nite set family F shatters at least
k1 ( )
|F| sets.[8] This immediately implies the SauerShelah lemma, because only i=0 ni of the subsets of an n -item
k1 ( )
universe have cardinality less than k . Thus, when |F| > i=0 ni , there are not enough small sets to be shattered,
so one of the shattered sets must have cardinality at least k .
For a restricted type of shattered set, called an order-shattered set, the number of shattered sets always equals the
cardinality of the set family.[9]
37.3 Proof
Pajors variant of the SauerShelah lemma may be proved by mathematical induction; the proof has variously been
credited to Noga Alon[10] or to Ron Aharoni and Ron Holzman.[9]
Base: every family of only one set shatters the empty set.
Step: Assume the lemma is true for all families of size less than |F| and let F be a family of two or more sets. Let x
be an element that belongs to some but not all of the sets in F . Split F into two subfamilies, of the sets that contain
x and the sets that do not contain x .
By the induction assumption, these two subfamilies shatter two collections of sets whose sizes add to at least |F| .
None of these shattered sets contain x , since a set that contains x cannot be shattered by a family in which all sets
contain x or all sets do not contain x .
Some of the shattered sets may be shattered by both subfamilies. When a set S is shattered by only one of the
two subfamilies, it contributes one unit both to the number of shattered sets of the subfamily and to the number of
shattered sets of F . When a set S is shattered by both subfamilies, both S and S {x} are shattered by F , so S
contributes two units to the number of shattered sets of the subfamilies and of F . Therefore, the number of shattered
sets of F is at least equal to the number shattered by the two subfamilies of F , which is at least |F| .
A dierent proof of the SauerShelah lemma in its original form, by Pter Frankl and Jnos Pach, is based on linear
algebra and the inclusionexclusion principle.[5][7]
37.4 Applications
The original application of the lemma, by Vapnik and Chervonenkis, was in showing that every probability distribution
can be approximated (with respect to a family of events of a given VC dimension) by a nite set of sample points
whose cardinality depends only on the VC dimension of the family of events. In this context, there are two important
notions of approximation, both parameterized by a number : a set S of samples, and a probability distribution on S,
is said to be an -approximation of the original distribution if the probability of each event with respect to S diers
from its original probability by at most . A set S of (unweighted) samples is said to be an -net if every event with
probability at least includes at least one point of S. An -approximation must also be an -net but not necessarily
vice versa.
37.5. SEE ALSO 151
Vapnik and Chervonenkis used the lemma to show that set systems of VC dimension d always have -approximations
of cardinality O( d2 log d ) . Later authors including Haussler & Welzl (1987)[11] and Komls, Pach & Woeginger
(1992)[12] similarly showed that there always exist -nets of cardinality O( d log 1 ) , and more precisely of cardinality
6d [5]
at most d ln 1 + 2d 1
ln ln + . The main idea of the proof of the existence of small -nets is to choose a random
sample x of cardinality O( log 1 ) and a second independent random sample y of cardinality O( d log2 1 ) , and to
d
bound the probability that x is missed by some large event E by the probability that x is missed and simultaneously
the intersection of y with E is larger than its median value. For any particular E, the probability that x is missed while
y is larger than its median is very small, and the SauerShelah lemma (applied to x y ) shows that only a small
number of distinct events E need to be considered, so by the union bound, with nonzero probability, x is an -net.[5]
In turn, -nets and -approximations, and the likelihood that a random sample of large enough cardinality has these
properties, have important applications in machine learning, in the area of probably approximately correct learning.[13]
In computational geometry, they have been applied to range searching,[11] derandomization,[14] and approximation
algorithms.[15][16]
Kozma & Moran (2013) use generalizations of the SauerShelah lemma to prove results in graph theory such as that
the number of strong orientations of a given graph is sandwiched between its numbers of connected and 2-edge-
connected subgraphs.[6]
37.5 See also

Growth function
37.6 References
[1] Sauer, N. (1972), On the density of families of sets, Journal of Combinatorial Theory, Series A, 13: 145147, MR
0307902, doi:10.1016/0097-3165(72)90019-2.
[2] Shelah, Saharon (1972), A combinatorial problem; stability and order for models and theories in innitary languages,
Pacic Journal of Mathematics, 41: 247261, MR 0307903, doi:10.2140/pjm.1972.41.247.
[3] Vapnik, V. N.; ervonenkis, A. Ja. (1971), The uniform convergence of frequencies of the appearance of events to their
probabilities, Akademija Nauk SSSR, 16: 264279, MR 0288823.
[4] Buzaglo, Sarit; Pinchasi, Rom; Rote, Gnter (2013), Topological hypergraphs, in Pach, Jnos, Thirty Essays on Geometric
Graph Theory, Springer, pp. 7181, doi:10.1007/978-1-4614-0110-0_6.
[5] Pach, Jnos; Agarwal, Pankaj K. (1995), Combinatorial geometry, Wiley-Interscience Series in Discrete Mathematics and
Optimization, New York: John Wiley & Sons Inc., p. 247, ISBN 0-471-58890-3, MR 1354145, doi:10.1002/9781118033203.
[6] Kozma, Lszl; Moran, Shay (2013), Shattering, Graph Orientations, and Connectivity, Electronic Journal of Combina-
torics, 20 (3), P44, arXiv:1211.1319 .
[7] Gowers, Timothy (July 31, 2008), Dimension arguments in combinatorics, Gowerss Weblog: Mathematics related dis-
cussions, Example 3.
[8] Pajor, Alain (1985), Sous-espaces l1n des espaces de Banach, Travaux en Cours [Works in Progress], 16, Paris: Hermann,
ISBN 2-7056-6021-6, MR 903247. As cited by Anstee, Rnyai & Sali (2002).
[9] Anstee, R. P.; Rnyai, Lajos; Sali, Attila (2002), Shattering news, Graphs and Combinatorics, 18 (1): 5973, MR
1892434, doi:10.1007/s003730200003.
[10] Kalai, Gil (September 28, 2008), Extremal Combinatorics III: Some Basic Theorems, Combinatorics and More.
[11] Haussler, David; Welzl, Emo (1987), "-nets and simplex range queries, Discrete and Computational Geometry, 2 (2):
127151, MR 884223, doi:10.1007/BF02187876.
[12] Komls, Jnos; Pach, Jnos; Woeginger, Gerhard (1992), Almost tight bounds for -nets, Discrete and Computational
Geometry, 7 (2): 163173, MR 1139078, doi:10.1007/BF02187833.
[13] Blumer, Anselm; Ehrenfeucht, Andrzej; Haussler, David; Warmuth, Manfred K. (1989), Learnability and the Vapnik
Chervonenkis dimension, Journal of the ACM, 36 (4): 929965, MR 1072253, doi:10.1145/76359.76371.
152 CHAPTER 37. SAUERSHELAH LEMMA
[14] Chazelle, B.; Friedman, J. (1990), A deterministic view of random sampling and its use in geometry, Combinatorica, 10
(3): 229249, MR 1092541, doi:10.1007/BF02122778.
[15] Brnnimann, H.; Goodrich, M. T. (1995), Almost optimal set covers in nite VC-dimension, Discrete and Computational
Geometry, 14 (4): 463479, MR 1360948, doi:10.1007/BF02570718.
[16] Har-Peled, Sariel (2011), On complexity, sampling, and -nets and -samples, Geometric approximation algorithms,
Mathematical Surveys and Monographs, 173, Providence, RI: American Mathematical Society, pp. 6185, ISBN 978-0-
8218-4911-8, MR 2760023.
Chapter 38
Set cover problem
The set cover problem is a classical question in combinatorics, computer science and complexity theory. It is one of
Karps 21 NP-complete problems shown to be NP-complete in 1972.
It is a problem whose study has led to the development of fundamental techniques for the entire eld of approximation
algorithms.[1]
Given a set of elements {1, 2, ..., n} (called the universe) and a collection S of m sets whose union equals the
universe, the set cover problem is to identify the smallest sub-collection of S whose union equals the universe. For
example, consider the universe U = {1, 2, 3, 4, 5} and the collection of sets S = {{1, 2, 3}, {2, 4}, {3, 4}, {4, 5}} .
Clearly the union of S is U . However, we can cover all of the elements with the following, smaller number of sets:
{{1, 2, 3}, {4, 5}} .
More formally, given a universe U and a family S of subsets of U , a cover is a subfamily C S of sets whose union
is U . In the set covering decision problem, the input is a pair (U, S) and an integer k ; the question is whether there
is a set covering of size k or less. In the set covering optimization problem, the input is a pair (U, S) , and the task
is to nd a set covering that uses the fewest sets.
The decision version of set covering is NP-complete, and the optimization/search version of set cover is NP-hard.[2]
If each set is assigned a cost, it becomes a weighted set cover problem.
38.1 Integer linear program formulation
The minimum set cover problem can be formulated as the following integer linear program (ILP).[3]
This ILP belongs to the more general class of ILPs for covering problems. The integrality gap of this ILP is at most
log n , so its relaxation gives a factor- log n approximation algorithm for the minimum set cover problem (where n is
the size of the universe).[4]
38.2 Hitting set formulation
Set covering is equivalent to the hitting set problem. That is seen by observing that an instance of set covering can
be viewed as an arbitrary bipartite graph, with sets represented by vertices on the left, the universe represented by
vertices on the right, and edges representing the inclusion of elements in sets. The task is then to nd a minimum
cardinality subset of left-vertices which covers all of the right-vertices. In the Hitting set problem, the objective is
to cover the left-vertices using a minimum subset of the right vertices. Converting from one problem to the other is
therefore achieved by interchanging the two sets of vertices.
153
154 CHAPTER 38. SET COVER PROBLEM

There is a greedy algorithm for polynomial time approximation of set covering that chooses sets according to one
rule: at each stage, choose the set that contains the largest number of uncovered elements. It can be shown[5] that this
algorithm achieves an approximation ratio of H(s) , where s is the size of the set to be covered. In other words, it
nds a covering that may be H(n) times as large as the minimum one, where H(n) is the n -th harmonic number:

n
1
H(n) = ln n + 1
k
k=1
This greedy algorithm actually achieves an approximation ratio of H(s ) where s is the maximum cardinality set of
S . For dense instances, there exists, however, a c ln m -approximation algorithm for every c > 0 .[6]
Tight example for the greedy algorithm with k=3
There is a standard example on which the greedy algorithm achieves an approximation ratio of log2 (n)/2 . The
universe consists of n = 2(k+1) 2 elements. The set system consists of k pairwise disjoint sets S1 , . . . , Sk with
sizes 2, 4, 8, . . . , 2k respectively, as well as two additional disjoint sets T0 , T1 , each of which contains half of the
elements from each Si . On this input, the greedy algorithm takes the sets Sk , . . . , S1 , in that order, while the optimal
solution consists only of T0 and T1 . An example of such an input for k = 3 is pictured on the right.
Inapproximability results show that the greedy algorithm is essentially the best-possible polynomial time approxima-
tion algorithm for set cover up to lower order terms (see Inapproximability results below), under plausible complexity
assumptions. A tighter analysis for the greedy algorithm shows that the approximation ratio is in fact ln n ln ln n +
(1) .[7]
38.4 Low-frequency systems

If each element occurs in at most f sets, then a solution can be found in polynomial time that approximates the
optimum to within a factor of f using LP relaxation.[8]
38.5 Inapproximability results

When n refers to the size of the universe, Lund & Yannakakis (1994) showed that set covering cannot be approximated
in polynomial time to within a factor of(12 log2 n
) 0.72 ln n , unless NP has quasi-polynomial time algorithms. Feige
(1998) improved this lower bound to 1 o(1) ln n under the same assumptions, which essentially matches the
approximation ratio achieved by the greedy algorithm. Raz & Safra (1997) established a lower bound of c ln n ,
where c is a certain constant, under the weaker assumption that P = NP. A similar result with a higher value of c was
recently proved by Alon, Moshkovitz & Safra ( (2006).) Dinur & Steurer (2013) showed optimal inapproximability by
proving that it cannot be approximated to 1 o(1) ln n unless P = NP.
38.6. RELATED PROBLEMS 155
38.6 Related problems

Hitting set is an equivalent reformulation of Set Cover.
Vertex cover is a special case of Hitting Set.
Edge cover is a special case of Set Cover.
Geometric set cover is a special case of Set Cover when the universe is a set of points in Rd and the sets are
induced by the intersection of the universe and geometric shapes (e.g., disks, rectangles).
Set packing is the dual problem of Set Cover.
Maximum coverage problem is to choose at most k sets to cover as many elements as possible.
Dominating set is the problem of selecting a set of vertices (the dominating set) in a graph such that all other
vertices are adjacent to at least one vertex in the dominating set. The Dominating set problem was shown to
be NP complete through a reduction from Set cover.
Exact cover problem is to choose a set cover with no element included in more than one covering set.
Closest pair of points problem
Nearest neighbor search
38.7 Notes
[1] Vazirani (2001, p. 15)
[2] Korte & Vygen 2012, p. 414.
[3] Vazirani (2001, p. 108)
[4] Vazirani (2001, pp. 110112)
[5] Chvatal, V. A Greedy Heuristic for the Set-Covering Problem. Mathematics of Operations Research Vol. 4, No. 3 (Aug.,
1979), pp. 233-235
[6] Karpinski & Zelikovsky 1998
[7] Slavk Petr A tight analysis of the greedy algorithm for set cover. STOC'96, Pages 435-441, doi:10.1145/237814.237991
[8] Vazirani (2001, pp. 118119)
38.8 References
Alon, Noga; Moshkovitz, Dana; Safra, Shmuel (2006), Algorithmic construction of sets for k-restrictions,
ACM Trans. Algorithms, ACM, 2 (2): 153177, ISSN 1549-6325, doi:10.1145/1150334.1150336.
Cormen, Thomas H.; Leiserson, Charles E.; Rivest, Ronald L.; Stein, Cliord (2001), Introduction to Algo-
rithms, Cambridge, Mass.: MIT Press and McGraw-Hill, pp. 10331038, ISBN 0-262-03293-7
Feige, Uriel (1998), A threshold of ln n for approximating set cover, Journal of the ACM, ACM, 45 (4):
634652, ISSN 0004-5411, doi:10.1145/285055.285059.
Karpinski, Marek; Zelikovsky, Alexander (1998). Approximating dense cases of covering problems. Pro-
ceedings of the DIMACS Workshop on Network Design: Connectivity and Facilities Location. 40. pp. 169178.
Lund, Carsten; Yannakakis, Mihalis (1994), On the hardness of approximating minimization problems,
Journal of the ACM, ACM, 41 (5): 960981, ISSN 0004-5411, doi:10.1145/185675.306789.
Raz, Ran; Safra, Shmuel (1997), A sub-constant error-probability low-degree test, and a sub-constant error-
probability PCP characterization of NP, STOC '97: Proceedings of the twenty-ninth annual ACM symposium
on Theory of computing, ACM, pp. 475484, ISBN 978-0-89791-888-6.
156 CHAPTER 38. SET COVER PROBLEM
Dinur, Irit; Steurer, David (2013), Analytical approach to parallel repetition, STOC '14: Proceedings of the
forty-sixth annual ACM symposium on Theory of computing, ACM, pp. 624633.
Vazirani, Vijay V. (2001), Approximation Algorithms (PDF), Springer-Verlag, ISBN 3-540-65367-8
Korte, Bernhard; Vygen, Jens (2012), Combinatorial Optimization: Theory and Algorithms (5 ed.), Springer,
ISBN 978-3-642-24487-2
Cardoso, Nuno; Abreu, Rui (2014). An Ecient Distributed Algorithm for Computing Minimal Hitting Sets
(PDF). Proceedings of the 25th International Workshop on Principles of Diagnosis (DX'14, best paper award).
Graz, Austria. doi:10.5281/zenodo.10037.
38.9 External links

Benchmarks with Hidden Optimum Solutions for Set Covering, Set Packing and Winner Determination
A compendium of NP optimization problems - Minimum Set Cover

Chapter 39
Sigma-algebra
"-algebra redirects here. For an algebraic structure admitting a given signature of operations, see Universal al-
gebra.
In mathematical analysis and in probability theory, a -algebra (also -eld) on a set X is a collection of subsets
of X that includes the empty subset, is closed under complement, and is closed under countable unions and countable
intersections. The pair (X, ) is called a measurable space.
A -algebra specializes the concept of a set algebra. An algebra of sets needs only to be closed under the union or
intersection of nitely many subsets.[1]
The main use of -algebras is in the denition of measures; specically, the collection of those subsets for which
a given measure is dened is necessarily a -algebra. This concept is important in mathematical analysis as the
foundation for Lebesgue integration, and in probability theory, where it is interpreted as the collection of events which
can be assigned probabilities. Also, in probability, -algebras are pivotal in the denition of conditional expectation.
In statistics, (sub) -algebras are needed for the formal mathematical denition of a sucient statistic,[2] particularly
when the statistic is a function or a random process and the notion of conditional density is not applicable.
If X = {a, b, c, d}, one possible -algebra on X is = { , {a, b}, {c, d}, {a, b, c, d} }, where is the empty set. In
general, a nite algebra is always a -algebra.
If {A1 , A2 , A3 , } is a countable partition of X then the collection of all unions of sets in the partition (including
the empty set) is a -algebra.
A more useful example is the set of subsets of the real line formed by starting with all open intervals and adding
in all countable unions, countable intersections, and relative complements and continuing this process (by transnite
iteration through all countable ordinals) until the relevant closure properties are achieved (a construction known as
the Borel hierarchy).
39.1 Motivation
There are at least three key motivators for -algebras: dening measures, manipulating limits of sets, and managing
partial information characterized by sets.
39.1.1 Measure
A measure on X is a function that assigns a non-negative real number to subsets of X; this can be thought of as making
precise a notion of size or volume for sets. We want the size of the union of disjoint sets to be the sum of their
individual sizes, even for an innite sequence of disjoint sets.
One would like to assign a size to every subset of X, but in many natural settings, this is not possible. For example,
the axiom of choice implies that when the size under consideration is the ordinary notion of length for subsets of the
real line, then there exist sets for which no size exists, for example, the Vitali sets. For this reason, one considers
instead a smaller collection of privileged subsets of X. These subsets will be called the measurable sets. They are
157
158 CHAPTER 39. SIGMA-ALGEBRA
closed under operations that one would expect for measurable sets, that is, the complement of a measurable set is a
measurable set and the countable union of measurable sets is a measurable set. Non-empty collections of sets with
these properties are called -algebras.
39.1.2 Limits of sets

Many uses of measure, such as the probability concept of almost sure convergence, involve limits of sequences of
sets. For this, closure under countable unions and intersections is paramount. Set limits are dened as follows on
-algebras.
The limit supremum of a sequence A1 , A2 , A3 , ..., each of which is a subset of X, is

lim sup An = Am .
n
n=1 m=n
The limit inmum of a sequence A1 , A2 , A3 , ..., each of which is a subset of X, is

lim inf An = Am .
n
n=1 m=n
If, in fact,
lim inf An = lim sup An ,

n n
then the limn An exists as that common set.
39.1.3 Sub -algebras

In much of probability, especially when conditional expectation is involved, one is concerned with sets that represent
only part of all the possible information that can be observed. This partial information can be characterized with a
smaller -algebra which is a subset of the principal -algebra; it consists of the collection of subsets relevant only to
and determined only by the partial information. A simple example suces to illustrate this idea.
Imagine you and another person are betting on a game that involves ipping a coin repeatedly and observing whether
it comes up Heads (H) or Tails (T). Since you and your opponent are each innitely wealthy, there is no limit to how
long the game can last. This means the sample space must consist of all possible innite sequences of H or T:
= {H, T } = {(x1 , x2 , x3 , . . . ) : xi {H, T }, i 1}.

