On the number of resolvable Steiner triple systems of small 3-rank
Minjia Shi (1), Li Xu (1), Denis S. Krotov (2) ((1) Anhui University,, Hefei, China, (2) Sobolev Institute of Mathematics, Novosibirsk, Russia)

TL;DR
This paper extends bounds on the number of resolvable Steiner triple systems of small 3-rank, providing estimates for isomorphism classes of STS of various orders beyond previous exponential bounds.
Contribution
It generalizes existing bounds on the count of resolvable Steiner triple systems to broader classes of orders with arbitrary factors.
Findings
Derived generalized bounds for the number of isomorphism classes of STS
Extended previous exponential bounds to more general cases
Provided estimates for STS of order $v=3^kT$
Abstract
In a recent work, Jungnickel, Magliveras, Tonchev, and Wassermann derived an overexponential lower bound on the number of nonisomorphic resolvable Steiner triple systems (STS) of order , where , and -rank . We develop an approach to generalize this bound and estimate the number of isomorphism classes of STS of rank for an arbitrary of form .
Peer Reviews
No public reviews on file for this paper yet. If you reviewed it on a platform where reviews are public (OpenReview, ICLR, NeurIPS, ICML), you can paste yours below so the community can read it here.
Videos
No videos yet. Explain this paper in a talk, walkthrough, or lecture? Add one.
On the number of resolvable Steiner triple systems
of small -rank††thanks: This research is supported by National Natural Science Foundation of China (61672036), Excellent Youth Foundation of Natural Science Foundation of Anhui Province (1808085J20) and the Program of fundamental scientific researches of the Siberian Branch of the Russian Academy of Sciences No.I.5.1. (proj. No.0314-2019-0016).
M. Shi, L. Xu, D. S. Krotov M. Shi and L. Xu are with the School of Mathematical Sciences, Anhui University, Hefei, 230601, ChinaD. Krotov is with the Sobolev Institute of Mathematics, Novosibirsk, 630090, Russia
Abstract
In a recent work, Jungnickel, Magliveras, Tonchev, and Wassermann derived an overexponential lower bound on the number of nonisomorphic resolvable Steiner triple systems (STS) of order , where , and -rank . We develop an approach to generalize this bound and estimate the number of isomorphism classes of STS of rank for an arbitrary of form .
1 Introduction
A Steiner triple system of order , or STS, is a pair from a finite set (called the support, or the point set, of the STS) of cardinality and a collection of -subsets of , called blocks, such that every two distinct elements of meet in exactly one block. A transversal design TD is a triple that consists of a point set of cardinality , a partition of into subsets, groups, of cardinality , and a collection of -subsets of , blocks, such that every block intersects every group in exactly one point and every two points in different groups meet in exactly one block. It is convenient to identify the system, STS or TD, with its block set (indeed, the support and, in the case of TD, the groups are uniquely determined by the block set). Two systems, STS or TD, are called isomorphic if there is a bijection between their supports, an isomorphism, that sends the blocks of one system to the blocks of the other. An isomorphism of a system to itself is called an automorphism; the set of all automorphisms of is denoted by .
Given a system, STS or TD, with the support , a parallel class is a partition of into blocks. A partition of the system into parallel classes is called a resolution or parallelism. Note that a resolution of an STS consists of parallel classes, while a resolution of an TD has parallel classes. A system that admits at least one resolution is called resolvable. The problem of existence of resolvable STS of order was suggested by Kirkman in [5] and completely solved by Ray-Chaudhuri and Wilson in 1971 [9] (as mentioned in [1, p.13], the problem ‘‘had in fact already been solved by the Chinese mathematician Lu Jiaxi at least eight years previously, but the solution had remained unpublished because of the political upheavals of the time’’). On the other hand, the existence of infinite families of non-resolvable Steiner triple systems of order divisible by was established in [6].
