1. Partially Ordered Sets
Elementary Definitions.
A poset (partially ordered set) is a set P with
a binary relation £ such that for all
a,
b,
c
Î
P:
-
a £ a
-
if a £ b and b £
c
then a £ c
-
if a £ b and b £
a
then a = b
If a £ b and a ¹
b
we write a < b. We say that
b
covers a if a £ b and
there does not exist c such that a <
c
<
b.
A subset C of P is called a chain if for any a,
b
ÎC,
either
a £
b or
b £
a.
A subset
A of P is called an antichain if for any
two distinct a,
b
Î A,
neither
a £
b nor
b £
a.
Examples.
-
P = Z, the set of integers, ordered by the usual order £.
-
P is a set of divisors of a given natural number n, ordered
by divisibility |.
-
P is a set of subsets of a given set S, ordered by set inclusion
Í.
It is often convenient to draw a poset diagram with dots representing
the elements of P and a decending line connecting
b with
a
whenever b covers a.
 |
 |
 |
Fig 1. (a) Poset of integers, (b) poset of
divisors of 12 and (c) poset of subsets of {1,2,3}
Dilworth's Theorem.
Consider the poset P of subsets of {1,2,3} ordered by set inclusion
shown in fig 1(c). There is a decomposition of the poset into 3 disjoint
chains P = C1 È C2
È C3 where:
-
C1 = {{ },{1},{1,2},{1,2,3}}
-
C2 = {{2},{2,3}}
-
C3 = {{3},{1,3}}
There are other ways of decomposing P into disjoint chains, but
a quick inspection shows that you cannot do it with less than 3
disjoint chains. On the other hand, there is an antichain in P with
3 elements, namely:
There are other antichains in P but a quick inspection shows that
you cannot find an antichain with more than 3 elements. So the minimum
number of chains that partition P is equal to the size of a maximal
antichain in P.
 |
 |
 |
Fig 2. Decomposition of the posets of fig
1 into a minimal number of chains (red, blue, green) and a maximal antichain
(yellow). In each case the two numbers are equal.
Robert Dilworth [1] observed that this equality is true for finite posets
in general.
Theorem 1. Let P be a finite poset. Let m be the
minimum number of disjoint chains that together contain all elements of
P.
Let M be the maximum number of elements in an antichain of P.
Then m = M.
Proof. This proof is due to Helge Tverberg [2]. We show that
(i) m ³ M and (ii) m £
M. Observe that (i) follows from the fact that for any antichain
with M elements we must have at least M disjoint chains,
each containing one element of the antichain, in order to obtain a decomposition
of P. For (ii) we use induction on |P|. If |P| = 0,
the theorem is vacuously true. Assume that the theorem is true for all
posets with less than |P| elements. Let C be a maximal chain
in P. If every antichain in P \ C has at most M
- 1 elements, we are done. So suppose {a1, ..., aM}
is an antichain in P \ C. Define
-
Q = { x Î P : x
£ ai for some i}
-
R = { x Î P : x
³ ai for some i}
Since C is a maximal chain, the largest element of C is not
in Q. So |Q| < |P| and
by the induction hypothesis, the theorem is true for the poset Q.
Hence Q is the union of disjoint chains Q1,
..., QM, where ai Î
Qi.
We claim that ai is the maximal element of chainQi
(Suppose a Î
Qi
and ai < a. Since
a
£ aj for some
j,
we have a contradiction ai < aj).
Similarly, R is the union of disjoint chains R1,
..., RM, where ai Î
Ri,
and we can show that ai is the minimal element of chain
Ri. The theorem follows by combining the respective chains
along the elements of the antichain.
¨
2. Lattices
Elementary Definitions.
A lattice is a poset L with the property that any finite
subset has a least upper bound (called join) and a greatest lower
bound (called meet). For any pair of not necessarily distinct elements
x
and
y, the join and meet are denoted by x Ú
y and x Ù y respectively.
The posets shown in fig 1 (a), (b), (c) are all lattices. The lattice shown
in fig 1(a) is an example of a lattice with an infinite chain. We shall
only be interested in lattices that have no infinite chains, for such
lattices have a unique minimum element called 0 and a unique maximum element
called 1. A point of such a lattice is an element that covers 0.
A lattice is called atomic if each element is a join of points.
