Warren brings up the very interesting question: For any such "0-modification" of the set {-1,1}^n (i.e., so that some components of some vectors become 0, the rest remaining unchanged), what is the smallest number f(n) such that there is always a nonempty subset S of modified vectors summing to the 0 vector, with #(S) <= f(n) ??? --Dan ________________________________________________________________________________________ It goes without saying that .
On 6/27/12, Dan Asimov <dasimov@earthlink.net> wrote:
Warren brings up the very interesting question:
For any such "0-modification" of the set {-1,1}^n (i.e., so that some components of some vectors become 0, the rest remaining unchanged), what is the smallest number f(n) such that there is always a nonempty subset S of modified vectors summing to the 0 vector, with #(S) <= f(n) ???
--Dan
________________________________________________________________________________________ It goes without saying that .
_______________________________________________ math-fun mailing list math-fun@mailman.xmission.com http://mailman.xmission.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/math-fun
participants (2)
-
Dan Asimov -
Fred lunnon