How many numbers in the matrix?Smith Normal Form and lower triangular Toeplitz Matricescriterion for deciding whether the product of a sequence of Givens rotations can reach the full special orthogonal groupHow to write this result (successive Schur complements compose nicely)Partitioned inverse 3x3 block matrixWhat is the criterion for a matrix containing vectors and their permutations being invertible?A linear combination problemHow to find the set of vectors which are as nearly orthogonal as possible?Is this totally unimodular family?How to find eigenvalues of following block matrices?A conjecture about the submatrix of orthogonal matrix
How many numbers in the matrix?
Smith Normal Form and lower triangular Toeplitz Matricescriterion for deciding whether the product of a sequence of Givens rotations can reach the full special orthogonal groupHow to write this result (successive Schur complements compose nicely)Partitioned inverse 3x3 block matrixWhat is the criterion for a matrix containing vectors and their permutations being invertible?A linear combination problemHow to find the set of vectors which are as nearly orthogonal as possible?Is this totally unimodular family?How to find eigenvalues of following block matrices?A conjecture about the submatrix of orthogonal matrix
$begingroup$
We consider a matrix $beginbmatrixa_i,jendbmatrix$ with $r$ rows and $c$ columns. We fill this matrix only with zeros and ones.
How many ones (maximally!) we can write into the matrix $rtimes c$ to not have any rectangle with ones at its vertices? Formally:
$$
forall_i_1,i_2in1,ldots,r forall_j_1,j_2in1,ldots,c big( (i_1neq i_2 wedge j_1neq j_2) Rightarrow 0ina_i_1,j_1,a_i_1,j_2, a_i_2,j_1, a_i_2,j_2 big).
$$
For example, for $3times 3$ matrix we can fill it with 6 ones:
$$
beginbmatrix
1 & 1 & 0 \
1 & 0 & 1 \
0 & 1 & 1
endbmatrix.
$$
But when we use 7 ones, then there always is a rectangle with ones at its vertices. For example:
$$beginbmatrix
mathbf 1 & mathbf 1 & 0 \
1 & 0 & 1 \
mathbf 1 & mathbf 1 & 1
endbmatrix.
$$
But what is the maximal number of ones for matrix $rtimes c$?
co.combinatorics matrices
New contributor
$endgroup$
add a comment |
$begingroup$
We consider a matrix $beginbmatrixa_i,jendbmatrix$ with $r$ rows and $c$ columns. We fill this matrix only with zeros and ones.
How many ones (maximally!) we can write into the matrix $rtimes c$ to not have any rectangle with ones at its vertices? Formally:
$$
forall_i_1,i_2in1,ldots,r forall_j_1,j_2in1,ldots,c big( (i_1neq i_2 wedge j_1neq j_2) Rightarrow 0ina_i_1,j_1,a_i_1,j_2, a_i_2,j_1, a_i_2,j_2 big).
$$
For example, for $3times 3$ matrix we can fill it with 6 ones:
$$
beginbmatrix
1 & 1 & 0 \
1 & 0 & 1 \
0 & 1 & 1
endbmatrix.
$$
But when we use 7 ones, then there always is a rectangle with ones at its vertices. For example:
$$beginbmatrix
mathbf 1 & mathbf 1 & 0 \
1 & 0 & 1 \
mathbf 1 & mathbf 1 & 1
endbmatrix.
$$
But what is the maximal number of ones for matrix $rtimes c$?
co.combinatorics matrices
New contributor
$endgroup$
$begingroup$
A simple (and not entirely straightforward) argument gives 2(r+c) as a weak upper bound. I suspect the answer is closer to 2max(r,c). (Actually, a tweak gives the latter, which may still be weak.) Gerhard "And What Have You Tried" Paseman, 2019.08.09.
$endgroup$
– Gerhard Paseman
8 hours ago
add a comment |
$begingroup$
We consider a matrix $beginbmatrixa_i,jendbmatrix$ with $r$ rows and $c$ columns. We fill this matrix only with zeros and ones.
