Wiki
Wiki

Research notes on every problem, and a library of the papers behind them. Built from the open erdos repository.

Updated

Semchankau 2020 maximal subsets free arithmetic progressions arbitrary

../

hypothesis_1: Semchankau's Hypothesis 1, proved in the paper for ε in (3/4, 1): for ε > 0 there is a subpolynomial h such that from any n-element integer set one can remove at most εn elements so that the rest has a compression, a set keeping every relation x_i − 2x_j + x_k = 0, inside [n h(n)].

lemma_3_2: Lemma 3.2 of Semchankau's paper: for large n, k ≥ 3 and α in (0, 1/4), every n-element integer set has a subset with no nontrivial k-term arithmetic progression of size more than αn times the density ρ_k(C_{α,k} n ln n) of a largest such subset of an interval of length C_{α,k} n ln n.

theorem_1: Semchankau's main theorem: for every k ≥ 3 there is an increasing sequence of natural numbers, with a member in every segment [n, n e^{(ln n)^{1/2+o(1)}}], along which every n-element integer set has a subset of size more than (1/4 + o(1)) g_k(n) with no nontrivial k-term arithmetic progression, g_k(n) being the size of a largest such subset of [1, n].


Aliaksei Semchankau, Maximal subsets free of arithmetic progressions in arbitrary sets. Math. Notes 102 (2017), no. 3-4, 396--402, DOI 10.1134/S0001434617090097; Russian original Mat. Zametki 102 (2017), no. 3, 436--444 (Crossref records read). The copy read for this card is arXiv:2010.04490v1 (9 October 2020, eight pages); the journal version was not compared.

For an integer set BB and k≥3k\ge3 let fk(B)f_k(B) be the size of a largest subset of BB with no nontrivial kk-term arithmetic progression, a progression being trivial when its terms are all equal; ϕk(n)\phi_k(n) is the minimum of fk(B)f_k(B) over sets BB of size nn, gk(n)=fk({1,…,n})g_k(n)=f_k(\{1,\ldots,n\}) and ρk(n)=gk(n)/n\rho_k(n)=g_k(n)/n (p. 1). The introduction recalls the theorem of Komlós, Sulyok and Szemerédi in the form ϕ3(n)>(1/215+o(1))g3(n)\phi_3(n)>(1/2^{15}+o(1))g_3(n), and O'Bryant's unproved remark that 1/2151/2^{15} might be improved to 1/341/34 (pp. 1--2). Theorem 1 (p. 2) gives the constant 1/41/4 along a sequence of nn: for every k≥3k\ge3 there are n1<n2<⋯n_1<n_2<\cdots with ϕk(n)>(1/4+o(1))gk(n)\phi_k(n)>(1/4+o(1))g_k(n) for each of them, and every segment [n,ne(ln⁡n)1/2+o(1)][n,ne^{(\ln n)^{1/2+o(1)}}] contains one; the paper calls this an improvement of the 1975 bound "for a subsequence of N\mathbb N" (p. 2), and attributes the constant to compressing modulo a prime twice and keeping roughly half of the elements each time.

