arXiv++ Combinatorics

Extremal problems on set systems with restricted intersections have been an important part of combinatorics in the last 70 year. In this paper, we study the following Ramsey version of these problems. Given a set $L\subseteq \{0,\dots,k-1\}$ and a family $\mathcal{F}$ of $k$-element sets which does not contain a sunflower with $m$ petals whose kernel size is in $L$, how large a subfamily of $\mathcal{F}$ can we find in which no pair has intersection size in $L$? We give matching upper and lower bounds, determining the dependence on $m$ for all $k$ and $L$. This problem also finds applications in quantum computing. As an application of our techniques, we also obtain a variant of Füredi's celebrated semilattice lemma, which is a key tool in the powerful delta-system method. We prove that one cannot remove the double-exponential dependency on the uniformity in Füredi's result, however, we provide an alternative with significantly better, single-exponential dependency on the parameters, which is still strong enough for most applications of the delta-system method.

A sunflower with $r$ petals is a collection of $r$ sets so that the intersection of each pair is equal to the intersection of all of them. Erdős and Rado proved the sunflower lemma: for any fixed $r$, any family of sets of size $w$, with at least about $w^w$ sets, must contain a sunflower with $r$ petals. The famous sunflower conjecture states that the bound on the number of sets can be improved to $c^w$ for some constant $c$. In this paper, we improve the bound to about $(\log w)^w$. In fact, we prove the result for a robust notion of sunflowers, for which the bound we obtain is sharp up to lower order terms.

In this work we investigate into energy complexity, a Boolean function measure related to circuit complexity. Given a circuit $\mathcal{C}$ over the standard basis $\{\vee_2,\wedge_2,\neg\}$, the energy complexity of $\mathcal{C}$, denoted by $\mathrm{EC}(\mathcal{C})$, is the maximum number of its activated inner gates over all inputs. The energy complexity of a Boolean function $f$, denoted by $\mathrm{EC}(f)$, is the minimum of $\mathrm{EC}(\mathcal{C})$ over all circuits $\mathcal{C}$ computing $f$. This concept has attracted lots of attention in literature. Recently, Dinesh, Otiv, and Sarma [COCOON'18] gave $\mathrm{EC}(f)$ an upper bound in terms of the decision tree complexity, $\mathrm{EC}(f)=O(\mathrm{D}(f)^3)$. They also showed that $\mathrm{EC}(f)\leq 3n-1$, where $n$ is the input size. Recall that the minimum size of circuit to compute $f$ could be as large as $2^n/n$. We improve their upper bounds by showing that $\mathrm{EC}(f)\leq\min\{\frac12\mathrm{D}(f)^2+O(\mathrm{D}(f)),n+2\mathrm{D}(f)-2\}$. For the lower bound, Dinesh, Otiv, and Sarma defined positive sensitivity, a complexity measure denoted by $\mathrm{psens}(f)$, and showed that $\mathrm{EC}(f)\ge\frac{1}{3}\mathrm{psens}(f)$. They asked whether $\mathrm{EC}(f)$ can also be lower bounded by a polynomial of $\mathrm{D}(f)$. In this paper we affirm it by proving $\mathrm{EC}(f)=Ω(\sqrt{\mathrm{D}(f)})$. For non-degenerated functions with input size $n$, we give another lower bound $\mathrm{EC}(f)=Ω(\log{n})$. All these three lower bounds are incomparable to each other. Besides, we also examine the energy complexity of $\mathtt{OR}$ functions and $\mathtt{ADDRESS}$ functions, which implies the tightness of our two lower bounds respectively. In addition, the former one answers another open question asking for a non-trivial lower bounds for the energy complexity of $\mathtt{OR}$ functions.