How many ones (maximally!) we can write into the matrix $rtimes c$ to not have any rectangle with ones at its vertices? Formally:
$$
forall_i_1,i_2in1,ldots,r forall_j_1,j_2in1,ldots,c big( (i_1neq i_2 wedge j_1neq j_2) Rightarrow 0ina_i_1,j_1,a_i_1,j_2, a_i_2,j_1, a_i_2,j_2 big).
$$
For example, for $3times 3$ matrix we can fill it with 6 ones:
$$
beginbmatrix
1 & 1 & 0 \
1 & 0 & 1 \
0 & 1 & 1
endbmatrix.
$$
But when we use 7 ones, then there always is a rectangle with ones at its vertices. For example:
$$beginbmatrix
mathbf 1 & mathbf 1 & 0 \
1 & 0 & 1 \
mathbf 1 & mathbf 1 & 1
endbmatrix.
$$
But what is the maximal number of ones for matrix $rtimes c$?
co.combinatorics matrices
New contributor
$endgroup$
We consider a matrix $beginbmatrixa_i,jendbmatrix$ with $r$ rows and $c$ columns. We fill this matrix only with zeros and ones.
How many ones (maximally!) we can write into the matrix $rtimes c$ to not have any rectangle with ones at its vertices? Formally:
$$
forall_i_1,i_2in1,ldots,r forall_j_1,j_2in1,ldots,c big( (i_1neq i_2 wedge j_1neq j_2) Rightarrow 0ina_i_1,j_1,a_i_1,j_2, a_i_2,j_1, a_i_2,j_2 big).
$$
For example, for $3times 3$ matrix we can fill it with 6 ones:
$$
beginbmatrix
1 & 1 & 0 \
1 & 0 & 1 \
0 & 1 & 1
endbmatrix.
$$
But when we use 7 ones, then there always is a rectangle with ones at its vertices. For example:
$$beginbmatrix
mathbf 1 & mathbf 1 & 0 \
1 & 0 & 1 \
mathbf 1 & mathbf 1 & 1
endbmatrix.
$$
But what is the maximal number of ones for matrix $rtimes c$?
co.combinatorics matrices
co.combinatorics matrices
New contributor
New contributor
New contributor
asked 9 hours ago
bonawenturabonawentura
83 bronze badges
83 bronze badges
New contributor
New contributor
$begingroup$
A simple (and not entirely straightforward) argument gives 2(r+c) as a weak upper bound. I suspect the answer is closer to 2max(r,c). (Actually, a tweak gives the latter, which may still be weak.) Gerhard "And What Have You Tried" Paseman, 2019.08.09.
$endgroup$
– Gerhard Paseman
8 hours ago
add a comment |
$begingroup$
A simple (and not entirely straightforward) argument gives 2(r+c) as a weak upper bound. I suspect the answer is closer to 2max(r,c). (Actually, a tweak gives the latter, which may still be weak.) Gerhard "And What Have You Tried" Paseman, 2019.08.09.
$endgroup$
– Gerhard Paseman
8 hours ago
$begingroup$
A simple (and not entirely straightforward) argument gives 2(r+c) as a weak upper bound. I suspect the answer is closer to 2max(r,c). (Actually, a tweak gives the latter, which may still be weak.) Gerhard "And What Have You Tried" Paseman, 2019.08.09.
$endgroup$
– Gerhard Paseman
8 hours ago
$begingroup$
A simple (and not entirely straightforward) argument gives 2(r+c) as a weak upper bound. I suspect the answer is closer to 2max(r,c). (Actually, a tweak gives the latter, which may still be weak.) Gerhard "And What Have You Tried" Paseman, 2019.08.09.
$endgroup$
– Gerhard Paseman
8 hours ago
add a comment |
2 Answers
2
active
oldest
votes
$begingroup$
It seems you just want to maximise the number of ones so that there is no
$$left[matrix1&1\1&1right]$$
as a not-necessarily-contiguous $2times 2$ submatrix.
Equivalently, how many edges can a bipartite graph with sides of size $r$ and $s$ have without having any 4-cycles?
This is the first non-trivial case of the Zarankiewicz problem.
The square case is A001197(n)-1.
There is a table of values and bounds in this paper. I have more exact values near the diagonal.
$endgroup$
$begingroup$
In particular, see OEIS sequences A191873 and A001197.
$endgroup$
– Robert Israel
8 hours ago
$begingroup$
Also A072567.
$endgroup$
– Rob Pratt
7 hours ago
add a comment |
$begingroup$
For an $n times n$ matrix, you can get $3 (n-1)$ ones by putting them in all entries except $(1,1)$ of the first row, first column and main diagonal. That's optimal at least for $n le 5$.