However, after n ips of the coin, you may want to determine or revise your betting strategy in advance of the next
ip. The observed information at that point can be described in terms of the 2n possibilities for the rst n ips.
Formally, since you need to use subsets of , this is codied as the -algebra
Gn = {A {H, T } : A {H, T }n }.
Observe that then
G1 G2 G3 G ,
where G is the smallest -algebra containing all the others.
39.2. DEFINITION AND PROPERTIES 159
39.2 Denition and properties
39.2.1 Denition
Let X be some set, and let 2X represent its power set. Then a subset 2X is called a -algebra if it satises the
following three properties:[3]
1. X is in , and X is considered to be the universal set in the following context.

2. is closed under complementation: If A is in , then so is its complement, X \ A.
3. is closed under countable unions: If A1 , A2 , A3 , ... are in , then so is A = A1 A2 A3 .
From these properties, it follows that the -algebra is also closed under countable intersections (by applying De
Morgans laws).
It also follows that the empty set is in , since by (1) X is in and (2) asserts that its complement, the empty
set, is also in . Moreover, since {X, } satises condition (3) as well, it follows that {X, } is the smallest possible
-algebra on X. The largest possible -algebra on X is 2X .
Elements of the -algebra are called measurable sets. An ordered pair (X, ), where X is a set and is a -algebra
over X, is called a measurable space. A function between two measurable spaces is called a measurable function if
the preimage of every measurable set is measurable. The collection of measurable spaces forms a category, with the
measurable functions as morphisms. Measures are dened as certain types of functions from a -algebra to [0, ].
A -algebra is both a -system and a Dynkin system (-system). The converse is true as well, by Dynkins theorem
(below).
39.2.2 Dynkins - theorem

This theorem (or the related monotone class theorem) is an essential tool for proving many results about properties
of specic -algebras. It capitalizes on the nature of two simpler classes of sets, namely the following.
A -system P is a collection of subsets of X that is closed under nitely many intersections, and
a Dynkin system (or -system) D is a collection of subsets of X that contains X and is closed under
complement and under countable unions of disjoint subsets.
Dynkins - theorem says, if P is a -system and D is a Dynkin system that contains P then the -algebra (P)
generated by P is contained in D. Since certain -systems are relatively simple classes, it may not be hard to verify
that all sets in P enjoy the property under consideration while, on the other hand, showing that the collection D of all
subsets with the property is a Dynkin system can also be straightforward. Dynkins - Theorem then implies that
all sets in (P) enjoy the property, avoiding the task of checking it for an arbitrary set in (P).
One of the most fundamental uses of the - theorem is to show equivalence of separately dened measures or
integrals. For example, it is used to equate a probability for a random variable X with the Lebesgue-Stieltjes integral
typically associated with computing the probability:

P(X A) = A
F (dx) for all A in the Borel -algebra on R,
where F(x) is the cumulative distribution function for X, dened on R, while P is a probability measure, dened on
a -algebra of subsets of some sample space .
39.2.3 Combining -algebras

Suppose { : A} is a collection of -algebras on a space X.
The intersection of a collection of -algebras is a -algebra. To emphasize its character as a -algebra, it often
is denoted by:

.
A
Sketch of Proof: Let denote the intersection. Since X is in every , is not empty. Closure under
complement and countable unions for every implies the same must be true for . Therefore, is a
-algebra.
The union of a collection of -algebras is not generally a -algebra, or even an algebra, but it generates a
-algebra known as the join which typically is denoted
( )

= .
A A
A -system that generates the join is

{n }

P= Ai : Ai i , i A, n 1 .
i=1
Sketch of Proof: By the case n = 1, it is seen that each P , so

P.
A
This implies
( )

(P)
A
by the denition of a -algebra generated by a collection of subsets. On the other hand,

( )

P
A
which, by Dynkins - theorem, implies

( )

(P) .
A
39.2.4 -algebras for subspaces

Suppose Y is a subset of X and let (X, ) be a measurable space.
The collection {Y B: B } is a -algebra of subsets of Y.

Suppose (Y, ) is a measurable space. The collection {A X : A Y } is a -algebra of subsets of X.
39.2.5 Relation to -ring

A -algebra is just a -ring that contains the universal set X.[4] A -ring need not be a -algebra, as for example
measurable subsets of zero Lebesgue measure in the real line are a -ring, but not a -algebra since the real line
has innite measure and thus cannot be obtained by their countable union. If, instead of zero measure, one takes
measurable subsets of nite Lebesgue measure, those are a ring but not a -ring, since the real line can be obtained
by their countable union yet its measure is not nite.
39.3. PARTICULAR CASES AND EXAMPLES 161
39.2.6 Typographic note

-algebras are sometimes denoted using calligraphic capital letters, or the Fraktur typeface. Thus (X, ) may be
denoted as (X, F ) or (X, F) .
39.3 Particular cases and examples
39.3.1 Separable -algebras

A separable -algebra (or separable -eld) is a -algebra F that is a separable space when considered as a metric
space with metric (A, B) = (AB) for A, B F and a given measure (and with being the symmetric dif-
ference operator).[5] Note that any -algebra generated by a countable collection of sets is separable, but the converse
need not hold. For example, the Lebesgue -algebra is separable (since every Lebesgue measurable set is equivalent
to some Borel set) but not countably generated (since its cardinality is higher than continuum).
A separable measure space has a natural pseudometric that renders it separable as a pseudometric space. The distance
between two sets is dened as the measure of the symmetric dierence of the two sets. Note that the symmetric
dierence of two distinct sets can have measure zero; hence the pseudometric as dened above need not to be a true
metric. However, if sets whose symmetric dierence has measure zero are identied into a single equivalence class,
the resulting quotient set can be properly metrized by the induced metric. If the measure space is separable, it can
be shown that the corresponding metric space is, too.
39.3.2 Simple set-based examples

Let X be any set.
The family consisting only of the empty set and the set X, called the minimal or trivial -algebra over X.
The power set of X, called the discrete -algebra.
The collection {, A, Ac , X} is a simple -algebra generated by the subset A.
The collection of subsets of X which are countable or whose complements are countable is a -algebra (which
is distinct from the power set of X if and only if X is uncountable). This is the -algebra generated by the
singletons of X. Note: countable includes nite or empty.
The collection of all unions of sets in a countable partition of X is a -algebra.
39.3.3 Stopping time sigma-algebras

A stopping time can dene a -algebra F , the so-called stopping time sigma-algebra, which in a ltered probability
space describes the information up to the random time in the sense that, if the ltered probability space is interpreted
as a random experiment, the maximum information that can be found out about the experiment from arbitrarily often
repeating it until the time is F .[6]
39.4 -algebras generated by families of sets
39.4.1 -algebra generated by an arbitrary family

Let F be an arbitrary family of subsets of X. Then there exists a unique smallest -algebra which contains every set
in F (even though F may or may not itself be a -algebra). It is, in fact, the intersection of all -algebras containing
F. (See intersections of -algebras above.) This -algebra is denoted (F) and is called the -algebra generated by
F.
If F is empty, then (F)={X, }. Otherwise (F) consists of all the subsets of X that can be made from elements of
F by a countable number of complement, union and intersection operations.
For a simple example, consider the set X = {1, 2, 3}. Then the -algebra generated by the single subset {1} is
({{1}}) = {, {1}, {2, 3}, {1, 2, 3}}. By an abuse of notation, when a collection of subsets contains only one
element, A, one may write (A) instead of ({A}); in the prior example ({1}) instead of ({{1}}). Indeed, using
(A1 , A2 , ...) to mean ({A1 , A2 , ...}) is also quite common.
There are many families of subsets that generate useful -algebras. Some of these are presented here.
39.4.2 -algebra generated by a function

If f is a function from a set X to a set Y and B is a -algebra of subsets of Y , then the -algebra generated by
the function f , denoted by (f ) , is the collection of all inverse images f 1 (S) of the sets S in B . i.e.
(f ) = {f 1 (S) | S B}.
A function f from a set X to a set Y is measurable with respect to a -algebra of subsets of X if and only if (f) is
a subset of .
One common situation, and understood by default if B is not specied explicitly, is when Y is a metric or topological
space and B is the collection of Borel sets on Y.
If f is a function from X to Rn then (f) is generated by the family of subsets which are inverse images of inter-
vals/rectangles in Rn :
( )
(f ) = {f 1 ((a1 , b1 ] (an , bn ]) : ai , bi R} .
A useful property is the following. Assume f is a measurable map from (X, X) to (S, S) and g is a measurable
map from (X, X) to (T, T). If there exists a measurable map h from (T, T) to (S, S) such that f(x) = h(g(x))
for all x, then (f) (g). If S is nite or countably innite or, more generally, (S, S) is a standard Borel space
(e.g., a separable complete metric space with its associated Borel sets), then the converse is also true.[7] Examples of
standard Borel spaces include Rn with its Borel sets and R with the cylinder -algebra described below.
39.4.3 Borel and Lebesgue -algebras

An important example is the Borel algebra over any topological space: the -algebra generated by the open sets (or,
equivalently, by the closed sets). Note that this -algebra is not, in general, the whole power set. For a non-trivial
example that is not a Borel set, see the Vitali set or Non-Borel sets.
On the Euclidean space Rn , another -algebra is of importance: that of all Lebesgue measurable sets. This -algebra
contains more sets than the Borel -algebra on Rn and is preferred in integration theory, as it gives a complete measure
space.
39.4.4 Product -algebra

Let (X1 , 1 ) and (X2 , 2 ) be two measurable spaces. The -algebra for the corresponding product space X1 X2
is called the product -algebra and is dened by
1 2 = ({B1 B2 : B1 1 , B2 2 }).
Observe that {B1 B2 : B1 1 , B2 2 } is a -system.

The Borel -algebra for Rn is generated by half-innite rectangles and by nite rectangles. For example,
B(Rn ) = ({(, b1 ] (, bn ] : bi R}) = ({(a1 , b1 ] (an , bn ] : ai , bi R}) .
For each of these two examples, the generating family is a -system.

39.4. -ALGEBRAS GENERATED BY FAMILIES OF SETS 163
39.4.5 -algebra generated by cylinder sets

Suppose
X RT = {f : f (t) R, t T}
is a set of real-valued functions. Let B(R) denote the Borel subsets of R. A cylinder subset of X is a nitely restricted
set dened as
Ct1 ,...,tn (B1 , . . . , Bn ) = {f X : f (ti ) Bi , 1 i n}.
Each
{Ct1 ,...,tn (B1 , . . . , Bn ) : Bi B(R), 1 i n}
is a -system that generates a -algebra t1 ,...,tn . Then the family of subsets

FX = t1 ,...,tn
n=1 ti T,in
is an algebra that generates the cylinder -algebra for X. This -algebra is a subalgebra of the Borel -algebra
determined by the product topology of RT restricted to X.
An important special case is when T is the set of natural numbers and X is a set of real-valued sequences. In this
case, it suces to consider the cylinder sets
Cn (B1 , . . . , Bn ) = (B1 Bn R ) X = {(x1 , x2 , . . . , xn , xn+1 , . . . ) X : xi Bi , 1 i n},
for which
n = ({Cn (B1 , . . . , Bn ) : Bi B(R), 1 i n})
is a non-decreasing sequence of -algebras.
39.4.6 -algebra generated by random variable or vector

Suppose (, , P) is a probability space. If Y : Rn is measurable with respect to the Borel -algebra on Rn
then Y is called a random variable (n = 1) or random vector (n > 1). The -algebra generated by Y is
(Y ) = {Y 1 (A) : A B(Rn )}.
39.4.7 -algebra generated by a stochastic process

Suppose (, , P) is a probability space and RT is the set of real-valued functions on T . If Y : X RT is
measurable with respect to the cylinder -algebra (FX ) (see above) for X then Y is called a stochastic process or
random process. The -algebra generated by Y is
{ }
(Y ) = Y 1 (A) : A (FX ) = ({Y 1 (A) : A FX }),
the -algebra generated by the inverse images of cylinder sets.

39.5 See also

Join (sigma algebra)
Measurable function
Sample space
Sigma ring
Sigma additivity
39.6 References
[1] Probability, Mathematical Statistics, Stochastic Processes. Random. University of Alabama in Huntsville, Department
of Mathematical Sciences. Retrieved 30 March 2016.
[2] Billingsley, Patrick (2012). Probability and Measure (Anniversary ed.). Wiley. ISBN 978-1-118-12237-2.
[3] Rudin, Walter (1987). Real & Complex Analysis. McGraw-Hill. ISBN 0-07-054234-1.
[4] Vestrup, Eric M. (2009). The Theory of Measures and Integration. John Wiley & Sons. p. 12. ISBN 978-0-470-31795-2.
[5] Damonja, Mirna; Kunen, Kenneth (1995). Properties of the class of measure separable compact spaces (PDF). Fundamenta
Mathematicae: 262. If is a Borel measure on X , the measure algebra of (X, ) is the Boolean algebra of all Borel sets
modulo -null sets. If is nite, then such a measure algebra is also a metric space, with the distance between the two
sets being the measure of their symmetric dierence. Then, we say that is separable i this metric space is separable as
a topological space.
[6] Fischer, Tom (2013). On simple representations of stopping times and stopping time sigma-algebras. Statistics and
Probability Letters. 83 (1): 345349. doi:10.1016/j.spl.2012.09.024.
[7] Kallenberg, Olav (2001). Foundations of Modern Probability (2nd ed.). Springer. p. 7. ISBN 0-387-95313-2.
39.7 External links

Hazewinkel, Michiel, ed. (2001) [1994], Algebra of sets, Encyclopedia of Mathematics, Springer Sci-
ence+Business Media B.V. / Kluwer Academic Publishers, ISBN 978-1-55608-010-4
Sigma Algebra from PlanetMath.
Chapter 40
Sigma-ideal
In mathematics, particularly measure theory, a -ideal of a sigma-algebra (, read sigma, means countable in this
context) is a subset with certain desirable closure properties. It is a special type of ideal. Its most frequent application
is perhaps in probability theory.
Let (X,) be a measurable space (meaning is a -algebra of subsets of X). A subset N of is a -ideal if the
following properties are satised:
(i) N;
(ii) When A N and B , B A B N;

(iii) {An }nN N nN An N.
Briey, a sigma-ideal must contain the empty set and contain subsets and countable unions of its elements. The
concept of -ideal is dual to that of a countably complete (-) lter.
If a measure is given on (X,), the set of -negligible sets (S such that (S) = 0) is a -ideal.
The notion can be generalized to preorders (P,,0) with a bottom element 0 as follows: I is a -ideal of P just when
(i') 0 I,
(ii') x y & y I x I, and
(iii') given a family xn I (n N), there is y I such that xn y for each n
Thus I contains the bottom element, is downward closed, and is closed under countable suprema (which must exist).
It is natural in this context to ask that P itself have countable suprema.
A -ideal of a set X is a -ideal of the power set of X. That is, when no -algebra is specied, then one simply
takes the full power set of the underlying set. For example, the meager subsets of a topological space are those in the
-ideal generated by the collection of closed subsets with empty interior.
40.1 References
Bauer, Heinz (2001): Measure and Integration Theory. Walter de Gruyter GmbH & Co. KG, 10785 Berlin,
Germany.
165
Chapter 41
Sigma-ring
In mathematics, a nonempty collection of sets is called a -ring (pronounced sigma-ring) if it is closed under countable
union and relative complementation.
41.1 Formal denition

Let R be a nonempty collection of sets. Then R is a -ring if:

1. n=1 An R if An R for all n N
2. A \ B R if A, B R
41.2 Properties
From these two properties we immediately see that

n=1 An R if An R for all n N
This is simply because

n=1 An = A1 \ n=1 (A1 \ An ) .
41.3 Similar concepts

If the rst property is weakened to closure under nite union (i.e., AB R whenever A, B R ) but not countable
union, then R is a ring but not a -ring.
41.4 Uses
-rings can be used instead of -elds (-algebras) in the development of measure and integration theory, if one does
not wish to require that the universal set be measurable. Every -eld is also a -ring, but a -ring need not be a
-eld.
A -ring R that is a collection of subsets of X induces a -eld for X . Dene A to be the collection of all subsets
of X that are elements of R or whose complements are elements of R . Then A is a -eld over the set X . In fact
A is the minimal -eld containing R since it must be contained in every -eld containing R .
166
41.5. SEE ALSO 167
41.5 See also

Delta ring
Ring of sets
Sigma eld
41.6 References
Walter Rudin, 1976. Principles of Mathematical Analysis, 3rd. ed. McGraw-Hill. Final chapter uses -rings
in development of Lebesgue theory.
Chapter 42
Sperners theorem
Sperners theorem, in discrete mathematics, describes the largest possible families of nite sets none of which
contain any other sets in the family. It is one of the central results in extremal set theory, and is named after Emanuel
Sperner, who published it in 1928.
This result is sometimes called Sperners lemma, but the name "Sperners lemma" also refers to an unrelated result
on coloring triangulations. To dierentiate the two results, the result on the size of a Sperner family is now more
commonly known as Sperners theorem.
42.1 Statement
A family of sets that does not include two sets X and Y for which X Y is called a Sperner family. For example,
the family of k-element subsets of an n-element set is a Sperner family. No set in this family can contain any of the
others, because a containing set has to be strictly bigger than the set it contains, and in this family all sets have equal
size. The value of k that makes this example have as many sets as possible
( n )is n/2 if n is even, or the nearest integer
to n/2 if n is odd. For this choice, the number of sets in the family is n/2 .
Sperners theorem states that these examples are the largest possible Sperner families over an n-element set. Formally,
the theorem states that, for every Sperner family S whose union has a total of n elements,
( )
n
|S| .
n/2
42.2 Partial orders

