Point-hyperplane incidence geometry and the log-rank conjecture

Abstract

We study the log-rank conjecture from the perspective of point-hyperplane incidence geometry. We formulate the following conjecture: Given a point set in Rd that is covered by constant-sized sets of parallel hyperplanes, there exists an affine subspace that accounts for a large (i.e., 2-polylog(d)) fraction of the incidences. Alternatively, our conjecture may be interpreted linear-algebraically as follows: Any rank-d matrix containing at most O(1) distinct entries in each column contains a submatrix of fractional size 2-polylog(d), in which each column contains one distinct entry. We prove that our conjecture is equivalent to the log-rank conjecture. Motivated by the connections above, we revisit well-studied questions in point-hyperplane incidence geometry without structural assumptions (i.e., the existence of partitions). We give an elementary argument for the existence of complete bipartite subgraphs of density (ε2d/d) in any d-dimensional configuration with incidence density ε. We also improve an upper-bound construction of Apfelbaum and Sharir (SIAM J. Discrete Math. '07), yielding a configuration whose complete bipartite subgraphs are exponentially small and whose incidence density is (1/ d). Finally, we discuss various constructions (due to others) which yield configurations with incidence density (1) and bipartite subgraph density 2-( d). Our framework and results may help shed light on the difficulty of improving Lovett's O(rank(f)) bound (J. ACM '16) for the log-rank conjecture; in particular, any improvement on this bound would imply the first bipartite subgraph size bounds for parallel 3-partitioned configurations which beat our generic bounds for unstructured configurations.

0

Turn this paper into a full lesson

ArcXiv compiles a staged curriculum from this paper: 8-12 lessons across beginner → advanced, synthesised section guides, visuals, flashcards, a quiz, exercises, and on-demand deep dives per section. Grounded in the abstract, never invented.

Discussion (0)

Sign in to join the discussion.

Loading comments…