arXiv:1804.10050v2 [math.CO] 11 May 2018 where ehdwt hrce hoyNsudadSwnpoe hta that proved Sawin and Naslund set theory sunflower-free character with method hr xcl w of two exactly where k resbesin subsets free uflwrfe ust of subsets sunflower-free free rei o vr itnttriple distinct every for if free uflwrfe ust subset a subset: sunflower-free uiomsubsets. -uniform oepeiey let precisely, More u anrsl sanwuprbudfrtesz fsunflower-f of size the for bound upper new a is result main Our ntepofw s aln n ai’ eutaotsunflower about result Sawin’s and Naslund use we proof the In nti hr oew ieanwuprbudfrtesz of size the for bound upper new a give we note short this In ln hik n mn osdrdtefloigvrinof version following the considered Umans and Shpilka Alon, k uiomstsse.Consider system. set -uniform c D = 2 F ≤ |F| ´ ci´t9,Bdps,Hnay H-1037 Hungary, Budapest, B´ecsi ´ut 96, 2 3 / 3 { ( 1 D [email protected] D , . . . , { ⊆ F 3( − bu sunflowers About ⌈ 1) etme 0 2021 10, September k x 2 3 k i 2 ea rirr nee.Let integer. arbitrary an be 1 y , } / G´abor Heged˝us ⌉ { bd University Obuda D , . . . , n ´ 3 1 i 1)(2 + . . z , D , . . . , i Abstract F ≤ |F| { ⊆ F r qa.Cmiigtepolynomial the Combining equal. are ,y z y, x, } 1 n / 1 } 3 a size has n · c 1 M . D n 3 D , . . . , F ∈ e , ) := k ( ⌈ hr xssacoordinate a exists there | M F k } S ∈ n − ⌉ F for F 1) | > D . F ⌈ Then 2 3 k easunflower- a be ⌉ ssunflower- is 2 . usual ree ny i - 1 Introduction

Let [n] stand for the set {1, 2,...,n}. We denote the family of all subsets of [n] by 2[n]. Let X be a fixed subset of [n]. Let 0 ≤ k ≤ n integers. We denote by X k the family of all k element subsets of X.
We say that a family F of subsets of [n] k-uniform, if |F | = k for each F ∈F. Recall that a family F = {F1,...,Fm} of subsets of [n] is a sunflower (or ∆-system) with t petals if

t

Fi ∩ Fj = Fs s\=1 for each 1 ≤ i, j ≤ t. The kernel of a sunflower is the intersection of the members of this sun- flower. By definition a family of disjoint sets is a sunflower with empty kernel. Erd˝os and Rado gave a remarkable upper bound for the size of a k-uniform family without a sunflower with t petals (see [7]).

Theorem 1.1 (Sunflower theorem) If F is a k-uniform set system with more than k−1 s k!(t − 1)k(1 − ) (s + 1)!(t − 1)s Xs=1 members, then F contains a sunflower with t petals.

Later Kostochka improved this upper bound in [12].

Theorem 1.2 Let t > 2 and α > 1 be fixed integers. Let k be an arbitrary integer. Then there exists a constant D(t, α) such that if F is a k-uniform set system with more than

(log log log k)2 k D(t, α)k!  α log log k  members, then F contains a sunflower with t petals.

The following statement is conjectured by Erd˝os and Rado in [7].

2 Conjecture 1 For each t, there exists a constant C(t) such that if F is a k-uniform set system with more than

C(t)k members, then F contains a sunflower with t petals.

It is well-known that Erd˝os offered 1000 dollars for the proof or disproof of this conjecture for t = 3 (see [4]). Naslund and Sawin proved the following upper bound for the size of a sunflower-free family in [13]. Their argument based on Tao’s slice–rank bounding method (see the blog [14]).

Theorem 1.3 Let F be a family of subsets of [n] without a sunflower with 3 petals. Then ⌊n/3⌋ n |F| ≤ 3(n + 1) .  i  Xi=0 Alon, Shpilka and Umans considered the following version of usual sun- Zn flowers in [1]: Let D > 2, n ≥ 1 be integers. Then k vectors v1,...,vk ∈ D form a k-sunflower if for every coordinate i ∈ [n] it holds that either (v1)i = ... =(vk)i or they all differ on that coordinate. In the following the ’sunflower’ term means always a 3-sunflower. Naslund and Sawin gave the following upper bounds for the size of sunflower- free families in [13] Theorem 2. Their proof worked only for 3-sunflowers.