For any prime , the -rank of a Steiner triple system is the dimension of the linear span over GF of the set of characteristic -vectors , of the blocks . As shown in [2], the -rank of every STS is for all prime except and . A sequence of papers is devoted to the enumeration of Steiner triple systems in accordance with the - and -rank, see a survey in [10]. In [3], Jungnickel et al. obtained a computer-aided classification of STS of the next-to-minimum -rank . The authors observed that all such systems are resolvable and proved this property theoretically for any STS of -rank . As a consequence, they derived a lower bound on the number of nonisomorphic resolvable STS. The goal of the current research is to generalize this bound to an arbitrary order of form , odd. More specifically, we evaluate the number of resolvable STS of rank , , for every odd except the case when is not a prime power (which could be resolved if a resolvable STS of rank is constructed).
The next section contains some preliminary results. In Section 3, we consider the case when (Theorem 3.1) or (Theorem 3.2); that is, when is the minimum possible -rank of STS, . The remaining case are solved in Section 4, Theorem 4. In the conclusion section, we consider some further research topics.
2 Preliminary results
Denote by the linear span, over GF, of the all-one vector and the rows of the matrix that consists of all possible columns ordered lexicographically, each column occurring times.
Denote by AG the Steiner triple system with the point set and the block set , where , …, are the ternary -tuples ordered lexicographically. AG is known as the affine geometry (over GF); trivially, it has a resolution, where for every block , all blocks such that belong to the same parallel class. We call it the standard resolution of AG.
Proposition 1[4] ([4]). A Steiner triple system of order has -rank at most if and only if it is isomorphic to an STS orthogonal to .
Proposition 2[4] ([4]). Let . Denote , . An STS is orthogonal to if and only if
[TABLE]
where is an STS, , and is a TD, .
**Corollary 1. ** Let . If , then the minimum possible -rank of STS is . If , then the minimum possible -rank of STS is .
Proof . By Proposition 2, a Steiner triple system of order has -rank at most exists if and only if an STS exists. If , then this is true with and . If , then this is true with and , but false for .
The following lemma was essentially proved in [7]; we need to formulate the statement in more general form.
**Lemma 1. ** Assume that the set of points is divided into groups , …, of size , and we are given
- •
an STS with the groups as the points;
- •
for every group , , an STS with the support ;
- •
for every block from , a transversal design on the groups , , .
If all these systems are resolvable, then the union
[TABLE]
is a resolvable STS.
Proof . The proof is straightforward. At first, check the STS property. If two points belong to the same , then they lie in a unique block from the STS . If they are from different , , then there is a unique such that and, by the definition of a transversal design, a unique block from that contains these two points. So, (2) in an STS by the definition.
Next, if is a resolution of , , then is a partition of the first part of (2) into parallel classes.
If we have a parallel class of , and for every in , is a resolution of , then is a partition of
[TABLE]
into parallel classes. Unifying over all parallel classes of a resolution of , we obtain a partition of the second part of (2) into parallel classes. So, we have a partition of (2) into parallel classes, and it is a resolvable STS by the definition.
3 Resolvable STS of the minimum -rank
In this section, we are interested in the number of resolvable STS of the minimum -rank, for a given order . According to Corollary 2, there are two cases for the order of an STS, and , which will be considered separately. Note that in the second case, the value of cannot be smaller than ; so, in that case , where . We will start with this case, as it is solved by simpler arguments.
3.1 , where
**Theorem 1. ** Assume that , where . The number of isomorphism classes of resolvable Steiner triple systems on points with -rank exactly satisfies
[TABLE]
where , is the number of resolvable STS, is the number of resolvable TD (Latin squares of order having an orthogonal mate), and is the automorphism group of the affine geometry , .
Proof . We note that ; so, there exists a resolvable STS [9]. As , there is no STS. So, is the minimum possible rank. We consider the STS’s orthogonal to . By Proposition 2, there are exactly such STS, where is the number of STS, is the number of Latin squares of order . As follows from Lemma 2, at least of them are resolvable.
It remains to show that at most of these systems can belong to the same isomorphism class. Indeed, because the -rank of the considered systems is exactly , is the dual space of each of them, which is uniquely defined by a system (this is a crucial observation). Therefore, an isomorphism between two systems is necessarily an automorphism of . The number of such automorphisms is , see [4, Theorem 3.5].
