{"id":949,"date":"2010-10-04T11:16:30","date_gmt":"2010-10-04T18:16:30","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/qpr.ca\/blog\/"},"modified":"2021-10-11T00:07:56","modified_gmt":"2021-10-11T07:07:56","slug":"cute-set-sizes-problem","status":"publish","type":"page","link":"https:\/\/qpr.ca\/blogs\/pages\/mathstuff5\/quora\/cute-set-sizes-problem\/","title":{"rendered":"Cute Set Sizes Problem"},"content":{"rendered":"<p>Let k be the number of elements common to all three sets, u be the number of elements in both A and B but not C, and v the number of elements that are only in B.<\/p>\n<p>(Note: The choice of independent variables is arbitrary. From among the seven components we could use the three given conditions to express any three in terms of the other four, and a more &#8220;symmetric&#8221; choice actually gives a <a href=\"http:\/\/qpr.ca\/blog\/other-pages\/mathstuff\/cute-set-sizes-problem\/neater-version\/\">neater version<\/a> of this proof)<\/p>\n<p>Since u+v is the number of elements in B but not C, the same number must be in both B and C. k are in all three so there must be u+v-k in B and C but not A.<\/p>\n<p>Now let w be the number of elements in C only. Then the total in C but not A is (u+v-k)+w=u+v+w-k, and since there are k in the common set, the number in A and C but not B must be u+v+w-2k. <\/p>\n<p>Since the total number in A must be twice what&#8217;s shared with B, that is 2(u+k), the number that are only in A must be (u+k)-(u+v+w-2k)=3k-v-w.<\/p>\n<p>If that is not all clear, then the following diagram might help:<br \/>\n<a href=\"http:\/\/qpr.ca\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2010\/10\/venn.jpg\"><img decoding=\"async\" src=\"http:\/\/qpr.ca\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2010\/10\/venn-300x212.jpg\" alt=\"\" title=\"venn\" width=\"300\" height=\"212\" class=\"aligncenter size-medium wp-image-950\" srcset=\"https:\/\/qpr.ca\/blogs\/wp-content\/uploads\/2010\/10\/venn-300x212.jpg 300w, https:\/\/qpr.ca\/blogs\/wp-content\/uploads\/2010\/10\/venn-1024x724.jpg 1024w\" sizes=\"(max-width: 300px) 100vw, 300px\" \/><\/a><\/p>\n<p>In terms of the independent variables k,u,v, and w, we get<br \/>\na=2(k+u)<br \/>\nb=2(u+v)<br \/>\nc=2(u+v+w-k)<br \/>\nand our objective is to find extrema of<br \/>\nR=a\/c=(u+k)\/(u+v+w-k)<br \/>\nfor positive integer values of k,u,v,w with u+v-k&ge;0 , u+v+w-2k&ge;0, and 3k-v-w&ge;0.<br \/>\nEquivalently, we could take k=1, look for rational values of u,v,w and rescale at the end to get integer solutions.<br \/>\nSo we&#8217;re looking at R=(u+1)\/(u+v+w-1) with u,v,w&ge;0, u+v+w&ge;2, and 3&ge;u+v&ge;1<\/p>\n<p>For fixed v and w, R->1 as u->infinity and is monotone in the domain so there are no interior critical points.<br \/>\nWe can therefore restrict our attention to the boundary.<\/p>\n<p>On u+v=1, we have u=1-v&le;1,<br \/>\nso R=(u+1)\/w=(2-v)\/w&le;2 (since w&ge;1 since u+v+w&ge;2);<br \/>\nOn u+v=3, R=(4-v)\/(2+w)&le;2; and finally<br \/>\nOn u+v+w=2, u=2-v-w, and so<br \/>\nR=(3-v-h)\/(2-1)&le;3<\/p>\n<p>So R is never greater than 3, and the bound is attained when v=h=0 (which corresponds to the example cited earlier)<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>Let k be the number of elements common to all three sets, u be the number of elements in both A and B but not C, and v the number of elements that are only in B. (Note: The choice &hellip; <a href=\"https:\/\/qpr.ca\/blogs\/pages\/mathstuff5\/quora\/cute-set-sizes-problem\/\">Continue reading <span class=\"meta-nav\">&rarr;<\/span><\/a><\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":2,"featured_media":0,"parent":4279,"menu_order":5,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"closed","template":"","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-949","page","type-page","status-publish","hentry"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/qpr.ca\/blogs\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/pages\/949","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/qpr.ca\/blogs\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/pages"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/qpr.ca\/blogs\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/page"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/qpr.ca\/blogs\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/2"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/qpr.ca\/blogs\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=949"}],"version-history":[{"count":11,"href":"https:\/\/qpr.ca\/blogs\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/pages\/949\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":2258,"href":"https:\/\/qpr.ca\/blogs\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/pages\/949\/revisions\/2258"}],"up":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/qpr.ca\/blogs\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/pages\/4279"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/qpr.ca\/blogs\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=949"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/qpr.ca\/blogs\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=949"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/qpr.ca\/blogs\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=949"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}