Search arXivSearch

arXiv · 2607.11753

On the maximum size of $B_3$-free and $D_s$-free families

Abstract

For a poset $P$, let $e(P)$ ($e^*(P)$) denote largest positive integer $k$ such that the union of the $k$ middle layers of $2^{[n]}$ does not contain a weak (strong) copy of $P$. Ellis, Ivan, and Leader showed the existence of posets $P$ for which there exists a positive real $\varepsilon_P$ such that $La(n,P)\ge (e(P)+\varepsilon_P)\binom{n}{\lfloor n/2\rfloor}$ and $La^*(n,P)\ge (e^*(P)+\varepsilon_P)\binom{n}{\lfloor n/2}$ hold, where $La(n,P)$ ($La^*(n,P)$) denotes the maximum size of a weak (strong) $P$-free family $\mathcal{F}\subseteq 2^{[n]}$. More precisely, they showed that $P=B_d$ are such posets for all $d\ge 4$, where $B_d$ is the Boolean lattice ordered by inclusion. Tompkins showed that the diamond $B_2$ is also such a poset. We apply his method to settle the case of the last Boolean poset $B_3$. We show that there exists a positive $\varepsilon$ such that $$La^*(n,B_3)\ge La(n,B_3)\ge La(n,D_6)\ge (3+\varepsilon)\binom{n}{\lfloor n/2\rfloor},$$ where $D_s$ is the poset on $s+2$ elements $a<b_1,\dots,b_s<c$. Consider the intervals $I_m=[2^{m-1}-1,2^m-2]$, $I^*_m=[\binom{m-1}{\lfloor \frac{m-1}{2}\rfloor}+1,\binom{m}{\lfloor \frac{m}{2}\rfloor}]$. It is known that for values $s$ in the major initial parts of $I_m$ and $I_m^*$, one has $La(n,D_s)=(m+o(1))\binom{n}{\lfloor \frac{n}{2}\rfloor}$ and $La^*(n,D_s)=(m+o(1))\binom{n}{\lfloor \frac{n}{2}\rfloor}$. The above equalities do not hold for the largest elements of the intervals, thus there exist $s_m\in I_m, s^*_m\in I^*_m$ such that for $s\in I_m$ we have $La(n,D_s)=(m+o(1))\binom{n}{\lfloor \frac{n}{2}\rfloor}$ if and only if $s<s_m$ and for $s\in I^*_m$ we have $La^*(n,D_s)=(m+o(1))\binom{n}{\lfloor \frac{n}{2}\rfloor}$ if and only if $s<s^*_m$. Modifying previous constructions, we obtain upper bounds on $s_m$ and $s^*_m$.

Explore related subjects

Keep this discovery

Explore connections, maps & timelines

BibTeXRIS

Balázs Patkós. 2026-08-12. On the maximum size of $B_3$-free and $D_s$-free families. https://arxiv.org/abs/2607.11753

Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.

KEEP EXPLORING

Related papers

Adjunctions, Box Products, and Forcing Families

Sidorenko's conjecture states that the number of copies of any given bipartite graph in another graph of given density is asymptotically minimized by a random graph. For bipartite graphs containing a cycle, the forcing conjecture further asserts that asymptotic equality characterizes quasi-random graphs. We establish an adjoint identity for a general class of graph-substitution operators and use it to obtain Sidorenko and forcing results for balanced blow-ups, subdivisions, Cartesian products, and strong products.

math.CO

On the Cost Number of Graphs with Determining Number Two

A distinguishing vertex coloring of a graph $G$ is a vertex coloring such that only the identity automorphism of $G$ preserves the coloring. A graph is $2$-distinguishable if it admits a distinguishing vertex coloring with two colors, and its cost $ρ(G)$ is the minimum size of a color class in such a coloring. The determining number of a graph $G$, denoted by $Det(G)$, is the minimum size of a subset $S\subseteq V(G)$ such that only the trivial automorphism fixes every element of $S$ pointwise. Boutin (J. Combin. Math. Combin. Comput. 85: 161-171, 2013) asked if $ρ(G)$ and $Det(G)$ can be arbitrarily far apart. While the case for $Det(G) = 1$ is trivial, the answer remained unknown for $Det(G) \ge 2$. In this manuscript, we show that if $Det(G)=2$ then not only is $ρ(G)$ bounded, but in fact $ρ(G) \leq 4$. This is the first resolution of Boutin's question for any nontrivial fixed determining number. Moreover, for every fixed $Det(G)= n$, we construct examples giving a lower bound on any possible upper bound for $ρ(G)$ in terms of $n$.

math.CO