How statement and proof provenance work
The first chip identifies the source of the statement or construction; the second identifies the source of its local proof or verification.
- Literature-sourced — the exact statement appears in a cited source; only wording and notation differ.
- AI-adapted — a semantically identical restatement of literature-sourced material, modulo indexing, notation, and boundary cases adopted by the library.
- AI-generated — a genuinely novel statement formulated by AI, with no source for the claim itself.
These labels describe origin, not correctness: citations and verification chips remain separate evidence.
Erdős-Rado sunflower lemma: more than distinct -sets contain an -petal sunflower
Statement
Let and . Every finite family of distinct -element sets satisfying
contains an -petal sunflower.
Facts & Assumptions
Given: Natural numbers and , and a finite family of distinct -sets with .
For , a maximal disjoint subfamily either contains members, forming an empty-core sunflower, or its union is a transversal of size at most (A maximal pairwise disjoint subfamily either supplies a sunflower or gives a small transversal for the whole uniform family).
A sunflower is a family of distinct sets with one common pairwise intersection (Sunflowers, petals, and their common core).
If is a function between finite sets and , then some fibre has more than elements (If then every has a fibre with more than elements, and for nonempty some fibre has at least elements).
and for (The factorial and the falling factorial , defined by recursion in ). Natural powers satisfy and (Exponentiation of natural numbers, , and its agreement with the integer power in ); induction on is valid (The principle of mathematical induction).
Proof
For , there is only one -element set, so no family of distinct -sets satisfies . The implication is therefore true.
Assume the assertion for -element sets, where , and let satisfy the displayed bound for .
Choose a maximal pairwise disjoint subfamily . If , [L1] already supplies the required sunflower. Otherwise meets every member of and .
In the second case, let and project to . Every contributes at least one incidence, so . Set . Since and , we have . By [L2], some belongs to more than members of .
Remove from those members. The resulting sets are distinct -sets, so the induction hypothesis gives of them forming a sunflower with core . Restoring gives original members whose pairwise intersections are all .
The first case in step 2.1 and the construction in step 4.1 cover all possibilities, so contains an -petal sunflower.
Depends on
- A maximal pairwise disjoint subfamily either supplies a sunflower or gives a small transversal for the whole uniform family
- Sunflowers, petals, and their common core
- The factorial $n!$ and the falling factorial $n^{\underline{k}}$, defined by recursion in $\mathbb{N}$
- Exponentiation of natural numbers, $m^{n}$, and its agreement with the integer power in $\mathbb{R}$
- If $\lvert A\rvert > k\lvert B\rvert$ then every $f : A \to B$ has a fibre with more than $k$ elements, and for nonempty $B$ some fibre has at least $\lceil \lvert A\rvert / \lvert B\rvert\rceil$ elements
- The principle of mathematical induction
Used by
Nothing in the library uses this result yet.
Dependency tree · next 3 levels
Direct dependencies and their dependencies through the next three levels: 71 results over 20 levels. An arrow runs from a result to what uses it, and this result sits at the bottom with a heavier outline. Click the chart to enlarge it.
Sources
- Sunflower (mathematics) (Wikipedia) (standard reference, not scraped)