Stanley–Wilf conjecture

About 36 years old · traced to

For a permutation σ\sigma of {1,2,…,n}\{1,2,\dots,n\} and a permutation β\beta of {1,2,…,k}\{1,2,\dots,k\}, say that σ\sigma contains β\beta as a pattern if there are indices 1≤i1<i2<⋯<ik≤n1\le i_1<i_2<\dots<i_k\le n such that, for all 1≤a<b≤k1\le a<b\le k,

σ(ia)<σ(ib)  ⟺  β(a)<β(b),\sigma(i_a)<\sigma(i_b)\iff \beta(a)<\beta(b),

and say that σ\sigma avoids β\beta otherwise. For n≥1n\ge 1 let

Sn(β)={σ∈Sn: σ avoids β},S_n(\beta)=\{\sigma\in S_n:\ \sigma \text{ avoids } \beta\},

where SnS_n is the set of all permutations of {1,2,…,n}\{1,2,\dots,n\}.

For every k≥1k\ge 1 and every permutation β∈Sk\beta\in S_k there exists a constant C=C(β)<∞C=C(\beta)<\infty such that

∣Sn(β)∣≤C nfor all n≥1;|S_n(\beta)|\le C^{\,n}\qquad\text{for all } n\ge 1;

equivalently, the limit

lim⁡n→∞∣Sn(β)∣n\lim_{n\to\infty}\sqrt[n]{|S_n(\beta)|}

exists and is finite.

References

Primary source

Wikipedia

Additional references

  1. Wikipedia, Stanley–Wilf conjecture, the article this problem comes from.

Progress summary

Refreshed
Claimed solved

The conjecture is an established theorem: avoiding any fixed pattern produces at most exponentially many permutations, and the associated growth rate exists.

The conjecture asks for an exponential upper bound on permutations avoiding each fixed pattern. Marcus and Tardos proved this affirmatively in 2004.

Known results

  • Füredi–Hajnal's extremal-function conjecture was proved by Marcus and Tardos in 2004, giving the linear bound underlying the result.
  • Marcus and Tardos, 2004: for every fixed pattern π\pi, ∣Av⁡n(π)∣|\operatorname{Av}_n(\pi)| is bounded above by c(π)nc(\pi)^n.
  • Arratia, 1999: the limit lim⁡n→∞∣Av⁡n(π)∣1/n\lim_{n\to\infty}|\operatorname{Av}_n(\pi)|^{1/n} exists; later sources cite this as the growth-rate formulation.

Community submission (unverified), September 8, 2026

A submitted proof presents the established Marcus–Tardos argument and proposes a Lean 44 formalization, using sum or skew-sum decompositions and supermultiplicativity before invoking the exponential bound. The formalization and its exposition are unverified.

Current status (as of September 2026): The exponential bound is established for every fixed pattern by Marcus and Tardos, and the finite growth-rate limit is recorded via Arratia; the submitted Lean formalization remains unverified.

Sources

Solutions 1

ProofAI-assistedA symbolic-method exposition and Lean 4 formalization of the Stanley–Wilf theorem, combining Arratia’s supermultiplicativity argument with the Marcus–Tardos/Klazar bound. Includes a two-page proof note, public source, and kernel-axiom audit. The extremal layer adapts the attributed ForbiddenMatrix library.See full solutionHide full solution

A symbolic-method presentation and Lean 4 formalization

The Stanley–Wilf conjecture is a theorem of Marcus and Tardos (2004). The following is a presentation of the established argument, with Arratia's limit-existence step organized through the symbolic method, together with a Lean 4 formalization. No mathematical priority is claimed.

Fix a pattern β∈Sk\beta\in S_k and write cn=∣Sn(β)∣c_n=|S_n(\beta)|, with c0=1c_0=1. If k=1k=1, then cn=0c_n=0 for every n≥1n\geq1, and both assertions are immediate. Assume k≥2k\geq2.

A permutation cannot have both a nontrivial direct-sum decomposition and a nontrivial skew-sum decomposition: the former places its smallest entry before its largest, while the latter places its largest before its smallest. Thus β\beta is indecomposable for at least one of these two operations.

Choose such an operation. The avoidance class C=Av⁡(β)\mathcal C=\operatorname{Av}(\beta) is closed under it. Indeed, an occurrence in a sum of two avoiders cannot lie entirely in either block, and an occurrence meeting both blocks would give a nontrivial decomposition of β\beta for the chosen operation.

Let I\mathcal I consist of the nonempty indecomposable members of C\mathcal C. Components of an avoider again avoid β\beta, and closure reconstructs an avoider from such components. The unique indecomposable decomposition gives the symbolic specification

C=SEQ⁡(I),C(z)=11−I(z),\mathcal C=\operatorname{SEQ}(\mathcal I),\qquad C(z)=\frac{1}{1-I(z)},

where C(z)=∑n≥0cnznC(z)=\sum_{n\geq0}c_nz^n and I(z)=∑n≥1inznI(z)=\sum_{n\geq1}i_nz^n are formal ordinary generating functions. Concatenation of component sequences of fixed sizes m,nm,n is injective: positive component sizes uniquely determine the cut at cumulative size mm. Consequently,

cm+n≥cmcn.c_{m+n}\geq c_mc_n.

The singleton avoids β\beta, so repeated use of the chosen operation gives cn≥1c_n\geq1. Fekete's lemma applied to log⁡cn\log c_n therefore gives

lim⁡n→∞cn1/n=sup⁡n≥1cn1/n,\lim_{n\to\infty}c_n^{1/n}=\sup_{n\geq1}c_n^{1/n},

initially allowing +∞+\infty. The Marcus–Tardos theorem supplies a finite exponential bound cn≤Kβnc_n\leq K_\beta^n. This proves the first assertion and bounds the displayed supremum by KβK_\beta, proving that the limit exists and is finite.

The accompanying Lean development also formalizes the extremal-matrix and matrix-counting steps underlying the exponential bound. It uses an attributed Lean 4.29 adaptation of Yaël Dillies and contributors' Apache-2.0 ForbiddenMatrix development for the Marcus–Tardos layer. The permutation bridge, Klazar counting recurrence, dyadic estimate, symbolic route, and unconditional endpoint are assembled in this repository. The explicit bound is

cn≤(2⋅152Mk)n,Mk=2k4(k2k).c_n\leq\bigl(2\cdot15^{2M_k}\bigr)^n,\qquad M_k=2k^4\binom{k^2}{k}.

The public endpoint is StanleyWilf.stanleyWilf {k : Nat} (tau : Perm k) : GrowthTarget tau. It has no supplied exponential-bound hypothesis; GrowthTarget asserts convergence to a finite nonnegative real number. Lean obtains supermultiplicativity from the first-component bijection and its convolution. The complete size-wise SEQ equivalence uses Fintype.equivOfCardEq; no executable whole-factor-list decomposition is claimed.

References: R. Arratia, On the Stanley–Wilf conjecture for the number of permutations avoiding a given pattern, Electronic Journal of Combinatorics 6 (1999), N1; A. Marcus and G. Tardos, Excluded permutation matrices and the Stanley–Wilf conjecture, Journal of Combinatorial Theory A 107 (2004), 153–160; M. Klazar, The Füredi–Hajnal conjecture implies the Stanley–Wilf conjecture, Formal Power Series and Algebraic Combinatorics (2000), 250–255, DOI 10.1007/978-3-662-04166-6_22; P. Flajolet and R. Sedgewick, Analytic Combinatorics, Cambridge University Press, 2009. Marcus–Tardos §3 reproduces Klazar's counting reduction.