arXiv reader

An Eventown Result for Multisets

Anirban Banerjee and Abisek Dewan

arXiv
2610.21636v1 · PDF · 15 October 2026
Categories
math.CO
Licence
CC BY 4.0 The site shows the text.

Abstract

We study an extension of the Eventown problem of sets to multisets on [n] = \{1,2,...,n\}. A multiset is called m-bounded if each element has multiplicity at most m. The intersection of two multisets is defined as the multiset in which each element has multiplicity equal to the minimum of its multiplicities in the two original multisets. A family of m-bounded multisets is called an Eventown family if every member and the intersection of every pair of distinct members has even cardinality, with cardinalities counted with multiplicities. We determine the maximum size E_m(n) of such a family for every m and n. We show that E_{2q}(n)=(q+1)^n, and E_{2q+1}(n)=(q+1)^{n-2k}\bigl((q+1)^2+1\bigr)^k, where k=\lfloor n/2\rfloor. In particular, the case m=1 recovers the classical Eventown theorem for sets. We also characterize all extremal families for m\ge2. For even m, the unique extremal family consists of all multisets in which every element has even multiplicity. For odd m\ge3, every extremal family has a product structure arising from two explicit families on pairs of coordinates, together with an additional coordinate restricted to even multiplicities when n is odd. Consequently, there are exactly k+1 extremal types up to permutations of the ground set.

Items 9

Theorem

Theorem 1

1ZXZ

Let E_m(n) be the maximum size of an Eventown family of m-bounded multisets on [n]. Then

E_m(n)= \begin{cases} (q+1)^n, & m=2q,\\[2mm] \bigl((q+1)^2+1\bigr)^{n/2}, & m=2q+1,\quad n\text{ even},\\[2mm] (q+1)\bigl((q+1)^2+1\bigr)^{(n-1)/2}, & m=2q+1,\quad n\text{ odd}. \end{cases}
Proof of Theorem 1

For a fixed coordinate i and a family \mathcal{F}, define

\begin{aligned} T_e^i&=\{x:\iota_i(s,x)\in \mathcal{F},\text{for some even}\ s\in \{0,1,...,m\}\} \\ T_o^i&=\{y:\iota_i(t,y)\in \mathcal{F},\text{for some odd}\ t\in \{0,1,...,m\}\} \end{aligned}

For i=1, we drop the superscript and just write T_e,T_o.

Case I: m is even

Suppose \delta=0, so m=2q. If q=0, the conclusion is immediate, otherwise, by Lemma 2.2, we have,

|\mathcal F|\le r\max(|T_e|,|T_o|).

Now, we fix the first coordinate and replace \mathcal F by

\mathcal F^{1}= \begin{cases} \{(0,x):x\in T_e\},& if \ |T_e|\ge |T_o|,\\[1mm] \{(1,y):y\in T_o\},& if\ |T_o|>|T_e|. \end{cases}

This replacement is clearly an Eventown family. Moreover,

|\mathcal F^1|=\max(|T_e|,|T_o|)\ge\frac{|\mathcal F|}{r}.

The selected first coordinate is now fixed, and all other coordinates remain unchanged.

Starting with \mathcal F, we perform this operation successively on all n coordinates. The resulting family \mathcal G contains at most one member, and at each iteration, the size of the family decreases by a factor of at most r. Consequently,

|\mathcal F|\le r^n |\mathcal{G}|\le r^n=(q+1)^n.

This proves the theorem when m is even.

Case II: m is odd

Suppose \delta=1, so m=2q+1. Define

Q_e=\{0,2,...,2q\}\cup\{m\},\ \ \ \ \ \ Q_o=\{0\}\cup\{1,3,...,2q+1\}

both of size r+1.

We first transform the family \mathcal{F} into another Eventown family \mathcal{G}, without decreasing its size, such that the value in each coordinate is either from Q_e or Q_o.

Fix the first coordinate. First suppose that,

|\mathcal{F}|\le r \max(|T_e|,|T_0|).

If |T_e|\ge |T_o|, replace \mathcal{F} by \{(s,x):s\in\{0,2,...,2q\},x\in T_e\}=V_e \times T_e; otherwise replace it by \{(t,y):t\in\{1,3,...,2q+1\},y\in T_o\}=V_o \times T_o. The replacement family is also an Eventown family, where the chosen first coordinate of each member lies in Q_e or Q_o. The size of the new family is r \max(T_e,T_o)\ge |\mathcal{F}|.