Section 2 (pp. 2--6) calls Y={y1,…,yn}Y=\{y_1,\ldots,y_n\} a compression of X={x1,…,xn}X=\{x_1,\ldots,x_n\} when every relation xi−2xj+xk=0x_i-2x_j+x_k=0 implies yi−2yj+yk=0y_i-2y_j+y_k=0, a notion the paper relates to Freiman homomorphisms, and states Hypothesis 1 (p. 2): for each ϵ>0\epsilon>0 some subpolynomial hϵh_\epsilon allows any nn-element integer set, after deleting at most ϵn\epsilon n elements, to be compressed into [nh(n)][nh(n)]. It is proved only for ϵ∈(3/4,1)\epsilon\in(3/4,1) (p. 6), by three compressions: Lemma 2.1 (p. 2), any set of size nn into [4n46n/2][4n^46^{n/2}]; Lemma 2.2 (p. 5), half of a set in [1,4n46n/2][1,4n^46^{n/2}] into [n3][n^3] by reduction modulo a prime p≤2n3p\le2n^3; and Lemma 2.3 (p. 5), a (1/2−ϵ)(1/2-\epsilon) share of a set in [8n3][8n^3] into [Cϵnln⁡n][C_\epsilon n\ln n] (its printed statement omits the words "compressed into"). Section 3 (pp. 6--7) proves Lemma 3.1 (p. 6), ρk(3ab)≥ρ3(a)ρk(b)/3\rho_k(3ab)\ge\rho_3(a)\rho_k(b)/3, and Lemma 3.2 (p. 6), ϕk(n)>αnρk(Cα,knln⁡n)\phi_k(n)>\alpha n\rho_k(C_{\alpha,k}n\ln n) for large nn, k≥3k\ge3 and α∈(0,1/4)\alpha\in(0,1/4), and derives Theorem 1 from Lemma 3.2 by contradiction (p. 7).

Read status: claims checked for the notation and recalled bounds (p. 1), Theorem 1, the definition of compression, Hypothesis 1 and Lemma 2.1 (p. 2), Lemmas 2.2 and 2.3 (p. 5), the proof of the case ϵ∈(3/4,1)\epsilon\in(3/4,1) and Lemmas 3.1 and 3.2 (p. 6), each read clause by clause on the page images of the arXiv copy; the proofs of Lemmas 2.1--2.3, 3.2 and Theorem 1 (pp. 2--7) were read for structure only, and nothing here is independently reviewed.

Source: https://arxiv.org/abs/2010.04490. The arXiv record names arXiv's non-exclusive distribution license (arXiv:2010.04490), every other right reserved.

Bears on. #201: in the problem's notation Gk(N)=ϕk(N)G_k(N)=\phi_k(N) and Rk(N)=gk(N)R_k(N)=g_k(N), so Theorem 1 (p. 2) gives Gk(N)>(1/4+o(1))Rk(N)G_k(N)>(1/4+o(1))R_k(N) for every k≥3k\ge3 along a sequence of NN with a member in every segment [N,Ne(ln⁡N)1/2+o(1)][N,Ne^{(\ln N)^{1/2+o(1)}}], and no bound for the other NN; Lemma 3.2 (p. 6) gives, for every large NN, Gk(N)>αNρk(Cα,kNln⁡N)G_k(N)>\alpha N\rho_k(C_{\alpha,k}N\ln N) for k≥3k\ge3 and α∈(0,1/4)\alpha\in(0,1/4), a comparison with the extremal density at the longer length Cα,kNln⁡NC_{\alpha,k}N\ln N rather than with Rk(N)R_k(N). Neither decides whether R3(N)/G3(N)→1R_3(N)/G_3(N)\to1.

Results.

  • Theorem 1 (p. 2): for every k≥3k\ge3 there is a sequence n1<n2<⋯n_1<n_2<\cdots, with a member in every segment [n,ne(ln⁡n)1/2+o(1)][n,ne^{(\ln n)^{1/2+o(1)}}], along which ϕk(n)>(1/4+o(1))gk(n)\phi_k(n)>(1/4+o(1))g_k(n).
  • Hypothesis 1 (p. 2; the case ϵ∈(3/4,1)\epsilon\in(3/4,1) proved on p. 6): for each ϵ>0\epsilon>0 some subpolynomial hϵh_\epsilon allows any nn-element integer set, after deleting at most ϵn\epsilon n elements, to be compressed into [nh(n)][nh(n)].
  • Lemma 3.2 (p. 6): for large nn, k≥3k\ge3 and α∈(0,1/4)\alpha\in(0,1/4), ϕk(n)>αnρk(Cα,knln⁡n)\phi_k(n)>\alpha n\rho_k(C_{\alpha,k}n\ln n).

No file of this source is held: no license on record permits its redistribution, and the card cites the edition it names above.