But for $6 times 6$ the optimal solution has $16$ ones, e.g.
$$ left[ begin arraycccccc 0&1&1&1&0&0\ 0&1&0&0
&1&1\ 1&1&0&0&0&0\ 1&0&1&0&1&0
\ 1&0&0&1&0&1\ 0&0&0&1&1&0
end array right]
$$
$endgroup$
add a comment |
Your Answer
StackExchange.ready(function()
var channelOptions =
tags: "".split(" "),
id: "504"
;
initTagRenderer("".split(" "), "".split(" "), channelOptions);
StackExchange.using("externalEditor", function()
// Have to fire editor after snippets, if snippets enabled
if (StackExchange.settings.snippets.snippetsEnabled)
StackExchange.using("snippets", function()
createEditor();
);
else
createEditor();
);
function createEditor()
StackExchange.prepareEditor(
heartbeatType: 'answer',
autoActivateHeartbeat: false,
convertImagesToLinks: true,
noModals: true,
showLowRepImageUploadWarning: true,
reputationToPostImages: 10,
bindNavPrevention: true,
postfix: "",
imageUploader:
brandingHtml: "Powered by u003ca class="icon-imgur-white" href="https://imgur.com/"u003eu003c/au003e",
contentPolicyHtml: "User contributions licensed under u003ca href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"u003ecc by-sa 3.0 with attribution requiredu003c/au003e u003ca href="https://stackoverflow.com/legal/content-policy"u003e(content policy)u003c/au003e",
allowUrls: true
,
noCode: true, onDemand: true,
discardSelector: ".discard-answer"
,immediatelyShowMarkdownHelp:true
);
);
bonawentura is a new contributor. Be nice, and check out our Code of Conduct.
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
StackExchange.ready(
function ()
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fmathoverflow.net%2fquestions%2f338028%2fhow-many-numbers-in-the-matrix%23new-answer', 'question_page');
);
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
2 Answers
2
active
oldest
votes
2 Answers
2
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
$begingroup$
It seems you just want to maximise the number of ones so that there is no
$$left[matrix1&1\1&1right]$$
as a not-necessarily-contiguous $2times 2$ submatrix.
Equivalently, how many edges can a bipartite graph with sides of size $r$ and $s$ have without having any 4-cycles?
This is the first non-trivial case of the Zarankiewicz problem.
The square case is A001197(n)-1.
There is a table of values and bounds in this paper. I have more exact values near the diagonal.
$endgroup$
$begingroup$
In particular, see OEIS sequences A191873 and A001197.
$endgroup$
– Robert Israel
8 hours ago
$begingroup$
Also A072567.
$endgroup$
– Rob Pratt
7 hours ago
add a comment |
$begingroup$
It seems you just want to maximise the number of ones so that there is no
$$left[matrix1&1\1&1right]$$
as a not-necessarily-contiguous $2times 2$ submatrix.
Equivalently, how many edges can a bipartite graph with sides of size $r$ and $s$ have without having any 4-cycles?
This is the first non-trivial case of the Zarankiewicz problem.
The square case is A001197(n)-1.
There is a table of values and bounds in this paper. I have more exact values near the diagonal.
$endgroup$
$begingroup$
In particular, see OEIS sequences A191873 and A001197.
$endgroup$
– Robert Israel
8 hours ago
$begingroup$
Also A072567.
$endgroup$
– Rob Pratt
7 hours ago
add a comment |
$begingroup$
It seems you just want to maximise the number of ones so that there is no
$$left[matrix1&1\1&1right]$$
as a not-necessarily-contiguous $2times 2$ submatrix.
Equivalently, how many edges can a bipartite graph with sides of size $r$ and $s$ have without having any 4-cycles?
This is the first non-trivial case of the Zarankiewicz problem.
The square case is A001197(n)-1.
There is a table of values and bounds in this paper. I have more exact values near the diagonal.
$endgroup$
It seems you just want to maximise the number of ones so that there is no
$$left[matrix1&1\1&1right]$$
as a not-necessarily-contiguous $2times 2$ submatrix.
Equivalently, how many edges can a bipartite graph with sides of size $r$ and $s$ have without having any 4-cycles?
This is the first non-trivial case of the Zarankiewicz problem.
The square case is A001197(n)-1.
There is a table of values and bounds in this paper. I have more exact values near the diagonal.
edited 8 hours ago
answered 8 hours ago
Brendan McKayBrendan McKay
26.6k1 gold badge54 silver badges109 bronze badges
26.6k1 gold badge54 silver badges109 bronze badges
$begingroup$
In particular, see OEIS sequences A191873 and A001197.
