Timeline for Upper bound for the size of a $k$-uniform $s$-wise $t$-intersecting set system
Current License: CC BY-SA 3.0
10 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| S Sep 29, 2013 at 22:27 | history | suggested | Yuichiro Fujiwara | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
Fixed typo in author's name, added tags, and formatted title in latex
|
| Sep 29, 2013 at 22:16 | review | Suggested edits | |||
| S Sep 29, 2013 at 22:27 | |||||
| Sep 29, 2013 at 8:31 | answer | added | Yuichiro Fujiwara | timeline score: 2 | |
| Apr 16, 2010 at 13:39 | comment | added | Hung Q. Ngo | Thanks Gerhard & Tony for the comments. @Gerhard, I did implicitly mention the $\binom{n-t}{k-t}$ bound in the last paragraph. @Tony, I'm aware of the Fisher's inequality. It's perhaps a little too far from what I'm seeking. | |
| Apr 16, 2010 at 4:32 | comment | added | Tony Huynh | Somewhat related is Fisher's inquality. That is, if we insist that every two sets have intersection exactly $t$, then there can be at most $n$ such sets (where $n$ is the size of the underlying set). Indeed, this holds even in the non-uniform case. | |
| Apr 16, 2010 at 0:59 | comment | added | Gerhard Paseman | Now that the math has rendered correctly, it seems the lower bound (n-t) choose (k-t) figures often, and is applicable when s <= (n-t) choose (k-t), and may not apply otherwise. | |
| Apr 16, 2010 at 0:40 | comment | added | Gerhard Paseman | It might help to mention an obvious lower bound: (n-t) choose (k-t). Gerhard "Ask Me About System Design" Paseman, 2010.04.15 | |
| Apr 16, 2010 at 0:19 | comment | added | Harry Gindi | I've removed the LaTeX in the title because it does not render properly on the front page or the questions page. | |
| Apr 16, 2010 at 0:18 | history | edited | Harry Gindi | CC BY-SA 2.5 |
delatexified the title
|
| Apr 16, 2010 at 0:17 | history | asked | Hung Q. Ngo | CC BY-SA 2.5 |