Wiki
Wiki

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

Updated


For n≥1n\ge1 and x≥0x\ge0,

Rn(x)≤2Hn(x).R_n(x)\le2^{\mathcal H_n(x)}.

Fix x0>0x_0>0 and 0<δ<10<\delta<1. Uniformly for x0≤x≤(1−δ)log⁡n/2x_0\le x\le(1-\delta)\log n/2, sufficiently large nn, and all U⊆[n]U\subseteq[n],

∣{A⊆U:s(A)≤x}∣≥2Hn(x)−(n−∣U∣)−Ox0,δ(n/cx,n).|\{A\subseteq U:s(A)\le x\}| \ge2^{\mathcal H_n(x)-(n-|U|)-O_{x_0,\delta}(\sqrt{n/c_{x,n}})}.

In particular, for each fixed real x>0x>0, Rn(x)=2cxn+ox(n)R_n(x)=2^{c_xn+o_x(n)}.

Source: published PDF, p. 2, Lemma 1, and pp. 4–7 proof. The lower bound has the precise positive-lower-threshold domain justified in lemma_2. The last sentence of the printed proof says A⊆[n]∖UA\subseteq[n]\setminus U; its valid conclusion is A⊆UA\subseteq U by the intersection map below.

Bears on. Problem 297.

Proof

The upper-bound argument works more generally for any finite indexed real weights w1,…,wnw_1,\ldots,w_n. If the family of subsets with total weight at most xx is nonempty, choose one uniformly and let XmX_m be its membership indicators, of means rmr_m. Then ∑mwmrm≤x\sum_mw_mr_m\le x and the logarithm in base 2 of the family's size is H(X1,…,Xn)H(X_1,\ldots,X_n). By subadditivity it is at most ∑mh(rm)\sum_mh(r_m), hence at most the maximum under that linear constraint. An empty family has zero count and needs no such random choice. Specialize to wm=1/mw_m=1/m to prove the displayed upper bound.

For the lower bound, conditional_entropy gives H(Y∣Z≤x)≥Hn(x)−O(n/cx,n)H(Y\mid Z\le x)\ge\mathcal H_n(x)-O(\sqrt{n/c_{x,n}}). The support of that conditional distribution consists of subsets of [n][n] with sum at most xx. The entropy support bound therefore supplies at least 2Hn(x)−O(n/cx,n)2^{\mathcal H_n(x)-O(\sqrt{n/c_{x,n}})} such sets. Intersect them with UU. Each image still has sum at most xx and has at most 2n−∣U∣2^{n-|U|} preimages, proving the result even when UU is empty.

For fixed x>0x>0, apply the growing-range estimates with any fixed x0≤xx_0\le x and δ∈(0,1)\delta\in(0,1). Lemma 2 gives Hn(x)=ncx+o(n)\mathcal H_n(x)=nc_x+o(n) and cx,n→λx>0c_{x,n}\to\lambda_x>0, so the lower error is Ox(n)=o(n)O_x(\sqrt n)=o(n). The upper and lower bounds with U=[n]U=[n] give the final exponential-rate formula.