Sperners theorem can also be stated in terms of partial order width. The family of all subsets of an n-element set
(its power set) can be partially ordered by set inclusion; in this partial order, two distinct elements are said to be
incomparable when neither of them contains the other. The width of a partial order is the largest number of elements
in an antichain, a set of pairwise incomparable elements. Translating this terminology into the language of sets, an
antichain is just a Sperner family, and the width of the partial order is the maximum number of sets in a Sperner
family.
( n ) Thus, another way of stating Sperners theorem is that the width of the inclusion order on a power set is
n/2 .
A graded partially ordered set is said to have the Sperner property when one of its largest antichains is formed by a
set of elements that all have the same rank. In this terminology, Sperners theorem states that the partially ordered
set of all subsets of a nite set, partially ordered by set inclusion, has the Sperner property.
42.3 Proof
The following proof is due to Lubell (1966). Let sk denote the number of k-sets in S. For all 0 k n,
168
42.4. GENERALIZATIONS 169
( ) ( )
n n

n/2 k
and, thus,
sk s
( n
) (nk) .
n/2 k
Since S is an antichain, we can sum over the above inequality from k = 0 to n and then apply the LYM inequality to
obtain
n
sk
n
s
( n
) (nk) 1,
k=0 n/2 k=0 k
which means

n ( )
n
|S| = sk .
n/2
k=0
This completes the proof.
42.4 Generalizations
There are several generalizations of Sperners theorem for subsets of P(E), the poset of all subsets of E.
42.4.1 No long chains
A chain is a subfamily {S0 , S1 , . . . , Sr } P(E) that is totally ordered, i.e., S0 S1 Sr (possibly after
renumbering). The chain has r + 1 members and length r. An r-chain-free family (also called an r-family) is a
family of subsets of E that contains no chain of length (r. )Erds (1945) proved that the largest size of an r-chain-free
family is the sum of the r largest binomial coecients ni . The case r = 1 is Sperners theorem.
42.4.2 p-compositions of a set
In the set P(E)p of p-tuples of subsets of E, we say a p-tuple (S1 , . . . , Sp ) is another one, (T1 , . . . , Tp ), if Si Ti
for each i = 1,2,...,p. We call (S1 , . . . , Sp ) a p-composition of E if the sets S1 , . . . , Sp form a partition of E.
Meshalkin ((1963) proved) that the maximum size of an antichain of p-compositions is the largest p-multinomial
coecient n1 n2n... np , that is, the coecient in which all ni are as nearly equal as possible (i.e., they dier by at
most 1). Meshalkin proved this by proving a generalized LYM inequality.
The case p = 2 is Sperners theorem, because then S2 = E \ S1 and the assumptions reduce to the sets S1 being a
Sperner family.
42.4.3 No long chains in p-compositions of a set
Beck & Zaslavsky (2002) combined the Erds and Meshalkin theorems by adapting Meshalkins proof of his gener-
alized LYM inequality. They showed that the largest size of a family of p-compositions such that the sets in the i-th
position of the p-tuples, ignoring duplications, are r-chain-free, for every i = 1, 2, . . . , p 1 (but not necessarily for
i = p), is not greater than the sum of the rp1 largest p-multinomial coecients.
170 CHAPTER 42. SPERNERS THEOREM
42.4.4 Projective geometry analog

In the nite projective geometry PG(d, Fq) of dimension d over a nite eld of order q, let L(p, Fq ) be the family
of all subspaces. When partially ordered by set inclusion, this family is a lattice.
[ Rota
] & Harper (1971) proved that
d+1
the largest size of an antichain in L(p, Fq ) is the largest Gaussian coecient ; this is the projective-geometry
k
analog, or q-analog, of Sperners theorem.
They further proved that the largest size of an r-chain-free family in L(p, Fq ) is the sum of the r largest Gaussian
coecients. Their proof is by a projective analog of the LYM inequality.
42.4.5 No long chains in p-compositions of a projective space

Beck & Zaslavsky (2003) obtained a Meshalkin-like generalization of the RotaHarper theorem. In PG(d, Fq), a
Meshalkin sequence of length p is a sequence (A1 , . . . , Ap ) of projective subspaces such that no proper subspace
of PG(d, Fq) contains them all and their dimensions sum to d p + 1 . The theorem is that a family of Meshalkin
sequences of length p in PG(d, Fq), such that the subspaces appearing in position i of the sequences contain no chain
of length r for each i = 1, 2, . . . , p 1, is not more than the sum of the largest rp1 of the quantities
[ ]
d+1
q s2 (n1 ,...,np ) ,
n1 n2 . . . n p
[ ]
d+1
where (in which we assume that d + 1 = n1 + + np ) denotes the p-Gaussian coecient
n1 n2 . . . np
[ ][ ] [ ]
d+1 d + 1 n1 d + 1 (n1 + + np1 )

n1 n2 np
and
s2 (n1 , . . . , np ) := n1 n2 + n1 n3 + n2 n3 + n1 n4 + + np1 np ,
the second elementary symmetric function of the numbers n1 , n2 , . . . , np .
42.5 See also

Dilworths theorem
42.6 References
Anderson, Ian (1987), Sperners theorem, Combinatorics of Finite Sets, Oxford University Press, pp. 24.
Beck, Matthias; Zaslavsky, Thomas (2002), A shorter, simpler, stronger proof of the Meshalkin-Hochberg-
Hirsch bounds on componentwise antichains, Journal of Combinatorial Theory, Series A, 100 (1): 196199,
MR 1932078, doi:10.1006/jcta.2002.3295.
Beck, Matthias; Zaslavsky, Thomas (2003), A Meshalkin theorem for projective geometries, Journal of
Combinatorial Theory, Series A, 102 (2): 433441, MR 1979545, doi:10.1016/S0097-3165(03)00049-9.
Engel, Konrad (1997), Sperner theory, Encyclopedia of Mathematics and its Applications, 65, Cambridge:
Cambridge University Press, p. x+417, ISBN 0-521-45206-6, MR 1429390, doi:10.1017/CBO9780511574719.
Engel, K. (2001) [1994], Sperner theorem, in Hazewinkel, Michiel, Encyclopedia of Mathematics, Springer
42.7. EXTERNAL LINKS 171
Erds, P. (1945), On a lemma of Littlewood and Oord (PDF), Bulletin of the American Mathematical
Society, 51: 898902, MR 0014608, doi:10.1090/S0002-9904-1945-08454-7
Lubell, D. (1966), A short proof of Sperners lemma, Journal of Combinatorial Theory, 1 (2): 299, MR
0194348, doi:10.1016/S0021-9800(66)80035-2.
Meshalkin, L.D. (1963), Generalization of Sperners theorem on the number of subsets of a nite set. (In
Russian)", Theory of Probability and its Applications, 8 (2): 203204, doi:10.1137/1108023.
Rota, Gian-Carlo; Harper, L. H. (1971), Matching theory, an introduction, Advances in Probability and
Related Topics, Vol. 1, New York: Dekker, pp. 169215, MR 0282855.
Sperner, Emanuel (1928), Ein Satz ber Untermengen einer endlichen Menge, Mathematische Zeitschrift (in
German), 27 (1): 544548, JFM 54.0090.06, doi:10.1007/BF01171114.
42.7 External links

Sperners Theorem at cut-the-knot
Sperners theorem on the polymath1 wiki
Chapter 43
Steiner system
The Fano plane is an S(2,3,7) Steiner triple system. The blocks are the 7 lines, each containing 3 points. Every pair of points belongs
to a unique line.
In combinatorial mathematics, a Steiner system (named after Jakob Steiner) is a type of block design, specically a
t-design with = 1 and t 2.
172
43.1. EXAMPLES 173
A Steiner system with parameters t, k, n, written S(t,k,n), is an n-element set S together with a set of k-element subsets
of S (called blocks) with the property that each t-element subset of S is contained in exactly one block. In an alternate
notation for block designs, an S(t,k,n) would be a t-(n,k,1) design.
This denition is relatively modern, generalizing the classical denition of Steiner systems which in addition required
that k = t + 1. An S(2,3,n) was (and still is) called a Steiner triple (or triad) system, while an S(3,4,n) was called a
Steiner quadruple system, and so on. With the generalization of the denition, this naming system is no longer strictly
adhered to.
A long-standing problem in design theory was if any nontrivial (t < k < n) Steiner systems have t 6; also if innitely
many have t = 4 or 5.[1] This was solved in the armative by Peter Keevash in 2014.[2][3][4]
43.1 Examples
43.1.1 Finite projective planes

A nite projective plane of order q, with the lines as blocks, is an S(2, q + 1, q2 + q + 1), since it has q2 + q + 1
points, each line passes through q + 1 points, and each pair of distinct points lies on exactly one line.
43.1.2 Finite ane planes

A nite ane plane of order q, with the lines as blocks, is an S(2, q, q2 ). An ane plane of order q can be obtained
from a projective plane of the same order by removing one block and all of the points in that block from the projective
plane. Choosing dierent blocks to remove in this way can lead to non-isomorphic ane planes.
43.2 Classical Steiner systems
43.2.1 Steiner triple systems

An S(2,3,n) is called a Steiner triple system, and its blocks are called triples. It is common to see the abbreviation
STS(n) for a Steiner triple system of order n. The total number of pairs is n(n-1)/2, of which three appear in a triple,
and so the total number of triples is n(n1)/6. This shows that n must be of the form 6k+1 or 6k + 3 for some k. The
fact that this condition on n is sucient for the existence of an S(2,3,n) was proved by Raj Chandra Bose[5] and T.
Skolem.[6] The projective plane of order 2 (the Fano plane) is an STS(7) and the ane plane of order 3 is an STS(9).
Up to isomorphism, the STS(7) and STS(9) are unique, there are two STS(13)s, 80 STS(15)s, and 11,084,874,829
STS(19)s.[7]
We can dene a multiplication on the set S using the Steiner triple system by setting aa = a for all a in S, and ab =
c if {a,b,c} is a triple. This makes S an idempotent, commutative quasigroup. It has the additional property that ab
= c implies bc = a and ca = b.[8] Conversely, any (nite) quasigroup with these properties arises from a Steiner triple
system. Commutative idempotent quasigroups satisfying this additional property are called Steiner quasigroups.[9]
43.2.2 Steiner quadruple systems

An S(3,4,n) is called a Steiner quadruple system. A necessary and sucient condition for the existence of an
S(3,4,n) is that n 2 or 4 (mod 6). The abbreviation SQS(n) is often used for these systems.
Up to isomorphism, SQS(8) and SQS(10) are unique, there are 4 SQS(14)s and 1,054,163 SQS(16)s.[10]
43.2.3 Steiner quintuple systems

An S(4,5,n) is called a Steiner quintuple system. A necessary condition for the existence of such a system is that n 3
or 5 (mod 6) which comes from considerations that apply to all the classical Steiner systems. An additional necessary
condition is that n 4 (mod 5), which comes from the fact that the number of blocks must be an integer. Sucient
conditions are not known.
174 CHAPTER 43. STEINER SYSTEM
There is a unique Steiner quintuple system of order 11, but none of order 15 or order 17.[11] Systems are known for
orders 23, 35, 47, 71, 83, 107, 131, 167 and 243. The smallest order for which the existence is not known (as of
2011) is 21.
43.3 Properties
It is clear from the denition of S(t, k, n) that 1 < t < k < n . (Equalities, while technically possible, lead to trivial
systems.)
If S(t, k, n) exists, then taking all blocks containing a specic element and discarding that element gives a derived
system S(t1, k1, n1). Therefore the existence of S(t1, k1, n1) is a necessary condition for the existence of
S(t, k, n).
( ) ( )
The number of t-element subsets in S is nt , while the number of t-element subsets in each block is kt . Since every
(n) (k)
t-element subset is contained in exactly one block, we have t = b t , or
(n)
n(n 1) (n t + 1)
b = (kt ) = ,
t
k(k 1) (k t + 1)
(where
n1
) b is (the
k1
number
) of blocks. Similar reasoning about t-element subsets containing a particular element gives us
t1 = r t1 , or
(n1)
r = (k1
t1 )
= (nt+1)(n2)(n1)
(kt+1)(k2)(k1) ,
t1
where r is the number of blocks containing any given element. From these denitions follows the equation bk = rn
. It is a necessary condition for the existence of S(t, k, n) that b and r are integers. As with any block design, Fishers
inequality b n is true in Steiner systems.
Given the parameters of a Steiner system S(t, k, n) and a subset of size t t , contained in at least one block, one
can compute the number of blocks intersecting that subset in a xed number of elements by constructing a Pascal
triangle.[12] In particular, the number of blocks intersecting a xed block in any number of elements is independent
of the chosen block.
The number of blocks that contain any i-element set of points is:
( )/ ( )
ni ki
i = for i = 0, 1, . . . , t,
ti ti
It can be shown that if there is a Steiner system S(2, k, n), where k is a prime power greater than 1, then n 1 or
k (mod k(k1)). In particular, a Steiner triple system S(2, 3, n) must have n = 6m + 1 or 6m + 3. And as we have
already mentioned, this is the only restriction on Steiner triple systems, that is, for each natural number m, systems
S(2, 3, 6m + 1) and S(2, 3, 6m + 3) exist.
43.4 History
Steiner triple systems were dened for the rst time by W.S.B. Woolhouse in 1844 in the Prize question #1733 of
Ladys and Gentlemens Diary.[13] The posed problem was solved by Thomas Kirkman (1847). In 1850 Kirkman
posed a variation of the problem known as Kirkmans schoolgirl problem, which asks for triple systems having an
additional property (resolvability). Unaware of Kirkmans work, Jakob Steiner (1853) reintroduced triple systems,
and as this work was more widely known, the systems were named in his honor.
43.5 Mathieu groups

Several examples of Steiner systems are closely related to group theory. In particular, the nite simple groups called
Mathieu groups arise as automorphism groups of Steiner systems:
43.6. THE STEINER SYSTEM S(5, 6, 12) 175
The Mathieu group M11 is the automorphism group of a S(4,5,11) Steiner system
The Mathieu group M22 is the unique index 2 subgroup of the automorphism group of a S(3,6,22) Steiner
system
The Mathieu group M24 is the automorphism group of a S(5,8,24) Steiner system.
43.6 The Steiner system S(5, 6, 12)

There is a unique S(5,6,12) Steiner system; its automorphism group is the Mathieu group M12 , and in that context it
is denoted by W12 .
43.6.1 Constructions
There are dierent ways to construct an S(5,6,12) system.
Projective line method
This construction is due to Carmichael (1937).[14]

Add a new element, call it , to the 11 elements of the nite eld F11 (that is, the integers mod 11). This set, S,
of 12 elements can be formally identied with the points of the projective line over F11 . Call the following specic
subset of size 6,
{, 1, 3, 4, 5, 9},
a block. From this block, we obtain the other blocks of the S(5,6,12) system by repeatedly applying the linear
fractional transformations:
az + b
z = f (z) = ,
cz + d
where a,b,c,d are in F11 and ad - bc is a non-zero square in F11 . With the usual conventions of dening f (d/c) =
and f () = a/c, these functions map the set S onto itself. In geometric language, they are projectivities of the
projective line. They form a group under composition which is the projective special linear group PSL(2,11) of order
660. There are exactly ve elements of this group that leave the starting block xed setwise,[15] so there will be 132
images of that block. As a consequence of the multiply transitive property of this group acting on this set, any subset
of ve elements of S will appear in exactly one of these 132 images of size six.
Kitten method
An alternative construction of W12 is obtained by use of the 'kitten' of R.T. Curtis,[16] which was intended as a hand
calculator to write down blocks one at a time. The kitten method is based on completing patterns in a 3x3 grid of
numbers, which represent an ane geometry on the vector space F3 xF3 , an S(2,3,9) system.
Construction from K6 graph factorization
The relations between the graph factors of the complete graph K6 generate an S(5,6,12).[17] A K6 graph has 6 dierent
1-factorizations (ways to partition the edges into disjoint perfect matchings), and also 6 vertices. The set of vertices
and the set of factorizations provide one block each. For every distinct pair of factorizations, there exists exactly one
perfect matching in common. Take the set of vertices and replace the two vertices corresponding to an edge of the
common perfect matching with the labels corresponding to the factorizations; add that to the set of blocks. Repeat
this with the other two edges of the common perfect matching. Similarly take the set of factorizations and replace
the labels corresponding to the two factorizations with the end points of an edge in the common perfect matching.
Repeat with the other two edges in the matching. There are thus 3+3 = 6 blocks per pair of factorizations, and there
are 6C2 = 15 pairs among the 6 factorizations, resulting in 90 new blocks. Finally take the full set of 12C6 = 924
combinations of 6 objects out of 12, and discard any combination that has 5 or more objects in common with any of
the 92 blocks generated so far. Exactly 40 blocks remain, resulting in 2+90+40 = 132 blocks of the S(5,6,12).
43.7 The Steiner system S(5, 8, 24)

The Steiner system S(5, 8, 24), also known as the Witt design or Witt geometry, was rst described by Carmichael
(1931) and rediscovered by Witt (1938). This system is connected with many of the sporadic simple groups and with
the exceptional 24-dimensional lattice known as the Leech lattice.
The automorphism group of S(5, 8, 24) is the Mathieu group M24 , and in that context the design is denoted W24
(W for Witt)
43.7.1 Constructions
There are many ways to construct the S(5,8,24). Two methods are described here:
Method based on 8-combinations of 24 elements
All 8-element subsets of a 24-element set are generated in lexicographic order, and any such subset which diers
from some subset already found in fewer than four positions is discarded.
The list of octads for the elements 01, 02, 03, ..., 22, 23, 24 is then:
01 02 03 04 05 06 07 08
01 02 03 04 09 10 11 12
01 02 03 04 13 14 15 16
.
. (next 753 octads omitted)
.
13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20
13 14 15 16 21 22 23 24
17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24
Each single element occurs 253 times somewhere in some octad. Each pair occurs 77 times. Each triple occurs 21
times. Each quadruple (tetrad) occurs 5 times. Each quintuple (pentad) occurs once. Not every hexad, heptad or
octad occurs.
Method based on 24-bit binary strings
All 24-bit binary strings are generated in lexicographic order, and any such string that diers from some earlier one
in fewer than 8 positions is discarded. The result looks like this:
000000000000000000000000 000000000000000011111111 000000000000111100001111 000000000000111111110000
000000000011001100110011 000000000011001111001100 000000000011110000111100 000000000011110011000011
000000000101010101010101 000000000101010110101010 . . (next 4083 24-bit strings omitted) . 111111111111000011110000
111111111111111100000000 111111111111111111111111
The list contains 4096 items, which are each code words of the extended binary Golay code. They form a group
under the XOR operation. One of them has zero 1-bits, 759 of them have eight 1-bits, 2576 of them have twelve
1-bits, 759 of them have sixteen 1-bits, and one has twenty-four 1-bits. The 759 8-element blocks of the S(5,8,24)
(called octads) are given by the patterns of 1s in the code words with eight 1-bits.
43.8. SEE ALSO 177
43.8 See also

Constant weight code
Kirkmans schoolgirl problem
SylvesterGallai conguration
43.9 Notes
[1] Encyclopaedia of Design Theory: t-Designs. Designtheory.org. 2004-10-04. Retrieved 2012-08-17.
[2] Keevash, Peter (2014). The existence of designs. arXiv:1401.3665 .
[3] A Design Dilemma Solved, Minus Designs. Quanta Magazine. 2015-06-09. Retrieved 2015-06-27.
[4] Kalai, Gil. Designs exist!" (PDF). http://www.bourbaki.ens.fr. Seminaire BOURBAKI. External link in |website= (help)
[5] R. C. Bose. On the construction of balanced incomplete block designs. Ann. Eugenics 9 (1939), 353399.
[6] T. Skolem. Some remarks on the triple systems of Steiner. Math. Scand. 6 (1958), 273280.
[7] Colbourn & Dinitz 2007, pg.60
[8] This property is equivalent to saying that (xy)y = x for all x and y in the idempotent commutative quasigroup.
[9] Colbourn & Dinitz 2007, pg. 497, denition 28.12
[10] Colbourn & Dinitz 2007, pg.106
[11] stergard & Pottonen 2008
[12] Assmus & Key 1994, pg. 8
[13] Lindner & Rodger 1997, pg.3
[14] Carmichael 1956, p. 431
[15] Beth, Jungnickel & Lenz 1986, p. 196
[16] Curtis 1984
[17] EAGTS textbook
43.10 References
Assmus, E. F., Jr.; Key, J. D. (1994), 8. Steiner Systems, Designs and Their Codes, Cambridge University
Press, pp. 295316, ISBN 0-521-45839-0.
0-521-41361-3
Press. 2nd ed. (1999) ISBN 978-0-521-44432-3.
Carmichael, Robert (1931), Tactical Congurations of Rank Two, American Journal of Mathematics, 53:
217240, JSTOR 10.2307/2370885, doi:10.2307/2370885
Carmichael, Robert D. (1956) [1937], Introduction to the theory of Groups of Finite Order, Dover, ISBN 0-
486-60300-8
Colbourn, Charles J.; Dinitz, Jerey H. (1996), Handbook of Combinatorial Designs, Boca Raton: Chapman
& Hall/ CRC, ISBN 0-8493-8948-8, Zbl 0836.00010
Chapman & Hall/ CRC, ISBN 1-58488-506-8, Zbl 1101.05001
Curtis, R.T. (1984), The Steiner system S(5,6,12), the Mathieu group M12 and the kitten"", in Atkinson,
Michael D., Computational group theory (Durham, 1982), London: Academic Press, pp. 353358, ISBN
0-12-066270-1, MR 0760669
Hughes, D. R.; Piper, F. C. (1985), Design Theory, Cambridge University Press, pp. 173176, ISBN 0-521-
35872-8.
Kirkman, Thomas P. (1847), On a Problem in Combinations, The Cambridge and Dublin Mathematical
Journal, Macmillan, Barclay, and Macmillan, II: 191204.
stergard, Patric R.J.; Pottonen, Olli (2008), There exists no Steiner system S(4,5,17)", Journal of Combina-
torial Theory Series A, 115 (8): 15701573, doi:10.1016/j.jcta.2008.04.005
Steiner, J. (1853), Combinatorische Aufgabe, Journal fr die Reine und Angewandte Mathematik, 45: 181
182.
Witt, Ernst (1938), Die 5-Fach transitiven Gruppen von Mathieu, Abh. Math. Sem. Univ. Hamburg, 12:
256264, doi:10.1007/BF02948947

Rowland, Todd and Weisstein, Eric W. Steiner System. MathWorld.
Rumov, B.T. (2001) [1994], Steiner system, in Hazewinkel, Michiel, Encyclopedia of Mathematics, Springer
Steiner systems by Andries E. Brouwer

Implementation of S(5,8,24) by Dr. Alberto Delgado, Gabe Hart, and Michael Kolkebeck
S(5, 8, 24) Software and Listing by Johan E. Mebius

The Witt Design computed by Ashay Dharwadker
Chapter 44
TeichmllerTukey lemma
In mathematics, the TeichmllerTukey lemma (sometimes named just Tukeys lemma), named after John Tukey
and Oswald Teichmller, states that every nonempty collection of nite character has a maximal element with respect
to inclusion. Over ZermeloFraenkel set theory, the TeichmllerTukey lemma is equivalent to the axiom of choice,
and therefore to the well-ordering theorem, Zorns lemma, and the Hausdor maximal principle.[1]
44.1 Denitions
A family of sets is of nite character provided it has the following properties:
1. For each A F , every nite subset of A belongs to F .

