43 research outputs found
Bounding Helly numbers via Betti numbers
We show that very weak topological assumptions are enough to ensure the
existence of a Helly-type theorem. More precisely, we show that for any
non-negative integers and there exists an integer such that
the following holds. If is a finite family of subsets of such that for any
and every
then has Helly number at most . Here
denotes the reduced -Betti numbers (with singular homology). These
topological conditions are sharp: not controlling any of these first Betti numbers allow for families with unbounded Helly number.
Our proofs combine homological non-embeddability results with a Ramsey-based
approach to build, given an arbitrary simplicial complex , some well-behaved
chain map .Comment: 29 pages, 8 figure
Bounding Helly Numbers via Betti Numbers
We show that very weak topological assumptions are enough to ensure the existence of a Helly-type theorem. More precisely, we show that for any non-negative integers b and d there exists an integer h(b,d) such that the following holds. If F is a finite family of subsets of R^d such that the ith reduced Betti number (with Z_2 coefficients in singular homology) of the intersection of any proper subfamily G of F is at most b for every non-negative integer i less or equal to (d-1)/2, then F has Helly number at most h(b,d). These topological conditions are sharp: not controlling any of these first Betti numbers allow for families with unbounded Helly number.
Our proofs combine homological non-embeddability results with a Ramsey-based approach to build, given an arbitrary simplicial complex K, some well-behaved chain map from C_*(K) to C_*(R^d). Both techniques are of independent interest
Bounding Radon Number via Betti Numbers
We prove general topological Radon-type theorems for sets in ?^d, smooth real manifolds or finite dimensional simplicial complexes. Combined with a recent result of Holmsen and Lee, it gives fractional Helly theorem, and consequently the existence of weak ?-nets as well as a (p,q)-theorem.
More precisely: Let X be either ?^d, smooth real d-manifold, or a finite d-dimensional simplicial complex. Then if F is a finite, intersection-closed family of sets in X such that the ith reduced Betti number (with ?? coefficients) of any set in F is at most b for every non-negative integer i less or equal to k, then the Radon number of F is bounded in terms of b and X. Here k is the smallest integer larger or equal to d/2 - 1 if X = ?^d; k=d-1 if X is a smooth real d-manifold and not a surface, k=0 if X is a surface and k=d if X is a d-dimensional simplicial complex.
Using the recent result of the author and Kalai, we manage to prove the following optimal bound on fractional Helly number for families of open sets in a surface: Let F be a finite family of open sets in a surface S such that the intersection of any subfamily of F is either empty, or path-connected. Then the fractional Helly number of F is at most three. This also settles a conjecture of Holmsen, Kim, and Lee about an existence of a (p,q)-theorem for open subsets of a surface
Bounding Radon's number via Betti numbers
We prove general topological Radon type theorems for sets in ,
smooth real manifolds or finite dimensional simplicial complexes. Combined with
a recent result of Holmsen and Lee, it gives fractional Helly and colorful
Helly theorems, and consequently an existence of weak -nets as
well as a -theorem.
More precisely: Let be either , smooth real -manifold, or
a finite -dimensional simplicial complex. Then if is a finite
family of sets in such that is at most for all and , then the Radon's number of is bounded in terms of
and . Here if ;
if is a smooth real -manifold and not a surface, if is
a surface and if is a -dimensional simplicial complex.
Using the recent result of the author and Kalai, we manage to prove the
following optimal bound on fractional Helly number for families of open sets in
a surface: Let be a finite family of open sets in a surface
such that for every , is
either empty, or path-connected. Then the fractional Helly number of is at most three. This also settles a conjecture of Holmsen, Kim, and Lee
about an existence of a -theorem for open subsets of a surface.Comment: 11 pages, 2 figure