# Difference between revisions of "Hyper-optimistic conjecture"

Line 8: | Line 8: | ||

This conjecture, if true, will imply the DHJ theorem. Note also that all our best lower bounds for the unweighted problem to date have been unions of slices. Also, the k=2 analogue of the conjecture is true, and is known as the [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lubell-Yamamoto-Meshalkin_inequality LYM inequality] (in fact, for k=2 we have <math>c^\mu_n = \overline{c}^\mu_n = 1</math> for all n). | This conjecture, if true, will imply the DHJ theorem. Note also that all our best lower bounds for the unweighted problem to date have been unions of slices. Also, the k=2 analogue of the conjecture is true, and is known as the [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lubell-Yamamoto-Meshalkin_inequality LYM inequality] (in fact, for k=2 we have <math>c^\mu_n = \overline{c}^\mu_n = 1</math> for all n). | ||

+ | |||

+ | == Small values of <math>c^\mu_n</math> == | ||

+ | |||

+ | I have now found the extremal solutions for the weighted problem in the hyper-optimistic conjecture, again using integer programming. | ||

+ | |||

+ | The first few values are | ||

+ | |||

+ | * <math>c^{\mu}_2=4</math> with [http://abel.math.umu.se/~klasm/solutions-n=2-k=3-HOC 3 solutions] | ||

+ | * <math>c^{\mu}_3=6</math> with [http://abel.math.umu.se/~klasm/solutions-n=3-k=3-HOC 9 solutions] | ||

+ | * <math>c^{\mu}_4=9</math> with [http://abel.math.umu.se/~klasm/solutions-n=4-k=3-HOC | ||

+ | 1 solution] | ||

+ | * <math>c^{\mu}_5=12</math> with [http://abel.math.umu.se/~klasm/solutions-n=5-k=3-HOC | ||

+ | 1 solution] |

## Revision as of 17:27, 4 March 2009

Gil Kalai and Tim Gowers have proposed a “hyper-optimistic” conjecture.

Let [math]c^\mu_n[/math] be the equal-slices measure of a line-free set. For instance, [math]c^\mu_0 = 1[/math], [math]c^\mu_1 = 2[/math], and [math]c^\mu_2 = 4[/math].

As in the unweighted case, every time we find a subset [math]B[/math] of the grid [math]\Delta_n := \{ (a,b,c): a+b+c=n\}[/math] without equilateral triangles, it gives a line-free set [math]\Gamma_B := \bigcup_{(a,b,c) \in B} \Gamma_{a,b,c}[/math]. The equal-slices measure of this set is precisely the cardinality of B. Thus we have the lower bound [math]c^\mu_n \geq \overline{c}^\mu_n[/math], where [math]\overline{c}^\mu_n[/math] is the largest size of equilateral triangles in [math]\Delta_n[/math]. The computation of the [math]\overline{c}^\mu_n[/math] is Fujimura's problem.

**Hyper-optimistic conjecture:** We in fact have [math]c^\mu_n = \overline{c}^\mu_n[/math]. In other words, to get the optimal equal-slices measure for a line-free set, one should take a set which is a union of slices [math]\Gamma_{a,b,c}[/math].

This conjecture, if true, will imply the DHJ theorem. Note also that all our best lower bounds for the unweighted problem to date have been unions of slices. Also, the k=2 analogue of the conjecture is true, and is known as the LYM inequality (in fact, for k=2 we have [math]c^\mu_n = \overline{c}^\mu_n = 1[/math] for all n).

## Small values of [math]c^\mu_n[/math]

I have now found the extremal solutions for the weighted problem in the hyper-optimistic conjecture, again using integer programming.

The first few values are

- [math]c^{\mu}_2=4[/math] with 3 solutions
- [math]c^{\mu}_3=6[/math] with 9 solutions
- [math]c^{\mu}_4=9[/math] with [http://abel.math.umu.se/~klasm/solutions-n=4-k=3-HOC

1 solution]

- [math]c^{\mu}_5=12[/math] with [http://abel.math.umu.se/~klasm/solutions-n=5-k=3-HOC

1 solution]