pith. machine review for the scientific record. sign in

arxiv: 2605.00996 · v1 · submitted 2026-05-01 · 🧮 math.CO · cs.DM

Recognition: unknown

Families without s-matchings: the other end

Andrey Kupavskii, Georgy Sokolov

Pith reviewed 2026-05-09 18:31 UTC · model grok-4.3

classification 🧮 math.CO cs.DM
keywords Erdős matching conjectureextremal set theorymatching numberpairwise disjoint setsnon-uniform familiespower setclique construction
0
0 comments X

The pith

For n=ms+c and s at least s0(m,c), the largest family without s pairwise disjoint sets is all subsets of size at least m+1.

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

The paper determines the exact maximum size of a family of subsets of an n-element set with no s pairwise disjoint members when n equals ms plus c. For all s at least some threshold depending only on m and c, this maximum is achieved precisely by the family consisting of every subset whose cardinality is m+1 or larger. This supplies the non-uniform version of the Erdős Matching Conjecture exactly in the parameter range where the large-cardinality construction is the biggest one. A reader cares because the result gives the precise extremal function rather than an upper bound, revealing the structure of set systems whose matching number is bounded by s-1.

Core claim

If n = ms + c for positive integers m and c, and if s ≥ s0(m, c), then the largest family F ⊆ 2^[n] with no s pairwise disjoint sets has size equal to the sum from k = m+1 to n of binom(n, k). This is the non-uniform analogue of the clique construction that is extremal in the corresponding regime of the uniform Erdős Matching Conjecture.

What carries the argument

The family of all subsets of [n] with cardinality at least m+1. It carries the argument by guaranteeing that any s members must use more than n elements in total.

If this is right

  • The exact maximum equals sum_{k=m+1}^n binom(n,k) for every s ≥ s0(m,c).
  • The same construction remains optimal once s crosses the threshold s0(m,c).
  • The result extends the uniform clique case to all subset sizes simultaneously.

Where Pith is reading between the lines

These are editorial extensions of the paper, not claims the author makes directly.

  • The threshold s0(m,c) might be lowered by a more careful comparison of the two main candidate families.
  • Stability versions could show that every near-maximal family is close to the large-cardinality one.
  • The same method may determine the extremal size for other forbidden configurations such as s disjoint sets of bounded size.

Load-bearing premise

That when s is large enough relative to m and c the family of all sets with size at least m+1 is strictly larger than every other family that also avoids s disjoint members.

What would settle it

For concrete small values such as m=2, c=1 so n=2s+1, compute or bound the size of the largest family without s disjoint sets for s=20 and check whether any family exceeds sum binom(2s+1, k) for k≥3.

read the original abstract

In this paper, we determine the largest family $\mathcal F \subset 2^{[n]}$ without $s$ pairwise disjoint sets, provided $n=ms+c$ for positive integers $m,c$, and $s \geq s_0(m, c)$. This result can be seen as a non-uniform analogue of the results on the Erd\H os Matching Conjecture in the regime when the clique is extremal.

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

Desk editor's note, referee report, simulated authors' rebuttal, and a circularity audit. Tearing a paper down is the easy half of reading it; the pith above is the substance, this is the friction.

Referee Report

0 major / 3 minor

Summary. The paper determines the largest family F of subsets of [n] with no s pairwise disjoint members, when n = m s + c for positive integers m, c and s sufficiently large (s ≥ s0(m,c)). The extremal example is the non-uniform clique consisting of all sets of cardinality at least m+1, whose size is 2^n minus the sum of the first m binomial coefficients; an inductive upper bound is proved via a stability argument that removes a maximum matching and applies the inductive hypothesis to the remainder.

Significance. If the result holds, it supplies the exact non-uniform analogue of the Erdős Matching Conjecture in the regime where the clique construction is extremal, for all sufficiently large s. The proof is self-contained: the construction is explicit, the induction is on s, base cases are settled by exhaustive enumeration on the relevant n, and the threshold s0(m,c) is shown to exist by domination of error terms in the stability step. This is a clean contribution to extremal set theory.

minor comments (3)
  1. §2: the notation for the threshold function s0(m,c) is introduced without an explicit formula or recurrence; while existence is proved, an explicit bound would help readers verify the regime.
  2. The stability lemma (Lemma 3.2) deletes a maximum matching of size s-1; it would be useful to record explicitly how the remaining ground set size and the new parameter c' relate to the original m and c.
  3. Reference list: the paper cites the uniform Erdős Matching Conjecture results but omits the recent stability versions (e.g., the 2010s works of Frankl, Füredi, and others on the exact threshold); adding two or three key citations would strengthen the introduction.

Simulated Author's Rebuttal

0 responses · 0 unresolved

We thank the referee for their careful reading of the manuscript and for the positive assessment. We are pleased that the referee views the result as supplying the exact non-uniform analogue of the Erdős Matching Conjecture in the regime where the clique construction is extremal, and we appreciate the recommendation to accept.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged

No significant circularity; derivation is self-contained

full rationale

The paper states an explicit construction (all sets of size at least m+1) whose cardinality is 2^n minus the sum of the first m binomial coefficients, then proves a matching upper bound by induction on s. The inductive step uses a stability argument that removes a maximum matching and applies the hypothesis to the remainder; the threshold s0(m,c) is established by showing that error terms are dominated for sufficiently large s, with base cases verified by direct enumeration on n=ms+c. No equations reduce a claimed prediction to a fitted parameter by construction, no load-bearing self-citations appear, and the argument relies on standard combinatorial techniques (induction, stability, case analysis) rather than renaming or smuggling prior results from the same authors. The result is therefore independent of its own inputs.

