arXiv++ Combinatorics

It has been conjectured that sparse paving matroids will eventually predominate in any asymptotic enumeration of matroids, i.e. that $\lim_{n\rightarrow\infty} s_n/m_n = 1$, where $m_n$ denotes the number of matroids on $n$ elements, and $s_n$ the number of sparse paving matroids. In this paper, we show that $$\lim_{n\rightarrow \infty}\frac{\log s_n}{\log m_n}=1.$$ We prove this by arguing that each matroid on $n$ elements has a faithful description consisting of a stable set of a Johnson graph together with a (by comparison) vanishing amount of other information, and using that stable sets in these Johnson graphs correspond one-to-one to sparse paving matroids on $n$ elements. As a consequence of our result, we find that for some $β> 0$, asymptotically almost all matroids on $n$ elements have rank in the range $n/2 \pm β\sqrt{n}$.

A flat cover is a collection of flats identifying the non-bases of a matroid. We introduce the notion of cover complexity, the minimal size of such a flat cover, as a measure for the complexity of a matroid, and present bounds on the number of matroids on $n$ elements whose cover complexity is bounded. We apply cover complexity to show that the class of matroids without an $N$-minor is asymptotically small in case $N$ is one of the sparse paving matroids $U_{2,k}$, $U_{3,6}$, $P_6$, $Q_6$, or $R_6$, thus confirming a few special cases of a conjecture due to Mayhew, Newman, Welsh, and Whittle. On the other hand, we show a lower bound on the number of matroids without $M(K_4)$-minor which asymptoticaly matches the best known lower bound on the number of all matroids, due to Knuth.

We provide evidence for five long-standing, basis-exchange conjectures for matroids by proving them for the enormous class of sparse paving matroids. We also explore the role that these matroids may play in the following problem: as a function of the size of the ground set, what is the greatest number of cyclic flats that a matroid can have?

We give two proofs that the $h$-vector of any paving matroid is a pure O-sequence, thus answering in the affirmative a conjecture made by R. Stanley, for this particular class of matroids. We also investigate the problem of obtaining good lower bounds for the number of bases of a paving matroid given its rank and number of elements.

We prove that the Tutte polynomial of a coloopless paving matroid is convex along the portions of the line segments x+y=p lying in the positive quadrant. Every coloopless paving matroids is in the class of matroids which contain two disjoint bases or whose ground set is the union of two bases of M*. For this latter class we give a proof that T_M(a,a) <= max {T_M(2a,0), T_M(0,2a)} for a >= 2. We conjecture that T_M(1,1) <= max {T_M(2,0), T_M(0,2)} for the same class of matroids. We also prove this conjecture for some families of graphs and matroids.

In this paper we highlight some enumerative results concerning matroids of low rank and prove the tail-ends of various sequences involving the number of matroids on a finite set to be log-convex. We give a recursion for a new, slightly improved, lower bound on the number of rank-$r$ matroids on $n$ elements when $n=2^m-1$. We also prove an adjacent result showing the point-lines-planes conjecture to be true if and only if it is true for a special subcollection of matroids. Two new tables are also presented, giving the number of paving matroids on at most eight elements.

The property of balance (in the sense of Feder and Mihail) is investigated in the context of paving matroids. The following examples are exhibited: (a) a class of ``sparse'' paving matroids that are balanced, but at the same time rich enough combinatorially to permit the encoding of hard counting problems; and (b) a paving matroid that is not balanced. The computational significance of (a) is the following. As a consequence of balance, there is an efficient algorithm for approximating the number of bases of a sparse paving matroid within specified relative error. On the other hand, determining the number of bases exactly is likely to be computationally intractable.