Wiki
Wiki

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

Updated


This is a complete author-recorded proof of L217. Until the final section, all asymptotic constants are absolute and concern s→∞s\to\infty; that section states its additional parameter dependence. Write W=s3−s2+sW=s^3-s^2+s, N=sWN=sW, k=s2k=s^2 and D=W−1D=W-1. The probability law μs\mu_s is the equal-block law of L216, whose difference capacities imply EQ≤D\mathbb E Q\le D.

We first prove

Var⁡μsQ≤3+2212s3+O(s5/2),(1)\operatorname{Var}_{\mu_s} Q \le\frac{3+2\sqrt2}{12}s^3+O(s^{5/2}), \tag{1}

and

Eμs∑d=1DrA(d)(rA(d)−1)=s3+O(s2).(2)\mathbb E_{\mu_s}\sum_{d=1}^{D}r_A(d)(r_A(d)-1) =s^3+O(s^2). \tag{2}

The constant in (1) is less than 1/21/2, whereas the leading constant in (2) is one.

The variance before sampling without replacement

For this calculation allow ss independent uniform labeled positions in each block, with repetitions. Count a pair of coinciding labels once as a pair of distance zero. Let CC count pairs at cyclic distance at most DD, and let Q∗Q_* count pairs at ordinary distance at most DD after an independent uniform rotation. Then Q∗=C−ZQ_*=C-Z, where ZZ counts the short cyclic pairs which cross the cut. The comparison with sets will remove all repetitions.

More generally, take B≥3B\ge3 blocks of length WW and mm independent points per block. If UbU_b denotes their coordinates in {0,…,W−1}\{0,\ldots,W-1\}, then

C=B(m2)+∑b∈ZBH(Ub,Ub+1),H(U,V)=∑x∈U, y∈V1y<x,(3)C=B\binom m2+\sum_{b\in\mathbb Z_B}H(U_b,U_{b+1}),\qquad H(U,V)=\sum_{x\in U,\,y\in V}\mathbf1_{y<x}, \tag{3}

with sums over labels. For independent uniform X,YX,Y in one block, put α=(W−1)/(2W)\alpha=(W-1)/(2W) and a(x)=(x−(W−1)/2)/Wa(x)=(x-(W-1)/2)/W. The kernel

g(x,y)=1y<x−α−a(x)+a(y)g(x,y)=\mathbf1_{y<x}-\alpha-a(x)+a(y)

has zero row and column means, and direct summation gives

Eg(X,Y)2=W2−112W2.(4)\mathbb E g(X,Y)^2=\frac{W^2-1}{12W^2}. \tag{4}

For example, Var⁡(1Y<X)=(W2−1)/(4W2)\operatorname{Var}(\mathbf1_{Y<X})=(W^2-1)/(4W^2) and each of the two orthogonal one-variable projections has variance (W2−1)/(12W2)(W^2-1)/(12W^2), giving (4) by subtraction. The one-variable terms in (3) telescope over the cycle. The residuals on different block boundaries have zero covariance: disjoint ones are independent, and for adjacent ones conditioning on the common block leaves two independent variables of conditional mean zero. Inside one boundary sum, distinct label pairs likewise have zero covariance. Consequently

Var⁡C=Bm212(1−W−2).(5)\operatorname{Var} C =\frac{B m^2}{12}(1-W^{-2}). \tag{5}

The variance caused by the cut

We show, uniformly for W≥mW\ge m and B≥4B\ge4,

Var⁡Z≤m36+O(m2+m3/W).(6)\operatorname{Var} Z\le\frac{m^3}{6}+O(m^2+m^3/W). \tag{6}

Only the block containing the cut and its two neighbors can contribute to ZZ. Conditional on the cut, it is a sum of zero-one kernels over pairs of at most 3m3m independent labeled positions. Decompose each kernel into its mean, two one-variable projections and a residual with zero conditional mean in each variable. This is an orthogonal decomposition: residuals on distinct label pairs have zero covariance, including when they share one label. Each residual has squared norm at most the squared norm of its original zero-one kernel, hence at most one. The total residual variance is therefore O(m2)O(m^2).

