Helly-type theorems for separated $d$-intervals

Wei Rao

REVIEW 2 major objections 3 minor 1 cited by

Helly-type theorems for separated $d$-intervals

T0 review · 2 major / 3 minor · reviewed 2026-08-10 · deepseek-v4-flash

Challenge this review Re-run · record.json Download PDF Read on arXiv ↗ Review JSON

Pith's one-line read This paper establishes a $(2d-1)$-collapsibility theorem for nerves of separated $d$-intervals and derives from it a full set of Helly-type results, including exact Radon and Helly numbers under a mild richness condition.

desk verdict The central collapsibility theorem is unproven because Lemma 5.1's trimming step is false; the framework is promising, but the current version should be rejected. read the letter →

arxiv 2501.03207 v2 pith:CHGMZMVB submitted 2025-01-06 math.CO

Wei Rao This is my paper · ORCID

classification math.CO MSC 52A3505E4552A01

keywords Hellytheorem(pq)d-intervalconvexityspacecollapsibilityRadonnumberfractionalcolorful

verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal

The pith

A machine-rendered reading of the paper's core claim, the machinery that carries it, and where it could break.

The reading

The paper aims to establish that separated $d$-intervals, sets made of $d$ convex pieces placed one in each of $d$ horizontal levels, form a convexity space in which all the standard Helly-type theorems hold. The central claim is Theorem 1.5: the nerve of any finite family of such convex sets is $(2d-1)$-collapsible. From that single fact, known theorems about collapsible complexes yield an optimal colorful fractional Helly theorem, and from it the Helly number, colorful Helly number, fractional Helly number, $(p,q)$ theorems, and two colorful $(p,q)$ theorems follow. The paper also pins down exact values (Radon number $2d+1$, Helly number $2d$) when each level contains at least two points, and proves variants for $k$-intersecting families.

What carries the argument

The central objects are the nerve complex and $d$-collapsibility. The nerve of a family $C$ is the simplicial complex whose faces are the subfamilies with non-empty total intersection; a complex is $d$-collapsible if it can be reduced to the empty complex by repeatedly deleting a free face of dimension at most $d-1$ together with all faces containing it. The carrying mechanism is a lexicographic sweep: to each non-empty intersection $\hat C$ the paper assigns the vector of right-endpoints of its non-empty levels, picks the lexicographically minimal such vector, and proves (Lemma 4.1) that a minimal intersection is witnessed by at most $2d-k$ sets when the family $k$-intersects. Lemma 5.1 then asserts that this minimal face is free, so an elementary collapse is possible, and that the collapsed complex is again the nerve of a separated-$d$-interval family, allowing the induction to continue.

What would settle it

Compute, for $d=2$, $P=\{(5,1),(10,2),(20,2)\}$, $C_1=\{(5,1),(10,2)\}$, and $C_2=\{(5,1),(20,2)\}$. The replacement in Lemma 5.1 with $a_1=5$ removes from each $C_k$ every point with $x\le 5$ on level 1 and every point on level 2, so both sets become empty and the new nerve has no vertex; the collapsed nerve $\operatorname{coll}(K,\sigma)$, however, keeps the two vertices $\{1\}$ and $\{2\}$. That discrepancy would refute Lemma 5.1 as stated.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The paper's central discovery is a collapsibility theorem for the nerve of separated $d$-intervals. Concretely, for any $P\subseteq\mathbb{R}\times[d]$, let $\mathcal C_\equiv(P)$ consist of all intersections $I\cap P$ where $I$ is a separated $d$-interval; then (Theorem 1.5) every finite family $C\subseteq\mathcal C_\equiv(P)$ has a nerve $K(C)$ that is $(2d-1)$-collapsible. The proof sweeps the $d$ levels in lexicographic order, chooses a lexicographically minimal non-empty intersection, bounds its size by $2d-1$ via a one-dimensional Helly argument, and uses it as a free face whose removal leaves the nerve of another separated-$d$-interval family. Theorem 2.10 records the consequences: bounded Radon number ($\le 2d+1$), Helly and colorful Helly numbers ($\le 2d$, tight when each level has at least two points), fractional Helly number $2$, a $(p,q)$ theorem for $p\ge q\ge 2$, and both kinds of colorful $(p,q)$ theorems; Theorem 2.11 gives the corresponding optimal colorful fractional Helly theorem with exponent $1/2d$.

