Research notes on every problem, and a library of the papers behind them. Built from the open erdos repository.
Updated
Statement
Example 1.2 (p. 2). Let be a prime and the largest integer with . Choose of order so that and . Then is square-sum-free: no nonempty subset of sums to a square.
The paper presents the example (p. 1) as the reason for Erdős's observation (1), , where is the largest size of a square-sum-free subset of . Remark 1.3 (p. 2) adds that need not be prime: a square-free , a product of distinct primes, also works.
Proof sketch
The paper states the example without proof. A subset sum of is with , so the prime divides it exactly once and it is not a square. For square-free , a square would force every prime factor of to divide , hence , which rules out. Both conditions can be met with of order : is then of order and of order , so taking a suitable constant multiple of gives .
Read depth
Claims checked: the example, Remark 1.3 and (1) were read clause by clause on the arXiv print. The sketch above is written here.
Dependencies
None.
Source. H. H. Nguyen and V. H. Vu, Squares in sumsets, in An Irregular Mind, Bolyai Soc. Math. Stud. 21, Springer (2010), 491--524, doi:10.1007/978-3-642-14444-8_14; arXiv:0811.1311v2, whose labels and pages are used here; the edition read is named on the source card.
Bears on
- Problem 587: the example gives a subset of of elements with no square subset sum, the lower bound that Theorem 1.4 matches up to the factor .