Construct · 1 fields · 3 citations
One name. One construct. A landmark on the map.
● anchor · a standalone principle Nearest construct by meaningarrangementcompare the meaningsEvery construct on the map is compared with every other by the meaning of its definitions, and the closest one is surfaced here. The nearest construct to pigeonhole principle is arrangement.
Hold this as a prompt, not a verdict. Two constructs sitting close in meaning is a reason to read them side by side and decide for yourself whether they are one idea under two names. It is not proof that they are. Compare the meanings in the Collider.
A single standalone construct; nearby constructs are located against it in the Collider. Tap a field for its definition, unit, and measures.
The pigeonhole principle is the observation that if n items are placed into m containers and n is greater than m, then at least one container must hold more than one item. Historians trace an informal statement to a 1622 collection of mathematical recreations by the Jesuit writer Jean Leurechon, and the principle took its standard formal name from Peter Gustav Lejeune Dirichlet, who by the 1830s was calling it the Schubfachprinzip, German for drawer principle, from which come the English names Dirichlet's box principle and Dirichlet's drawer principle (Rittaud and Heeffer, 2014). Its general form states that distributing n objects among m boxes forces some box to contain at least the ceiling of n divided by m objects. What makes it a landmark is its reach relative to its simplicity: a one-line counting fact underwrites existence proofs across combinatorics, number theory, and geometry, guaranteeing that some configuration must occur without exhibiting it, as in the standard results collected in van Lint and Wilson (2001) and Aigner and Ziegler (2018).[1][2][3]
Next
See how pigeonhole principle sits against neighbouring constructs in the Collider, or export every reference on this page in one click.
Open in ColliderExport BibTeXReport this entryCited on this page?
If your work is cited behind one of these entries, you know better than we do whether we captured the meaning right. Confirm it, suggest an edit, or dispute it, and your name goes on the entry as an author who has checked it, linked to your ORCID.
Claim your construct