Load-bearing premise

The proof rests on Lemma 5.1, which asserts without a proof that the particular trimming of each set after the first surviving coordinate produces a new family whose nerve is exactly the collapsed nerve; if this step fails, the collapsibility theorem and every result built on it lack a proof.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

The Radon number of $(P,\mathcal C_\equiv(P))$ is at most $2d+1$, and is exactly $2d+1$ when every level of $P$ contains at least two points.
The Helly number and colorful Helly number are at most $2d$, and both bounds are tight under the same two-points-per-level condition.
The fractional Helly number is $2$, so any finite family with at least $\alpha\binom{n}{2}$ intersecting pairs contains an intersecting subfamily of size proportional to $n$.
The space admits a $(p,q)$ theorem for all $p\ge q\ge 2$, as well as the first and second kinds of colorful $(p,q)$ theorems.
For $k\in[d]$, the colorful and fractional Helly numbers with respect to $k$-intersecting families are at most $2d-k+1$.

Reading between the lines

Editorial extensions of the paper, not claims the author makes directly.

If Theorem 1.5 is correct, its $(2d-1)$-collapsibility should also control finer topological invariants of these nerves, such as Leray number bounds or higher-order fractional Helly parameters, which the paper does not explore.
The $k$-intersecting theorems suggest a discrete analogue for axis-parallel boxes: the paper notes in Section 10.2 that separated $d$-intervals behave like boxes in $\mathbb{R}^d$, but the transfer to flat transversals is blocked because arbitrary recombinations of such flats are unavailable.
A natural testable extension is to classify the exact Radon and Helly numbers when some level of $P$ contains fewer than two points; the paper only proves tightness under the two-points-per-level assumption.
The gap between the fractional Helly number $2$ and the dual VC-dimension lower bound $\log_2 d$ discussed in Section 10.3 suggests that the fractional Helly number is not governed by dual VC-dimension alone in this setting.

Share X Bluesky LinkedIn Reddit HN

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

Desk editor's note, referee report, and a circularity audit.

Desk Editor's Note

read the letter

The headline is that the main theorem isn't proved. Lemma 5.1, the load-bearing step in the proof of Theorem 1.5, contains a trimming assertion that is false. Take d=2, P=R×[2], and C1={(5,1),(10,2)}, C2={(5,1),(20,2)}, C3={(5,1),(30,2)}. The lexicographically minimal nonempty intersection is (5,1), with minimal n=2, so σ={1,2}. K is the full simplex on {1,2,3}; coll(K,σ) keeps vertices {1},{2},{3} and edges {1,3},{2,3}. But applying the displayed trimming to C1 and C2 empties both, so the new nerve is just {3}. That's not coll(K,σ). The stress-test note is right that the reader's own two-set example isn't the right witness (σ wouldn't be free there), but the three-set example lands exactly on the induction step. So Theorem 1.5 and everything downstream of it—Theorem 2.11 and items 4–7 of Theorem 2.10—is unsupported.

What's actually good: the ≡-convexity space formulation with arbitrary P⊆R×[d] is a reasonable generalization, and the paper correctly sees that (2d−1)-collapsibility would deliver a whole package of Helly-type results. The direct proofs in Section 9 for the Radon number bound and the Helly number lower bound are short and look correct. Lemma 4.1, which drives Theorems 2.12 and 2.13, is a plausible maximal-element argument, though the 'we may assume compact' step is unjustified for arbitrary P and needs real justification.

The bigger problem is that the main advertised package is built on the false lemma. The counting in Theorem 2.13 is also opaque—the algebra that gets to αn/(2d−k+1) doesn't obviously go through. These are secondary; the false trimming is the decisive problem.

Who is this for? Researchers in combinatorial convexity who care about Helly-type parameters for d-intervals. The direction is worth pursuing, and a corrected collapse argument might salvage most of the claims. But as submitted, the central theorem is unproven, and the error is easy to demonstrate. I'd reject this version. If the author comes back with a correct Lemma 5.1, it deserves a serious referee; the framework and the direct results are solid enough.