Scale distances from the cut by WW, and let f(x)=(1−∣x∣)+f(x)=(1-|x|)_+. For a labeled position at xx, the expected number of its partners across the cut is

mf(x)−b(x)+O(m/W),0≤b(x)≤1.(7)m f(x)-b(x)+O(m/W),\qquad 0\le b(x)\le1. \tag{7}

The triangular term counts all positions across the cut within distance W−1W-1 at density m/Wm/W. The term bb subtracts the spurious partner label equal to the chosen label in its own block. The error is uniform: the integer count of allowed positions differs from Wf(x)Wf(x) by a bounded amount.

Let the cut fall at relative position a∈[0,1]a\in[0,1] in its block. The three unit blocks around the cut have integrals of ff equal to

(1−a)22,12+a−a2,a22.\frac{(1-a)^2}{2},\qquad \frac12+a-a^2, \qquad\frac{a^2}{2}.

Since ∫f2=2/3\int f^2=2/3, the sum of its within-block variances is

K(a)=23−((1−a)44+(12+a−a2)2+a44)=16−32a2(1−a)2≤16.(8)K(a)=\frac23-\left(\frac{(1-a)^4}{4} +\left(\frac12+a-a^2\right)^2+\frac{a^4}{4}\right) =\frac16-\frac32a^2(1-a)^2\le\frac16. \tag{8}

For the discrete grid the same sum is at most 1/6+O(1/W)1/6+O(1/W), uniformly in aa: the bounded, piecewise linear functions ff and f2f^2 have uniformly bounded variation, so their left Riemann sums differ from their integrals by O(1/W)O(1/W). Equations (7)--(8), with mm labels in each block, show that the one-variable part of the conditional variance is at most m3/6+O(m2+m3/W)m^3/6+O(m^2+m^3/W). Together with the residual bound this proves the same bound for Var⁡(Z∣cut)\operatorname{Var}(Z\mid\text{cut}).

Its conditional mean differs by O(m)O(m) from the cut-independent value m2D(D+1)/(2W2)m^2D(D+1)/(2W^2). Indeed the leading term counts the D(D+1)/2D(D+1)/2 unordered position pairs across the cut with density m2/W2m^2/W^2. Excluding identical labels subtracts at most mm times a bounded number of normalized within-block pair counts. Thus the variance of the conditional mean is O(m2)O(m^2). The law of total variance proves (6).

Now use B=m=sB=m=s and W≍s3W\asymp s^3. From (5)--(6) and the triangle inequality for centered L2L^2 norms,

Var⁡Q∗≤Var⁡C+Var⁡Z,Var⁡Q∗≤(1+2)212s3+O(s2).(9)\sqrt{\operatorname{Var}Q_*} \le\sqrt{\operatorname{Var}C}+\sqrt{\operatorname{Var}Z}, \qquad \operatorname{Var}Q_* \le\frac{(1+\sqrt2)^2}{12}s^3+O(s^2). \tag{9}

Coupling back to genuine sets

Within each block accept the independent positions in label order. If a position repeats an already accepted one, replace it by a fresh uniform position outside the accepted set. This yields a uniform sample without replacement. Keep the same random rotation. If JJ is the total number of labels replaced, its conditional replacement probability at the jjth label of a block is (j−1)/W(j-1)/W. Thus

EJ=s2(s−1)2W=O(1),EJ2=O(1).(10)\mathbb E J=\frac{s^2(s-1)}{2W}=O(1),\qquad \mathbb E J^2=O(1). \tag{10}

For the second assertion, conditional expectations of two distinct replacement indicators factor: at the later label its conditional probability is the same deterministic number, regardless of the earlier history. Hence the second moment is at most EJ+(EJ)2\mathbb E J+(\mathbb E J)^2.

Replacing a point inside its block changes the short-pair count by at most 3s3s: only labels in that block and its two neighbors can be involved, before or after the replacement. Therefore ∥Q−Q∗∥2=O(s)\|Q-Q_*\|_2=O(s). Standard deviation is 11-Lipschitz in L2L^2 (it is distance to the constant random variables), so (9) gives (1). The convention for coincident labels disappears after this coupling.

