Research notes on every problem, and a library of the papers behind them. Built from the open erdos repository.
Updated
Statement
Setting (pp. 1, 3). A family is union when no two of its members have union (p. 1), and an intersecting-union family, or IU-family, when for all both and (Definition 2, p. 3). Two families are cross-IU when every member of one meets every member of the other and no such pair has union (p. 3). The abstract (p. 1) phrases the IU condition as ; Definition 2, followed here, bounds the union, not the intersection, by .
Theorem 8 (p. 3). If is IU, then (6).
The paper says this maximum was proved earlier by several people, among them Daykin and Lovász (its reference [3]) and Schönheim and Seymour (private communication, cf. [3]); the product example on p. 3, an intersecting family on one part of a partition of times a union family on the other, gives many IU families of size .
Theorem 9 (p. 3). If are cross-IU, then
Taking recovers (6) (p. 3).
Proof pointer
Theorem 8, p. 3: is intersecting and is union, so each has at most members, and the Harris–Kleitman inequality applied to gives (6). Theorem 9, p. 6: Harris–Kleitman gives at most the product of the densities of and , and likewise for ; are cross-intersecting and cross-union, so each pair of densities sums to at most and has product at most .
Read depth
Claims checked: Definition 2, the cross-IU definition, Theorems 8 and 9 and both proofs were read clause by clause on the print. Nothing here is independently reviewed.
Dependencies
None in the corpus. External input named by the paper: the Harris–Kleitman inequality (its Theorem 2, p. 2).
Source. P. Frankl and A. Kupavskii, Perfect matchings in down-sets, Discrete Math. 346 (2023), Paper No. 113323, DOI 10.1016/j.disc.2023.113323; read in arXiv:2201.03865v1, Definition 2 and Theorems 8 and 9 on p. 3, the proof of Theorem 9 on p. 6. The edition is identified on the source card.
Bears on
No Erdős problem in the corpus is linked to these bounds.