Referee Report

2 major / 3 minor

Summary. The paper studies separated d-intervals, viewed as sets in R × [d], and the convexity spaces (P, C≡(P)) they generate. Its central result, Theorem 1.5, asserts that the nerve of every finite family C ⊆ C≡(P) is (2d−1)-collapsible. From this collapsibility the paper derives a broad suite of Helly-type conclusions: bounds on the Radon, Helly, colorful Helly, and fractional Helly numbers, a (p,q) theorem, two kinds of colorful (p,q) theorems, a colorful fractional Helly theorem, and k-intersecting variants. The proof strategy is a lexicographic sweep over the d levels, following Wegner's method for intervals; the key inductive step is Lemma 5.1, which claims that a lexicographically minimal intersection gives a free face σ whose collapse is realized by trimming the corresponding sets. The remaining sections apply known black-box theorems, mostly from Bulavka–Goodarzi–Tancer, Bárány–Matoušek, and Alon–Kalai–Matoušek–Meshulam, to convert the collapsibility statement into the named Helly-type results.

Significance. If Theorem 1.5 were established, the paper would give a unified and clean route to a wide range of Helly-type results for a natural family of discrete convexity spaces, and the k-intersecting versions in Theorems 2.12 and 2.13 would be useful new tools. The dependency chain among the results is laid out transparently, the paper uses quoted theorems as black boxes, and there are no fitted parameters or signs of circular reasoning. The lower-bound examples in Section 9 are simple but valid. However, the central inductive step rests on a false lemma, so the main theorem and all consequences derived from it are not established by the submitted proof.

major comments (2)

[Section 5, Lemma 5.1] The construction in the last two sentences of Lemma 5.1 is false as written, and this is the exact induction step needed for Theorem 1.5. Let d = 2, P = {p, q1, q2} with p = (5,1), q1 = (10,2), q2 = (20,2), and let C1 = {p, q1}, C2 = {p, q2}. Both sets belong to C≡(P). The nerve K is the full 1-dimensional simplex on {1,2}. The lexicographically minimal image of f among nonempty intersections is f(C1 ∩ C2) = f({p}) = (5,−∞), attained with n = 2, so the proof takes σ = {1,2}. Since σ is free, coll(K,σ) removes only the edge {1,2} and leaves the two vertices {1} and {2}. The displayed trimming with ai = 5 and i = 1 removes from C1 and C2 the point p on level 1 and all points on level 2, so both modified sets are empty. The nerve of the modified family has no nonempty faces, not the two isolated vertices of coll(K,σ). Thus Lemma 5.1 fails, and the induction proving Theorem 1.5 is not valid. Consequently Theorem 2.11 and items 4–7 of Theorem 2.10, which rely on Theorem 1.5, are not proved.
[Section 4, Lemma 4.1] Lemma 4.1 and its later applications (Lemma 5.1 and Theorem 2.13) assume that the sets may be taken to be compact because the family is finite. This is not automatic for arbitrary P ⊆ R × [d]. For example, if d = 1 and P = (0,1), then C = P belongs to C≡(P) but has no compact representative in C≡(P). The proof uses compactness to conclude that the coordinates ai are attained as maxima; for arbitrary P, a limiting argument or a reduction to a finite point set preserving all intersection patterns is needed. As written, the proof of Lemma 4.1 does not cover the stated generality, and this gap affects the bound n ≤ 2d−1 used in Lemma 5.1.

minor comments (3)

[Section 1, Definition 1.2] The definition of a separated d-interval given in Definition 1.2 is not literally equivalent to the preceding description involving components I^(i) lying in (i, i+1); the coordinate-band condition is dropped. The paper should either adopt Definition 1.2 as the definition of nonhomogeneous d-interval or explain the coordinate change.
[Section 5, Lemma 5.1] In the displayed construction of the replacement family, the text says 'replacing C ∈ C by ... for k ∈ [n]'; the index k is not tied to the sets C_k, and the intended meaning should be stated clearly.
[Section 10.1] The claim that the nerve of C ⊆ C≡(P) can be represented by replacing each C with I(C), without changing the nerve, is asserted as an implicit fact but is not proved; this should be justified or removed.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 0.0 of 10

No circular reasoning found; the derivation is a standard black-box application of external collapsibility results, with an unrelated and serious proof gap in Lemma 5.1.