Zn Theorem 1.4 Let D> 2, n ≥ 1 be integers. Let F ⊆ D be a sunflower-free Zn family in D. Then n |F| ≤ cD, 3 2/3 c 2 3 D where D = 2 / ( − 1) . Let D > 2, n ≥ 1 be integers. Let s(D, n) denote the maximum size of a Zn sunflower-free family in D. q q−1 1 1−x − 3 Define J(q) := q min0 1. This J(q) constant appeared in Ellenberg and Gijswijt’s bound for the size of three-term progression-free sets (see [5]). Blasiak, Church, Cohn,

3 Grochow and Umans proved in [2] Proposition 4.12 that J(q) is a decreasing function of q and

z − z−2 lim J(q) = inf =0.8414 .... q→∞ z>3 3 log(z)

It is easy to verify that J(3) = 0.9184, consequently J(q) lies in the range

0.8414 ≤ J(q) ≤ 0.9184 for each q ≥ 3. Zn Since a sunflower-free family in D can not contain a a three-term arith- metic progression, hence the Ellenberg and Gijswijt’s striking result (see [5]) implies the following upper bound.

Theorem 1.5 Let n ≥ 1 be an integer, pα > 2 be a prime power. Let Zn Zn F ⊆ D be a sunflower-free family in D. Then

|F| ≤ (J(pα)pα)n.

Now we give some new bounds for the size of sunflower-free families in Zn D. The Chinese Remainder Theorem implies immediately the following re- sult.

α1 αr Theorem 1.6 Let m = p1 · ... · pr , where pi are different primes. Then

r α1 αr αi n s(m, n) ≤ s(p1 , n) · ... · s(pr , n) ≤ (( J(pi ))m) . Yi=1

Proof. By the Chinese Remainder Theorem there exists a bijection

φ Z Z α1 ... Z αr . : m → p1 × × pr

n We can extend this bijection in a natural way to (Zm) and we get the bijection ∗ n n n φ Z Z α1 ... Z αr . :( m) → ( p1 ) × × ( pr ) n n Let F ⊆ (Zm) be a sunflower-free family in (Zm) .

4 ∗ Z n Then it is easy to check that φ (F) is a a sunflower-free family in ( p1 ) × Z n ... × ( pr ) . Hence

∗ α1 αr |F|≤ |φ (F)| ≤ s(p1 , n) · ... · s(pr , n).

Next we give an other new upper bound for the size of sunflower-free Zn families in D, which is independent of D. Theorem 1.7 Let D > 2, n ≥ 1 be integers, α > 1 be a real number. Let Zn Zn F ⊆ D be a sunflower-free family in D. Then there exists a constant K(α) > 0 such that (log log log n)2 n |F| ≤ K(α)n! .  α log log n  Our main result is a new upper bound for the size of k-uniform sunflower- free families. In the proof we use Theorem 1.4 and Erd˝os and Kleitman’s famous result about k-partite hypergraphs. Theorem 1.8 Let k be an arbitrary integer. Let F be a sunflower-free k- uniform set system. Let M := | F |. Then FS∈F 2k M 2k |F| ≤ 3(⌈ ⌉ + 1)(21/3 · 3e)k(⌈ ⌉ − 1)⌈ 3 ⌉. 3 k Corollary 1.9 Let k be an arbitrary integer. Let ǫ> 0 be a fixed real num- ber. Let F be a sunflower-free k-uniform set system. Suppose that | F | ≤ k2.5−ǫ. F[∈F Then 2k 2ǫ |F| ≤ 3(⌈ ⌉ + 1)(21/3 · 3e)kk⌈k(1− 3 )⌉. 3 Proof. Define M := | F |. Then FS∈F M ≤ k1.5−ǫ. k Theorem 1.8 gives us the desired result.

We present our proofs in Section 2.

5 2 Proofs

Proof of Theorem 1.7:

n n Let F ⊆ (ZD) be a sunflower-free family in (ZD) . We define first a hypergraph corresponding to F. Let U := [D] × [n] denote the universe of this hypergraph. Zn Then for each vector v ∈ D we can define the set

M(v) := {(v1 +1, 1),..., (vn +1, n)} ⊆ U.