Now, suppose |\mathcal{F}|>r \max(|T_e|,|T_o|). This forces a+b >r. Therefore, by Lemma 2.2, we get,

a+b=r+1

and for every x\in T_e with a number of even extensions and any y \in T_o with b number of odd extensions, the even extensions come before the odd extensions. Therefore, selected tuples have exactly the following extensions:

\begin{aligned} x&:0,2,...,2l\\ y&:2l+1,2l+3,...,2q+1 \end{aligned}

for some l \in \{0\}\cup[q].

Now, every extension of a tuple in T_e precedes every extension of y. Consequently, each tuple in T_e has extensions at most 2l. Similarly, a tuple in T_o has all its extensions above 2l. Consequently, every even extension precedes every odd extension in \mathcal{F}.

Now, if |T_e|\ge |T_o| we replace \mathcal{F} by

\mathcal{F}_1^{(1)}=\{(s,x):s\in\{0,2,...,2q\},x\in T_e\} \cup \{(2q+1,y):y \in T_o\},

otherwise by

\mathcal{F}_2^{(1)}=\{(0,x):x \in T_e\} \cup \{(t,y):t\in\{1,3,...,2q+1\},y\in T_o\}.

Both of the families, \mathcal{F}_1^{(1)} and \mathcal{F}_2^{(1)} are Eventown families with the sizes r|T_e|+|T_o| and |T_e|+r|T_o|, respectively.

So, when |T_e|\ge |T_o| we have

r|T_e|+|T_o|-(a|T_e|+b|T_o|)=(b-1)(|T_e|-|T_o|)\ge0,

and for |T_o|\ge|T_e|, we have

|T_e|+r|T_o|-(aT_e+b|T_o|)=(a-1)(|T_o|-|T_e|)\ge0.

Thus the chosen replacement family, has size at least a|T_e|+b|T_o|\ge|\mathcal F|, preserves the Eventown condition and restricts the first coordinate to Q_e or Q_o.

We apply the above procedure successively to all coordinates, with each iteration modifying only the chosen coordinate of the family members. After all n iterations, we obtain an Eventown family \mathcal G satisfying

|\mathcal F|\le |\mathcal G|,

such that, in each coordinate, every member of \mathcal G takes values exclusively from either Q_e or Q_o. Hence by Lemma 2.3, we have,

|\mathcal{F}|\le |\mathcal G| \le r^{n-2k}(1+r^2)^k.

Therefore,

|\mathcal{F}|\le\begin{cases} \bigl((q+1)^2+1\bigr)^{n/2}, \qquad\ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \text{ for } n\text{ even},\\[2mm] (q+1)\bigl((q+1)^2+1\bigr)^{(n-1)/2},\qquad \text{ when }n\text{ is odd}. \end{cases}
Lemma

Lemma 2.1

BF2L

Let C\le \mathbb{F}_2^n be a d-dimensional self-orthogonal subspace, so that,

c \cdot c'=0 \ \ \ \ \ \ \ (c,c'\in C).

Then there exist disjoint coordinate sets I,K\subseteq[n], each of cardinality d, such that the coordinate restriction maps to either I or K are injective on C. In particular, the coordinates indexed by either I or K uniquely determine every vector in C.

Used by Proof
Proof of Lemma 2.1

If d=0, take I=K=\varnothing. Assume d>0, and let G be a d\times n matrix whose rows form a basis of C. For J\subseteq[n], let G_J denote the submatrix of G consisting of the columns indexed by J. Choose d independent columns, indexed by I. Since G_I is invertible, the restriction or projection map

\pi_I:C\longrightarrow \mathbb{F}_2^I

is a bijection. Here, \mathbb{F}_2^I denotes the space of binary vectors indexed by I. We claim that restriction to the complementary coordinates is also injective. Indeed, suppose z\in C is supported on I, that is, z_i=0 for all i\notin I. By the self-orthogonality of C, we have

0=z\cdot c=\sum_{i\in I}z_i c_i, \qquad\text{for every }c\in C.

Since c|_I ranges over all of \mathbb{F}_2^I, this forces z|_I=0, and hence z=0.

Therefore restriction to I^c=[n]\setminus I is injective, and thus G_{I^c} has rank d. Choosing d independent columns of this matrix gives a set K\subseteq I^c, of size d, such that restriction to K is also injective.

Lemma

Lemma 2.2

Q924

Let m=2q+\delta, where \delta\in\{0,1\}, and put r=q+1. Let \mathcal F\subseteq\{0,1,\ldots,m\}^n be an Eventown family. Then, for every coordinate j\in[n],

a_j+b_j\le r+\delta.
Used by Proof
Proof of Lemma 2.2

If a_j=0 or b_j=0, the conclusion follows from the fact that \{0,1,...,m\} contains r even values and q+\delta \le r odd values.