full rationale

The claimed derivation chain is not circular. Theorem 1.5 is meant to be proved by induction using Lemma 5.1, and Lemma 5.1 invokes Wegner's d-collapsibility framework and a lexicographic sweep; no parameter is fitted from the target results and no self-citation is used. The external results quoted as black boxes (Theorem 1.1 from [BGT21], Theorem 2.7 from [AKMM02], Theorem 3.8 from [AKMM02], Theorem 3.9 from [AK92], Theorem 6.1 from [ES83]) are independent of this paper's claims and do not presuppose Theorem 1.5 or Theorem 2.10. The downstream implications (Theorem 1.1 to Theorem 2.11; Theorem 2.7 to item 5 of Theorem 2.10; Lemmas 3.3 and 3.5 to items 6 and 7 of Theorem 2.10) are one-way deductions, not definitions of the target quantities. There are no self-citations. The paper's serious weakness is not circularity: the final paragraph of Lemma 5.1 asserts without proof that replacing each C_k by the displayed trimming yields a family whose nerve is coll(K,sigma), and on small two-level examples the trimmed sets can be empty, so the assertion appears false or at least unsubstantiated. However, a false or unproved intermediate lemma is a correctness gap, not a circular reduction of the conclusion to the hypothesis. Therefore the circularity score is 0; the proof remains suspect for non-circular reasons.

Assumptions & free parameters 0 free parameters · 6 assumptions · 0 invented entities

No free parameters or invented entities. The proofs rest on standard quoted theorems (BGT21, AKMM02, AK92, ES83) and on a compactness assumption for finite families of convex sets.

assumptions (6)

standard math Helly's theorem in R (interval Helly number 2)
Used in Lemma 4.1 to find two sets whose per-level interval hulls are disjoint.
standard math Theorem 1.1 (Bulavka-Goodarzi-Tancer optimal colorful fractional Helly for d-collapsible complexes)
Quoted as a black box in Section 3; it converts (2d-1)-collapsibility into the colorful fractional Helly theorem 2.11.
standard math Theorem 2.7 / Theorem 3.8 (Alon-Kalai-Matousek-Meshulam)
Used to derive (p,q) theorems from fractional Helly, and to bound transversal numbers.
standard math Theorem 3.9 (Alon-Kleitman)
Used in Lemma 3.5 to relate fractional matching to blown-up families.
standard math Theorem 6.1 (Erdos-Simonovits supersaturation)
Used in Lemma 3.3.
domain assumption Finite families of convex sets may be replaced by compact sets preserving intersections
Invoked in Lemma 4.1 and Lemma 5.1 to ensure extrema are attained and endpoints of interval hulls lie in P; not justified for arbitrary P.

how reviews work

0 comments

Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Helly-type theorems for separated $d$-intervals." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/CHGMZMVB

@misc{pith2026250103207,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Helly-type theorems for separated $d$-intervals},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/CHGMZMVB}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2501.03207}
}

abstract

A separated $d$-interval is defined as a disjoint union of $d$ convex sets from the real line $\mathbb R$. In this paper, we establish a series of Helly-type theorems for convexity spaces derived from separated $d$-intervals. Our results encompass the Radon number, Helly number, colorful Helly number, fractional Helly number, colorful fractional Helly theorem, $(p,q)$ theorem, and two kinds of colorful $(p,q)$ theorems for these convexity spaces. The primary tools employed in our proofs involve simplicial complexes and collapsibility.

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Forward citations

Cited by 1 Pith paper

Reviewed papers in the Pith corpus that reference this work. Sorted by Pith novelty score. Full citation record

Strong invariants and Tverberg numbers in convexity spaces
math.CO 2026-07 accept novelty 7.0 of 10

In convexity spaces, VC-dimension, strong Helly, strong Carathéodory, comatching, and strong Radon numbers coincide; for S3-separable spaces the Tverberg number satisfies r_t = O(r^2 log r) t.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

31 extracted references · 25 canonical work pages · cited by 1 Pith paper

[2]

Transversal numbers for hypergraphs arising in geometry

Noga Alon, Gil Kalai, Ji r \' Matou s ek, and Roy Meshulam. Transversal numbers for hypergraphs arising in geometry. Advances in Applied Mathematics , 29(1):79--101, 2002

work page 2002
[1]

Piercing convex sets and the H adwiger- D ebrunner (p, q) -problem

Noga Alon and Daniel J Kleitman. Piercing convex sets and the H adwiger- D ebrunner (p, q) -problem. Advances in Mathematics , 96(1):103--112, 1992

