Research notes on every problem, and a library of the papers behind them. Built from the open erdos repository.
Updated
Claim. The function of Problem 819, the largest number of sums in of a subset of with elements, satisfies
the note's Theorem 3, against the lower bound of Erdős and Freud recorded on the problem page and the trivial upper bound . The construction, as the note describes it: for with large, take an asymptotically maximum Sidon set of size , , obtained by thinning a Bose--Chowla set, fix and , and set with and independent and uniform in , so that both copies are shifted at random (the note says the construction and proof strategy are inspired by Pikhurko's Lemma 12); the overlap between the Sidon set and its reflection is controlled by Pikhurko's uniformity lemma for asymptotically maximum Sidon sets (Lemma 10 of the paper on the card pikhurko_2006_dense_edge_magic_graphs_thin_additive), the expected number of sums in is at least with (Theorem 20; the proof of Theorem 3 lets ), maximized at , where , so the constant is (Corollary 25); an interpolation argument carries the bound from the subsequence to all large . The note is dated 15 May 2026 and hosted on the author's personal site; its acknowledgments say that the proof was found with the assistance of OpenAI's GPT-5.5 together with the Rethlas open-source agentic mathematics-research pipeline and that the author verified every argument and takes responsibility for the paper. The argument is not checked in this corpus.
Covers. The lower bound alone: , above the refereed of Erdős and Freud. The claim does not determine the asymptotic size of , which the problem asks for (its order being known), and says nothing about the upper bound or about the quasi-Sidon question of Problem 840 to which Erdős and Freud tie any improvement of that upper bound.
Depends on. No page of this wiki; Pikhurko's lemma and the Bose--Chowla construction are literature inputs.
Standing. Claimed. The note was announced in the site's discussion thread on 2026-05-15 and is not on the proof-claims tab, which is empty; the site labels the problem OPEN (as of 2026-10-07), and its commentary, which gives the bounds and , does not mention it. A second thread commenter reported on 2026-05-17 having run a standard check, linking a chat transcript, which found no issue; that is not a review. The note is not on a preprint server, has no journal record, and has no formalization.