3.2 , where
In this case, we cannot use the arguments of Theorem 3.1 directly, because is not divisible by and hence there are no resolvable STS, . To solve this, we will introduce a modified version of Proposition 2, where the union (1) is rearranged to fit our needs. We fix from [math] to and split the set into the groups
[TABLE]
of size . Denote
[TABLE]
Now, it is easy to understand that the blocks of AG restricted by form a sub-STS, actually AG; we denote it by , . The set of blocks of AG that do not belong to any is denoted by (essentially, it is a TD). With this notation, (1) turns to
[TABLE]
We now see that is an STS, and it is orthogonal to . Moreover, by Proposition 2, any orthogonal to can be represented as (6). So, we have derived the following generalization of Proposition 2.
**Theorem 2. ** Let . Denote , , , and , . An STS is orthogonal to if and only if
[TABLE]
where is an STS orthogonal to , , and is a TD, .
**Theorem 3. ** Assume that , where . The number of isomorphism classes of resolvable Steiner triple systems on points with -rank exactly satisfies
[TABLE]
where ; is the number of resolvable STS orthogonal to ; is the number of Latin squares of order having an orthogonal mate.
Proof . We first observe that
[TABLE]
So, we can construct different systems in the form (7), where and all and are resolvable and is orthogonal to . By Theorem 3.2, the resulting systems have the rank at most , which is the minimum possible value. Similarly to Lemma 2, we find that the resulting systems are resolvable (note that is resolvable as it is obtained from by deleting the blocks of a standard parallel class).
The proof that representatives of one isomorphism class occur not more than times is similar to Theorem 3.1.
To claim that the theorem above gives a nonzero bound, we need to ensure that . For some values of , this fact is guaranteed by one of Ray-Chaudhuri–Wilson constructions [9], as reflected in the following proposition. Proving for the other values of remains an open problem.
**Proposition 3. ** For every prime power such that , we have
[TABLE]
Proof . If satisfies the hypothesis of the proposition, there is a construction [9, Theorem 5] of resolvable STS , , where , , are STS and is a TD. It is straightforward that such STS is orthogonal to and ; so, its rank is (it cannot be smaller because is not divisible by ). Applying permutations of points that keep the dual space, we obtain isomorphic STS, and only of permutation give the same result. So, the number of different STS isomorphic to and dual to is . As proved in [11], a Steiner triple system of any order has no more than automorphisms.
**Example 1. **Consider the case , . Proposition 3.2 gives . Considering only the isomorphic TD that correspond to the linear latin square, namely, the isomorphs of
[TABLE]
we find
[TABLE]
(The exact number can be computed from the list of all nonequivalent pairs of orthogonal latin squares, see [8].) Substituting to (8), we find the following lower bound on the number of non-isomorphic STS of -rank :
[TABLE]
4 Resolvable STS of non-minimum -rank
According to Propositions 2 and 2, we have a representation of every STS whose -rank is not larger than . To evaluate the number of isomorphism classes, we can use arguments similar to those in Theorem 3.1. However, those arguments work only if we are sure that the orthogonal space is uniquely determined as the dual space of each of the considered systems; that is, if the -rank is exactly . So, we either need to develop another arguments to estimate the number of isomorphism classes, or to consider some subclass of the class of all systems from Proposition 2 such that every system from the subclass has -rank exactly . We choose the second way. The key fact, in our arguments, is the following lemma.
**Lemma 2. ** Assume that , where and . Under the hypothesis and notation of Proposition 2, there is an STS such that the STS
[TABLE]
which differs from by only a sub-STS on , has the dual space and, hence, the rank .
Before proving Lemma 4, we formulate its direct corollary, the main result of this section.
**Theorem 4. ** Assume that , where and . The number of isomorphism classes of resolvable Steiner triple systems on points with -rank exactly satisfies
[TABLE]
where , is the number of resolvable STS, is the number of resolvable TD (Latin squares of order having an orthogonal mate).