Otherwise, choose u,v such that |E_j(u)|=a_j and |O_j(v)|=b_j. Let E_j(u)=\{s_1<s_2<...<s_{a_j}\} and O_j(v)=\{t_1<t_2<...<t_{b_j}\}. Then, we have

\min(s_i,t_{i'})+I(u,v) \equiv 0 \pmod2\ \ \ \ \forall \ i\in[a_j],\ i'\in[b_j].

Thus all \min(s_i,t_{i'}) have same parity. Since s_i’s are even and t_{i'}’s are odd, either s_1<...<s_{a_j}<t_1<...<t_{b_j} or t_1<...<t_{b_j}<s_1<...<s_{a_j}. So, either every element of E_j(u) lies below every element of O_j(v), or conversely.

In the first case, write \max E_j(u)=2l. There are at most l+1 even values at most 2l, and q+\delta -l odd values greater than 2l. Hence

a_j \le l+1,\ \ \ \ \ \ b_j \le q+\delta-l,

so a_j+b_j\le r+\delta.

In the second case, write \max O_j(v)=2l-1. Then,

b_j \le l,\ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ a_j \le q-l+1,

and therefore a_j+b_j \le r\le r+\delta. This proves the lemma.

Lemma

Lemma 2.3

ECUD

Let \mathcal G\subseteq\{0,1,\ldots,m\}^n be an Eventown family of multisets such that, in each coordinate, the multiplicities lie in either Q_e or Q_o, with the choice fixed for that coordinate. Then

|\mathcal G| \le r^{n-2k}(1+r^2)^k.

Moreover, if r>1, equivalently m\ge3, equality holds if and only if, up to a permutation of the coordinates,

\mathcal G = \mathcal A^{\,t}\times \mathcal B^{\,k-t}\times V_e^{\,n-2k} \qquad\text{for some }t\in\{0,\ldots,k\}.
Used by Proof
Proof of Lemma 2.3

Observe that the identity \min(s,t)\bmod2=(s\bmod2)(t\bmod2) holds within each of Q_e,Q_o. For x \in \mathcal{G}, define its parity vector as

\pi(x)=(x_1 \bmod2,x_2 \bmod2,...,x_n \bmod2)\in\mathbb{F}_2^n.

Using the above identity we get for x,y\in \mathcal{G},

\pi(x) \cdot \pi(y)=\sum_{i=1}^n\min(x_i,y_i)=0\ \ \ \ \ \text{in}\ \mathbb{F}_2.

Let C=\text{span}_{\mathbb{F}_2}\{\pi(x):x \in \mathcal{G}\}. Then C is a self-orthogonal subspace of \mathbb{F}_2^n. Therefore if dimension of C is d, then d\le k.

By Lemma 2.1, there exist disjoint coordinate sets I,J\subseteq[n], each of size d, such that either restriction determines a vector of C. Put L=[n]\setminus(I\cup J), so |L|=n-2d. Note that these restrictions determine the parity vector, not the actual multiplicities.

In each coordinate, the allowed multiplicities have parity counts (r,1) or (1,r). Thus, one parity has r multiplicities, and the other has one. Let P be the set of parity vectors occurring in \mathcal{G}. For each c \in P, define

\begin{aligned} a_c &\coloneqq\ \text{the number of allowed multiplicity assignments on} \ I \ \text{having parity pattern }\ c|_I, \\ b_c &\coloneqq\ \text{the number of allowed multiplicity assignments on} \ J \ \text{having parity pattern }\ c|_J. \end{aligned}

Once c is fixed, each coordinate in L has at most r multiplicity choices. Hence the number of members of \mathcal{G} with parity vector c is at most a_cb_cr^{n-2d}. Consequently,

|\mathcal{G}|\le r^{n-2d}\sum_{c \in P} a_cb_c.

Next, we shall bound \sum_{c \in P} a_c^2. For every binary pattern u on I, let A(u) be the number of allowed multiplicity assignments with that pattern. Since I contains d coordinates, there are 2^d possible patterns for u. If u selects the parity with r choices in exactly p coordinates, then

A(u)=r^{p}.

Since l' coordinates are chosen from d coordinates, there are exactly \binom{d}{p} such patterns. Consequently,

\sum_{u\in\{0,1\}^{I}}A(u)^2 =\sum_{p=0}^{d}\binom {d}{p} r^{2p} =(1+r^2)^d.

