Research notes on every problem, and a library of the papers behind them. Built from the open erdos repository.
Updated
Deshouillers 1995 additive problem erdos straus
theorem_1: Deshouillers and Freiman's 1995 bound: an admissible subset of [1,N] has at most 2N^{1/2} + C N^{5/12} elements, the (2+o(1))√N bound whose constant 2 is best possible by Straus's block; superseded for large N by the exact bound of their 1999 paper.
theorem_2: Deshouillers and Freiman's 1995 structure theorem: for N large, an admissible subset of [1,N] with more than 1.96√N elements has a subset of at most 10^5 N^{5/12} elements whose t-fold distinct sums contain a long arithmetic progression, with the rest of the set inside a short progression of the same difference; the input the 1999 exact bound quotes as its Theorem 2.
J-M. Deshouillers and G. A. Freiman, On an additive problem of Erdős and Straus, 1, Israel Journal of Mathematics 92 (1995), 33--43, DOI 10.1007/BF02762069 (the DOI is the publisher's, from the Crossref record and the acquisition URL; the PDF does not print it); received March 11, 1993 and in revised form March 22, 1994 (p. 33); the authors at Mathématiques Stochastiques, Université Bordeaux 2, and the School of Mathematical Sciences, Tel Aviv University. Cited as [DeFr95] on the problem pages. Its five references (p. 43) are Erdős, Some remarks on number theory, III, Math. Lapok 13 (1962), 28--38 (the paper's abbreviation, PDF p. 11, page image; the journal's own name is Matematikai Lapok), filed as erdos_1962_szamelmeleti_megjegyzesek; Erdős, Nicolas and Sárközy, Sommes de sous-ensembles (1991), filed as erdos_1991_sommes_de_sous_ensembles; Freiman's 1959 paper The addition of finite sets (Russian) and his 1973 monograph Foundations of a Structural Theory of Set Addition; and Straus, On a problem in combinatorial number theory, J. Math. Sci. 1 (1966), 77--80 (not held). The sequel, part 2 (Astérisque 258 (1999), 141--148), is filed as deshouillers_1999_additive_problem_erdos_straus and quotes this paper's Theorem 2 as its own Theorem 2.
The copy read for this card is the publisher's scan of the printed article: 11 pages, printed pp. 33--43 = PDF pp. 1--11 (printed p. is PDF p. ), a 2007 scan of the printed pages (the file's metadata names a TIFF source and a November 2007 creation date) with an OCR text layer that reads the prose and garbles the mathematics (calligraphic letters, the wedge in , inequality signs, floors and fractions come out as scattered characters). Provenance: obtained from the publisher on 2026-09-22 as a DRM-free per-article PDF through the library's acquisition, from https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02762069; 416,956 bytes. No notice is printed on the scan; the publisher's article page (https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/BF02762069, read 2026-10-02) shows a Rights and permissions section and no open access or Creative Commons license, its copyright holder line not rendered in that read, every other right reserved.
Read status: claims checked for the abstract and the definition of admissibility (p. 33), the account of Erdős's and Straus's results, Theorem 1, Theorem 2 with its remark on the constant , Theorem 3 and the standing assumption (pp. 34--35), each read clause by clause on the page images of PDF pp. 1--3 on 2026-09-22; the proof of Theorem 1 (Section 6, pp. 41--42) was read in full on the page images of PDF pp. 9--10 and its reduction to Theorem 2 followed; Proposition 1 and its proof (p. 35) were read on the page image. Sections 2--5 (pp. 35--41: Propositions 2, 3.1--3.3 and 4 and the proof of Theorem 2) were read in the text layer for structure only, and none of their computations was checked. Nothing here is independently reviewed.
Contents
- Abstract and introduction (pp. 33--34, page images). The abstract defines, "according to Erdős and Straus", an admissible subset of as one "such that whenever an integer can be written as a sum of distinct elements from , then is well defined", and announces the bound on the cardinality of such a set, improving earlier results, with the constant best possible by Straus. The notion is attributed to Erdős (1962, the paper's [1]) and the name to Straus ([5]); with the set of integers representable as a sum of distinct elements of , admissibility is for all . Page 34 records that Erdős proved an admissible subset of has cardinality and suggested that the maximum is attained by the consecutive integers at the top of ; that Straus proved and exhibited an admissible with ; and that Erdős, Nicolas and Sárközy ([2]) had recently lowered the constant , the paper's primary aim being to lower it to , which Straus's example shows to be best possible.
- Theorem 1 (p. 34, quoted): "There exists a constant such that any admissible set included in satisfies ." The paper adds that determining the structure of large admissible sets is an interesting question, that Theorem 2 is a first step toward it, strong enough that Theorem 1 follows from it easily, and that Theorem 2 is far from its strongest form, a topic the authors intend to return to.