The proof is the same as for Theorem 3.1, with the only difference that we are not free to choose the subsystem ; its choice is forced to make the rank exactly in accordance with Lemma 4.
To prove Lemma 4, we need two technical results. The first one generalizes Proposition 2 from STS’s to partial STS’s of some kind.
**Proposition 4. ** Let , , be an STS orthogonal to the vectors and , , . If be some set of blocks from restricted by the first points, then the dual space of is , up to a permutation of points, for some .
Proof . Let be the generator matrix of the dual space of , so we only need to prove that is also the generator matrix of Without loss of generality, we can assume that the first column of is .
Claim . If and are columns of , then is also a column of . Let and be the and columns of . Firstly, if neither nor is in the first positions of , then there is a block in that contains and . Since all rows of are orthogonal to the characteristic vector of this block, the column satisfies , i.e., . This proves . Secondly, is in the first positions but is not. Because the second element of is 0, and the second element of is 1 or 2, so the the second element of is 2 or 1 over , it means that cannot be in the first positions of . Because two of the three columns , and are not in the first positions, so if is in the position, will be a block of , therefore, is a column of . Finally, both and are in the first positions, then let be a column of that does not lie in the first positions. By the second case, and are columns of , and they are not in the first positions of . So is a column of , we know its not in the first positions because its second element is not 0. Therefore, is a column of . These prove .
Claim . If and are columns of , then is also a column of . This is proved by applying with , first, and then with , .
The last claim means that the set of columns of the matrix obtained from by removing the first row is closed under addition. Since there are linearly independent columns, this set contains all possible columns of height .
It remains to prove that different columns and occur the same number of times in . Let and be the sets of positions in which has the columns and , respectively. And let be a position of the column .
Case , if all s and s are not in the first positions of , then for each from , there is from such that is a block of . Moreover, different s correspond to different s. This shows that . Similarly, .
Case , if s are in the first positions but s are not. By the proof of claim , can’t be in the first positions of , so for each from , there is still from such that is a block of . Different s correspond to different s, it shows that . Similarly, .
Case , if all s and s are in the first positions, then let be a column of that does not lie in the first positions. Let be the sets of positions in which has the column . By case , we know and , so .
**Proposition 5. ** For every and divisible by , there is a permutation of the coordinates such that the spaces and intersect in the one-dimensional subspace spanned by the all-one vector.
Proof . Since , the equation is equivalent to .
The case is trivial.
In the case (hence ), we can choose such that the generator matrices of and are of forms
[TABLE]
respectively, and we see that the second row of the second matrix is not in .
Assume . Denote by the set of all permutations of coordinates. For any , let and be generator matrices of and , respectively, with the first row being the all-one vector. So, the problem is equivalent to finding a permutation such that , i.e., the rank of the matrix P=\left(\begin{array}[]{c}M\\ \pi(M)\\ \end{array}\right) is . Let P_{\pi}^{\prime}=\left(\begin{array}[]{c}M^{\prime}\\ \pi(M^{\prime})\\ \end{array}\right), where the matrices and are obtained from and , respectively, by removing the first row.
We now state that the permutation can be chosen in such a way that has a submatrix
[TABLE]
is the identity matrix of size , and is the all-zero vector. Indeed, contains all possible columns of height . As the columns of the matrix are different, it is a submatrix of . Similarly, is a submatrix of , and we can choose in such a way that is a submatrix of .
With defined as above, contains a submatrix \left(\begin{array}[]{ccc}1&\bar{1}&\bar{1}\\ \bar{0}^{T}&I_{t}&2I_{t}\\ \bar{0}^{T}&C&I_{t}\\ \end{array}\right) of non-zero determinant \det\left(\begin{array}[]{cc}I_{t}&2I_{t}\\ C&I_{t}\\ \end{array}\right)=\det\left(\begin{array}[]{cc}I_{t}&2I_{t}\\ 0&I_{t}-2C\\ \end{array}\right)\neq 0. So has rank and the spaces and intersect in a one-dimensional subspace.
Now, we are ready to proof Lemma 4.