Repeated differences and the cost of renormalization

For any fixed set TT of t≤4t\le4 distinct positions, and any rotation, its inclusion probability is a product of factors (s)tb/(W)tb(s)_{t_b}/(W)_{t_b}, where tbt_b counts its positions in block bb and (v)j=v(v−1)⋯(v−j+1)(v)_j=v(v-1)\cdots(v-j+1). Uniformly in TT and the rotation,

p(T)=yt(1+O(s−1)),y=s/W.(11)p(T)=y^t(1+O(s^{-1})),\qquad y=s/W. \tag{11}

For s≥4s\ge4 these probabilities are positive. In particular the denominators defining a3,a4a_3,a_4 are positive, since strong Sidon triples and quadruples exist in the interval.

For d≤Dd\le D, the number of ordered pairs of distinct dd-edges having four different endpoints is

(N−d)(N−d−1)−2(N−2d)=N2(1+O(s−1)).(N-d)(N-d-1)-2(N-2d)=N^2(1+O(s^{-1})).

By (11) their contribution to ErA(d)(rA(d)−1)\mathbb E r_A(d)(r_A(d)-1) is N2y4(1+O(s−1))=1+O(s−1)N^2y^4(1+O(s^{-1}))=1+O(s^{-1}), uniformly in dd. The shared-endpoint terms contribute O(Ny3)=O(s−2)O(Ny^3)=O(s^{-2}). Summing over D=s3+O(s2)D=s^3+O(s^2) proves (2).

There are O(N2)O(N^2) non-Sidon triples and O(N3)O(N^3) non-Sidon quadruples: a triple contains a three-term progression, while a quadruple contains either such a progression or two different pairs of equal sum. Choosing all but one position in the relevant equality determines the last one. Thus, for t=3,4t=3,4, the total moment erased at degree tt is at most

O(Nt−1yt)=O(s2t−4).O(N^{t-1}y^t)=O(s^{2t-4}).

Before zeroing, the total is exactly (kt)≍s2t\binom kt\asymp s^{2t} because the law has fixed cardinality. Consequently

at=1+O(s−4)(t=3,4).(12)a_t=1+O(s^{-4})\quad(t=3,4). \tag{12}

Let L0\mathcal L_0 merely erase non-Sidon moments, without renormalizing. All coefficients of the Boolean-reduced Q2Q^2 are nonnegative. Every term in ∑d≤DPd(Pd−1)\sum_{d\le D}P_d(P_d-1), where Pd=∑izizi+dP_d=\sum_i z_i z_{i+d}, has non-Sidon support and is erased. Hence

L0((Q−EQ)2)≤Var⁡μsQ−Eμs∑d≤DrA(d)(rA(d)−1).(13)\mathcal L_0((Q-\mathbb E Q)^2) \le\operatorname{Var}_{\mu_s}Q -\mathbb E_{\mu_s}\sum_{d\le D}r_A(d)(r_A(d)-1). \tag{13}

The constant and linear-in-QQ terms remain unchanged: L0Q=EQ\mathcal L_0 Q=\mathbb E Q and L01=1\mathcal L_0 1=1. No positivity of L0\mathcal L_0 is assumed. By (12), the change from L0Q2\mathcal L_0 Q^2 to LQ2\mathcal L Q^2 is at most O(s−4)EQ2=O(s2)O(s^{-4})\mathbb E Q^2=O(s^2), using EQ≤D\mathbb E Q\le D and (1). Combining (1)--(2) and (13),

L((Q−EQ)2)≤−9−2212s3+O(s5/2).\mathcal L((Q-\mathbb E Q)^2) \le-\frac{9-2\sqrt2}{12}s^3+O(s^{5/2}).

This is negative for all sufficiently large ss, proving the claim. The normalizations give the displayed total moments exactly by their definition; they do not supply any missing local identity or repair the negative square.

Admixture with the uniform fixed-size law

Let νs\nu_s be uniform on all kk-subsets of the interval, and put ρs=(1−αs)μs+αsνs\rho_s=(1-\alpha_s)\mu_s+\alpha_s\nu_s, with 0≤αs≤10\le\alpha_s\le1. Assume only the necessary capacity EρsrA(1)≤1\mathbb E_{\rho_s}r_A(1)\le1. Writing b=EμsrA(1)b=\mathbb E_{\mu_s}r_A(1) and u=EνsrA(1)u=\mathbb E_{\nu_s}r_A(1), the pair formulas give exactly

b=1−s−1W−s2W3,u=s2−1s2−s+1=1+s(s−2)W.b=1-\frac{s-1}{W}-\frac{s^2}{W^3},\qquad u=\frac{s^2-1}{s^2-s+1} =1+\frac{s(s-2)}W.