- Theorem 2 (p. 34, quoted): "Let be an admissible set included in , such that . If is large enough, there exists having the following properties: (i) , (ii) for some , the set contains an arithmetic progression with at least terms, and difference , say, (iii) is included in an arithmetic progression with difference , and containing at most terms." Remark: "It will be clear from the proof that a similar result may be obtained when 1.96 is replaced by any number larger than ." Filing observation (PDF p. 2, page image at 300 dpi: the root sign covers ): the printed expression does not equal the printed value, since ; the constant intended is , which matches the printed value.
- Theorem 3 (p. 34, quoted), which the paper derives from the second author's structural result ([3]) as the key inverse additive input to the proof of Theorem 2: "Let and be a finite set of integers such that $\operatorname{card}(4^\wedge\mathcal B)\le \lambda\operatorname{card}\mathcal B$. There exist real numbers and such that contains an arithmetic progression with at least terms." Standing assumption for the rest of the paper (pp. 34--35): is a sufficiently large integer and an admissible subset of with , the upper bound being valid for any admissible set by Straus's result. The acknowledgment (p. 35) thanks N. Alon and B. Sudakov for pointing out inaccuracies in a first draft.
- Section 1 (p. 35, page image). Proposition 1: there is an integer in with . The proof sums the disjoint sets over that interval, all inside , and gets for large otherwise, against the standing assumption.
- Sections 2--4 (pp. 35--39, text layer). Proposition 2: for any integer between 1 and there is with and , found inside a block of consecutive elements using (complementation). Section 3 states three general results: Proposition 3.1, Freiman's inverse theorem in its easiest case ($|2\mathcal S|\le 2|\mathcal S|-1+b$ with puts in an arithmetic progression of length ; cited to [4], Thm. 1.9, p. 11, with the original proof in [3]); Proposition 3.2 (a set inside a progression of length at most has containing a progression of length with the same difference, for ); Proposition 3.3 (). Section 4 proves Proposition 4, the special case of Theorem 3: for large and , the set contains at least terms in an arithmetic progression, through the set of elements of with more than representations.
- Section 5 (pp. 39--41; p. 41 on the page image, the rest in the text layer): the proof of Theorem 2, with and . Propositions 2 and 4 give whose contains at least terms of a progression of difference ; the elements of fall into fewer than residue classes modulo , the differences between one "rich" class and each of the others have order less than in and generate a subgroup (p. 40), , and the smallest and largest remaining elements are collected into so that the rest spans at most terms of the progression; each step bounds from below against Proposition 1's .
- Section 6 (pp. 41--42, page images): the proof of Theorem 1. It opens by disposing of the case and the case of small , where Theorem 1 holds trivially. Otherwise Theorem 2 supplies , and , with () the progression in ; an integer congruent to modulo 2 with is chosen and . The sums (), , ..., of elements of are congruent modulo with consecutive gaps at most , so contains every integer of its residue class in an interval ; the element of is in the same class and lies in once (the paper's ), which reduces to for a multiple of in and holds because and . The common element contradicts admissibility, so for large .
- References (p. 43, page image): the five items listed above.
Compiled scope
The paper is compiled at statement depth for the two results the citing problems consume: Theorem 1, the bound, and Theorem 2, the structure theorem the 1999 exact bound rests on, both read on the page image of printed p. 34 and paged on theorem_1 and theorem_2. The proof of Theorem 1 from Theorem 2 was read in full on the page images; the proof of Theorem 2 (Sections 1--5) was read for structure only. Nothing here is independently reviewed.
Bears on. #874: Theorem 1 (printed p. 34, PDF p. 2, page image), "There exists a constant such that any admissible set included in satisfies ", is the bound for the problem's , with the constant best possible by Straus's block (p. 34: an admissible with exists); it gives , hence , the affirmative answer to the site's asymptotic question, before the exact bound for large of the 1999 paper. Theorem 2 (p. 34, PDF p. 2, page image) is the structure theorem quoted as Theorem 2 of the 1999 paper, on which its Theorem 1, the problem's status-defining result, rests. #875: Theorem 1 applied to the initial segments of an infinite admissible set gives , so and a gap bound for all large forces , the same conclusions the problem page draws from the sharper 1999 bound (deduction on the result page).
Results.
- Theorem 1 (p. 34): for every admissible ; the proof (pp. 41--42) takes for large .
- Theorem 2 (p. 34): for admissible with and large, a subset of at most elements with containing at least terms of an arithmetic progression of difference , and inside a progression of difference with at most terms.
No file of this source is held: no license on record permits its redistribution, and the card cites the edition it names above.