A lattice is semimodular if whenever distinct
a and b
cover c then a Ú b
covers both a and b. A geometric lattice is
a lattice L with the following properties:
-
L has no infinite chains
-
L is atomic
-
L is semimodular
Exercise. Are the lattices shown in fig 1(a) and fig 1(b) geometric
lattices? Show that the lattice shown in fig 1(c) is a geometric lattice.
Given a geometric lattice L, let X denote its set of points.
For each y Î
L, define Fy
= { x Î
X : x £
y
}. Define the set F = { Fy : y
Î
L
}. Then (X, F) is called a combinatorial geometry
with the elements of X called points and the elements of
F called flats.
Examples.
-
Consider the geometric lattice shown in fig 1(c). The set of points is
X
= {{1},{2},{3}}. The set of F of flats is given by
-
F{} = {}
-
F{1} = {{1}}
-
F{2} = {{2}}
-
F{3} = {{3}}
-
F{1,2} = {{1},{2}}
-
F{1,3} = {{1},{3}}
-
F{2,3} = {{2},{3}}
-
F{1,2,3} = {{1},{2},{3}}
-
Consider the geometric lattice shown in fig 3 below:
 |
Fig 3. A geometric lattice consisting of certain
subsets of {0,1,2,3,4,5,6} ordered by set inclusion.
The set of points is X = {{0},{1},{2},{3},{4},{5},{6}}.
The set F of flats is given by
-
{}
-
{{0}}
-
{{1}}
-
{{2}}
-
{{3}}
-
{{4}}
-
{{5}}
-
{{6}}
-
{{1},{2},{4}}
-
{{0},{1},{3}}
-
{{0},{2},{6}}
-
{{0},{4},{5}}
-
{{3},{4},{6}}
-
{{1},{5},{6}}
-
{{2},{3},{5}}
-
{{0},{1},{2},{3},{4},{5},{6}}}
Exercise. Show that the poset of fig 3 is a geometric lattice.
3. Projective Planes
There is a very nice way of visualizing the combinatorial geometry
of the last example, discovered by Gino Fano [3]. Represent the one-element
flats by dots and the three-element flats by curves connecting the respective
dots. We obtain the famous configuration known as the Fano Plane:
 |
Fig 4. The Fano plane
A finite projective plane of order n is a set of n2
+ n + 1 points and a set of n2 + n
+ 1 subsets of points called lines such that
-
Any two distinct points determine a unique line
-
Any two distinct lines determine a unique point
-
Every point is contained in exactly n + 1 lines
-
Every line contains exactly n + 1 points
The finite projective plane of order n = 2, the Fano
plane, is shown above in fig 4. It is easy to show that
-
For every prime power q = pk, there exists a projective
plane of order q.
Consider the three-dimensional vector space GF(q) Å
GF(q) Å GF(q)
over the Galois field GF(q). This vector space contains (q3
- 1)/(q - 1) = q2 +
q + 1 one-dimensional subspaces (define these to be the points
of the projective plane) and the same number of two-dimensional subspaces
(define these to be the lines of the projective plane). A projective
plane of order q constructed in this way is usually denoted by the
symbol PG(2,q). Thus the Fano plane is PG(2,2).
Exercise. Show that the PG(2,q) construction satisfies
the geometric definition of a projective plane of order q.
A long standing unsolved problem in combinatorics is the following:
-
Do there exist projective planes of order n, where n is not
a prime power?
It was proved by R.H. Bruck and Herbert Ryser [4] that if n º
1 or 2 (mod 4), and a projective plane of order n exists, then n
must be the sum of two squares. So, for example, there cannot exist a projective
plane of order n = 6 because 6 º
2 (mod 4) and 6 is not the sum of two squares. However, what about values
of n that are not prime powers and not º
1 or 2 (mod 4)? It is suspected that there are no projective planes of
order n = 10, based on extensive computer searches. The case n
= 12 is still open. The general problem still remains unsolved even for
small values of n.
References.
| [1] |
Robert P. Dilworth, A decomposition theorem for partially ordered
sets, Annals of Math. (2) 51,161-166, 1950. |
| [2] |
Helge Tverberg, On Dilworth's decomposition theorem for partially
ordered sets, J. Combinatorial Theory (3), 305-306, 1967. |
| [3] |
Gino Fano, Giornale di Matimatiche (30), 114-124, 1892. |
| [4] |
R.H. Bruck and Herbert J. Ryser, The nonexistence of certain finite
projective planes, Canad. J. Math. 1, 88-93, 1949. |
|