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.

We consider the set of matchings of a graph and a local change operation, called a flip, between them. In the combinatorial setting, the base graphs are either complete graphs or complete bipartite graphs, and in the geometric setting, the graphs are embedded on point sets in the plane, with the requirement that edges must be drawn as straight lines and must not cross. For base graphs with an even number of vertices, we consider perfect matchings, i.e., all vertices are matched, and for base graphs with an odd number of vertices, we consider almost-perfect matchings, i.e., all but one vertex of the graph are matched. A 2-flip between two perfect matchings exchanges two edges, and a 1-flip between two almost-perfect matchings exchanges one edge. The corresponding flip graph has the set of perfect or almost-perfect matchings as vertices, with pairs of them connected by an edge if they differ in a 2-flip or 1-flip, respectively. In this work, we provide a comprehensive picture of Hamiltonicity properties of these flip graphs. We prove that the flip graphs in the combinatorial setting are Hamilton-connected, i.e., they admit a Hamilton path between any two vertices, or, if the flip graphs are bipartite, we prove that they are Hamilton-laceable, i.e., they admit a Hamilton path between any two vertices from different partition classes. In the geometric setting, we prove that any path in them misses exponentially many vertices, in particular, they have no Hamilton paths or cycles. For points in convex position and almost-perfect matchings under 1-flips, we complement this by constructing a cycle in the flip graph that visits almost all vertices.

The traveling salesman problem (TSP) is a cornerstone of combinatorial optimization and has deeply influenced the development of algorithmic techniques in both exact and approximate settings. Yet, improving on the decades-old bounds for solving TSP exactly remains elusive: the dynamic program of Bellman, Held, and Karp from 1962 uses $2^{n+O(\log{n})}$ time and space, and the divide-and-conquer approach of Gurevich and Shelah from 1987 uses $4^{n + O(\log^2{n})}$ time and polynomial space. A straightforward combination of the two algorithms trades off $T^{n+o(n)}$ time and $S^{n+o(n)}$ space at various points of the curve $ST = 4$. An improvement to this tradeoff when $2 < T < 2\sqrt{2}$ was found by Koivisto and Parviainen (SODA 2010), yielding a minimum of $ST \approx 3.93$. Koivisto and Parviainen show their method to be optimal among a broad class of partial-order-based approaches, and to date, no improvement or alternative method has been found. In this paper we give a tradeoff that strictly improves all previous ones for all $2 < T < 4$, achieving a minimum of $ST < 3.572$. A key ingredient is the construction of sparse set systems (hypergraphs) that admit a large number of maximal chains. The existence of such objects is of independent interest in extremal combinatorics, likely to see further applications. Along the way we disprove a combinatorial conjecture of Johnson, Leader, and Russell from 2013, relating it with the optimality of the previous tradeoff schemes for TSP. Our techniques extend to a broad class of permutation problems over arbitrary semirings, yielding improved space-time tradeoffs in these settings as well.

We show that for large enough $n$, the number of non-isomorphic pseudoline arrangements of order $n$ is greater than $2^{c\cdot n^2}$ for some constant $c > 0.2604$, improving the previous best bound of $c>0.2083$ by Dumitrescu and Mandal (2020). Arrangements of pseudolines (and in particular arrangements of lines) are important objects appearing in many forms in discrete and computational geometry. They have strong ties for example with oriented matroids, sorting networks and point configurations. Let $B_n$ be the number of non-isomorphic pseudoline arrangements of order $n$ and let $b_n := \log_2(B_n)$. The problem of estimating $b_n$ dates back to Knuth, who conjectured that $b_n \leq 0.5n^2 + o(n^2)$ and derived the first bounds $n^2/6-O(n) \leq b_n \leq 0.7924(n^2+n)$. Both the upper and the lower bound have been improved a couple of times since. For the upper bound, it was first improved to $b_n < 0.6988n^2$ (Felsner, 1997), then $b_n < 0.6571 n^2$ by Felsner and Valtr (2011), for large enough $n$. In the same paper, Felsner and Valtr improved the constant in the lower bound to $c> 0.1887$, which was subsequently improved by Dumitrescu and Mandal to $c>0.2083$. Our new bound is based on a construction which starts with one of the constructions of Dumitrescu and Mandal and breaks it into constant sized pieces. We then use software to compute the contribution of each piece to the overall number of pseudoline arrangements. This method adds a lot of flexibility to the construction and thus offers many avenues for future tweaks and improvements which could lead to further tightening of the lower bound.

