arXiv++ Combinatorics

A combinatorial code $\mathcal{C}$ is a collection of subsets of $[n]$, or equivalently a set of points in $\{0,1\}^n$. A morphism of codes is a map from one combinatorial code to another such that the coordinates of points in the image can be expressed as products of coordinates in the domain. By representing morphisms of codes as binary matrices, we show that any morphism of codes is part of a Galois connection where its adjoint is boolean multiplication by the representative matrix. We use this to characterize those morphisms of codes which allow to factor a boolean matrix, with applications to estimating boolean matrix rank. Morphisms also induce a partial order on (isomorphism classes of) codes. We determine the covering relations in this partial order for which the two adjoint maps are mutual inverses in terms of \emph{free} neurons, a combinatorial condition on the index corresponding to the covering maps. We introduce the \emph{defect} of a code as a new tool to study this poset and show that defect decreases by exactly 0 or 1 under a covering map.

Boolean matrix factorization (BMF) has many applications in data mining, bioinformatics, and network analysis. The goal of BMF is to decompose a given binary matrix as the Boolean product of two smaller binary matrices, revealing underlying structure in the data. When interpreting a binary matrix as the adjacency matrix of a bipartite graph, BMF is equivalent to the NP-hard biclique cover problem. By approaching this problem through the lens of commutative algebra, we utilize algebraic structures and techniques--particularly the Castelnuovo-Mumford regularity of combinatorially defined ideals--to establish new lower bounds for Boolean matrix rank.

A connected digraph in which the in-degree of any vertex equals its out-degree is Eulerian; this baseline result is used as the basis of existence proofs for universal cycles (also known as ucycles or generalized deBruijn cycles or U-cycles) of several combinatorial objects. The existence of ucycles is often dependent on the specific representation that we use for the combinatorial objects. For example, should we represent the subset $\{2,5\}$ of $\{1,2,3,4,5\}$ as "25" in a linear string? Is the representation "52" acceptable? Or it it tactically advantageous (and acceptable) to go with $\{0,1,0,0,1\}$? In this paper, we represent combinatorial objects as graphs, as in \cite{bks}, and exhibit the flexibility and power of this representation to produce {\it graph universal cycles}, or {\it Gucycles}, for $k$-subsets of an $n$-set; permutations (and classes of permutations) of $[n]=\{1,2,\ldots,n\}$, and partitions of an $n$-set, thus revisiting the classes first studied in \cite{cdg}. Under this graphical scheme, we will represent $\{2,5\}$ as the subgraph $A$ of $C_5$ with edge set consisting of $\{2,3\}$ and $\{5,1\}$, namely the "second" and "fifth" edges in $C_5$. Permutations are represented via their permutation graphs, and set partitions through disjoint unions of complete graphs.