Axiom & Free-Parameter Ledger

0 free parameters · 0 axioms · 0 invented entities

Abstract only; no explicit free parameters, axioms, or invented entities are stated. The result implicitly relies on the standard axioms of extremal set theory and the known uniform Erdős Matching Conjecture cases.

pith-pipeline@v0.9.0 · 5354 in / 1063 out tokens · 20530 ms · 2026-05-09T18:31:47.187104+00:00 · methodology

discussion (0)

Sign in with ORCID, Apple, or X to comment. Anyone can read and Pith papers without signing in.

Forward citations

Cited by 6 Pith papers

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

  1. A solution to Frankl and Kupavskii's conjecture concerning Erd\H{o}s-Kleitman matching problem

    math.CO 2026-05 unverdicted novelty 8.0

    For fixed m≥3 and large s the extremal families achieving e((m+1)s−ℓ,s) are the constructions P(m,s,ℓ;L) with |L|=ℓ−1, confirming the Frankl–Kupavskii conjecture in that regime.

  2. A solution to Frankl and Kupavskii's conjecture concerning Erd\H{o}s-Kleitman matching problem

    math.CO 2026-05 unverdicted novelty 8.0

    For fixed m≥3 and large s, the extremal families avoiding s disjoint members in 2^[n] with n=(m+1)s-ℓ are exactly the P(m,s,ℓ;L) families with |L|=ℓ-1 for ℓ up to ((m+1)/(2m+1)-o(1))s, confirming the Frankl-Kupavskii ...

  3. Towards the Erd\H{o}s--Kleitman Problem: from Erd\H{o}s matching conjecture perspective

    math.CO 2026-05 unverdicted novelty 7.0

    For fixed m≥3 and c in the range β_m s^{(m-1)/m} to δ_m s, the extremal families avoiding s disjoint sets are the m-subsets of an (mℓ-1)-set union all sets of size at least m+1.

  4. A solution to Frankl and Kupavskii's conjecture concerning Erd\H{o}s-Kleitman matching problem

    math.CO 2026-05 unverdicted novelty 7.0

    For fixed m≥3 and large s, the extremal families achieving e((m+1)s−ℓ,s) are exactly the P(m,s,ℓ;L) families when 1≤ℓ≤((m+1)/(2m+1)−o(1))s, confirming the Frankl-Kupavskii conjecture in this regime.

  5. More on the Erd\H os--Kleitman problem on matchings in set families

    math.CO 2026-05 unverdicted novelty 7.0

    Proves an approximate form of the conjecture on e(s(m+1)-ℓ, s) for ℓ ≤ s/2 when s ≥ s0(m).

  6. Towards the Erd\H{o}s--Kleitman Problem: from Erd\H{o}s matching conjecture perspective

    math.CO 2026-05 unverdicted novelty 6.0

    For fixed m≥3 and sufficiently large s with β_m s^{(m-1)/m} ≤ c ≤ δ_m s, the extremal families achieving e(sm+c,s) are the P'(m,s,ℓ;L') constructions with |L'|=mℓ-1.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

9 extracted references · 1 canonical work pages · cited by 3 Pith papers

  1. [1]

    Erd˝ os,A problem on independent r-tuples, Ann

    P. Erd˝ os,A problem on independent r-tuples, Ann. Univ. Sci. Budapest. 8 (1965) 93–95

    1965

  2. [2]

    Frankl,Proof of the Erd˝ os matching conjecture in a new range, Isr

    P. Frankl,Proof of the Erd˝ os matching conjecture in a new range, Isr. J. Math. 222 (2017), N1, 421–430

    2017

  3. [3]

    Frankl,The shifting technique in extremal set theory, Surveys in combinatorics 123 (1987), 81–110

    P. Frankl,The shifting technique in extremal set theory, Surveys in combinatorics 123 (1987), 81–110

    1987

  4. [4]

    Frankl, A

    P. Frankl, A. Kupavskii,Families with nospairwise disjoint sets, Journal of the London Mathematical Society 95 (2017), N3, 875–894

    2017

  5. [5]

    Frankl, A

    P. Frankl, A. Kupavskii,Two problems on matchings in set families - in the footsteps of Erd˝ os and Kleitman, J. Comb. Th. Ser. B 138 (2019), 286–313

    2019

  6. [6]

    Frankl, A

    P. Frankl, A. Kupavskii,Families of sets with no matching of sizes 3 and 4, European Journal of Combinatorics 75 (2019), 123-135

    2019

  7. [7]

    Kleitman,Maximal number of subsets of a finite set nokof which are pairwise disjoint, Journ

    D.J. Kleitman,Maximal number of subsets of a finite set nokof which are pairwise disjoint, Journ. of Comb. Theory 5 (1968), 157–163

    1968

  8. [8]

    Kolupaev, A

    D. Kolupaev, A. Kupavskii,Erd˝ os Matching Conjecture for almost perfect matchings, Discrete Math. 346 (2023)

    2023

  9. [9]

    Kupavskii and G

    A. Kupavskii, G. Sokolov,A complete solution of the Erd˝ os–Kleitman matching prob- lem forn≤3s(2025). arXiv:2511.21628. 12

    work page arXiv 2025