2. If every nite subset of a given set A belongs to F , then A belongs to F .
44.2 Statement of the Lemma

Whenever F P(A) is of nite character and X F , there is a maximal Y F such that X Y .[2]
44.3 Applications
In linear algebra, the lemma may be used to show the existence of a basis. Let V be a vector space. Consider the
collection F of linearly independent sets of vectors. This is a collection of nite character Thus, a maximal set exists,
which must then span V and be a basis for V.
44.4 Notes
[1] Jech, Thomas J. (2008) [1973]. The Axiom of Choice. Dover Publications. ISBN 978-0-486-46624-8.
[2] Kunen, Kenneth (2009). The Foundations of Mathematics. College Publications. ISBN 978-1-904987-14-7.
44.5 References
Brillinger, David R. John Wilder Tukey
179
Chapter 45
Two-graph
In mathematics, a two-graph is a set of (unordered) triples chosen from a nite vertex set X, such that every (un-
ordered) quadruple from X contains an even number of triples of the two-graph. A regular two-graph has the
property that every pair of vertices lies in the same number of triples of the two-graph. Two-graphs have been stud-
ied because of their connection with equiangular lines and, for regular two-graphs, strongly regular graphs, and also
nite groups because many regular two-graphs have interesting automorphism groups.
A two-graph is not a graph and should not be confused with other objects called 2-graphs in graph theory, such as
2-regular graphs.
45.1 Examples
On the set of vertices {1,...,6} the following collection of unordered triples is a two-graph:
123 124 135 146 156 236 245 256 345 346
This two-graph is a regular two-graph since each pair of distinct vertices appears together in exactly two triples.
Given a simple graph G = (V,E), the set of triples of the vertex set V whose induced subgraph has an odd number of
edges forms a two-graph on the set V. Every two-graph can be represented in this way.[1] This example is referred to
as the standard construction of a two-graph from a simple graph.
As a more complex example, let T be a tree with edge set E. The set of all triples of E that are not contained in a
path of T form a two-graph on the set E.[2]
45.2 Switching and graphs

A two-graph is equivalent to a switching class of graphs and also to a (signed) switching class of signed complete
graphs.
Switching a set of vertices in a (simple) graph means reversing the adjacencies of each pair of vertices, one in the
set and the other not in the set: thus the edge set is changed so that an adjacent pair becomes nonadjacent and a
nonadjacent pair becomes adjacent. The edges whose endpoints are both in the set, or both not in the set, are not
changed. Graphs are switching equivalent if one can be obtained from the other by switching. An equivalence class
of graphs under switching is called a switching class. Switching was introduced by van Lint & Seidel (1966) and
developed by Seidel; it has been called graph switching or Seidel switching, partly to distinguish it from switching
of signed graphs.
In the standard construction of a two-graph from a simple graph given above, two graphs will yield the same two-graph
if and only if they are equivalent under switching, that is, they are in the same switching class.
Let be a two-graph on the set X. For any element x of X, dene a graph with vertex set X having vertices y and z
adjacent if and only if {x, y, z} is in . In this graph, x will be an isolated vertex. This construction is reversible; given
180
45.2. SWITCHING AND GRAPHS 181
X X
Y Y
Switching {X,Y} in a graph
a simple graph G, adjoin a new element x to the set of vertices of G and dene the two-graph whose triples are all the
{x, y, z} where y and z are adjacent vertices in G. This two-graph is called the extension of G by x in design theoretic
language.[3] In a given switching class of graphs of a regular two-graph, let x be the unique graph having x as an
isolated vertex (this always exists, just take any graph in the class and switch the open neighborhood of x) without
the vertex x. That is, the two-graph is the extension of x by x. In the rst example above of a regular two-graph, x
is a 5-cycle for any choice of x.[4]
To a graph G there corresponds a signed complete graph on the same vertex set, whose edges are signed negative
if in G and positive if not in G. Conversely, G is the subgraph of that consists of all vertices and all negative edges.
The two-graph of G can also be dened as the set of triples of vertices that support a negative triangle (a triangle with
an odd number of negative edges) in . Two signed complete graphs yield the same two-graph if and only if they are
equivalent under switching.
Switching of G and of are related: switching the same vertices in both yields a graph H and its corresponding signed
complete graph.
182 CHAPTER 45. TWO-GRAPH
45.3 Adjacency matrix

The adjacency matrix of a two-graph is the adjacency matrix of the corresponding signed complete graph; thus it is
symmetric, is zero on the diagonal, and has entries 1 o the diagonal. If G is the graph corresponding to the signed
complete graph , this matrix is called the (0, 1, 1)-adjacency matrix or Seidel adjacency matrix of G. The Seidel
matrix has zero entries on the main diagonal, 1 entries for adjacent vertices and +1 entries for non-adjacent vertices.
If graphs G and H are in a same switching class, the multisets of eigenvalues of the two Seidel adjacency matrices of
G and H coincide, since the matrices are similar.[5]
A two-graph on a set V is regular if and only if its adjacency matrix has just two distinct eigenvalues 1 > 0 > 2 say,
where 1 2 = 1 - |V|.[6]
45.4 Equiangular lines

Main article: Equiangular lines
Every two-graph is equivalent to a set of lines in some dimensional euclidean space each pair of which meet in the
same angle. The set of lines constructed from a two graph on n vertices is obtained as follows. Let - be the smallest
eigenvalue of the Seidel adjacency matrix, A, of the two-graph, and suppose that it has multiplicity n - d. Then
the matrix I + A is positive semi-denite of rank d and thus can be represented as the Gram matrix of the inner

products of n vectors in euclidean d-space. As these vectors have the same norm (namely, ) and mutual inner
products 1, any pair of the n lines spanned by them meet in the same angle where cos = 1/. Conversely, any
set of non-orthogonal equiangular lines in a euclidean space can give rise to a two-graph (see equiangular lines for
the construction).[7]
With the notation as above, the maximum cardinality n satises n d(2 - 1)/(2 - d) and the bound is achieved if
and only if the two-graph is regular.
45.5 Strongly regular graphs

Main article: Strongly regular graph
The two-graphs on X consisting of all possible triples of X and no triples of X are regular two-graphs and are con-
sidered to be trivial two-graphs.
For non-trivial two-graphs on the set X, the two-graph is regular if and only if for some x in X the graph x is a
strongly regular graph with k = 2 (the degree of any vertex is twice the number of vertices adjacent to both of any
non-adjacent pair of vertices). If this condition holds for one x in X, it holds for all the elements of X.[8]
It follows that a non-trivial regular two-graph has an even number of points.
If G is a regular graph whose two-graph extension is having n points, then is a regular two-graph if and only if G
is a strongly regular graph with eigenvalues k, r and s satisfying n = 2(k - r) or n = 2(k - s).[9]
45.6 Notes
[1] Colburn & Dinitz 2007, p. 876, Remark 13.2
[2] Cameron, P.J. (1994), Two-graphs and trees, Discrete Mathematics, 127: 6374, doi:10.1016/0012-365x(92)00468-7
cited in Colburn & Dinitz 2007, p. 876, Construction 13.12
[3] Cameron & van Lint 1991, pp. 58-59
[4] Cameron & van Lint 1991, p. 62
[5] Cameron & van Lint 1991, p. 61
[6] Colburn & Dinitz 2007, p. 878 #13.24

[7] van Lint & Seidel 1966
[8] Cameron & van Lint 1991, p. 62 Theorem 4.11
[9] Cameron & van Lint 1991, p. 62 Theorem 4.12
45.7 References
Brouwer, A.E., Cohen, A.M., and Neumaier, A. (1989), Distance-Regular Graphs. Springer-Verlag, Berlin.
Sections 1.5, 3.8, 7.6C.
Cameron, P.J.; van Lint, J.H. (1991), Designs, Graphs, Codes and their Links, London Mathematical Society
Student Texts 22, Cambridge University Press, ISBN 978-0-521-42385-4
Chapman & Hall/ CRC, pp. 875882, ISBN 1-58488-506-8
Godsil, Chris: Royle, Gordon (2001), Algebraic Graph Theory. Graduate Texts in Mathematics, Vol. 207.
Springer-Verlag, New York. Chapter 11.
Seidel, J. J. (1976), A survey of two-graphs. In: Colloquio Internazionale sulle Teorie Combinatorie (Proceed-
ings, Rome, 1973), Vol. I, pp. 481511. Atti dei Convegni Lincei, No. 17. Accademia Nazionale dei Lincei,
Rome.
Taylor, D. E. (1977), Regular 2-graphs. Proceedings of the London Mathematical Society (3), vol. 35, pp.
257274.
van Lint, J. H.; Seidel, J. J. (1966), Equilateral point sets in elliptic geometry, Indagationes Mathematicae,
Proc. Koninkl. Ned. Akad. Wetenschap. Ser. A 69, 28: 335348
Chapter 46
Ultralter
This article is about the mathematical concept. For the physical device, see ultraltration.
In the mathematical eld of set theory, an ultralter on a given partially ordered set (poset) P is a maximal lter
1, 2, 3, 4
1, 2, 3 1, 2, 4 1, 3, 4 2, 3, 4
1, 2 1, 3 1, 4 2, 3 2, 4 3, 4
1 2 3 4
The powerset lattice of the set {1,2,3,4}, with the upper set {1,4} colored yellow. It is a principal lter, but not an ultralter, as
it can be extended to the larger nontrivial lter {1}, by including also the light green elements. Since {1} cannot be extended any
further, it is an ultralter.
on P, that is, a lter on P that cannot be enlarged. Filters and ultralters are special subsets of P. If P happens to be
a Boolean algebra, each ultralter is also a prime lter, and vice versa.[1]:186
If X is an arbitrary set, its power set (X), ordered by set inclusion, is always a Boolean algebra, and (ultra)lters on
(X) are usually called "(ultra)lters on X".[note 1] Ultralters have many applications in set theory, model theory, and
topology.[1]:186 An ultralter on a set X may be considered as a nitely additive measure. In this view, every subset
of X is either considered "almost everything" (has measure 1) or almost nothing (has measure 0).
184
46.1. ULTRAFILTERS ON PARTIAL ORDERS 185
46.1 Ultralters on partial orders

In order theory, an ultralter is a subset of a partially ordered set that is maximal among all proper lters. This
implies that any lter that properly contains an ultralter has to be equal to the whole poset.
Formally, if P is a set, partially ordered by (), then
a subset F of P is called a lter on P if

F is nonempty,
for every x, y in F, there is some element z in F such that z x and z y, and
for every x in F and y in P, x y implies that y is in F, too;
a proper subset U of P is called an ultralter on P if
U is a lter on P, and
there is no lter F on P such that U F P.
46.2 Special case: Boolean algebra

An important special case of the concept occurs if the considered poset is a Boolean algebra. In this case, ultralters
are characterized by containing, for each element a of the Boolean algebra, exactly one of the elements a and a (the
latter being the Boolean complement of a):
If P is a Boolean algebra and F P is a proper lter, then the following statements are equivalent:
1. F is an ultralter on P,
2. F is a prime lter on P,
3. for each a in P, either a is in F or (a) is in F.[1]:186
A proof of 1.2. is also given in (Burris, Sankappanavar, 2012, Cor.3.13, p.133)[2]

Moreover, ultralters on a Boolean algebra can be related to prime ideals, maximal ideals, and homomorphisms to
the 2-element Boolean algebra {true, false}, as follows:
Given a homomorphism of a Boolean algebra onto {true, false}, the inverse image of true is an ultralter,
and the inverse image of false is a maximal ideal.
Given a maximal ideal of a Boolean algebra, its complement is an ultralter, and there is a unique homomor-
phism onto {true, false} taking the maximal ideal to false.
Given an ultralter of a Boolean algebra, its complement is a maximal ideal, and there is a unique homomor-
phism onto {true, false} taking the ultralter to true.
46.3 Special case: ultralter on the powerset of a set

Given an arbitrary set X, its power set (X), ordered by set inclusion, is always a Boolean algebra; hence the results
of the above section #Special case: Boolean algebra apply. An (ultra)lter on (X) is often called just an "(ultra)lter
on X".[note 1] The above formal denitions can be particularized to the powerset case as follows:
Given an arbitrary set X, an ultralter on (X) is a set U consisting of subsets of X such that:
1. The empty set is not an element of U.

2. If A and B are subsets of X, the set A is a subset of B, and A is an element of U, then B is also an element of U.
3. If A and B are elements of U, then so is the intersection of A and B.
186 CHAPTER 46. ULTRAFILTER
4. If A is a subset of X, then either[note 2] A or its relative complement X \ A is an element of U.
A characterization is given by the following theorem. A lter U on (X) is an ultralter if any of the following
conditions are true:
1. There is no lter F strictly ner than U, that is, U F implies U = F.

2. If a union AB is in U, then A is in U or B is.
3. For each subset A of X, either[note 2] A is in U or (X \ A) is.
Another way of looking at ultralters on a power set (X) is to dene a function m on (X) by setting m(A) = 1 if
A is an element of U and m(A) = 0 otherwise. Such a function is called a 2-valued morphism. Then m is nitely
additive, and hence a content on (X), and every property of elements of X is either true almost everywhere or false
almost everywhere. However, m is usually not countably additive, and hence does not dene a measure in the usual
sense.
For a lter F that is not an ultralter, one would say m(A) = 1 if A F and m(A) = 0 if X \ A F, leaving m undened
elsewhere.
46.4 Completeness
The completeness of an ultralter U on a powerset is the smallest cardinal such that there are elements of U
whose intersection is not in U. The denition implies that the completeness of any powerset ultralter is at least 0 .
An ultralter whose completeness is greater than 0 that is, the intersection of any countable collection of elements
of U is still in Uis called countably complete or -complete.
The completeness of a countably complete nonprincipal ultralter on a powerset is always a measurable cardinal.
46.5 Types and existence of ultralters

There are two very dierent types of ultralter: principal and free. A principal (or xed, or trivial) ultralter is a
lter containing a least element. Consequently, principal ultralters are of the form Fa = {x | a x} for some (but
not all) elements a of the given poset. In this case a is called the principal element of the ultralter. Any ultralter
that is not principal is called a free (or non-principal) ultralter.
For ultralters on a powerset (S), a principal ultralter consists of all subsets of S that contain a given element s
of S. Each ultralter on (S) that is also a principal lter is of this form.[1]:187 Therefore, an ultralter U on (S) is
principal if and only if it contains a nite set.[note 3] If S is innite, an ultralter U on (S) is hence non-principal if
and only if it contains the Frchet lter of conite subsets of S.[note 4] If S is nite, each ultralter is principal.[1]:187
One can show that every lter of a Boolean algebra (or more generally, any subset with the nite intersection property)
is contained in an ultralter (see Ultralter lemma) and that free ultralters therefore exist, but the proofs involve the
axiom of choice (AC) in the form of Zorns Lemma. On the other hand, the statement that every lter is contained
in an ultralter does not imply AC. Indeed, it is equivalent to the Boolean prime ideal theorem (BPIT), a well-
known intermediate point between the axioms of Zermelo-Fraenkel set theory (ZF) and the ZF theory augmented by
the axiom of choice (ZFC). In general proofs involving the axiom of choice do not produce explicit examples of free
ultralters, though it is possible to nd explicit examples in some models of ZFC; for example, Godel showed that this
can be done in the constructible universe where one can write down an explicit global choice function. In ZF without
the axiom of choice, it is possible that every ultralter is principal.{see p.316, [Halbeisen, L.J.] Combinatorial Set
Theory, Springer 2012}
46.6 Applications
Ultralters on powersets are useful in topology, especially in relation to compact Hausdor spaces, and in model
theory in the construction of ultraproducts and ultrapowers. Every ultralter on a compact Hausdor space converges
to exactly one point. Likewise, ultralters on Boolean algebras play a central role in Stones representation theorem.
46.7. ORDERING ON ULTRAFILTERS 187
The set G of all ultralters of a poset P can be topologized in a natural way, that is in fact closely related to the above-
mentioned representation theorem. For any element a of P, let Da = {U G | a U}. This is most useful when P
is again a Boolean algebra, since in this situation the set of all Da is a base for a compact Hausdor topology on G.
Especially, when considering the ultralters on a powerset (S), the resulting topological space is the Stoneech
compactication of a discrete space of cardinality |S|.
The ultraproduct construction in model theory uses ultralters to produce elementary extensions of structures. For
example, in constructing hyperreal numbers as an ultraproduct of the real numbers, the domain of discourse is ex-
tended from real numbers to sequences of real numbers. This sequence space is regarded as a superset of the reals by
identifying each real with the corresponding constant sequence. To extend the familiar functions and relations (e.g.,
+ and <) from the reals to the hyperreals, the natural idea is to dene them pointwise. But this would lose important
logical properties of the reals; for example, pointwise < is not a total ordering. So instead the functions and relations
are dened "pointwise modulo U", where U is an ultralter on the index set of the sequences; by o' theorem, this
preserves all properties of the reals that can be stated in rst-order logic. If U is nonprincipal, then the extension
thereby obtained is nontrivial.
In geometric group theory, non-principal ultralters are used to dene the asymptotic cone of a group. This con-
struction yields a rigorous way to consider looking at the group from innity, that is the large scale geometry of the
group. Asymptotic cones are particular examples of ultralimits of metric spaces.
Gdels ontological proof of Gods existence uses as an axiom that the set of all positive properties is an ultralter.
In social choice theory, non-principal ultralters are used to dene a rule (called a social welfare function) for ag-
gregating the preferences of innitely many individuals. Contrary to Arrows impossibility theorem for nitely many
individuals, such a rule satises the conditions (properties) that Arrow proposes (e.g., Kirman and Sondermann,
1972[3] ). Mihara (1997,[4] 1999[5] ) shows, however, such rules are practically of limited interest to social scientists,
since they are non-algorithmic or non-computable.
46.7 Ordering on ultralters

The RudinKeisler ordering is a preorder on the class of powerset ultralters dened as follows: if U is an ultralter
on (X), and V an ultralter on (Y), then V RK U if there exists a function f: X Y such that
C V f 1 [C] U
for every subset C of Y.