Proof of Lemma 4. Assume that , , , and is an STS of order and rank at most . By Proposition 2, we can assume without loss of generality that is orthogonal to . By Proposition 2 and under its notation, has the following decomposition:
[TABLE]
By Proposition 4, the dual space of is equivalent to for some (it should include the dual space of ), and without loss of generality assume that it is precisely .
Now consider the STS of order . Let its rank be for some . Then its dual space is equivalent to , and we consider a permutation of coordinates [math], …, such that the dual space of is precisely . We now define and take a permutation from Proposition 4, such that
[TABLE]
We state that the conclusion of the lemma is satisfied with . That is, the rank of the system obtained from with replacing by is exactly . To see this, we assume for the contrary that the dual space of has a vector in . Then the values in the first coordinates of are not constant, and they form a vector from (and hence, from ), say . By Proposition 4, it does not belong to , and hence it does not belong to , i.e., it is not orthogonal to . Therefore is not orthogonal to , a contradiction. So, by rotating only one sub-STS of order , we excluded all orthogonal vectors that are not in .
5 Conclusion
In this paper, we have proven a hyperexponential (in ) lower bound for the number of isomorphism classes of resolvable STS of -rank , for most (but not all) values of odd . We separately solved the cases (Theorem 3.2), (Theorem 3.1), and (Theorem 4). The case was previously considered in [3]; the case corresponds to the affine geometry, which is a unique STS of -rank . Theorems 3.1 and 4 cover all corresponding cases, but Theorem 3.2 is conditional: to produce a nontrivial lower bound, it needs at least one resolvable STS of non-maximum -rank. If is a prime power, such STS were constructed in [9, Theorem 5]. The existence of resolvable STS of -rank for the other values of , , remains an actual research problem.
It would be quite interesting, but expectedly more difficult to consider similar asymptotics with respect to the -rank. Another interesting problem is the evaluation of the number of doubly-resolvable STS of limited - or -rank (an STS is doubly resolvable if there are two resolutions such that two parallel classes from different resolutions have no more than one block in common).
The reference list from the paper itself. Each links out to its DOI / PubMed record.
- 11. C. J. Colbourn and J. H. Dinitz, editors. Handbook of Combinatorial Designs . Discrete Mathematics and Its Applications. Chapman & Hall/CRC, Boca Raton, London, New York, second edition, 2006.
- 22. J. Doyen, X. Hubaut, and M. Vandensavel. Ranks of incidence matrices of Steiner triple systems. Mathematische Zeitschrift , 163(3):251–259, Oct. 1978. DOI: 10.1007/BF 01174898 .
- 33. D. Jungnickel, S. S. Magliveras, V. D. Tonchev, and A. Wassermann. The classification of Steiner triple systems on 27 27 27 points with 3 3 3 -rank 24 24 24 . Des. Codes Cryptography , 87(4):831–839, 2019. DOI: 10.1007/s 10623-018-0502-5 .
- 44. D. Jungnickel and V. D. Tonchev. Counting Steiner triple systems with classical parameters and prescribed rank. J. Comb. Theory, Ser. A , 162:10–33, Feb. 2019. DOI: 10.1016/j.jcta.2018.09.009 .
- 55. T. P. Kirkman. On a problem in combinations. Cambridge and Dublin Math. J. , 2:191–204, 1847.
- 66. P. C. Li and G. H. J. van Rees. The existence of non-resolvable steiner triple systems. J. Comb. Des. , 13(1), 2005. DOI: 10.1002/jcd.20027 .
- 77. Y. Lu and M. Shi. Sufficient conditions for STS ( 3 k ) superscript 3 𝑘 (3^{k}) of 3 3 3 -rank ≤ 3 k − r absent superscript 3 𝑘 𝑟 \leq 3^{k}-r to be resolvable. E-print 1906.00620, ar Xiv.org, 2019. Available at http://arxiv.org/abs/1906.00620.
- 88. B. D. Mc Kay. Combinatorial data. Latin squares. https://cs.anu.edu.au/people/Brendan.Mc Kay/data/latin.html.
