Research notes on every problem, and a library of the papers behind them. Built from the open erdos repository.
Updated
Source. Section 5, printed p. 152 (published PDF). The source gives the constructions and rank formula briefly; their proofs are expanded here.
Statement. Restricting a finite matroid to preserves the rank of all its subsets. For , choose any base of the restriction to . The family
is a matroid on , independent of the chosen base . Its rank is
This is contraction of , followed by retaining the ground set . The source calls it contraction to .
Proof. For restriction, the independent subsets of are exactly the same as in , so heredity, the rank axiom and the rank value are unchanged.
For fixed , the family contains the empty set and is hereditary. If and , apply augmentation in to and . Their size difference is the same, and an augmenting element belongs to , because both contain . This proves augmentation in , so it is a matroid.
Take a maximal member of inside . Then is maximal independent in . An element of cannot be added by maximality in . An element of cannot be added because is maximal independent in , and the larger set would contain the dependent set obtained by adding it to . Thus
which proves (1). This expression does not depend on . In any matroid a subset is independent exactly when its rank equals its size. Hence the rank formula also proves that is independent of the chosen base.
In particular, if an independent seed is contracted, then is independent in the contraction exactly when is independent in the original matroid. Subsequent deletion of other prescribed seeds does not change ranks on the remaining subsets. These are the interfaces used in Theorem 1d and Theorem 2d.