Arrangements of pseudolines are classic objects in discrete and computational geometry. They have been studied with increasing intensity since their introduction almost 100 years ago. The study of the number $B_n$ of non-isomorphic simple arrangements of $n$ pseudolines goes back to Goodman and Pollack, Knuth, and others. It is known that $B_n$ is in the order of $2^{Θ(n^2)}$ and finding asymptotic bounds on $b_n = \frac{\log_2(B_n)}{n^2}$ remains a challenging task. In 2011, Felsner and Valtr showed that $0.1887 \leq b_n \le 0.6571$ for sufficiently large $n$. The upper bound remains untouched but in 2020 Dumitrescu and Mandal improved the lower bound constant to $0.2083$. Their approach utilizes the known values of $B_n$ for up to $n=12$. We tackle the lower bound by utilizing dynamic programming and the Lindström-Gessel-Viennot lemma. Our new bound is $b_n \geq 0.2721$ for sufficiently large $n$. The result is based on a delicate interplay of theoretical ideas and computer assistance.

A \emph{saddlepoint} of an $n \times n$ matrix is an entry that is the maximum of its row and the minimum of its column. Saddlepoints give the \emph{value} of a two-player zero-sum game, corresponding to its pure-strategy Nash equilibria; efficiently finding a saddlepoint is thus a natural and fundamental algorithmic task. For finding a \emph{strict saddlepoint} (an entry that is the strict maximum of its row and the strict minimum of its column) we recently gave an $O({n\log^*{n}})$-time algorithm, improving the $O({n\log{n}})$ bounds from 1991 of Bienstock, Chung, Fredman, Schäffer, Shor, Suri and of Byrne and Vaserstein. In this paper we present an optimal $O({n})$-time algorithm for finding a strict saddlepoint based on random sampling. Our algorithm, like earlier approaches, accesses matrix entries only via unit-cost binary comparisons. For finding a (non-strict) saddlepoint, we extend an existing lower bound to randomized algorithms, showing that the trivial $O(n^2)$ runtime cannot be improved even with the use of randomness.

A saddlepoint of an $n \times n$ matrix $A$ is an entry of $A$ that is a maximum in its row and a minimum in its column. Knuth (1968) gave several different algorithms for finding a saddlepoint. The worst-case running time of these algorithms is $Θ(n^2)$, and Llewellyn, Tovey, and Trick (1988) showed that this cannot be improved, as in the worst case all entries of A may need to be queried. A strict saddlepoint of $A$ is an entry that is the strict maximum in its row and the strict minimum in its column. The strict saddlepoint (if it exists) is unique, and Bienstock, Chung, Fredman, Schäffer, Shor, and Suri (1991) showed that it can be found in time $O(n \log{n})$, where a dominant runtime contribution is sorting the diagonal of the matrix. This upper bound has not been improved since 1991. In this paper we show that the strict saddlepoint can be found in $O(n \log^{*}{n})$ time, where $\log^{*}$ denotes the very slowly growing iterated logarithm function, coming close to the lower bound of $Ω(n)$. In fact, we can also compute, within the same runtime, the value of a non-strict saddlepoint, assuming one exists. Our algorithm is based on a simple recursive approach, a feasibility test inspired by searching in sorted matrices, and a relaxed notion of saddlepoint.