It is clear that M(v) are n-sets. Consider the hypergraph

M(F) := {M(v): v ∈ F}.

Then M(F) is an n-uniform set family. It is easy to check that M(F) is a sunflower-free hypergraph, since F is sunflower-free. Consequently we can apply Theorem 1.2 to the hypergraph M(F) and we get our result.

X Suppose that K ⊆ k and that for some disjoint decomposition
X = X1 ⊕ ... ⊕ Xm,

K satisfies the equality |F ∩ Xi| = 1 for all F ∈K and 1 ≤ i ≤ m. Then K is an m-partite hypergraph. Erd˝os and Kleitman proved in [6] the following well-known result using an averaging argument.

X Theorem 2.1 Suppose that K ⊆ k . Then there exists a subfamily G⊆F such that G is k-partite and satisfies
k! |G| ≥ |K|. (1) kk We use also in our proof the following generalization of Theorem 1.4.

6 Z Theorem 2.2 Let Di ≥ 3 be integers for each i ∈ [n]. Let H ⊆ D1 × ... × Z Z Z Dn be a sunflower-free family in D1 × ... × Dn . Then

|H| ≤ 3 (Di − 1). 2n I⊆[n],X0≤|I|≤ 3 Yi∈I

Proof. A simple modification of the argument appearing the proof of Theorem 1.4 works as a proof of Theorem 2.2.

It is easy to verify the following Proposition.

Proposition 2.3 Let Di ≥ 3 be integers for each i ∈ [n]. Define M :=

i Di. Then P 2n 3 n M j (D − 1) ≤ ⌈ ⌉ − 1 . i j  n 2n j=0   I⊆[n],X0≤|I|≤ 3 Yi∈I X

Proof of Theorem 1.9:

Let F be a sunflower-free k-uniform set system. Define M := | F | and X := F . FS∈F FS∈F By Theorem 2.1 there exists a subfamily G⊆F such that G is k-partite and satisfies k! |F| |G| ≥ |F| ≥ . kk ek Consider the disjoint decomposition into classes

X = C1 ⊕ ... ⊕ Ck, where G satisfies the equality |G ∩ Ci| = 1 for all G ∈ G and 1 ≤ i ≤ k. We can suppose that C1,...,Ct are the classes with |Ci| = 2 for each 1 ≤ i ≤ t and |Ci| ≥ 3 for each i > t.

7 Let Ci = {xi,yi} for each 1 ≤ i ≤ t. Define for each N ⊆ [t] the following subfamily of G:

G(N) := {G ∈ G : {xi : i ∈ N}∪{yi : i ∈ [t] \ N} ⊆ G}.

Denote by L ⊆ [t] the subset with

|G(L)| = max |G(N)|. N⊆[t]

Consider the set system

H := {F \ L : F ∈ G(L)}.

Clearly here X \ L = H. HS∈H Then H is a (k − t)-uniform, (k − t)-partite set system with the disjoint decomposition into classes

X \ L = B1 ⊕ ... ⊕ Bk−t, where H satisfies the equality |H ∩ Bi| = 1 for all H ∈ H and 1 ≤ i ≤ k − t. Our construction of the set system H shows that |Bi| ≥ 3 for each 1 ≤ i ≤ k − t. On the other hand it follows from the equality

|G(L)| = max |G(N)| N⊆[t] that |G| ≤ |G(N)| ≤ 2t|G(L)| =2t|H| ≤ 2k|H|. (2) NX⊆[t] In the following we consider only the case when t = 0. The t > 0 cases can be treated in a similar way. We use the following Proposition in our proof.

Proposition 2.4 Let Di ≥ 3 be integers for each i ∈ [n]. Define M := Z Z [M] i Di. Then there exists an injection ψ : D1 × ... × Dn → n such that Peach n-uniform, n-partite set system with classes Ci, where |Ci|
= Di for each 1 ≤ i ≤ n is precisely the image set of the map ψ and each n-uniform, n-partite and sunflower-free family with classes Ci, where |Ci| = Di for each Z Z 1 ≤ i ≤ n corresponds to a sunflower-free family in D1 × ... × Dn .