Ultralters U and V are called RudinKeisler equivalent, denoted U RK V, if there exist sets A U and B V,
and a bijection f: A B that satises the condition above. (If X and Y have the same cardinality, the denition can
be simplied by xing A = X, B = Y.)
It is known that RK is the kernel of RK, i.e., that U RK V if and only if U RK V and V RK U.
46.8 Ultralters on ()
There are several special properties that an ultralter on () may possess, which prove useful in various areas of
set theory and topology.
A non-principal ultralter U is called a P-point (or weakly selective) if for every partition { Cn | n< } of
such that n<: Cn U, there exists some A U such that A Cn is a nite set for each n.
A non-principal ultralter U is called Ramsey (or selective) if for every partition { Cn | n< } of such that
n<: Cn U, there exists some A U such that A Cn is a singleton set for each n.
It is a trivial observation that all Ramsey ultralters are P-points. Walter Rudin proved that the continuum hypothesis
implies the existence of Ramsey ultralters.[6] In fact, many hypotheses imply the existence of Ramsey ultralters,
including Martins axiom. Saharon Shelah later showed that it is consistent that there are no P-point ultralters.[7]
Therefore, the existence of these types of ultralters is independent of ZFC.
188 CHAPTER 46. ULTRAFILTER
P-points are called as such because they are topological P-points in the usual topology of the space \ of non-
principal ultralters. The name Ramsey comes from Ramseys theorem. To see why, one can prove that an ultralter
is Ramsey if and only if for every 2-coloring of []2 there exists an element of the ultralter that has a homogeneous
color.
An ultralter on () is Ramsey if and only if it is minimal in the RudinKeisler ordering of non-principal powerset
ultralters.
46.9 See also

Universal net
46.10 Notes
[1] If X happens to be partially ordered, too, particular care is needed to understand from the context whether an (ultra)lter
on (X) or an (ultra)lter just on X is meant; both kinds of (ultra)lters are quite dierent. Some authors use "(ultra)lter
of a partial ordered set vs. "on an arbitrary set"; i.e. they write "(ultra)lter on X" to abbreviate "(ultra)lter of (X)".
[2] Properties 1 and 3 imply that A and X \ A cannot both be elements of U.
[3] To see the if direction: If {s1 ,...,sn} U, then {s1 } U, or ..., or {sn} U by induction on n, using Nr.2 of the above
characterization theorem. That is, some {si} is the principal element of U.
[4] U is non-principal i it contains no nite set, i.e. (by Nr.3 of the above characterization theorem) i it contains every
conite set, i.e. every member of the Frchet lter.
46.11 References
[1] B.A. Davey and H.A. Priestley (1990). Introduction to Lattices and Order. Cambridge Mathematical Textbooks. Cambridge
University Press.
[2] Stanley N. Burris and H.P. Sankappanavar (2012). A Course in Universal Algebra (PDF). ISBN 978-0-9880552-0-9.
[3] Kirman, A.; Sondermann, D. (1972). Arrows theorem, many agents, and invisible dictators. Journal of Economic
Theory. 5: 267. doi:10.1016/0022-0531(72)90106-8.
[4] Mihara, H. R. (1997). Arrows Theorem and Turing computability (PDF). Economic Theory. 10 (2): 257276. doi:10.1007/s001990050157R
in K. V. Velupillai , S. Zambelli, and S. Kinsella, ed., Computable Economics, International Library of Critical Writings
in Economics, Edward Elgar, 2011.
[5] Mihara, H. R. (1999). Arrows theorem, countably many agents, and more visible invisible dictators. Journal of Mathe-
matical Economics. 32: 267277. doi:10.1016/S0304-4068(98)00061-5.
[6] Rudin, Walter (1956), Homogeneity problems in the theory of ech compactications, Duke Mathematical Journal, 23
(3): 409419, doi:10.1215/S0012-7094-56-02337-7
[7] Wimmers, Edward (March 1982), The Shelah P-point independence theorem, Israel Journal of Mathematics, Hebrew
University Magnes Press, 43 (1): 2848, doi:10.1007/BF02761683
46.12 Further reading

Comfort, W. W. (1977), Ultralters: some old and some new results, Bulletin of the American Mathematical
Society, 83 (4): 417455, ISSN 0002-9904, MR 0454893, doi:10.1090/S0002-9904-1977-14316-4
Comfort, W. W.; Negrepontis, S. (1974), The theory of ultralters, Berlin, New York: Springer-Verlag, MR
0396267
Ultralter in nLab
Chapter 47
Union-closed sets conjecture
In combinatorial mathematics, the union-closed sets conjecture is an elementary problem, posed by Pter Frankl in
1979 and still open. A family of sets is said to be union-closed if the union of any two sets from the family remains in
the family. The conjecture states that for any nite union-closed family of nite sets, other than the family consisting
only of the empty set, there exists an element that belongs to at least half of the sets in the family.
47.1 Equivalent forms
If F is a union-closed family of sets, the family of complement sets to sets in F is closed under intersection, and
an element that belongs to at least half of the sets of F belongs to at most half of the complement sets. Thus, an
equivalent form of the conjecture (the form in which it was originally stated) is that, for any intersection-closed family
of sets that contains more than one set, there exists an element that belongs to at most half of the sets in the family.
Although stated above in terms of families of sets, Frankls conjecture has also been formulated and studied as a
question in lattice theory. A lattice is a partially ordered set in which for two elements x and y there is a unique
greatest element less than or equal to both of them (the meet of x and y) and a unique least element greater than or
equal to both of them (the join of x and y). The family of all subsets of a set S, ordered by set inclusion, forms a lattice
in which the meet is represented by the set-theoretic intersection and the join is represented by the set-theoretic union;
a lattice formed in this way is called a Boolean lattice. The lattice-theoretic version of Frankls conjecture is that in
any nite lattice there exists an element x that is not the join of any two smaller elements, and such that the number of
elements greater than or equal to x totals at most half the lattice, with equality only if the lattice is a Boolean lattice.
As Abe (2000) shows, this statement about lattices is equivalent to the Frankl conjecture for union-closed sets: each
lattice can be translated into a union-closed set family, and each union-closed set family can be translated into a
lattice, such that the truth of the Frankl conjecture for the translated object implies the truth of the conjecture for the
original object. This lattice-theoretic version of the conjecture is known to be true for several natural subclasses of
lattices.[1] but remains open in the general case.
Another equivalent formulation of the union-closed sets conjecture uses the language of graph theory. In an undirected
graph, an independent set is a set of vertices no two of which are adjacent to each other; an independent set is maximal
if it is not a subset of a larger independent set. In any graph, the heavy vertices that appear in more than half of the
maximal independent sets must themselves form an independent set, so there always exists at least one non-heavy ver-
tex, a vertex that appears in at most half of the maximal independent sets.. The graph formulation of the union-closed
sets conjecture states that every nite non-empty graph contains two adjacent non-heavy vertices. It is automatically
true when the graph contains an odd cycle, because the independent set of all heavy vertices cannot cover all the
edges of the cycle. Therefore, the more interesting case of the conjecture is for bipartite graphs, which have no odd
cycles. Another equivalent formulation of the conjecture is that, in every bipartite graph, there exist two vertices, one
on each side of the bipartition, such that each of these two vertices belongs to at most half of the graphs maximal
independent sets. This conjecture is known to hold for chordal bipartite graphs, bipartite series-parallel graphs, and
bipartite graphs of maximum degree three.[2]
189
190 CHAPTER 47. UNION-CLOSED SETS CONJECTURE
47.2 Families known to satisfy the conjecture

The conjecture has been proven for many special cases of union-closed set families. In particular, it is known to be
true for
families of at most 46 sets (Roberts & Simpson 2010).

families of sets such that their union has at most 11 elements,[3] and
families of sets in which the smallest set has one or two elements.[4]
47.3 History
Pter Frankl stated the conjecture, in terms of intersection-closed set families, in 1979, and so the conjecture is
usually credited to him and sometimes called the Frankl conjecture. The earliest publication of the union-closed
version of the conjecture appears to be by Duus (1985).
47.4 Notes
[1] Abe (2000); Poonen (1992); Reinhold (2000).
[2] Bruhn et al. (2015).
[3] Bonjak & Markovi (2008), improving previous bounds by Morris (2006), Lo Faro (1994) and others.
[4] Sarvate & Renaud (1989), since rediscovered by several other authors. If a one-element or two-element set S exists, some
element of S belongs to at least half the sets in the family, but the same property does not hold for three-element sets, due
to counterexamples of Sarvate, Renaud, and Ronald Graham.
47.5 References
Abe, Tetsuya (2000). Strong semimodular lattices and Frankls conjecture. Algebra Universalis. 44 (34):
379382. doi:10.1007/s000120050195.
Bonjak, Ivica; Markovi, Peter (2008). The 11-element case of Frankls conjecture. Electronic Journal of
Combinatorics. 15 (1): R88.
Bruhn, Henning; Charbit, Pierre; Schaudt, Oliver; Telle, Jan Arne (2015). The graph formulation of the union-
closed sets conjecture. European Journal of Combinatorics. 43: 210219. MR 3266293. arXiv:1212.4175
. doi:10.1016/j.ejc.2014.08.030.
Duus, D. (1985). Rival, I., ed. Open problem session. Graphs and Order. D. Reidel. p. 525.
Lo Faro, Giovanni (1994). Union-closed sets conjecture: improved bounds. J. Combin. Math. Combin.
Comput. 16: 97102. MR 1301213.
Morris, Robert (2006). FC-families and improved bounds for Frankls conjecture. European Journal of
Combinatorics. 27 (2): 269282. MR 2199779. doi:10.1016/j.ejc.2004.07.012.
Poonen, Bjorn (1992). Union-closed families. Journal of Combinatorial Theory. Series A. 59 (2): 253268.
MR 1149898. doi:10.1016/0097-3165(92)90068-6.
Reinhold, Jrgen (2000). Frankls conjecture is true for lower semimodular lattices. Graphs and Combina-
torics. 16 (1): 115116. doi:10.1007/s003730050008.
Roberts, Ian; Simpson, Jamie (2010). A note on the union-closed sets conjecture (PDF). Australas. J.
Combin. 47: 265267.
Sarvate, D. G.; Renaud, J.-C. (1989). On the union-closed sets conjecture. Ars Combin. 27: 149153. MR
0989460.
47.6. EXTERNAL LINKS 191
47.6 External links

Frankls union-closed sets conjecture, the Open Problem Garden.
Union-Closed Sets Conjecture (1979). In Open Problems - Graph Theory and Combinatorics, collected by D.
B. West.
Weisstein, Eric W. Union-Closed Sets Conjecture. MathWorld.

Chapter 48
Universal set
For other uses, see Universal set (disambiguation).
In set theory, a universal set is a set which contains all objects, including itself.[1] In set theory as usually formulated,
the conception of a universal set leads to a paradox (Russells paradox) and is consequently not allowed. However,
some non-standard variants of set theory include a universal set.
48.1 Notation
There is no standard notation for the universal set of a given set theory. Common symbols include V, U and .
48.2 Reasons for nonexistence

ZermeloFraenkel set theory and related set theories, which are based on the idea of the cumulative hierarchy, do
not allow for the existence of a universal set. Its existence would cause paradoxes which would make the theory
inconsistent.
48.2.1 Russells paradox
Russells paradox prevents the existence of a universal set in ZermeloFraenkel set theory and other set theories that
include Zermelo's axiom of comprehension. This axiom states that, for any formula (x) and any set A, there exists
another set
{x A | (x)}
that contains exactly those elements x of A that satisfy . If a universal set V existed and the axiom of comprehension
could be applied to it, then there would also exist another set {x V | x x} , the set of all sets that do not contain
themselves. However, as Bertrand Russell observed, this set is paradoxical. If it contains itself, then it should not
contain itself, and vice versa. For this reason, it cannot exist.
48.2.2 Cantors theorem
A second diculty with the idea of a universal set concerns the power set of the set of all sets. Because this power set
is a set of sets, it would automatically be a subset of the set of all sets, provided that both exist. However, this conicts
with Cantors theorem that the power set of any set (whether innite or not) always has strictly higher cardinality than
the set itself.
192
48.3. THEORIES OF UNIVERSALITY 193
48.3 Theories of universality

The diculties associated with a universal set can be avoided either by using a variant of set theory in which the
axiom of comprehension is restricted in some way, or by using a universal object that is not considered to be a set.
48.3.1 Restricted comprehension

There are set theories known to be consistent (if the usual set theory is consistent) in which the universal set V does
exist (and V V is true). In these theories, Zermelos axiom of comprehension does not hold in general, and the
axiom of comprehension of naive set theory is restricted in a dierent way. A set theory containing a universal set
is necessarily a non-well-founded set theory. The most widely studied set theory with a universal set is Willard Van
Orman Quine's New Foundations. Alonzo Church and Arnold Oberschelp also published work on such set theories.
Church speculated that his theory might be extended in a manner consistent with Quines,[2] [3] but this is not possible
for Oberschelps, since in it the singleton function is provably a set,[4] which leads immediately to paradox in New
Foundations.[5] The most recent advances in this area have been made by Randall Holmes who published an online
draft version of the book Elementary Set Theory with a Universal Set in 2012.[6]
Another example is positive set theory, where the axiom of comprehension is restricted to hold only for the positive
formulas (formulas that do not contain negations). Such set theories are motivated by notions of closure in topology.
48.3.2 Universal objects that are not sets

Main article: Universe (mathematics)
The idea of a universal set seems intuitively desirable in the ZermeloFraenkel set theory, particularly because most
versions of this theory do allow the use of quantiers over all sets (see universal quantier). One way of allowing
an object that behaves similarly to a universal set, without creating paradoxes, is to describe V and similar large
collections as proper classes rather than as sets. One dierence between a universal set and a universal class is that
the universal class does not contain itself, because proper classes cannot be elements of other classes. Russells
paradox does not apply in these theories because the axiom of comprehension operates on sets, not on classes.
The category of sets can also be considered to be a universal object that is, again, not itself a set. It has all sets as
elements, and also includes arrows for all functions from one set to another. Again, it does not contain itself, because
it is not itself a set.
48.4 Notes
[1] Forster 1995 p. 1.
[2] Church 1974 p. 308. See also Forster 1995 p. 136 or 2001 p. 17.
[3] Flash Sheridan (2016). A Variant of Churchs Set Theory with a Universal Set in which the Singleton Function is a Set
(PDF). Logique et Analyse. 59 (233). 0.2. doi:10.2143/LEA.233.0.3149532. Lay summary (PDF).
[4] Oberschelp 1973 p. 40.
[5] Holmes 1998 p. 110.
[6] Overview of Randall Holmess Home Page.
48.5 References
Alonzo Church (1974). Set Theory with a Universal Set, Proceedings of the Tarski Symposium. Proceedings
of Symposia in Pure Mathematics XXV, ed. L. Henkin, American Mathematical Society, pp. 297308.
T. E. Forster (1995). Set Theory with a Universal Set: Exploring an Untyped Universe (Oxford Logic Guides
31). Oxford University Press. ISBN 0-19-851477-8.
194 CHAPTER 48. UNIVERSAL SET
T. E. Forster (2001). Churchs Set Theory with a Universal Set.
Bibliography: Set Theory with a Universal Set, originated by T. E. Forster and maintained by Randall Holmes
at Boise State University.
Randall Holmes (1998). Elementary Set theory with a Universal Set, volume 10 of the Cahiers du Centre de
Logique, Academia, Louvain-la-Neuve (Belgium).
Arnold Oberschelp (1973). Set Theory over Classes, Dissertationes Mathematicae 106.
Willard Van Orman Quine (1937) New Foundations for Mathematical Logic, American Mathematical Monthly
44, pp. 7080.
48.6 External links

Weisstein, Eric W. Universal Set. MathWorld.
Chapter 49
Universe (mathematics)

A
The relationship between universe and complement.
In mathematics, and particularly in set theory and the foundations of mathematics, a universe is a class that contains
(as elements) all the entities one wishes to consider in a given situation. There are several versions of this general
idea, described in the following sections.
49.1 In a specic context

Perhaps the simplest version is that any set can be a universe, so long as the object of study is conned to that particular
set. If the object of study is formed by the real numbers, then the real line R, which is the real number set, could be
the universe under consideration. Implicitly, this is the universe that Georg Cantor was using when he rst developed
modern naive set theory and cardinality in the 1870s and 1880s in applications to real analysis. The only sets that
Cantor was originally interested in were subsets of R.
This concept of a universe is reected in the use of Venn diagrams. In a Venn diagram, the action traditionally takes
place inside a large rectangle that represents the universe U. One generally says that sets are represented by circles;
but these sets can only be subsets of U. The complement of a set A is then given by that portion of the rectangle
outside of A's circle. Strictly speaking, this is the relative complement U \ A of A relative to U; but in a context
195
196 CHAPTER 49. UNIVERSE (MATHEMATICS)
where U is the universe, it can be regarded as the absolute complement AC of A. Similarly, there is a notion of the
nullary intersection, that is the intersection of zero sets (meaning no sets, not null sets). Without a universe, the
nullary intersection would be the set of absolutely everything, which is generally regarded as impossible; but with the
universe in mind, the nullary intersection can be treated as the set of everything under consideration, which is simply
U.
These conventions are quite useful in the algebraic approach to basic set theory, based on Boolean lattices. Except
in some non-standard forms of axiomatic set theory (such as New Foundations), the class of all sets is not a Boolean
lattice (it is only a relatively complemented lattice). In contrast, the class of all subsets of U, called the power set
of U, is a Boolean lattice. The absolute complement described above is the complement operation in the Boolean
lattice; and U, as the nullary intersection, serves as the top element (or nullary meet) in the Boolean lattice. Then De
Morgans laws, which deal with complements of meets and joins (which are unions in set theory) apply, and apply
even to the nullary meet and the nullary join (which is the empty set).
49.2 In ordinary mathematics