1992
[3]

A generalization of C arath \'e odory's theorem

Imre B \'a r \'a ny. A generalization of C arath \'e odory's theorem. Discrete Mathematics , 40(2-3):141--152, 1982

work page 1982
[4]

Combinatorial convexity , volume 77

Imre B \'a r \'a ny. Combinatorial convexity , volume 77. American Mathematical Soc., 2021

work page 2021
[5]

Colourful and fractional (p, q) -theorems

Imre B \'a r \'a ny, Ferenc Fodor, Luis Montejano, Deborah Oliveros, and Attila P \'o r. Colourful and fractional (p, q) -theorems. Discrete & Computational Geometry , 51(3):628--642, 2014

2014
[6]

Optimal bounds for the colorful fractional H elly theorem

Denys Bulavka, Afshin Goodarzi, and Martin Tancer. Optimal bounds for the colorful fractional H elly theorem. In 37th International Symposium on Computational Geometry , 2021

work page 2021
[7]

Helly-type problems

Imre B \'a r \'a ny and Gil Kalai. Helly-type problems. Bulletin of the American Mathematical Society , 59(4):471--502, 2022

2022
[8]

A fractional H elly theorem for convex lattice sets

Imre B \'a r \'a ny and Ji r \' Matou s ek. A fractional H elly theorem for convex lattice sets. Advances in Mathematics , 174(2):227--235, 2003

work page 2003

Show all 31 references

[9]

o rner, Ji r \' Matou s ek, and G \

Anders Bj \"o rner, Ji r \' Matou s ek, and G \"u nter M Ziegler. Using B rouwer’s fixed point theorem. A Journey Through Discrete Mathematics: A Tribute to Ji r \' Matou s ek , pages 221--271, 2017

2017
[10]

Stabbing boxes with finitely many axis-parallel lines and flats

Sutanoya Chakraborty, Arijit Ghosh, and Soumi Nandi. Stabbing boxes with finitely many axis-parallel lines and flats. Discrete Mathematics , 348(2):114269, 2025

2025
[11]

Convexity in cristallographical lattices

Jean-Paul Doignon. Convexity in cristallographical lattices. Journal of Geometry , 3:71--85, 1973

1973
[12]

The partition conjecture

J \"u rgen Eckhoff. The partition conjecture. Discrete Mathematics , 221(1-3):61--78, 2000

2000
[13]

Supersaturated graphs and hypergraphs

Paul Erd o s and Mikl \'o s Simonovits. Supersaturated graphs and hypergraphs. Combinatorica , 3:181--192, 1983

1983
[14]

Extensions of discrete H elly theorems for boxes

Timothy Edwards and Pablo Sober \'o n. Extensions of discrete H elly theorems for boxes. arXiv preprint arXiv:2404.14308 , 2024

2024 arXiv
[15]

Helly-type theorems for monotone properties of boxes

N \'o ra Frankl and Attila Jung. Helly-type theorems for monotone properties of boxes. arXiv preprint arXiv:2503.22571 , 2025

2025 arXiv
[16]

Colorful coverings of polytopes and piercing numbers of colorful d -intervals

Florian Frick and Shira Zerbib. Colorful coverings of polytopes and piercing numbers of colorful d -intervals. Combinatorica , 39:627--637, 2019

2019
[17]

Discrete and lexicographic H elly-type theorems

Nir Halman. Discrete and lexicographic H elly-type theorems. Discrete & Computational Geometry , 39:690--719, 2008

2008
[18]

U ber M engen konvexer K \

Ed Helly. \"U ber M engen konvexer K \"o rper mit gemeinschaftlichen P unkte. Jahresbericht der Deutschen Mathematiker-Vereinigung , 32:175--176, 1923

1923
[19]

Helly type problems in convexity spaces

Andreas F Holmsen. Helly type problems in convexity spaces. arXiv preprint arXiv:2408.05871 , 2024

2024 arXiv
[20]

The fractional H elly number for separable convexity spaces

Andreas F Holmsen and Zuzana Pat \'a kov \'a . The fractional H elly number for separable convexity spaces. arXiv preprint arXiv:2412.01445 , 2024

2024 arXiv
[21]

Transversals of d -intervals

Tom \'a s Kaiser. Transversals of d -intervals. Discrete & Computational Geometry , 18(2):195--203, 1997