8 We can apply Proposition 2.4 with the choices Di := |Bi| and we get that −1 Z Z T := ψ (H) is a sunflower-free family in the group D1 × ... × Dk . It follows from Theorem 2.2 that

|H| = |T|≤ 3 · (Di − 1). 2k i∈I I⊆[n],X0≤|I|≤ 3 Y But we get from Proposition 2.3 that

2k 3 k M j 3 · (D − 1) ≤ 3 ⌈ ⌉ − 1 . i j k 2k i∈I j=0   I⊆[n],X0≤|I|≤ 3 Y X Hence 2k 3 k M j 2k 3 M 2k 3 ⌈ ⌉ − 1 ≤ 3(⌈ ⌉ + 1)( )k( − 1)⌈ 3 ⌉. j k 3 22/3 k Xj=0   The desired upper bound follows from equations (1) and (2):

2k M 2k |F| ≤ ek|G| ≤ 2kek|H| ≤ 3(⌈ ⌉ + 1)(21/3 · 3e)k(⌈ ⌉ − 1)⌈ 3 ⌉. 3 k

3 Concluding remarks

The following conjecture implies an unconditional, strong upper bound for the size of any sunflower-free k-uniform set system. Conjecture 2 There exists a D> 0 constant such that if F is any sunflower- free k-uniform set system, then | F | ≤ Dk2. F[∈F We give here a weaker version of Conjecture 2. Conjecture 3 Let F be a sunflower-free k-uniform set system. Then there exist F1,...,F2k ∈F such that 2k

F = Fj. F[∈F j[=1

9 References

[1] N. Alon, A. Shpilka, A. and C. Umans (2013). On sunflowers and matrix multiplication. Computational complexity, 22(2), 219-243.

[2] J. Blasiak, T. Church, H. Cohn, J. A. Grochow and C. Umans, On cap sets and the group-theoretic approach to matrix multiplication. Disc. Anal. 3, 27pp (2017).

[3] W. A. Deuber, P. Erd˝os, D. S. Gunderson, A. V. Kostochka and A. G. Meyer, Intersection statements for systems of sets. Journal of com- binatorial theory, Series A, 79(1), (1997) 118-132.

[4] P. Erd˝os, Problems and results on finite and infinite combinatorial analysis, in: Infinite and finite sets (Colloq. Keszthely 1973), Vol. I, Colloq. Math. Soc. J. Bolyai, 10, North Holland, Amsterdam, 1975, 403-424.

Fn [5] J. S. Ellenberg and D. Gijswijt. On large subsets of q with no three- term arithmetic progression. Annals of Mathematics, 185(1), 339-343 (2017).

[6] P. Erd˝os and D. J. Kleitman, On coloring graphs to maximize the proportion of multicolored k-edges. J. of Comb. Theory, 5(2), (1968). 164-169.

[7] P. Erd˝os and R. Rado, Intersection theorems for systems of sets. J. of the London Math. Soc., 1(1), (1960) 85-90.

[8] P. Erd˝os, and E. Szemer´edi, Combinatorial properties of systems of sets. J. of Comb. Theory, Ser. A, 24(3), (1978) pp.308-313.

[9] G. Hegeds, A generalization of Croot-Lev-Pach’s Lemma and a new upper bound for the size of difference sets in polynomial rings. arXiv preprint arXiv:1803.05308 (2018)

[10] S. Jukna, Extremal combinatorics: with applications in computer sci- ence. Springer Science and Business Media. (2011)

[11] A. V. Kostochka, (1996). An intersection theorem for systems of sets. Random Structures and Algorithms, 9(1-2), 213-221.

10 [12] A. V. Kostochka, (1997). A bound of the cardinality of families not containing ∆-systems. In The Mathematics of Paul Erds II (pp. 229- 235). Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg.

[13] E. Naslund and W. Sawin, Upper bounds for sunflower-free sets. Fo- rum of Mathematics, Sigma (Vol. 5). (Cambridge University Press, 2017)

[14]T. Tao. A symmetric formulation of the Croot- Lev-Pach-Ellenberg-Gijswijt capset bound, 2016. URL:https://terrytao.wordpress.com/2016/05/18/a-symmetric- formulation-of-the-croot-lev-pachellenberg- gijswijt-capset-bound

11