arXiv++ Combinatorics

We nearly settle a natural extremal question about set systems over $[n]$: the tradeoff between the {size} (number of sets) and the number of {full chains}. This question was initially raised by Johnson, Leader, and Russell [Combin.~Probab.~Comp., 2015] as a counterpart to Sperner-type results in combinatorics. Recently, a framework introduced by Ameli, Nederlof, and Wang, and independently by Dallant and Kozma [FOCS 2026] linked this question to the space- and time-complexity of Bellman-Held-Karp-style dynamic programming algorithms for permutation problems such as the traveling salesman (TSP). Precisely, they showed that a space-time product $γ^{n+o(n)}$ is feasible for the TSP, whenever a set system of (normalized) size $S$ and chain density $D$ exists, with $ γ= S^2/D$. In this paper we show an essentially {optimal} bound of $γ\approx 3.1819$ for this quantity, closing the gap between the previous best lower and upper bounds of $γ\geq 3.015$ and $ γ\leq 3.572$ respectively. This implies a TSP algorithm with space-time product $O(3.1819^n)$ for input size $n$, as well as a limit to further improvements in this broad framework. More generally, we can obtain close to optimal values $D$ for any feasible value $S$, effectively settling the question of the number of full chains at every size. The crucial step towards our results is casting the extremal combinatorics question as an {information~vs.~entropy} tradeoff involving two random variables. This reformulation {exactly} captures the optimal tradeoff for the combinatorial problem, leading to a framework in which primal-dual certificates can be derived, proving rigorous upper and lower bounds on $γ$. We also give a further application of our techniques, improving a bound of Duffus, Sands, and Winkler on the minimum size of fibres in the Boolean lattice.

A useful approach to "compress" a large network $G$ is to represent it with a {\em flow-sparsifier}, i.e., a small network $H$ that supports the same flows as $G$, up to a factor $q \geq 1$ called the quality of sparsifier. Specifically, we assume the network $G$ contains a set of $k$ terminals $T$, shared with the network $H$, i.e., $T\subseteq V(G)\cap V(H)$, and we want $H$ to preserve all multicommodity flows that can be routed between the terminals $T$. The challenge is to construct $H$ that is small. These questions have received a lot of attention in recent years, leading to some known tradeoffs between the sparsifier's quality $q$ and its size $|V(H)|$. Nevertheless, it remains an outstanding question whether every $G$ admits a flow-sparsifier $H$ with quality $q=1+ε$, or even $q=O(1)$, and size $|V(H)|\leq f(k,ε)$ (in particular, independent of $|V(G)|$ and the edge capacities). Making a first step in this direction, we present new constructions for several scenarios: * Our main result is that for quasi-bipartite networks $G$, one can construct a $(1+ε)$-flow-sparsifier of size $\poly(k/\eps)$. In contrast, exact ($q=1$) sparsifiers for this family of networks are known to require size $2^{Ω(k)}$. * For networks $G$ of bounded treewidth $w$, we construct a flow-sparsifier with quality $q=O(\log w / \log\log w)$ and size $O(w\cdot \poly(k))$. * For general networks $G$, we construct a {\em sketch} $sk(G)$, that stores all the feasible multicommodity flows up to factor $q=1+\eps$, and its size (storage requirement) is $f(k,ε)$.