Design Theory and Some Non-simple Forbidden Configurations

Abstract

Let 1k 0l denote the (k+l)× 1 column of k 1's above l 0's. Let q. (1k 0l) $ denote the (k+l)xq matrix with q copies of the column 1k0l. A 2-design Sλ(2,3,v) can be defined as a vx(λ/3)v2 (0,1)-matrix with all column sums equal 3 and with no submatrix (λ+1).(1200). Consider an mxn matrix A with all column sums in 3,4,... ,m-1. Assume m is sufficiently large (with respect to λ) and assume that A has no submatrix which is a row permutation of (λ+1). (12 01). Then we show the number of columns in A is at most (λ)/3)m3 with equality for A being the columns of column sum 3 corresponding to the triples of a 2-design Sλ(2,3,m). A similar results holds for(λ+1). (12 02). Define a matrix to be simple if it is a (0,1)-matrix with no repeated columns. Given two matrices A, F, we define A to have F as a configuration if and only if some submatrix of A is a row and column permutation of F. Given m, let forb(m,q.(1k 0l)) denote the maximum number of possible columns in a simple m-rowed matrix which has no configuration q.(1k 0l). For m sufficiently large with respect to q, we compute exact values for forb(m,q.(11 01)), forb(m,q.(12 01)), forb(m,q.(12 02)). In the latter two cases, we use a construction of Dehon (1983) of simple triple systems Sλ(2,3,v) for λ>1. Moreover for l=1,2, simple mxforb(m,q.(12 0l)) matrices with no configuration q.(12 0l) must arise from simple 2-designs Sλ(2,3,m) of appropriate λ. The proofs derive a basic upper bound by a pigeonhole argument and then use careful counting and Turan's bound, for large m, to reduce the bound. For small m, the larger pigeonhole bounds are sometimes the exact bound. There are intermediate values of m for which we do not know the exact bound.

0

Discussion (0)

Sign in to join the discussion.

Loading comments…