$p-$biased measure of increasing sets/upsets
up vote
1
down vote
favorite
Let $[n] = {1 , dots, n}$ and let $mathcal{A} in mathcal{P}([n])$ be an increasing set, i.e. if $x in mathcal{A}$ and $x subset y subset [n]$ then $y in mathcal{A}$.
For $p in [0,1]$, define the $p$-biased measure of a subset $A subset [n]$ to be:
$$mu_p(A) = p^{|A|}(1-p)^{n - |A|}$$
For a family of sets $mathcal{A} subset mathcal{P}([n])$, define:
$$mu_p(mathcal{A}) = sum_{A in mathcal{A}} mu_p(A)$$
Theorem 7 says that for $0 < p <1$ and $mathcal{A}, mathcal{B} subset mathcal{P}([n])$ both increasing families of sets, then:
$$mu_p(mathcal{A})mu_p(mathcal{B}) leq mu_p(mathcal{A} cap mathcal{B})$$
With some work, I've managed to show that:
$$mu_p(mathcal{A})mu_p(mathcal{B}) = sum_{A in mathcal{A} backslash mathcal{B} \ B inmathcal{B} backslash mathcal{A}}{mu_p(mathcal{A})mu_p(mathcal{B})} +
sum_{C in mathcal{A} cap mathcal{B}}{mu_p(C) sum_{A in mathcal{A} backslash mathcal{B} \ B inmathcal{B} backslash mathcal{A}} (mu_p(A) + mu_p(B)}) + (mu_p(mathcal{A} cap mathcal{B})^2$$
However, at this point I am stuck and I'm not sure how to proceed, or how to use the fact that $mathcal{A}, mathcal{B}$ are increasing sets. How can I use this piece of information?
combinatorics
add a comment |
up vote
1
down vote
favorite
Let $[n] = {1 , dots, n}$ and let $mathcal{A} in mathcal{P}([n])$ be an increasing set, i.e. if $x in mathcal{A}$ and $x subset y subset [n]$ then $y in mathcal{A}$.
For $p in [0,1]$, define the $p$-biased measure of a subset $A subset [n]$ to be:
$$mu_p(A) = p^{|A|}(1-p)^{n - |A|}$$
For a family of sets $mathcal{A} subset mathcal{P}([n])$, define:
$$mu_p(mathcal{A}) = sum_{A in mathcal{A}} mu_p(A)$$
Theorem 7 says that for $0 < p <1$ and $mathcal{A}, mathcal{B} subset mathcal{P}([n])$ both increasing families of sets, then:
$$mu_p(mathcal{A})mu_p(mathcal{B}) leq mu_p(mathcal{A} cap mathcal{B})$$
With some work, I've managed to show that:
$$mu_p(mathcal{A})mu_p(mathcal{B}) = sum_{A in mathcal{A} backslash mathcal{B} \ B inmathcal{B} backslash mathcal{A}}{mu_p(mathcal{A})mu_p(mathcal{B})} +
sum_{C in mathcal{A} cap mathcal{B}}{mu_p(C) sum_{A in mathcal{A} backslash mathcal{B} \ B inmathcal{B} backslash mathcal{A}} (mu_p(A) + mu_p(B)}) + (mu_p(mathcal{A} cap mathcal{B})^2$$
However, at this point I am stuck and I'm not sure how to proceed, or how to use the fact that $mathcal{A}, mathcal{B}$ are increasing sets. How can I use this piece of information?
combinatorics
Have you checked the cited reference (Harris 1960)?
– Clement C.
Nov 22 at 22:21
add a comment |
up vote
1
down vote
favorite
up vote
1
down vote
favorite
Let $[n] = {1 , dots, n}$ and let $mathcal{A} in mathcal{P}([n])$ be an increasing set, i.e. if $x in mathcal{A}$ and $x subset y subset [n]$ then $y in mathcal{A}$.
For $p in [0,1]$, define the $p$-biased measure of a subset $A subset [n]$ to be:
$$mu_p(A) = p^{|A|}(1-p)^{n - |A|}$$
For a family of sets $mathcal{A} subset mathcal{P}([n])$, define:
$$mu_p(mathcal{A}) = sum_{A in mathcal{A}} mu_p(A)$$
Theorem 7 says that for $0 < p <1$ and $mathcal{A}, mathcal{B} subset mathcal{P}([n])$ both increasing families of sets, then:
$$mu_p(mathcal{A})mu_p(mathcal{B}) leq mu_p(mathcal{A} cap mathcal{B})$$
With some work, I've managed to show that:
$$mu_p(mathcal{A})mu_p(mathcal{B}) = sum_{A in mathcal{A} backslash mathcal{B} \ B inmathcal{B} backslash mathcal{A}}{mu_p(mathcal{A})mu_p(mathcal{B})} +
sum_{C in mathcal{A} cap mathcal{B}}{mu_p(C) sum_{A in mathcal{A} backslash mathcal{B} \ B inmathcal{B} backslash mathcal{A}} (mu_p(A) + mu_p(B)}) + (mu_p(mathcal{A} cap mathcal{B})^2$$
However, at this point I am stuck and I'm not sure how to proceed, or how to use the fact that $mathcal{A}, mathcal{B}$ are increasing sets. How can I use this piece of information?
combinatorics
Let $[n] = {1 , dots, n}$ and let $mathcal{A} in mathcal{P}([n])$ be an increasing set, i.e. if $x in mathcal{A}$ and $x subset y subset [n]$ then $y in mathcal{A}$.
For $p in [0,1]$, define the $p$-biased measure of a subset $A subset [n]$ to be:
$$mu_p(A) = p^{|A|}(1-p)^{n - |A|}$$
For a family of sets $mathcal{A} subset mathcal{P}([n])$, define:
$$mu_p(mathcal{A}) = sum_{A in mathcal{A}} mu_p(A)$$
Theorem 7 says that for $0 < p <1$ and $mathcal{A}, mathcal{B} subset mathcal{P}([n])$ both increasing families of sets, then:
$$mu_p(mathcal{A})mu_p(mathcal{B}) leq mu_p(mathcal{A} cap mathcal{B})$$
With some work, I've managed to show that:
$$mu_p(mathcal{A})mu_p(mathcal{B}) = sum_{A in mathcal{A} backslash mathcal{B} \ B inmathcal{B} backslash mathcal{A}}{mu_p(mathcal{A})mu_p(mathcal{B})} +
sum_{C in mathcal{A} cap mathcal{B}}{mu_p(C) sum_{A in mathcal{A} backslash mathcal{B} \ B inmathcal{B} backslash mathcal{A}} (mu_p(A) + mu_p(B)}) + (mu_p(mathcal{A} cap mathcal{B})^2$$
However, at this point I am stuck and I'm not sure how to proceed, or how to use the fact that $mathcal{A}, mathcal{B}$ are increasing sets. How can I use this piece of information?
combinatorics
combinatorics
asked Nov 22 at 22:20
user366818
813410
813410
Have you checked the cited reference (Harris 1960)?
– Clement C.
Nov 22 at 22:21
add a comment |
Have you checked the cited reference (Harris 1960)?
– Clement C.
Nov 22 at 22:21
Have you checked the cited reference (Harris 1960)?
– Clement C.
Nov 22 at 22:21
Have you checked the cited reference (Harris 1960)?
– Clement C.
Nov 22 at 22:21
add a comment |
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
StackExchange.ready(
function () {
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fmath.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f3009743%2fp-biased-measure-of-increasing-sets-upsets%23new-answer', 'question_page');
}
);
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Have you checked the cited reference (Harris 1960)?
– Clement C.
Nov 22 at 22:21