Paper detail

Asymmetric Latin squares, Steiner triple systems, and edge-parallelisms

This article, showing that almost all objects in the title are asymmetric, is re-typed from a manuscript I wrote somewhere around 1980 (after the papers of Bang and Friedland on the permanent conjecture but before those of Egorychev and Falikman). I am not sure of the exact date. The manuscript had been lost, but surfaced among my papers recently. I am grateful to Laci Babai and Ian Wanless who have encouraged me to make this document public, and to Ian for spotting a couple of typos. In the section on Latin squares, Ian objects to my use of the term "cell"; this might be more reasonably called a "triple" (since it specifies a row, column and symbol), but I have decided to keep the terminology I originally used. The result for Latin squares is in B. D. McKay and I. M. Wanless, On the number of Latin squares, Annals of Combinatorics 9 (2005), 335-344 (arXiv 0909.2101), while the result for Steiner triple systems is in L. Babai, Almost all Steiner triple systems are asymmetric, Annals of Discrete Mathematics 7 (1980), 37-39.

preprint2015arXivOpen access

Signal facts

What is known right now

Open access1 author1 topic

Next steps

Decide what to do with this paper

Use like or dislike for the fast social read. The more specific scholarly feedback stays available below when needed.

Log in to curate

Reading frame

Keep the important context close to the paper

Keep the important signals around this paper in one place: votes, save state, collection context, reviews and the metadata you need before deciding what to do next.

Institutions

Add specific reaction

Move through the context

Research map

Open full explorer

Move through nearby people, institutions, topics and adjacent work without leaving the paper page.

Building this map preview

BZPEER is loading the nearby papers, people, topics and institutions for this page.

Structured reviews

0 review(s)

ContributeLeave structured feedbackUse the review template when you have a concrete strength, concern or method question.Open review form

No structured reviews yet. High-signal critique starts here.

Work discussion

0 comment(s)

DiscussAdd a high-signal commentKeep quick notes, caveats and replication pointers separate from formal reviews.Open comment form

No discussion yet. The first strong comment sets the tone.