$endgroup$
– Robert Israel
8 hours ago
$begingroup$
Also A072567.
$endgroup$
– Rob Pratt
7 hours ago
add a comment |
$begingroup$
In particular, see OEIS sequences A191873 and A001197.
$endgroup$
– Robert Israel
8 hours ago
$begingroup$
Also A072567.
$endgroup$
– Rob Pratt
7 hours ago
$begingroup$
In particular, see OEIS sequences A191873 and A001197.
$endgroup$
– Robert Israel
8 hours ago
$begingroup$
In particular, see OEIS sequences A191873 and A001197.
$endgroup$
– Robert Israel
8 hours ago
$begingroup$
Also A072567.
$endgroup$
– Rob Pratt
7 hours ago
$begingroup$
Also A072567.
$endgroup$
– Rob Pratt
7 hours ago
add a comment |
$begingroup$
For an $n times n$ matrix, you can get $3 (n-1)$ ones by putting them in all entries except $(1,1)$ of the first row, first column and main diagonal. That's optimal at least for $n le 5$.
But for $6 times 6$ the optimal solution has $16$ ones, e.g.
$$ left[ begin arraycccccc 0&1&1&1&0&0\ 0&1&0&0
&1&1\ 1&1&0&0&0&0\ 1&0&1&0&1&0
\ 1&0&0&1&0&1\ 0&0&0&1&1&0
end array right]
$$
$endgroup$
add a comment |
$begingroup$
For an $n times n$ matrix, you can get $3 (n-1)$ ones by putting them in all entries except $(1,1)$ of the first row, first column and main diagonal. That's optimal at least for $n le 5$.
But for $6 times 6$ the optimal solution has $16$ ones, e.g.
$$ left[ begin arraycccccc 0&1&1&1&0&0\ 0&1&0&0
&1&1\ 1&1&0&0&0&0\ 1&0&1&0&1&0
\ 1&0&0&1&0&1\ 0&0&0&1&1&0
end array right]
$$
$endgroup$
add a comment |
$begingroup$
For an $n times n$ matrix, you can get $3 (n-1)$ ones by putting them in all entries except $(1,1)$ of the first row, first column and main diagonal. That's optimal at least for $n le 5$.
But for $6 times 6$ the optimal solution has $16$ ones, e.g.
$$ left[ begin arraycccccc 0&1&1&1&0&0\ 0&1&0&0
&1&1\ 1&1&0&0&0&0\ 1&0&1&0&1&0
\ 1&0&0&1&0&1\ 0&0&0&1&1&0
end array right]
$$
$endgroup$
For an $n times n$ matrix, you can get $3 (n-1)$ ones by putting them in all entries except $(1,1)$ of the first row, first column and main diagonal. That's optimal at least for $n le 5$.
But for $6 times 6$ the optimal solution has $16$ ones, e.g.
$$ left[ begin arraycccccc 0&1&1&1&0&0\ 0&1&0&0
&1&1\ 1&1&0&0&0&0\ 1&0&1&0&1&0
\ 1&0&0&1&0&1\ 0&0&0&1&1&0
end array right]
$$
edited 8 hours ago
answered 8 hours ago
Robert IsraelRobert Israel
45.2k54 silver badges125 bronze badges
45.2k54 silver badges125 bronze badges
add a comment |
add a comment |
bonawentura is a new contributor. Be nice, and check out our Code of Conduct.
bonawentura is a new contributor. Be nice, and check out our Code of Conduct.
bonawentura is a new contributor. Be nice, and check out our Code of Conduct.
bonawentura is a new contributor. Be nice, and check out our Code of Conduct.
Thanks for contributing an answer to MathOverflow!
- Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!
But avoid …
- Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.
- Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.
Use MathJax to format equations. MathJax reference.
To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
StackExchange.ready(
function ()
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fmathoverflow.net%2fquestions%2f338028%2fhow-many-numbers-in-the-matrix%23new-answer', 'question_page');
);
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
$begingroup$
A simple (and not entirely straightforward) argument gives 2(r+c) as a weak upper bound. I suspect the answer is closer to 2max(r,c). (Actually, a tweak gives the latter, which may still be weak.) Gerhard "And What Have You Tried" Paseman, 2019.08.09.
$endgroup$
– Gerhard Paseman
8 hours ago