1997
[22]

A problem of geometry in R ^n

Meir Katchalski and Andy Liu. A problem of geometry in R ^n . Proceedings of the American Mathematical Society , 75(2):284--288, 1979

1979
[23]

Matroid colorings of kkm covers

Daniel McGinnis. Matroid colorings of kkm covers. arXiv preprint arXiv:2409.03026 , 2024

2024 arXiv
[24]

A sparse colorful polytopal kkm theorem

Daniel McGinnis and Shira Zerbib. A sparse colorful polytopal kkm theorem. Discrete & Computational Geometry , 71(3):945--959, 2024

2024
[25]

On the geometry and computational complexity of R adon partitions in the iinteger lattice

Shmuel Onn. On the geometry and computational complexity of R adon partitions in the iinteger lattice. SIAM Journal on Discrete Mathematics , 4(3):436--447, 1991

1991
[26]

Mengen konvexer K \"o rper, die einen gemeinsamen P unkt enthalten

Johann Radon. Mengen konvexer K \"o rper, die einen gemeinsamen P unkt enthalten. Mathematische Annalen , 83(1):113--115, 1921

1921
[27]

Relationships between C arath \'e odory, H elly, R adon and exchange numbers of convexity spaces

Gerardus Sierksma. Relationships between C arath \'e odory, H elly, R adon and exchange numbers of convexity spaces. Nieuw Arch. Wisk. (3) , 25(2):115--132, 1977

1977
[28]

Intersection patterns of convex sets via simplicial complexes: a survey

Martin Tancer. Intersection patterns of convex sets via simplicial complexes: a survey. Thirty essays on geometric graph theory , pages 521--540, 2013

2013
[29]

Transversals of 2 -intervals, a topological approach

G \'a bor Tardos. Transversals of 2 -intervals, a topological approach. Combinatorica , 15(1):123--134, 1995

1995
[30]

Theory of convex structures , volume 50

Marcel LJ van De Vel. Theory of convex structures , volume 50. Elsevier, 1993

1993
[31]

d - C ollapsing and nerves of families of convex sets

Gerd Wegner. d - C ollapsing and nerves of families of convex sets. Archiv der Mathematik , 26(1):317--321, 1975

1975

Pith tools

Reviewed August 10, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.

[1] [2]

Transversal numbers for hypergraphs arising in geometry

Noga Alon, Gil Kalai, Ji r \' Matou s ek, and Roy Meshulam. Transversal numbers for hypergraphs arising in geometry. Advances in Applied Mathematics , 29(1):79--101, 2002

work page 2002

[2] [1]

Piercing convex sets and the H adwiger- D ebrunner (p, q) -problem

Noga Alon and Daniel J Kleitman. Piercing convex sets and the H adwiger- D ebrunner (p, q) -problem. Advances in Mathematics , 96(1):103--112, 1992

1992

[3] [3]

A generalization of C arath \'e odory's theorem

Imre B \'a r \'a ny. A generalization of C arath \'e odory's theorem. Discrete Mathematics , 40(2-3):141--152, 1982

work page 1982

[4] [4]

Combinatorial convexity , volume 77

Imre B \'a r \'a ny. Combinatorial convexity , volume 77. American Mathematical Soc., 2021

work page 2021

[5] [5]

Colourful and fractional (p, q) -theorems

Imre B \'a r \'a ny, Ferenc Fodor, Luis Montejano, Deborah Oliveros, and Attila P \'o r. Colourful and fractional (p, q) -theorems. Discrete & Computational Geometry , 51(3):628--642, 2014

2014

[6] [6]

Optimal bounds for the colorful fractional H elly theorem

Denys Bulavka, Afshin Goodarzi, and Martin Tancer. Optimal bounds for the colorful fractional H elly theorem. In 37th International Symposium on Computational Geometry , 2021

work page 2021

[7] [7]

Helly-type problems

Imre B \'a r \'a ny and Gil Kalai. Helly-type problems. Bulletin of the American Mathematical Society , 59(4):471--502, 2022

2022

[8] [8]

A fractional H elly theorem for convex lattice sets

Imre B \'a r \'a ny and Ji r \' Matou s ek. A fractional H elly theorem for convex lattice sets. Advances in Mathematics , 174(2):227--235, 2003

work page 2003