However, once subsets of a given set X (in Cantors case, X = R) are considered, the universe may need to be a set
of subsets of X. (For example, a topology on X is a set of subsets of X.) The various sets of subsets of X will not
themselves be subsets of X but will instead be subsets of PX, the power set of X. This may be continued; the object
of study may next consist of such sets of subsets of X, and so on, in which case the universe will be P(PX). In another
direction, the binary relations on X (subsets of the Cartesian product X X) may be considered, or functions from X
to itself, requiring universes like P(X X) or XX .
Thus, even if the primary interest is X, the universe may need to be considerably larger than X. Following the above
ideas, one may want the superstructure over X as the universe. This can be dened by structural recursion as follows:
Let S0 X be X itself.
Let S1 X be the union of X and PX.
Let S2 X be the union of S1 X and P(S1 X).
In general, let SnX be the union of S X and P(SnX).
Then the superstructure over X, written SX, is the union of S0 X, S1 X, S2 X, and so on; or

SX := Si X.
i=0
Note that no matter what set X is the starting point, the empty set {} will belong to S1 X. The empty set is the von
Neumann ordinal [0]. Then {[0]}, the set whose only element is the empty set, will belong to S2 X; this is the von
Neumann ordinal [1]. Similarly, {[1]} will belong to S3 X, and thus so will {[0],[1]}, as the union of {[0]} and
{[1]}; this is the von Neumann ordinal [2]. Continuing this process, every natural number is represented in the
superstructure by its von Neumann ordinal. Next, if x and y belong to the superstructure, then so does {{x},{x,y}},
which represents the ordered pair (x,y). Thus the superstructure will contain the various desired Cartesian products.
Then the superstructure also contains functions and relations, since these may be represented as subsets of Cartesian
products. The process also gives ordered n-tuples, represented as functions whose domain is the von Neumann ordinal
[n]. And so on.
So if the starting point is just X = {}, a great deal of the sets needed for mathematics appear as elements of the
superstructure over {}. But each of the elements of S{} will be nite sets! Each of the natural numbers belongs
to it, but the set N of all natural numbers does not (although it is a subset of S{}). In fact, the superstructure over
{} consists of all of the hereditarily nite sets. As such, it can be considered the universe of nitist mathematics.
Speaking anachronistically, one could suggest that the 19th-century nitist Leopold Kronecker was working in this
universe; he believed that each natural number existed but that the set N (a "completed innity") did not.
However, S{} is unsatisfactory for ordinary mathematicians (who are not nitists), because even though N may be
available as a subset of S{}, still the power set of N is not. In particular, arbitrary sets of real numbers are not available.
So it may be necessary to start the process all over again and form S(S{}). However, to keep things simple, one can
49.3. IN SET THEORY 197
take the set N of natural numbers as given and form SN, the superstructure over N. This is often considered the
universe of ordinary mathematics. The idea is that all of the mathematics that is ordinarily studied refers to elements
of this universe. For example, any of the usual constructions of the real numbers (say by Dedekind cuts) belongs to
SN. Even non-standard analysis can be done in the superstructure over a non-standard model of the natural numbers.
One should note a slight shift in philosophy from the previous section, where the universe was any set U of interest.
There, the sets being studied were subsets of the universe; now, they are members of the universe. Thus although
P(SX) is a Boolean lattice, what is relevant is that SX itself is not. Consequently, it is rare to apply the notions of
Boolean lattices and Venn diagrams directly to the superstructure universe as they were to the power-set universes
of the previous section. Instead, one can work with the individual Boolean lattices PA, where A is any relevant set
belonging to SX; then PA is a subset of SX (and in fact belongs to SX). In Cantors case X = R in particular, arbitrary
sets of real numbers are not available, so there it may indeed be necessary to start the process all over again.
49.3 In set theory

It is possible to give a precise meaning to the claim that SN is the universe of ordinary mathematics; it is a model of
Zermelo set theory, the axiomatic set theory originally developed by Ernst Zermelo in 1908. Zermelo set theory was
successful precisely because it was capable of axiomatising ordinary mathematics, fullling the programme begun
by Cantor over 30 years earlier. But Zermelo set theory proved insucient for the further development of axiomatic
set theory and other work in the foundations of mathematics, especially model theory. For a dramatic example, the
description of the superstructure process above cannot itself be carried out in Zermelo set theory! The nal step,
forming S as an innitary union, requires the axiom of replacement, which was added to Zermelo set theory in 1922
to form ZermeloFraenkel set theory, the set of axioms most widely accepted today. So while ordinary mathematics
may be done in SN, discussion of SN goes beyond the ordinary, into metamathematics.
But if high-powered set theory is brought in, the superstructure process above reveals itself to be merely the beginning
of a transnite recursion. Going back to X = {}, the empty set, and introducing the (standard) notation Vi for Si{},
V 0 = {}, V 1 = P{}, and so on as before. But what used to be called superstructure is now just the next item on the
list: V, where is the rst innite ordinal number. This can be extended to arbitrary ordinal numbers:

Vi := PVj
j<i
denes Vi for any ordinal number i. The union of all of the Vi is the von Neumann universe V:

V := Vi
i
Note that every individual Vi is a set, but their union V is a proper class. The axiom of foundation, which was added
to ZF set theory at around the same time as the axiom of replacement, says that every set belongs to V.
Kurt Gdel's constructible universe L and the axiom of constructibility

Inaccessible cardinals yield models of ZF and sometimes additional axioms, and are equivalent to the
existence of the Grothendieck universe set
49.4 In category theory

There is another approach to universes which is historically connected with category theory. This is the idea of a
Grothendieck universe. Roughly speaking, a Grothendieck universe is a set inside which all the usual operations of
set theory can be performed. This version of a universe is dened to be any set for which the following axioms hold:[1]
1. x u U implies x U
2. u U and v U imply {u,v}, (u,v), and u v U .

3. x U implies Px U and x U
4. U (here = {0, 1, 2, ...} is the set of all nite ordinals.)

5. if f : a b is a surjective function with a U and b U , then b U .
The advantage of a Grothendieck universe is that it is actually a set, and never a proper class. The disadvantage is
that if one tries hard enough, one can leave a Grothendieck universe.
The most common use of a Grothendieck universe U is to take U as a replacement for the category of all sets. One
says that a set S is U-small if S U, and U-large otherwise. The category U-Set of all U-small sets has as objects all
U-small sets and as morphisms all functions between these sets. Both the object set and the morphism set are sets,
so it becomes possible to discuss the category of all sets without invoking proper classes. Then it becomes possible
to dene other categories in terms of this new category. For example, the category of all U-small categories is the
category of all categories whose object set and whose morphism set are in U. Then the usual arguments of set theory
are applicable to the category of all categories, and one does not have to worry about accidentally talking about proper
classes. Because Grothendieck universes are extremely large, this suces in almost all applications.
Often when working with Grothendieck universes, mathematicians assume the Axiom of Universes: For any set x,
there exists a universe U such that x U. The point of this axiom is that any set one encounters is then U-small for
some U, so any argument done in a general Grothendieck universe can be applied. This axiom is closely related to
the existence of strongly inaccessible cardinals.
Set-like toposes
49.5 See also

Herbrand universe
Free object
49.6 Notes
[1] Mac Lane 1998, p.22
49.7 References
Mac Lane, Saunders (1998). Categories for the Working Mathematician. Springer-Verlag New York, Inc.
49.8 External links

Hazewinkel, Michiel, ed. (2001) [1994], Universe, Encyclopedia of Mathematics, Springer Science+Business
Media B.V. / Kluwer Academic Publishers, ISBN 978-1-55608-010-4
Weisstein, Eric W. Universal Set. MathWorld.

49.9. TEXT AND IMAGE SOURCES, CONTRIBUTORS, AND LICENSES 199
49.9 Text and image sources, contributors, and licenses

49.9.1 Text
Abstract simplicial complex Source: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abstract_simplicial_complex?oldid=796522268 Contributors: Ax-
elBoldt, Zundark, Tomo, Charles Matthews, Altenmann, Giftlite, BenFrantzDale, Jkseppan, Zhen Lin, Zaslav, Gauge, Billlion, Fiedorow,
Danhash, Oleg Alexandrov, Linas, BD2412, John Baez, Gaius Cornelius, Hv, SmackBot, Henning Makholm, MichaelNChristo, 345Kai,
David Eppstein, Franp9am, Trevorgoodchild, JackSchmidt, Yasmar, Saddhiyama, Rswarbrick, Yobot, Citation bot, LilHelpa, Queen
Rhana, Stereospan, Tgoodwil, Dcirovic, Gud music only, Helpful Pixie Bot, BG19bot, Lesser Cartographies, Magriteappleface, Pro-
boscideaRubber15, Quiddital, Magic links bot and Anonymous: 12
Almost disjoint sets Source: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Almost_disjoint_sets?oldid=788433087 Contributors: Revolver, Charles
Matthews, Kaol, Nickj, Oleg Alexandrov, Pol098, Salix alba, SmackBot, Maksim-e~enwiki, Dreadstar, CBM, Magioladitis, Addbot,
Yobot, SassoBot, Erik9bot, Kasterma, Pivocajs and Anonymous: 4
Antimatroid Source: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Antimatroid?oldid=789435413 Contributors: Altenmann, Giftlite, Peter Kwok, Za-
slav, Algebraist, Wavelength, Wimt, Yahya Abdal-Aziz, Mhym, E-Kartoel, Myasuda, Headbomb, D Haggerty, Pftupper, David Eppstein,
R'n'B, Lantonov, LokiClock, Justin W Smith, DOI bot, Citation bot, Citation bot 1, Kiefer.Wolfowitz, CrowzRSA, Helpful Pixie Bot,
BG19bot, Mark viking, InternetArchiveBot and Anonymous: 4
Block design Source: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Block_design?oldid=797672681 Contributors: Michael Hardy, Dominus, Docu, Sil-
versh, Charles Matthews, Giftlite, Rich Farmbrough, Xezbeth, Zaslav, Mairi, Kaganer, Joriki, Linas, Will Orrick, Btyner, Rjwilmsi,
Maxal, RFBailey, Ott2, Cullinane, Vicarious, SmackBot, Ttzz, Gutworth, Nbarth, Ccero, Rogrio Brito, Cydebot, Flowerpotman, Head-
bomb, JustAGal, A3nm, David Eppstein, Maproom, Squids and Chips, Kmhkmh, VVVBot, Melcombe, Qwfp, Addbot, KorinoChikara,
Mjcollins68, Nassrat, Yobot, AnomieBOT, Erel Segal, LilHelpa, Mendelso, Howard McCay, FrescoBot, Nageh, SlumdogAramis, Kiefer.Wolfowitz,
Jonesey95, RjwilmsiBot, RA0808, Dcirovic, ClueBot NG, Wcherowi, Myas012, Helpful Pixie Bot, BG19bot, BattyBot, Illia Connell,
Cosmia Nebula, Mnoshad, Moritz Kohls, Deacon Vorbis, Magic links bot and Anonymous: 16
Clique complex Source: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Clique_complex?oldid=731759319 Contributors: Michael Hardy, YUL89YYZ,
Igorpak, Rjwilmsi, Marozols, Nihiltres, Ott2, Chris the speller, Headbomb, David Eppstein, LarRan, Balabiot, Yobot, Citation bot 1,
Helpful Pixie Bot, Ikaalin, Fmadd and Anonymous: 1
Combinatorial design Source: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Combinatorial_design?oldid=797845125 Contributors: The Anome, Ed-
ward, Michael Hardy, Charles Matthews, Giftlite, Bender235, Igorpak, Will Orrick, Btyner, DePiep, Rjwilmsi, Maxal, Michael Slone,
SmackBot, Ttzz, Nbarth, Ccero, Pladdin~enwiki, CBM, Cydebot, Hardmath, David Eppstein, Lantonov, Melcombe, Niceguyedc, Nass-
rat, AnomieBOT, Carturo222, Kiefer.Wolfowitz, Xnn, John of Reading, Dcirovic, Wcherowi, Helpful Pixie Bot, BG19bot, Melcous,
InternetArchiveBot, DoctorKee, Magic links bot, Eduardovinuela and Anonymous: 11
Conguration (geometry) Source: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Configuration_(geometry)?oldid=771303057 Contributors: Tomo, Michael
Hardy, Charles Matthews, Giftlite, Rich Farmbrough, Igorpak, R.e.b., Michael Kinyon, Headbomb, Wayiran, Steelpillow, David Eppstein,
FANSTARbot, BotMultichill, Addbot, Blah28948, Citation bot, FrescoBot, Double sharp, RjwilmsiBot, Wcherowi, Helpful Pixie Bot,
Solomon7968, Boodlepounce, Nathann.cohen, Bender the Bot and Anonymous: 5
Content (measure theory) Source: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Content_(measure_theory)?oldid=752532259 Contributors: Michael
Hardy, Nandhp, Kusma, Oleg Alexandrov, R.e.b., SmackBot, Decltype, Pascal.Tesson, Alaibot, Vanish2, Fountains of Bryn Mawr,
Twistedliquidcrystal, BartekChom, ClueBot, Niceguyedc, Addbot, Yobot, Omnipaedista, Content (measure theory), Trappist the monk,
John of Reading, ClueBot NG, Qetuth, Arkeet, Hierarchivist, Gagz7, ThePlatypusofDoom and Anonymous: 5
Dedekind number Source: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dedekind_number?oldid=713379906 Contributors: Michael Hardy, Roman-
poet, Macrakis, Rjwilmsi, Chris the speller, CRGreathouse, FlyingToaster, HenningThielemann, Headbomb, David Eppstein, Gs,
Fharper1961, JimInTheUSA, Watchduck, Addbot, Luckas-bot, FrescoBot, Slawekb, Toshio Yamaguchi, and Anony-
mous: 2
Delta-ring Source: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Delta-ring?oldid=544536467 Contributors: Charles Matthews, Touriste, Salix alba,
Keith111, Addbot and ZroBot
Disjoint sets Source: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Disjoint_sets?oldid=792770500 Contributors: AxelBoldt, Mav, Tarquin, Jeronimo,
Shd~enwiki, Arvindn, Toby Bartels, Michael Hardy, Wshun, Revolver, Charles Matthews, Fibonacci, Robbot, Sheskar~enwiki, Tea2min,
Giftlite, Fropu, Achituv~enwiki, Almit39, Bender235, Nickj, Jumbuck, Dirac1933, Salix alba, FlaBot, Jameshsher, Chobot, Alge-
braist, YurikBot, RobotE, Bota47, Light current, Raijinili, SmackBot, RDBury, Maksim-e~enwiki, DHN-bot~enwiki, Vina-iwbot~enwiki,
Typinaway, Mets501, Iridescent, Devourer09, Ezrakilty, Christian75, Kilva, RobHar, Salgueiro~enwiki, JAnDbot, David Eppstein,
Miker70741, J.delanoy, STBotD, VolkovBot, Jamelan, PanagosTheOther, Alexbot, DumZiBoT, WikHead, Addbot, LaaknorBot, Sp-
Bot, Legobot, Luckas-bot, Yobot, GrouchoBot, Erik9bot, MastiBot, Peacedance, Tbhotch, Ripchip Bot, ZroBot, 28bot, ClueBot NG,
Prakhar.agrwl, Wcherowi, Helpful Pixie Bot, BG19bot, Amyxz, Solomon7968, JYBot, Stephan Kulla, Jumpow, Domez99, Flat Out,
KH-1, Loraof, Triggered12 and Anonymous: 37
Dynkin system Source: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dynkin_system?oldid=741241653 Contributors: Charles Matthews, Giftlite, Lupin,
Skylarth, Bob.v.R, Rich Farmbrough, Paul August, Bender235, Tsirel, Btyner, Sin-man, Rjwilmsi, Salix alba, RussBot, Natalie Packham,
Thijs!bot, Vanish2, Nm420, Jmath666, SieBot, Melcombe, Addbot, Tcncv, Angry bee, DSisyphBot, 777sms, Cncmaster, ChrisGualtieri,
Rank-one map, Mathmensch, DarenCline and Anonymous: 7
ErdsKoRado theorem Source: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Erd%C5%91s%E2%80%93Ko%E2%80%93Rado_theorem?oldid=
793587167 Contributors: The Anome, Michael Hardy, Tim Starling, Dominus, Charles Matthews, Timwi, Molinari, Doctorbozzball,
McKay, Psychonaut, Giftlite, Dbenbenn, Sam Hocevar, Urhixidur, Zaslav, PaulHanson, Gene Nygaard, Linas, Ott2, Zvika, BeteNoir, CR-
Greathouse, Stebulus, David Eppstein, Kope, DorganBot, Geometry guy, Weakley, Addbot, DOI bot, Fraggle81, Kilom691, AnomieBOT,
Citation bot, Miym, Citation bot 1, RjwilmsiBot, WikitanvirBot, ZroBot, Prvk, Wcherowi, Helpful Pixie Bot, Yuval Filmus, Anurag
Bishnoi, M4farrel, TheMathCat and Anonymous: 14
Family of sets Source: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Family_of_sets?oldid=798300845 Contributors: Toby Bartels, Charles Matthews,
Chris Howard, Oleg Alexandrov, Salix alba, Chobot, Wavelength, Arthur Rubin, Netrapt, Reedy, Mhss, Crboyer, CBM, RomanXNS,
David Eppstein, JoergenB, Pomte, PixelBot, Avoided, Addbot, Matj Grabovsk, Calle, Materialscientist, Erik9bot, DivineAlpha, NearSe-
tAccount, Xnn, Sheerun, ClueBot NG, Wcherowi, Sro23, Fmadd and Anonymous: 13
Field of sets Source: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Field_of_sets?oldid=798201434 Contributors: Charles Matthews, David Shay, Tea2min,
Giftlite, William Elliot, Rich Farmbrough, Paul August, Touriste, DaveGorman, Kuratowskis Ghost, Bart133, Oleg Alexandrov, Salix
alba, YurikBot, Trovatore, Mike Dillon, Arthur Rubin, That Guy, From That Show!, SmackBot, Mhss, Gala.martin, Stotr~enwiki,
Marek69, Mathematrucker, R'n'B, Lamro, BotMultichill, VVVBot, Hans Adler, Addbot, DaughterofSun, Jarble, AnomieBOT, Cita-
tion bot, Kiefer.Wolfowitz, Yahia.barie, EmausBot, Tijfo098, ClueBot NG, MerlIwBot, BattyBot, Deltahedron, Mohammad Abubakar
and Anonymous: 14
Finite character Source: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Finite_character?oldid=544108057 Contributors: Michael Hardy, Charles Matthews,
Aleph4, Giftlite, Paul August, Salix alba, YurikBot, Arthur Rubin, Judicael, Dreadstar, David Eppstein, KittyHawker, Addbot, Ptbot-
gourou, 777sms and Anonymous: 1
Finite intersection property Source: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Finite_intersection_property?oldid=733831130 Contributors: Michael
Hardy, Revolver, Charles Matthews, Dcoetzee, Ruakh, EmilJ, ABCD, Linas, Yuval Madar~enwiki, R.e.b., YurikBot, Ondenc, Kompik,
SmackBot, Mhss, Nbarth, Physis, Zero sharp, Vaughan Pratt, Carl Turner, David Eppstein, Alighat~enwiki, JackSchmidt, J.Gowers,
Addbot, Topology Expert, Ozob, Yobot, FrescoBot, Xnn, WikitanvirBot, Dewritech, TricksterWolf, Mark viking, Snittle timberry and
Anonymous: 9
Fishers inequality Source: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fisher{}s_inequality?oldid=778445616 Contributors: Michael Hardy, Giftlite,
Btyner, RichardWeiss, Ccero, CBM, Cydebot, David Eppstein, Melcombe, Yobot, FrescoBot, I dream of horses, Kiefer.Wolfowitz,
Dcirovic, Wcherowi, Helpful Pixie Bot, BG19bot and Anonymous: 10
Generalized quadrangle Source: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Generalized_quadrangle?oldid=799259487 Contributors: Charles Matthews,
Oleg Alexandrov, Mathbot, Evilbu, SmackBot, Michael Kinyon, STBot, Leyo, Rocchini, Kthas, Wikikane, Addbot, Laurinavicius, Yobot,
JackieBot, Octonion, ClueBot NG, Wcherowi, BG19bot, Anurag Bishnoi, Magic links bot and Anonymous: 11
Greedoid Source: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Greedoid?oldid=793526872 Contributors: Edward, Michael Hardy, Charles Matthews,
Dcoetzee, Zoicon5, Altenmann, Peterkwok, Peter Kwok, Zaslav, Nickj, Oleg Alexandrov, BD2412, Rjwilmsi, Mathbot, Gaius Cornelius,
Claygate, GrinBot~enwiki, Bluebot, Mhym, Dreadstar, E-Kartoel, Sytelus, Headbomb, LachlanA, David Eppstein, LokiClock, Justin W
Smith, Hans Adler, Addbot, Erel Segal, Citation bot, Citation bot 1, Kiefer.Wolfowitz, SporkBot, Desikblack, BG19bot, Nosuchforever,
Deltahedron, Dillon128, JMP EAX, Maformatiker and Anonymous: 12
Growth function Source: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Growth_function?oldid=783721962 Contributors: Michael Hardy, Bgwhite, Ma-
gioladitis and Erel Segal
Incidence structure Source: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Incidence_structure?oldid=795379343 Contributors: Tomo, Patrick, Michael
Hardy, Charles Matthews, McKay, Giftlite, Gubbubu, Pgan002, Paul August, Zaslav, Rgdboer, Longhair, Pkledgrape, BD2412, Rjwilmsi,
Mathbot, Michael Slone, Cullinane, Davepape, Melchoir, Papa November, Nbarth, Jon Awbrey, Lambiam, Michael Kinyon, CBM, Mya-
suda, David Eppstein, Koko90, Lantonov, Mx. Granger, Watchduck, Addbot, Twri, Xqbot, Tremlin, FrescoBot, Cobaltcigs, Wdmatthews,
Wcherowi, Parcly Taxel, AHusain314, Ag2gaeh, Dough34, Some1Redirects4You, Magic links bot and Anonymous: 12
Kirkmans schoolgirl problem Source: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kirkman{}s_schoolgirl_problem?oldid=798846594 Contribu-
tors: Charles Matthews, Giftlite, Rgdboer, Rjwilmsi, Cullinane, Ccero, Sopoforic, Magioladitis, David Eppstein, Austinmohr, Zeldaf-
reakx86, Addbot, DOI bot, PV=nRT, Yobot, Trappist the monk, RjwilmsiBot, Takahiro4, Suslindisambiguator, ChuispastonBot, Wcherowi,
Heathertewkesbury, SzMithrandir, Statsphil, BattyBot, Eric Corbett, Fzeedaudgu and Anonymous: 7
KruskalKatona theorem Source: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kruskal%E2%80%93Katona_theorem?oldid=688324208 Contribu-
tors: TakuyaMurata, Charles Matthews, Psychonaut, Robinh, Giftlite, Jkseppan, Bender235, Gene Nygaard, BeteNoir, Bluebot, CBM,
Sopoforic, Hermel, A3nm, David Eppstein, Geometry guy, Arcfrk, Addbot, Yobot, Jowa fan, ZroBot, Brad7777 and Anonymous: 7
Levi graph Source: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Levi_graph?oldid=786759444 Contributors: Tomo, Infrogmation, Michael Hardy,
Chris-martin, AugPi, Charles Matthews, Alan Liefting, Giftlite, Rgdboer, Remuel, Raymond, Linas, Mathbot, AntiVandalBot, David
Eppstein, Koko90, JohnnyMrNinja, Jarauh, Justin W Smith, Twri, Citation bot 1, BG19bot, Equinox, Bender the Bot and Anonymous: 3
Matroid Source: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Matroid?oldid=799842082 Contributors: AxelBoldt, Michael Hardy, Chris-martin, Notheruser,
AugPi, Charles Matthews, Dcoetzee, Hbruhn, Dmytro, Altenmann, Robinh, Tea2min, Giftlite, Dratman, Gubbubu, Alberto da Cal-
vairate~enwiki, Almit39, Jqstm, Barnaby dawson, Rich Farmbrough, Zaslav, Gauge, Spayrard, Kwamikagami, EmilJ, Guidod, Pontus,
Oleg Alexandrov, Natalya, Joriki, Rjwilmsi, Jweiss11, Salix alba, MZMcBride, R.e.b., VKokielov, Mathbot, Margosbot~enwiki, Bgwhite,
Siddhant, Encyclops, Michael Slone, Modify, SmackBot, RDBury, Tracy Hall, Papa November, Thomas Bliem, Mhym, Akriasas, Mdrine,
Geminatea, Wandrer2, 345Kai, Ntsimp, Sytelus, After Midnight, Headbomb, LachlanA, Hannes Eder, Byrgenwulf, Quarague, Deec-
tive, Skamathguy, Changbao, Dricherby, David Eppstein, STBot, Katalaveno, Policron, Kriega, VolkovBot, LokiClock, Maximillion
Pegasus, Saibod, Conformancenut347, Tcamps42, Periergeia, Veddharta, Justin W Smith, Ideal gas equation, Mike0001, Bender2k14,
Hans Adler, Erik Joling, Addbot, Wohingenau, Matj Grabovsk, Luckas-bot, Yobot, Kilom691, Erel Segal, Gnotisauton, Citation bot,
ArthurBot, Xqbot, Yyfreeman, Dhg-mt, NOrbeck, Cerniagigante, Matroid~enwiki, Sawomir Biay, Citation bot 1, Kiefer.Wolfowitz,
RobinK, Jsmith23156, Matroid Applications, Dinamik-bot, RjwilmsiBot, Grumpfel, Ein student, JackB09, LOKyrandia, Helpful Pixie
Bot, BG19bot, Brad7777, Yoavlen, Illia Connell, Deltahedron, Thepasta, Mark viking, 101 Owls, Monkbot, Aviss2277, Alies.camp,
Bender the Bot and Anonymous: 99
Maximum coverage problem Source: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Maximum_coverage_problem?oldid=798967636 Contributors: Michael
Hardy, RHaworth, SmackBot, J. Finkelstein, David Eppstein, LiranKatzir, Piyush Sriva, Bender2k14, Mjsa, LilHelpa, RobinK, Baldazen,
Aszarsha, Eraserhuang, Semihatakan, Monkbot, KolbertBot and Anonymous: 14
Monotone class theorem Source: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Monotone_class_theorem?oldid=796178893 Contributors: Zundark,
Charles Matthews, Giftlite, Petrus~enwiki, David Haslam, Steeng, Pooya Molavi, RDBury, Jackzhp, CBM, Eleuther, Jahredtobin,
SchreiberBike, Protony~enwiki, Omaranto, Addbot, Erik9bot, FrescoBot, Tianhuil, Chdrappi, Brad7777, Qetuth, ChrisGualtieri, Hypa-
tia271828, Mathmensch, Monkbot and Anonymous: 10
Near polygon Source: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Near_polygon?oldid=796624723 Contributors: Michael Hardy, Ben Standeven,
BD2412, Rjwilmsi, Fram, David Eppstein, Carriearchdale, AnomieBOT, Citation bot, Wcherowi, BG19bot, Northamerica1000, Bat-
tyBot, Jumpow, Arthur goes shopping, Anurag Bishnoi and Anonymous: 13
Noncrossing partition Source: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Noncrossing_partition?oldid=671531200 Contributors: Michael Hardy,
Charles Matthews, Giftlite, Lupin, Sietse Snel, Igorpak, RDBury, Melchoir, Bluebot, Mhym, Austinmohr, LokiClock, Carolus m, Watch-
duck, Kilom691, AnomieBOT, FrescoBot, D.Lazard and Anonymous: 1
Partition of a set Source: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Partition_of_a_set?oldid=766460420 Contributors: AxelBoldt, Tomo, Patrick,

