Matroids with different configurations and the same -invariant
Introduction
The configuration of a matroid, which Eberhardt [9] introduced, is obtained from its lattice of cyclic flats (that is, flats that are unions of circuits) by recording the abstract lattice structure along with just the size and rank of each cyclic flat, not the set. Eberhardt proved that from the configuration of a matroid M, one can compute its Tutte polynomial, The data recorded in the Tutte polynomial is the multiset of size-rank pairs, , over all . The Tutte polynomial is one of the most extensively studied invariants of a matroid (see, e.g., [6], [10]).
Strengthening Eberhardt's result, Bonin and Kung [2, Theorem 7.3] showed that from the configuration of a matroid M, one can compute its -invariant, . Derksen [7] introduced the -invariant and showed that the Tutte polynomial can be computed from it. The perspective on the -invariant that we use is the reformulation introduced in [2]: records the multiset of sequences of sizes of the sets in flags (maximal chains of flats) of M. (Section 2 gives a more precise formulation.) This information about flags just begins to suggest the wealth of information that captures beyond what the Tutte polynomial contains; other examples (from [2, Section 5]) include the number of saturated chains of flats with specified sizes and ranks, the number of circuits and cocircuits of each size (in particular, the number of spanning circuits), and, for each triple of integers, the number of flats F with and for which the restriction has c coloops. Beyond the multiset of size-rank pairs noted above as equivalent to the Tutte polynomial, as [3, Theorem 5.3] shows, from , one can find, for each triple of integers, the number of sets A with and for which the restriction has c coloops. Akin to the universality property of the Tutte polynomial among matroid invariants that satisfy deletion-contraction rules, Derksen and Fink [8] showed that the -invariant is a universal valuative invariant for subdivisions of matroid base polytopes.
Reflecting on the proof of [2, Theorem 7.3] reveals that the chains of cyclic flats in the configuration play the key role; the lattice structure is secondary. So if one can construct pairs of non-isomorphic lattices for which one can relate their chains via bijections, one might be able to produce pairs of matroids with different configurations and the same -invariant. That is the idea that we develop in this paper and use to shed light on how much stronger the configuration is compared to the -invariant. Since the Tutte polynomial can be computed from the -invariant, our results also contribute to the theory of Tutte-equivalent matroids (see [5]).
In Section 2, we review the relevant background and previously known examples of matroids with different configurations but the same -invariant. The core of the paper is Section 3, where we develop the tools that we apply in Sections 4 and 5 to give the constructions of interest. These tools and the strategy in the proofs of Theorem 4.1, Theorem 5.1 are likely to be useful to obtain more such constructions.
Section snippets
Notation, background, and prior results
Our notation and terminology for matroid theory follow Oxley [11]. Let denote the set . Let denote the least element of a lattice L, and let denote its greatest element. If we need to clarify in which lattice an interval is formed, we use a subscript, as in . Likewise, we may use and . For a lattice L, we let denote L with and removed, so is the open interval .
Given a matroid M, a subset A of is cyclic if A is a (possibly empty) union of
The tools
The first lemma generalizes an argument from the proof of [2, Theorem 7.3]. The join mentioned below is the join in the lattice of cyclic flats.
Lemma 3.1 Assume that the function has the property that if , then and . Then
Before proving the lemma, we note an example of such a function g. For a matroid M, let be given by
Application: a construction modifying a lattice
In this section we show how to extend a finite lattice in different ways to produce lattices in different configurations that yield the same -invariant.
We first construct the lattices that appear in Theorem 4.1. Let be distinct elements of a finite lattice L for which
- •
there is a with for all with , and
- •
for each , there is a lattice isomorphism with for all .
Application: a construction using paving matroids
In Theorem 5.1 we show how to use the lattices of flats of paving matroids as the lattices in different configurations that yield the same -invariant. Examples are given after the proof.
Theorem 5.1 Let and be non-isomorphic rank-r paving matroids on a set E. For , let be the set of hyperplanes of and let be the lattice of flats of . Assume that there are partitions of and of , and, for each , a bijection such that if and only if
Acknowledgements
The author thanks both referees for their careful reading of the manuscript and their thoughtful comments.
References (12)
- et al.
The -invariant and catenary data of a matroid
Adv. Appl. Math.
(2018) - et al.
Valuative invariants for polymatroids
Adv. Math.
(2010) - et al.
On the number of matroids
Combinatorica
(2015) - J. Bonin, K. Long, The free m-cone of a matroid and its G-invariant, submitted for...
- et al.
The lattice of cyclic flats of a matroid
Ann. Comb.
(2008) - et al.
Tutte uniqueness and Tutte equivalence
Cited by (6)
The Cyclic Flats of an L-Polymatroids
2023, arXivCHAIN TUTTE POLYNOMIALS
2023, arXivTHE NATURAL MATROID OF AN INTEGER POLYMATROID
2023, SIAM Journal on Discrete MathematicsThe Free m-Cone of a Matroid and Its G -Invariant
2022, Annals of Combinatorics