Since I determines the complete parity vector, distinct c \in P provide distinct restrictions c_I. Therefore, we have,

\sum_{c \in P} a_c^2 \le(1+r^2)^d.

Similarly from J we have

\sum_{c \in P} b_c^2 \le(1+r^2)^d.

Hence

\begin{aligned} |\mathcal{G}|&\le r^{n-2d}\sum_{c \in P}a_cb_c \\ &\le r^{n-2d} \frac{1}{2}(\sum_{c \in P} a_c^2+\sum_{c \in P} b_c^2) \\ &\le r^{n-2d} (1+r^2)^d \\ & \le r^{n-2k} (1+r^2)^k\ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ [\text{as}\ r\ge1] \end{aligned}

Now we characterize the extremal families. Since |\mathcal{G}|=r^{n-2k}(1+r^2)^k, every inequality above is an equality. Consequently, we have the following

  1. d=k,

  2. P=C, and

  3. a_c=b_c for all c \in C.

Also, if a parity pattern occurs in P, then every allowed choice of multiplicity vector realizing that pattern belongs to \mathcal{G}.

If n is odd, there is one coordinate outside I \cup J. This coordinate must contribute exactly r choices for each parity pattern that occurs. Since 0\in C=P, the even parity must provide r choices. Hence, the multiplicity assigned to this coordinate must belong to Q_e. In contrast, the odd parity provides only one choice, so no member of the family can have odd multiplicity in this coordinate. Consequently, the remaining coordinate takes values precisely from V_e, independently of the other coordinates.

Now since I,J both determines C, their restrictions have the form

\{(u,Tu):u \in \mathbb{F}_2^k\},

where T=\pi_J \circ \pi_I^{-1} is an invertible linear map. Define \alpha \in \mathbb{F}_2^{|I|} as follows

\alpha_i=\begin{cases} 0, & \text{the $i$-th coordinate of $I$ uses $Q_e$},\\[2mm] 1, & \text{the $i$-th coordinate of $I$ uses $Q_o$}. \end{cases}

Similarly, define \beta\in \mathbb{F}_2^{|J|} on J. Thus, a coordinate of I gives r choices precisely when u_i=\alpha_i. Therefore,

A(u)=r^{k-\text{wt}(u+\alpha)}.

Similarly,

B(Tu)=r^{k-\text{wt}(Tu+\beta)},

where B(Tu) is the analogous multiplicity assignment count on J. By using a_c=b_c for c\in C and r>1, we get,

\text{wt}(u+\alpha)=\text{wt}(Tu+\beta)\ \ \ \ \ \ \text{for every}\ u.

Taking u=\alpha we have T\alpha=\beta. Substituting u=v+\alpha into the preceding equation, we obtain

\operatorname{wt}(Tv)=\operatorname{wt}(v) \qquad\text{for every }v.

Each standard basis vector has Hamming weight 1. Since T preserves Hamming weight, it maps every standard basis vector to a standard basis vector. The invertibility of T ensures that these images are distinct. Hence, T is a coordinate permutation, inducing a pairing between the coordinates of I and those of J. Within each pair, the two coordinates have the same parity, and both take values exclusively from either Q_e or Q_o.

A pair of Q_e-coordinates, therefore, gives

V_e^2 \cup \{(m,m)\}=\mathcal{B}

and a pair of Q_o-coordinates gives

\{(0,0)\}\cup V_o^2=\mathcal{A}.

Since all parity patterns and all permitted assignments occur, we have,

\mathcal{G}=\mathcal{A}^t\times\mathcal{B}^{k-t}\times V_e^{n-2k},

after a coordinate permutation. The converse is immediate.

Acknowledgement

Acknowledgement Acknowledgement

6QZB

The work of the author Anirban Banerjee is supported by the Department of Biotechnology, India (No. BT/PR40182/BTIS/137/88/2025). The work of the author Abisek Dewan is supported by University Grants Commission, India (Beneficiary Code/Flag: BWBDA00147662 U). The authors have used ChatGPT to assist with polishing arguments, paraphrasing language, and making grammatical corrections during the preparation of this manuscript.

Source and licence

The text on this page is from arXiv:2610.21636v1 by Anirban Banerjee and Abisek Dewan, under the licence CC BY 4.0. The corpus made these changes: it read the items out of the LaTeX source, it expanded the macros of the paper, it put each proof after its statement, and it converted the text to HTML. The formulas are the TeX of the paper, and KaTeX renders them. A formula or a reference can look different from the PDF. The page is published under CC BY 4.0.

The record of each item is in analysis/objects/2610/2610.21636.jsonl.