Michael Hardy, Wshun, Kku, Revolver, Charles Matthews, Zero0000, Robbot, MathMartin, Ruakh, Tea2min, Giftlite, Smjg, Arved,
Fropu, Gubbubu, Mennucc, Sam Hocevar, Tsemii, TedPavlic, Paul August, Zaslav, Elwikipedista~enwiki, El C, PhilHibbs, Corvi42,
Oleg Alexandrov, Stemonitis, Bobrayner, Kelly Martin, Linas, MFH, Mayumashu, Salix alba, R.e.b., FlaBot, Mathbot, YurikBot, Lau-
rentius, Gaius Cornelius, StevenL, Pred, Finell, Capitalist, That Guy, From That Show!, Adam majewski, Mcld, Mhss, Tsca.bot, Mhym,
Armend, Jon Awbrey, Rob Zako, CRGreathouse, 345Kai, Sopoforic, Escarbot, Magioladitis, Jiejunkong, David Eppstein, Lantonov,
Elenseel, TXiKiBoT, Anonymous Dissident, PaulTanenbaum, Jamelan, Skippydo, PipepBot, DragonBot, Watchduck, Addbot, AkhtaBot,
Legobot, Luckas-bot, Yobot, Bunnyhop11, Calle, AnomieBOT, ArthurBot, Stereospan, Gwideman, Sae1962, MastiBot, EmausBot, Mar-
tinThoma, Dcirovic, ZroBot, D.Lazard, Orange Suede Sofa, ClueBot NG, Mesoderm, Helpful Pixie Bot, BG19bot, BattyBot, Minature-
Cookie, Mikael asplund, Mark viking, Cepphus, Leegrc, BethNaught, Mathjam, Bender the Bot and Anonymous: 53
Partition regularity Source: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Partition_regularity?oldid=710810473 Contributors: Michael Hardy, Charles
Matthews, Altenmann, Tea2min, Giftlite, Redquark, Greg321, JdH, Landonproctor, Ksoileau, FizzyP, Sullivan.t.j, David Eppstein,
Darnedfrenchman, Addbot, Yobot, Kiefer.Wolfowitz, Xnn, WikitanvirBot, BG19bot and Anonymous: 6
Pi system Source: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pi_system?oldid=793604258 Contributors: Charles Matthews, Salix alba, Wavelength,
Spacepotato, Dmharvey, Stie, Mattroberts, Ru elio, Vanish2, Sullivan.t.j, David Eppstein, TXiKiBoT, Kinrayfchen, Addbot, Aroch,
Yobot, Hairer, DrilBot, Helpful Pixie Bot, BG19bot, Odaniel1, Savick01, Bwangaa, Egreif1, DarenCline, Loraof, Cyrus Cousins and
Anonymous: 10
Polar space Source: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Polar_space?oldid=779235898 Contributors: Charles Matthews, KSmrq, Larsinio,
Evilbu, GeraldH, CBM, MartinBot, Saibod, XLinkBot, Addbot, Erik9bot, BertSeghers, EmausBot, Quondum, Wcherowi, Dimpase,
BG19bot, Qetuth, Anurag Bishnoi and Anonymous: 3
Property B Source: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Property_B?oldid=795415079 Contributors: Schneelocke, Charles Matthews, Jnc,
Blotwell, R.e.b., Eskimbot, Dreadstar, Cold Light, Rschwieb, King Bee, CharlotteWebb, David Eppstein, Cjwiki, Zuphilip, Addbot,
Kilom691, Fireson435, Citation bot 1, RjwilmsiBot, Krenair, Dexbot, Vl.gusev, Anrnusna, Domotorp and Anonymous: 6
Ring of sets Source: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ring_of_sets?oldid=798105920 Contributors: Michael Hardy, Charles Matthews,
Chentianran~enwiki, Lethe, DemonThing, EmilJ, Touriste, Keenan Pepper, Salix alba, Trovatore, SmackBot, Keith111, David Eppstein,
VolkovBot, Joeldl, DragonBot, PixelBot, Addbot, Jarble, Luckas-bot, Erik9bot, ZroBot, Zephyrus Tavvier, Wlelsing, DarenCline and
Anonymous: 9
SauerShelah lemma Source: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sauer%E2%80%93Shelah_lemma?oldid=755991678 Contributors: Michael
Hardy, Giftlite, Rjwilmsi, Eastmain, David Eppstein, Topher385, Yobot, Erel Segal, SBaker43, HasteurBot and Anonymous: 4
Set cover problem Source: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Set_cover_problem?oldid=783889880 Contributors: Charles Matthews, Dcoet-
zee, Kaal, Robinh, Mellum, Jason Quinn, Macrakis, TempeteCoeur, Zaslav, Cje~enwiki, JanKG, Chobot, Payool, SmackBot, Od Mishehu,
J. Finkelstein, Ezrarez, Ylloh, Pgr94, Thijs!bot, Tatrgel, MrSampson, LokiClock, Singleheart, LiranKatzir, Keepssouth, Lisatwo, Svick,
Panjiangwei, Compupdate, Addbot, LatitudeBot, Yobot, Nallimbot, Citation bot, Winniehell, Miym, Omnipaedista, Yewang315,
, Citation bot 1, Chenopodiaceous, RobinK, Trappist the monk, Deeparnab, EmausBot, AManWithNoPlan, Wcherowi, Frietjes,
Rezabot, Jimmy-jambe, BG19bot, Qx2020, Jochen Burghardt, Aksh04ay, Gupta.sumedha, AustinBuchanan, AndrewWhitaker, Ynaa-
mad, Fabian Henneke, Gareld Gareld, Ruimaranhao, Bender the Bot and Anonymous: 65
Sigma-algebra Source: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sigma-algebra?oldid=800163136 Contributors: AxelBoldt, Zundark, Tarquin, Iwn-
bap, Miguel~enwiki, Michael Hardy, Chinju, Karada, Stevan White, Charles Matthews, Dysprosia, Vrable, AndrewKepert, Fibonacci,
McKay, Robbot, Romanm, Aetheling, Ruakh, Tea2min, Giftlite, Lethe, MathKnight, Mboverload, Gubbubu, Gauss, Barnaby dawson, Vi-
vacissamamente, William Elliot, ArnoldReinhold, Paul August, Bender235, Zaslav, Elwikipedista~enwiki, MisterSheik, EmilJ, SgtThroat,
Jung dalglish, Tsirel, Passw0rd, Msh210, Jheald, Cmapm, Ultramarine, Oleg Alexandrov, Linas, Graham87, Salix alba, FlaBot, Mathbot,
Jrtayloriv, Chobot, Jayme, YurikBot, Lucinos~enwiki, Archelon, Trovatore, Mindthief, Solstag, Crasshopper, Dinno~enwiki, Nielses,
SmackBot, Melchoir, JanusDC, Object01, Dan Hoey, MalafayaBot, RayAYang, Nbarth, DHN-bot~enwiki, Javalenok, Gala.martin,
Henning Makholm, Lambiam, Dbtfz, Jim.belk, Mets501, Stotr~enwiki, Madmath789, CRGreathouse, CBM, David Cooke, Mct mht,
Blaisorblade, Xantharius, , Thijs!bot, Marek69, Escarbot, Keith111, Forgetfulfunctor, Quentar~enwiki, MSBOT, Magioladitis, Ro-
gierBrussee, Paartha, Joeabauer, Hippasus, Policron, Cerberus0, Digby Tantrum, Jmath666, Alfredo J. Herrera Lago, StevenJohnston,
Ocsenave, Tcamps42, SieBot, Melcombe, MicoFils~enwiki, Andrewbt, The Thing That Should Not Be, Mild Bill Hiccup, BearMa-
chine, 1ForTheMoney, DumZiBoT, Addbot, Luckas-bot, Yobot, Li3939108, Amirmath, Godvjrt, Xqbot, RibotBOT, Charvest, Fres-
coBot, BrideOfKripkenstein, AstaBOTh15, Stpasha, RedBot, Soumyakundu, Wikiborg4711, Stj6, TjBot, Max139, KHamsun, Ra5749,
Mikhail Ryazanov, ClueBot NG, Marcocapelle, Thegamer 298, QuarkyPi, Brad7777, AntanO, Shalapaws, Crawfoal, Dexbot, Y256,
Jochen Burghardt, A koyee314, Limit-theorem, Mark viking, NumSPDE, Moyaccercchi, Lewis Goudy, Killaman slaughtermaster, Daren-
Cline, 5D2262B74, Byyourleavesir, Amateur bert, KolbertBot and Anonymous: 99
Sigma-ideal Source: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sigma-ideal?oldid=701828529 Contributors: Charles Matthews, RickK, Vivacissama-
mente, Linas, Magister Mathematicae, RussBot, SmackBot, Valfontis, Yobot and Anonymous: 4
Sigma-ring Source: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sigma-ring?oldid=727614337 Contributors: Charles Matthews, Touriste, Salix alba,
Maxbaroi, Konradek, Keith111, Addbot, Luckas-bot, Xqbot, Tom.Reding, ZroBot, Zephyrus Tavvier, Jim Sukwutput, Brirush, Daren-
Cline, Ganatuiyop and Anonymous: 3
Sperners theorem Source: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sperner{}s_theorem?oldid=761665813 Contributors: Michael Hardy, Peter
Kwok, Rjwilmsi, David Eppstein, Wcherowi, ChrisGualtieri, Bwstucky and NsisArman
Steiner system Source: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Steiner_system?oldid=797842831 Contributors: AxelBoldt, Tobias Hoevekamp,
Zundark, Taw, Roadrunner, Karl Palmen, Chas zzz brown, Michael Hardy, Darkwind, Charles Matthews, Dcoetzee, Giftlite, Gene Ward
Smith, Fropu, Sigfpe, Zaslav, Btyner, Rjwilmsi, Salix alba, R.e.b., John Baez, Ninel, Jemebius, Cullinane, Evilbu, SmackBot, RD-
Bury, Nbarth, Ccero, Makyen, RJChapman, CBM, Cydebot, Vanish2, David Eppstein, JoergenB, Maproom, Mkoko483, JackSchmidt,
Sfan00 IMG, Justin W Smith, Evgumin, Watchduck, Addbot, Fractaler, Yobot, Erel Segal, Anybody, Citation bot 1, RjwilmsiBot, Go-
ingBatty, ., Wcherowi, Helpful Pixie Bot, CitationCleanerBot, Deltahedron, Saung Tadashi, Jochen Burghardt, Anurag Bishnoi and
Anonymous: 37
TeichmllerTukey lemma Source: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Teichm%C3%BCller%E2%80%93Tukey_lemma?oldid=727614876
Contributors: Michael Hardy, , Tea2min, Giftlite, Paul August, Malcolma, Incnis Mrsi, AnOddName, CBM, Marek69, TreasuryTag,
Fcady2007, Addbot, Yobot, Erik9bot, HRoestBot, Tom.Reding, FoxBot, John of Reading, Syberlazer, Brirush, Juanbenitez125 and
Anonymous: 2
Two-graph Source: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Two-graph?oldid=710631563 Contributors: Giftlite, Zaslav, Rjwilmsi, Ttzz, David

