Wiki
Wiki

Research notes on every problem, and a library of the papers behind them. Built from the open erdos repository.

Updated


Statement

Definitions (pp. 5--6). A weighted set system (F,σ)(\mathcal F,\sigma) gives the members of F\mathcal F nonnegative rational weights, not all zero, with σ(F′)\sigma(\mathcal F') the total weight of F′⊆F\mathcal F'\subseteq\mathcal F. A weight profile is a vector s=(s0;s1,…,sk)\mathbf s=(s_0;s_1,\ldots,s_k) with s0≥s1≥⋯≥sk≥0s_0\ge s_1\ge\cdots\ge s_k\ge0 and s0>0s_0>0, read as si=0s_i=0 for i>ki>k. For s=(s0;s1,…,sw)\mathbf s=(s_0;s_1,\ldots,s_w), the system (F,σ)(\mathcal F,\sigma) is s\mathbf s-spread (Definition 2.1, p. 5) if σ(F)≥s0\sigma(\mathcal F)\ge s_0 and σ(FT)≤s∣T∣\sigma(\mathcal F_T)\le s_{|T|} for every link FT\mathcal F_T at a nonempty TT; in particular F\mathcal F is then a ww-set system. A set system is s\mathbf s-spread if some weight function makes it so (Definition 2.2), and for 0<α,β<10<\alpha,\beta<1 the profile s\mathbf s is (α,β)(\alpha,\beta)-satisfying if every s\mathbf s-spread set system is (α,β)(\alpha,\beta)-satisfying (Definition 2.3, p. 6; satisfying set systems are defined on the page of Theorem 1.9). For 0<α,β<10<\alpha,\beta<1 and w≥2w\ge2, κ(w,α,β)\kappa(w,\alpha,\beta) is the least κ\kappa such that (1;κ−1,…,κ−w)(1;\kappa^{-1},\ldots,\kappa^{-w}) is (α,β)(\alpha,\beta)-satisfying (p. 6).

Theorem 2.5 (p. 6): "$\kappa(w,\alpha,\beta)=O\left(\frac1{\alpha^2}\cdot\left(\log w\log\log w +\left(\log\frac1\beta\right)^2\right)\right)$."

The end of the proof (p. 11) shows that the conclusion holds whenever

κ=Ω(max⁡{(1α)1+2/log⁡log⁡wlog⁡wlog⁡log⁡w, 1α(1+log⁡1β)2, 1α(1+log⁡1β)log⁡log⁡w}),\kappa=\Omega\Bigl(\max\Bigl\{\Bigl(\frac1\alpha\Bigr)^{1+2/\log\log w} \log w\log\log w,\ \frac1\alpha\Bigl(1+\log\frac1\beta\Bigr)^2, \ \frac1\alpha\Bigl(1+\log\frac1\beta\Bigr)\log\log w\Bigr\}\Bigr),

a finer form from which the stated bound follows. On p. 13 the paper quotes Rao's later bound κ(w,α,β)≤(C/α)log⁡(w/β)\kappa(w,\alpha,\beta)\le(C/\alpha)\log(w/\beta) for some constant CC, and uses it, not Theorem 2.5, for its applications in Section 4.

Source. R. Alweiss, S. Lovett, K. Wu and J. Zhang, Improved bounds for the sunflower lemma, arXiv:1908.08483v3 (31 August 2021, 19 pages; the copy read), Theorem 2.5 on p. 6, Definitions 2.1--2.3 on pp. 5--6, the end of the proof on p. 11; published in Ann. of Math. (2) 194 (2021), no. 3. The journal text was not compared.

Read depth. Claims checked: Definitions 2.1--2.3, the definition of κ(w,α,β)\kappa(w,\alpha,\beta) and Theorem 2.5 were read clause by clause on the page images of pp. 5--6, and the parameter choice on p. 11. The proof (pp. 6--11) was not checked.

Proof pointer

Section 2 (pp. 6--11): the reduction step, Lemma 2.6 (p. 6), samples a pp-biased random set WW and replaces most sets SS by a set S′∖WS'\setminus W of size at most w′≤ww'\le w, losing little spreadness; it is proved by an encoding argument modelled on Razborov's proof of Håstad's switching lemma (p. 5). Iterating it, at most (Klog⁡w)/ε(K\log w)/\varepsilon times with ε=1/log⁡log⁡w\varepsilon=1/\log\log w (pp. 10--11), shrinks the sets, and Lemma 2.10, proved by Janson's inequality, finishes; the parameters are chosen on p. 11.

Dependencies

Lemma 2.6 and Lemma 2.10, the latter proved in the paper by Janson's inequality.

Bears on