5 The union-closed conjecture

Definition (Union-closed). Let A be a (finite) family of sets. Say that A is union closed if for any A,BA, we have ABA.

Conjecture. If A is a non-empty union-closed family, then there exists x that belongs to at least 12|A| sets in A.

Theorem (Justin Gilmer). There exists c>0 such that if A is a union-closed family, then there exists x that belongs to at least c|A| of the sets in A.

Justin Gilmer’s constant was about 1100.

His method has a “natural barrier” of 352.

We will briefly and “informally” discuss this.

A reason for this is that if we weaken the property union-closed to “almost union-closed” (if we pick two elements randomly, then with high probability the union is in the family), then 352 is the right bound.

Let A=[n](pn)[n]((2pp2o(1))n). With high probability, if A,B are random elements of [n](pn), then |AB|(2pp2o(1))n.

If 1(2pp2o(1))=p then almost all of A is [n](pn).

PIC

One of the roots of the quadratic 13p+p2=0 is p=352.

If we want to prove Justin Gilmer’s Theorem, it is natural to let A,B be independent uniformly random elements of A and to consider H[AB]. Since A is union-closed, ABA, so H[AB]log|A|. Now we would like to get a lower bound for H[AB] assuming that no x belongs to more than p|A| sets in A.

h(xy)c(xh(y)+yh(x)),h(x2)2cxh(x).

Lemma 5.1. Assuming that:

  • c>0 is such that

    h(xy)c(xh(y)+yh(x))

    for every x,y[0,1]

  • A is a family of sets such that every element (of A) belongs to fewer than p|A| members of A

Then H[AB]>c(1p)(H[A]+H[B]).

Proof. Think of A,B as characteristic functions. Write A<k for (A1,,Ak1) etc. By the Chain rule it is enough to prove for every k that

H[(AB)k|(AB)<k]>c(1p)(H[Ak|A<k]+H[Bk|B<k]).

By Submodularity,

H[(AB)k|(AB)<k]H[(AB)k|A<k,B<k].

For each u,v{0,1}k1 write p(u)=(Ak=0|A<k=u), q(v)=(Bk=0|B<k=v).

Then

H[(AB)k|A<k=u,B<k=v]=h(p(u)q(v))

which by hypothesis is at least

c(p(u)h(q(v))+q(v)h(p(u))).

So

H[(AB)k|(AB)<k]cu,v(A<k=u)(B<k=v)(p(u)h(q(v))+q(v)h(p(u))).

But

u(A<k=u)(Ak=0|A<k=u)=(Ak=0)

and

v(B<k=v)h(q(v))=v(B<k=v)H[Bk|B<k=v]=H[Bk|B<k].

Similarly for the other term, so the RHS equals

c((Ak=0)H[Bk|B<k]+(Bk=0)H[Ak|A<k]),

which by hypothesis is greater than

c(1p)(H[Ak|A<k]+H[Bk|B<k])

as required.

This shows that if A is union-closed, then c(1p)12, so p112c. Non-trivial as long as c>12.

We shall obtain 151. We start by proving the diagonal case – i.e. when x=y.

Lemma 5.2 (Boppana). For every x[0,1],

h(x2)ϕxh(x).

Proof. Write ψ for ϕ1=512. Then ψ2=1ψ, so h(ψ2)=h(1ψ)=h(ψ) and ϕψ=1, so h(ψ2)=ϕψh(ψ). Equality also when x=0,1.

PIC

Toolkit:

ln2h(x)=xlnx(1x) ln (1x)ln2h(x)=lnx1+ ln (1x)+1=ln(1x) ln xln2h (x)=1x11xln2h (x)=1x21(1x)2

Let f(x)=h(x2)ϕxh(x). Then

f(x)=2xh(x2)ϕh(x)ϕxh(x)f(x)=2h(x2)+4x2h(x2)2ϕh(x)ϕxh(x)f(x)=4xh(x2)+8xh(x2)+8x3h(x2)3ϕh(x)ϕxh(x)=12xh(x2)+8x3h(x2)3ϕh(x)ϕxh(x)

So

ln2f (x)=12xx2(1x2)+8x3(12x2)x4(1x2)2+3ϕx(1x)ϕx(12x)x2(1x)2=12x(1x2)+8(12x2)x(1x2)2+3ϕx(1x)ϕ(12x)x(1x)2=12(1x2)+8(12x2)+3ϕ(1x)(1+x)2ϕ(12x)(1+x)2x(1x)2(1+x)2

This is zero if and only if

12+12x2+816x2+3ϕ(1+xx2x3)ϕ(13x22x3)=0

which simplifies to

ϕx34x2+3ϕx4+2ϕ=0.

Since this is a cubic with negative leading coefficient and constant term, it has a negative root, so it has at most two roots in (0,1). It follows (using Rolle’s theorem) that f has at most five roots in [0,1], up to multiplicity.

But

f(x)=2x(log(1x2) log x2)+ϕ(x log x+(1x) log (1x))ϕx( log (1x) log x).

So f(0)=0, so f has a double root at 0.

We can also calculate (using ψ2+ψ=1):

f(ψ)=2ψ(logψ2 log ψ)+ϕ(ψ log ψ+2(1ψ) log ψ)(2 log ψ log ψ)=2ψlogψ+ log ψ+2ϕ log ψ2 log ψ log ψ=2logψ(ψ+ϕ1)=2ϕlogψ(ψ2+1ψ)=0

So there’s a double root at ψ.

Also, note f(1)=0.

So f is either non-negative on all of [0,1] or non-positive on all of [0,1].

If x is small,

f(x)=x2log1x2+(1x2) log 11x2ϕx(x log 1x+(1x) log 11x)=2x2log1xϕx2 log 1x+O(x2)

so there exists x such that f(x)>0.

Lemma 5.3. The function f(x,y)=h(xy)xh(y)+yh(x) is minimised on (0,1)2 at a point where x=y.

Proof. We can extend f continuously to the boundary by setting f(x,y)=1 whenever x or y is 0 or 1. To see this, note first that it’s valid if neither x nor y is 0.

PIC

If either x or y is small, then

h(xy)=xy(logx+ log y)+O(xy)xh(y)+yh(x)=x(ylogy+O(y))y(x log x+O(x))=h(x)+O(xy)

So it tends to 1 again.

One can check that f(12,12)<1, so f is minimised somewhere in (0,1)2.

Let (x,y) be a minimum with f(x,y)=α.

Let g(x)=h(x)x and note that

f(x,y)=g(xy)g(x)+g(y).

Also,

g(xy)α(g(x)+g(y))0

with equality at (x,y). So the partial derivatives of LHS are both 0 at (x,y).

yg(xy)αg(x)=0xg(xy)αg(y)=0

So xg(x)=yg(y). So it’s enough to prove that xg(x) is an injection. g(x)=h(x)xh(x)x2, so

xg(x)=h(x)h(x)x=log(1x) log x+x log x+(1x) log (1x)x=log(1x)x

Differentiating gives

1x(1x)log(x1)x2=x(1x)log(1x)x2(1x).

The numerator differentiates to 1+1+log(1x), which is negative everywhere. Also, it equals 0 at 0. So it has a constant sign.

Combining this with Lemma 5.2, we get that

h(xy)ϕ2(xh(y)+yh(x)).

This allows us to take 11ϕ=1512=352.