Eppstein, Tedyun, Yobot, Twri, RobinK, Wcherowi, BG19bot and Anonymous: 4
Ultralter Source: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ultrafilter?oldid=776513664 Contributors: AxelBoldt, Zundark, Michael Hardy, Chinju,
Stevan White, Charles Matthews, Timwi, Prumpf, MathMartin, Giftlite, Gene Ward Smith, Markus Krtzsch, Jason Quinn, Salasks, Paul
August, EmilJ, TenOfAllTrades, Oleg Alexandrov, Graham87, Rjwilmsi, R.e.b., Vlad Patryshev, FlaBot, Karelj, YurikBot, Benja, Trova-
tore, Crasshopper, Arthur Rubin, Psolrzan, Eskimbot, Mhss, Henning Makholm, Physis, JRSpriggs, CRGreathouse, Gregbard, Nick
Number, JAnDbot, .anacondabot, Magioladitis, EdwardLockhart, Sullivan.t.j, David Eppstein, Danimey, Quux0r, Gogobera, VolkovBot,
Cbigorgne, M gol, Paradoctor, Anchor Link Bot, Nsk92, Mpd1989, Hans Adler, Hugo Herbelin, Legobot, Luckas-bot, Yobot, Ht686rg90,
Kilom691, AnomieBOT, Xqbot, Howard McCay, FrescoBot, Theorist2, Citation bot 1, Tkuvho, RjwilmsiBot, EmausBot, Dewritech,
Wgunther, Bbbbbbbbba, Nosuchforever, CitationCleanerBot, Dexbot, Jochen Burghardt, Mark viking, Grabigail, Baking Soda, -oo- and
Anonymous: 28
Union-closed sets conjecture Source: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Union-closed_sets_conjecture?oldid=728724418 Contributors: Charles
Matthews, Markhurd, Giftlite, Trovatore, Bluebot, W109, David Eppstein, Addbot, Mjcollins68, Lightbot, Yobot, Ptrf, Trappist the monk,
ZroBot, ClueBot NG, Anuj1123, Zanubi1 and Anonymous: 6
Universal set Source: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Universal_set?oldid=796667534 Contributors: The Anome, Awaterl, Patrick, Charles
Matthews, Dysprosia, Hyacinth, Tea2min, Paul August, Jumbuck, Gary, Salix alba, Chobot, Hairy Dude, SmackBot, Incnis Mrsi, FlashSh-
eridan, Gilliam, Lambiam, AndriusKulikauskas, Newone, CBM, User6985, Cydebot, LookingGlass, David Eppstein, Fruits Monster,
VolkovBot, Anonymous Dissident, SieBot, ToePeu.bot, Paradoctor, Oxymoron83, Cli, Addbot, Neodop, Download, Dimitris, Yobot,
Shlakoblock, AnomieBOT, Subtlevirtue, Citation bot, Xqbot, Amaury, FrescoBot, Aikidesigns, Petrb, Wcherowi, Jochen Burghardt,
Vivianthayil, Smortypi, Blackbombchu, Paul2520, ColRad85, TerryAlex, Hayman30, Arian DM, Bender the Bot, Dgghgguuvu9 and
Anonymous: 30
Universe (mathematics) Source: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Universe_(mathematics)?oldid=756454472 Contributors: Mav, The Anome,
Andre Engels, Toby Bartels, William Avery, Michael Hardy, Oliver Pereira, MartinHarper, Gabbe, Georey~enwiki, Charles Matthews,
Asar~enwiki, WhisperToMe, Jeoth, Robbot, Fredrik, Wile E. Heresiarch, Lethe, Waltpohl, Gdr, Discospinster, Rich Farmbrough, Paul
August, Elwikipedista~enwiki, Mdd, Arthena, Linas, Isnow, Marudubshinki, Jshadias, Salix alba, John Baez, Mathbot, YurikBot, Zwobot,
SmackBot, FlashSheridan, ArgentiumOutlaw, Acepectif, Lambiam, Scoty6776, Mets501, EdC~enwiki, Newone, CmdrObot, CBM,
JAnDbot, Hut 8.5, Magioladitis, Zana Dark, David Eppstein, R'n'B, Huzzlet the bot, CooperDenn, Policron, Station1, Kumioko (re-
named), Marino-slo, Hans Adler, DumZiBoT, Addbot, CarsracBot, Lightbot, Luckas-bot, Andy.melnikov, AnomieBOT, , XZeroBot,
Omnipaedista, Erik9bot, Pinethicket, MastiBot, Level777, ClueBot NG, BG19bot, Blue Mist 1, Kephir, Mervat Salman, AdhesiveStation,
Clear Sky C and Anonymous: 29
49.9.2 Images
File:Antimatroid.svg Source: https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/4/45/Antimatroid.svg License: Public domain Contrib-
utors: Transferred from en.wikipedia to Commons. Original artist: David Eppstein at English Wikipedia
File:BellNumberAnimated.gif Source: https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/a/ab/BellNumberAnimated.gif License: CC
BY-SA 3.0 Contributors: Own work Original artist: Xanthoxyl
File:CardContin.svg Source: https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/7/75/CardContin.svg License: Public domain Contrib-
utors: en:Image:CardContin.png Original artist: en:User:Trovatore, recreated by User:Stannered
File:Commons-logo.svg Source: https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/4/4a/Commons-logo.svg License: PD Contributors: ? Orig-
inal artist: ?
File:Complete-quads.svg Source: https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/7/7b/Complete-quads.svg License: Public domain
Contributors: Transferred from en.wikipedia to Commons. Original artist: David Eppstein at English Wikipedia
File:Convex_shelling.svg Source: https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/3/37/Convex_shelling.svg License: Public domain
Contributors: Transferred from en.wikipedia to Commons. Original artist: David Eppstein at English Wikipedia
File:Disjuct-sets.svg Source: https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/8/89/Disjuct-sets.svg License: CC BY-SA 3.0 Contrib-
utors: Own work Original artist: Svjo
File:Disjunkte_Mengen.svg Source: https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/d/df/Disjunkte_Mengen.svg License: CC BY
3.0 Contributors: Own work Original artist: Stephan Kulla (User:Stephan Kulla)
File:Double_six.svg Source: https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/9/9a/Double_six.svg License: Public domain Contribu-
tors: Own work Original artist: David Eppstein
File:Example_of_a_non_pairwise_disjoint_family_of_sets.svg Source: https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/e/e2/Example_
of_a_non_pairwise_disjoint_family_of_sets.svg License: CC0 Contributors: Own work Original artist: Stephan Kulla (User:Stephan
Kulla)
File:Example_of_a_pairwise_disjoint_family_of_sets.svg Source: https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/0/06/Example_
of_a_pairwise_disjoint_family_of_sets.svg License: CC0 Contributors: Own work Original artist: Stephan Kulla (User:Stephan Kulla)
File:Fano_plane-Levi_graph.svg Source: https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/0/01/Fano_plane-Levi_graph.svg License:
CC BY-SA 3.0 Contributors: Own work Original artist: Tremlin
File:Fano_plane.svg Source: https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/a/af/Fano_plane.svg License: Public domain Contribu-
tors: created using vi Original artist: de:User:Gunther
File:Fano_plane_with_nimber_labels.svg Source: https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/3/32/Fano_plane_with_nimber_
labels.svg License: Public domain Contributors:
Fano_plane.svg Original artist: Fano_plane.svg: de:User:Gunther
File:Filter_vs_ultrafilter.svg Source: https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/6/68/Filter_vs_ultrafilter.svg License: CC BY-
SA 4.0 Contributors: Own work, based on File:Upset.svg Original artist: Jochen Burghardt
File:GQ(2,2),_the_Doily.svg Source: https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/a/a9/GQ%282%2C2%29%2C_the_Doily.svg

License: CC BY-SA 3.0 Contributors: Own work Original artist: Wcherowi
File:GQ24.svg Source: https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/5/59/GQ24.svg License: CC BY 3.0 Contributors: Own work
Original artist: Rocchini
File:Genji_chapter_symbols_groupings_of_5_elements.svg Source: https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/a/ac/Genji_
chapter_symbols_groupings_of_5_elements.svg License: Public domain Contributors: Self-made graphic, generated from abstract geom-
etry and publicly-available information. Own work Original artist: AnonMoos
File:Incidencestructure.svg Source: https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/2/2a/Incidencestructure.svg License: CC0 Con-
tributors: Own work Original artist: Wcherowi
File:Indiabundleware.jpg Source: https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/7/79/Indiabundleware.jpg License: Public do-
main Contributors: Own collection Original artist: scanned by User:Nickpo
File:Intersecting_set_families_2-of-4.svg Source: https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/8/86/Intersecting_set_families_
2-of-4.svg License: CC0 Contributors: Own work Original artist: David Eppstein
File:Inzidenz-struktur.svg Source: https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/0/05/Inzidenz-struktur.svg License: CC BY-SA
4.0 Contributors: Own work Original artist: Ag2gaeh
File:LGDiary_CoverAndPage.jpg Source: https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/5/5f/LGDiary_CoverAndPage.jpg Li-
cense: Public domain Contributors: The Ladys and Gentlemans Diary, 1850, p. 48 Original artist: Thomas Penyngton Kirkman 1806-
1895
File:Lebesgue_Icon.svg Source: https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/c/c9/Lebesgue_Icon.svg License: Public domain
Contributors: w:Image:Lebesgue_Icon.svg Original artist: w:User:James pic
File:Lock-green.svg Source: https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/6/65/Lock-green.svg License: CC0 Contributors: en:
File:Free-to-read_lock_75.svg Original artist: User:Trappist the monk
File:MbiusKantor_configuration.svg Source: https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/6/63/M%C3%B6bius%E2%80%
93Kantor_configuration.svg License: Public domain Contributors: Own work Original artist: David Eppstein
File:MbiusKantor_unit_distance.svg Source: https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/7/77/M%C3%B6bius%E2%80%
93Kantor_unit_distance.svg License: Public domain Contributors: Own work Original artist: David Eppstein
File:Non-Desargues_configuration.svg Source: https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/f/f8/Non-Desargues_configuration.
svg License: Public domain Contributors: Own work Original artist: David Eppstein
File:Noncrossing_partitions_4;_Hasse.svg Source: https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/0/00/Noncrossing_partitions_
4%3B_Hasse.svg License: CC BY 3.0 Contributors: Own work Original artist: <a href='//commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Watchduck.
svg' class='image'><img alt='Watchduck.svg' src='https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/d/d8/Watchduck.svg/40px-Watchduck.
svg.png' width='40' height='46' srcset='https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/d/d8/Watchduck.svg/60px-Watchduck.
svg.png 1.5x, https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/d/d8/Watchduck.svg/80px-Watchduck.svg.png 2x' data-le-width='703'
data-le-height='806' /></a> Watchduck (a.k.a. Tilman Piesk)
File:Noncrossing_partitions_5.svg Source: https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/e/e7/Noncrossing_partitions_5.svg Li-
cense: CC BY 3.0 Contributors: Own work Original artist: <a href='//commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Watchduck.svg' class='image'><img
alt='Watchduck.svg' src='https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/d/d8/Watchduck.svg/40px-Watchduck.svg.png' width='40'
height='46' srcset='https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/d/d8/Watchduck.svg/60px-Watchduck.svg.png 1.5x, https:
//upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/d/d8/Watchduck.svg/80px-Watchduck.svg.png 2x' data-le-width='703' data-le-
height='806' /></a> Watchduck (a.k.a. Tilman Piesk)
File:Nuvola_apps_atlantik.png Source: https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/7/77/Nuvola_apps_atlantik.png License: LGPL
Contributors: http://icon-king.com Original artist: David Vignoni / ICON KING
File:Pappusconfig.svg Source: https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/d/d4/Pappusconfig.svg License: CC BY-SA 3.0 Con-
tributors: Own work Original artist: Wcherowi
File:Probability_venn_event.svg Source: https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/e/e1/Probability_venn_event.svg License:
Public domain Contributors: <a href='//commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Venn-diagram-AB.png' class='image'><img alt='Venn-diagram-
AB.png' src='https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/5/56/Venn-diagram-AB.png' width='192' height='128' data-le-width='192'
data-le-height='128' /></a> Original artist: Erez Segal (based on copy-rights free work)
File:Question_book-new.svg Source: https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/9/99/Question_book-new.svg License: Cc-by-sa-3.0
Contributors:
Created from scratch in Adobe Illustrator. Based on Image:Question book.png created by User:Equazcion Original artist:
Tkgd2007
File:Question_dropshade.png Source: https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/d/dd/Question_dropshade.png License: Pub-
lic domain Contributors: Image created by JRM Original artist: JRM
File:R._A._Fischer.jpg Source: https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/4/46/R._A._Fischer.jpg License: Public domain Con-
tributors: http://www.swlearning.com/quant/kohler/stat/biographical_sketches/Fisher_3.jpeg Original artist: ?
File:SauerShelah_lemma.svg Source: https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/4/4b/Sauer%E2%80%93Shelah_lemma.svg
License: CC0 Contributors: Own work Original artist: David Eppstein
File:SetCoverGreedy.gif Source: https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/4/4b/SetCoverGreedy.gif License: Public domain
Contributors: ? Original artist: ?
File:Set_partitions_4;_Hasse;_circles.svg Source: https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/3/32/Set_partitions_4%3B_Hasse%
3B_circles.svg License: CC BY 3.0 Contributors: Own work Original artist: <a href='//commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Watchduck.
svg' class='image'><img alt='Watchduck.svg' src='https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/d/d8/Watchduck.svg/40px-Watchduck.
svg.png' width='40' height='46' srcset='https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/d/d8/Watchduck.svg/60px-Watchduck.
svg.png 1.5x, https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/d/d8/Watchduck.svg/80px-Watchduck.svg.png 2x' data-le-width='703'
data-le-height='806' /></a> Watchduck (a.k.a. Tilman Piesk)
File:Set_partitions_5;_circles.svg Source: https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/1/19/Set_partitions_5%3B_circles.svg Li-

cense: CC BY 3.0 Contributors: Own work Original artist: <a href='//commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Watchduck.svg' class='image'><img
alt='Watchduck.svg' src='https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/d/d8/Watchduck.svg/40px-Watchduck.svg.png' width='40'
height='46' srcset='https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/d/d8/Watchduck.svg/60px-Watchduck.svg.png 1.5x, https:
//upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/d/d8/Watchduck.svg/80px-Watchduck.svg.png 2x' data-le-width='703' data-le-
height='806' /></a> Watchduck (a.k.a. Tilman Piesk)
File:Simplicial_complex_nonexample.svg Source: https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/5/5c/Simplicial_complex_nonexample.
svg License: Public domain Contributors:
Simplicial_complex_nonexample.png Original artist: Simplicial_complex_nonexample.png: Original uploader was Trevorgoodchild at
en.wikipedia
File:VR_complex.svg Source: https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/d/d0/VR_complex.svg License: Public domain Con-
tributors: Own work Original artist: David Eppstein
File:Vamos_matroid.svg Source: https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/b/b7/Vamos_matroid.svg License: CC0 Contribu-
tors: Own work Original artist: David Eppstein
File:Venn_A_intersect_B.svg Source: https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/6/6d/Venn_A_intersect_B.svg License: Pub-
lic domain Contributors: Own work Original artist: Cepheus
File:Veranschaulichung_von_disjunkten_Mengen.svg Source: https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/e/e6/Veranschaulichung_
von_disjunkten_Mengen.svg License: CC BY-SA 4.0 Contributors:
Bordered_h_6.svg Original artist: Bordered_h_6.svg: Nicu Buculei
File:Wikiversity-logo-en.svg Source: https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/1/1b/Wikiversity-logo-en.svg License: CC BY-
SA 3.0 Contributors: Own work Original artist: Snorky
File:Xyswitch.svg Source: https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/a/a1/Xyswitch.svg License: CC BY-SA 3.0 Contributors:
Own work Original artist: Wcherowi
49.9.3 Content license

Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike 3.0

Family of Sets - 2 PDF

Загружено:

Сведения о документе

Оригинальное название

Авторское право

Доступные форматы

Поделиться этим документом

Поделиться или встроить документ

Параметры публикации

Этот документ был вам полезен?

Это неприемлемый материал?

Авторское право:

Доступные форматы

Family of Sets - 2 PDF

Загружено:

Авторское право:

Доступные форматы

Abstract simplicial complex

Note that the link of the empty set is itself.

1.2 Geometric realization

1, 2, 5, 19, 167, 7580, 7828353, 2414682040997, 56130437228687557907787 (sequence A014466 in

1.5 See also

Almost disjoint sets

However, the converse is not truethe intersection of the collection

{{1, 2, 3, . . .}, {2, 3, 4, . . .}, {3, 4, 5, . . .}, . . .}

2.2 Other meanings

The case of = 1 is simply the denition of disjoint sets; the case of

Every symbol of the alphabet occurs in at least one word of L.

Each word of L contains at most one copy of any symbol.

Every prex of a string in L is also in L.

3.3 Paths and basic words

antimatroids in terms of their basic words.

3.4 Convex geometries

() = : the closure of the empty set is empty.

Any set S is a subset of (S).

If S is a subset of T, then (S) must be a subset of (T).

For any set S, (S) = ((S)).

3.5 Join-distributive lattices

3.6 Supersolvable antimatroids

3.7 Join operation and convex dimension

1, 3, 22, 485, 59386, 133059751, ... (sequence A119770 in the OEIS).

[2] Korte et al., Theorem 1.4.

[4] Kashiwabara, Nakamura & Okamoto (2005).

[5] Korte et al., Theorem 1.1.

[6] Farber & Jamison (1986).

[8] Edelman (1980), Theorem 3.3; Armstrong (2007), Theorem 2.8.

[10] Edelman & Saks (1988); Korte et al., Theorem 6.9.

[11] Korte et al., Corollary 6.10.

[12] Doignon & Falmagne (1999).

Armstrong, Drew (2007), The sorting order on a Coxeter group, arXiv:0712.1047 .

4.1 Denition of a BIBD (or 2-design)

4.3 Symmetric BIBDs

4.3.1 Projective planes

4.3.3 Hadamard 2-designs

4.4 Resolvable 2-designs

4.5 Generalization: t-designs

4.5.1 Derived and extendable t-designs

4.6 Partially balanced designs (PBIBDs)

R0 = {(x, x) : x X} and is called the Identity relation.

Dening R := {(x, y)|(y, x) R} , if R in S, then R* in S

The blocks of a PBIBD(3) based on A(3) are:

The parameters of a PBIBD(m) satisfy:[27]

A PBIBD(1) is a BIBD and a PBIBD(2) in which 1 = 2 is a BIBD.[28]

4.6.3 Two associate class PBIBDs

3. Latin square type;

5. partial geometry type;

4.7.1 Statistical application

A = {2, 3}, B = {1, 3} and C = {1, 2}.

A corresponding incidence matrix is specied in the following table:

4.8 See also

[2] Stinson 2003, p.1

[4] Colburn & Dinitz, p. 27

[6] Stinson 2003, pg.23, Theorem 2.2

[7] Ryser 1963, pp. 102104

[8] Hughes & Piper 1985, pg.109

[9] Hall 1986, pp.320-335

[10] Assmus & Key 1992, pg.55

[12] Salwach & Mezzaroba 1978

[13] Kaski & stergrd 2008