ProofComplete

Proof of Sperner's Theorem via LYM Inequality

Sperner's theorem asserts that the largest antichain in 2[n]2^{[n]} has size (n⌊n/2⌋)\binom{n}{\lfloor n/2 \rfloor}. We prove this using the Lubell-Yamamoto-Meshalkin (LYM) inequality, which is a far-reaching tool in extremal set theory.


The LYM Inequality

Theorem4.5LYM Inequality

Let F⊆2[n]\mathcal{F} \subseteq 2^{[n]} be an antichain. Then ∑F∈F1(n∣F∣)≤1.\sum_{F \in \mathcal{F}} \frac{1}{\binom{n}{|F|}} \leq 1.


Proof

Proof

Consider a uniformly random permutation σ\sigma of [n][n]. For each k∈{0,1,…,n}k \in \{0, 1, \ldots, n\}, define the initial segment Ik(σ)={σ(1),σ(2),…,σ(k)}I_k(\sigma) = \{\sigma(1), \sigma(2), \ldots, \sigma(k)\}.

For any fixed set F∈FF \in \mathcal{F} with ∣F∣=k|F| = k, the probability that F=Ik(σ)F = I_k(\sigma) is Pr⁡[Ik(σ)=F]=k!(n−k)!n!=1(nk).\Pr[I_k(\sigma) = F] = \frac{k!(n-k)!}{n!} = \frac{1}{\binom{n}{k}}.

Since F\mathcal{F} is an antichain, at most one set in F\mathcal{F} can appear as an initial segment of σ\sigma. Indeed, if F,G∈FF, G \in \mathcal{F} with ∣F∣<∣G∣|F| < |G| and F=I∣F∣(σ)F = I_{|F|}(\sigma), G=I∣G∣(σ)G = I_{|G|}(\sigma), then F⊆GF \subseteq G, contradicting the antichain property.

Therefore, the events {I∣F∣(σ)=F}\{I_{|F|}(\sigma) = F\} for F∈FF \in \mathcal{F} are mutually exclusive. By the union bound (which is tight here): 1≥∑F∈FPr⁡[I∣F∣(σ)=F]=∑F∈F1(n∣F∣).1 \geq \sum_{F \in \mathcal{F}} \Pr[I_{|F|}(\sigma) = F] = \sum_{F \in \mathcal{F}} \frac{1}{\binom{n}{|F|}}.

This completes the proof of the LYM inequality. □\square

■

Deriving Sperner's Theorem

Theorem4.6Sperner's Theorem

The maximum size of an antichain in 2[n]2^{[n]} is (n⌊n/2⌋)\binom{n}{\lfloor n/2 \rfloor}.

Proof

Let F\mathcal{F} be an antichain in 2[n]2^{[n]}. By the LYM inequality, ∑F∈F1(n∣F∣)≤1.\sum_{F \in \mathcal{F}} \frac{1}{\binom{n}{|F|}} \leq 1.

Since (nk)≤(n⌊n/2⌋)\binom{n}{k} \leq \binom{n}{\lfloor n/2 \rfloor} for all 0≤k≤n0 \leq k \leq n, we have 1(n∣F∣)≥1(n⌊n/2⌋)\frac{1}{\binom{n}{|F|}} \geq \frac{1}{\binom{n}{\lfloor n/2 \rfloor}} for each FF. Therefore, ∣F∣(n⌊n/2⌋)≤∑F∈F1(n∣F∣)≤1,\frac{|\mathcal{F}|}{\binom{n}{\lfloor n/2 \rfloor}} \leq \sum_{F \in \mathcal{F}} \frac{1}{\binom{n}{|F|}} \leq 1, which gives ∣F∣≤(n⌊n/2⌋)|\mathcal{F}| \leq \binom{n}{\lfloor n/2 \rfloor}.

Equality is achieved by taking all subsets of size ⌊n/2⌋\lfloor n/2 \rfloor, confirming that the bound is tight. □\square

■
RemarkBollobás Set-Pairs Inequality

The LYM inequality can be generalized to the Bollobás set-pairs inequality: if (Ai,Bi)i=1m(A_i, B_i)_{i=1}^m are pairs with Ai∩Bj=∅A_i \cap B_j = \emptyset if and only if i=ji = j, then ∑i=1m(∣Ai∣+∣Bi∣∣Ai∣)−1≤1\sum_{i=1}^m \binom{|A_i| + |B_i|}{|A_i|}^{-1} \leq 1. This powerful generalization has applications in information theory and topology.

ExampleWidth of Boolean Lattice

The width of the Boolean lattice 2[n]2^{[n]} (maximum antichain size) is (n⌊n/2⌋)\binom{n}{\lfloor n/2 \rfloor}, while the height (maximum chain length) is n+1n + 1. By Dilworth's theorem, 2[n]2^{[n]} can be partitioned into (n⌊n/2⌋)\binom{n}{\lfloor n/2 \rfloor} chains, which yields a symmetric chain decomposition.