Thus

αs≤1−bu−b=(s−1)W2+s2(s2−s−1)W2+s2=1+O(s−1)s.(14)\alpha_s\le\frac{1-b}{u-b} =\frac{(s-1)W^2+s^2}{(s^2-s-1)W^2+s^2} =\frac{1+O(s^{-1})}{s}. \tag{14}

The short-pair means differ by s2/2+O(s)s^2/2+O(s). Indeed, set T0=∑d=1W−1(N−d)=(W−1)(N−W/2)T_0=\sum_{d=1}^{W-1}(N-d)=(W-1)(N-W/2). The uniform pair moment is y2−y(1−y)/(N−1)y^2-y(1-y)/(N-1), so (9) in L216 gives

EνsQ−EμsQ=y(1−y)(N2−W+16−T0N−1)=s22+O(s).(15)\mathbb E_{\nu_s}Q-\mathbb E_{\mu_s}Q =y(1-y)\left(\frac N2-\frac{W+1}{6} -\frac{T_0}{N-1}\right) =\frac{s^2}{2}+O(s). \tag{15}

We also need Var⁡νsQ=O(s3)\operatorname{Var}_{\nu_s}Q=O(s^3), including the fixed-cardinality cancellation. View the short pairs as the edges of a graph on the interval. Let EE be its number of edges, did_i its vertex degrees, A=∑idi(di−1)A=\sum_i d_i(d_i-1), and pj=(k)j/(N)jp_j=(k)_j/(N)_j. Exact counting of two edges by their intersection gives

Var⁡νsQ=E(p2−p4)+A(p3−p4)+E2(p4−p22).(16)\operatorname{Var}_{\nu_s}Q =E(p_2-p_4)+A(p_3-p_4)+E^2(p_4-p_2^2). \tag{16}

Here E=O(ND)E=O(ND) and A=4E2/N+O(D3+E)A=4E^2/N+O(D^3+E). To see the latter estimate, all but 2D2D vertices have degree 2D2D; the exceptional degrees are between DD and 2D2D, and 2E/N=2D−D(D+1)/N2E/N=2D-D(D+1)/N. Consequently ∑i(di−2E/N)2=O(D3)\sum_i(d_i-2E/N)^2=O(D^3). For the fixed values j≤4j\le4, with N≍k2N\asymp k^2,

pj=yj(1−j(j−1)2k+O(k−2)),p4−p22=y4(−4k+O(k−2)).p_j=y^j\left(1-\frac{j(j-1)}{2k}+O(k^{-2})\right), \qquad p_4-p_2^2=y^4\left(-\frac4k+O(k^{-2})\right).

In (16), the leading terms 4E2y3/N4E^2y^3/N and −4E2y4/k-4E^2y^4/k cancel because y=k/Ny=k/N. The remainder is

O(Ey2+D3y3+E2y4k2)=O(s3).(17)O\left(Ey^2+D^3y^3+\frac{E^2y^4}{k^2}\right)=O(s^3). \tag{17}

The variance formula for a mixture, (1), and (14)--(17) now yield

Var⁡ρsQ=(1−αs)Var⁡μsQ+αsVar⁡νsQ+αs(1−αs)(EνsQ−EμsQ)2≤(3+2212+14)s3+O(s5/2).(18)\begin{aligned} \operatorname{Var}_{\rho_s}Q &=(1-\alpha_s)\operatorname{Var}_{\mu_s}Q +\alpha_s\operatorname{Var}_{\nu_s}Q +\alpha_s(1-\alpha_s) (\mathbb E_{\nu_s}Q-\mathbb E_{\mu_s}Q)^2\\ &\le\left(\frac{3+2\sqrt2}{12}+\frac14\right)s^3 +O(s^{5/2}). \tag{18} \end{aligned}

For each distinct set TT of at most four positions, the mixture still has inclusion probability y∣T∣(1+O(s−1))y^{|T|}(1+O(s^{-1})), uniformly in αs\alpha_s. Thus its repeated-difference mass is still s3+O(s2)s^3+O(s^2), the normalizing factors are still 1+O(s−4)1+O(s^{-4}), and EρsQ2=O(s6)\mathbb E_{\rho_s}Q^2=O(s^6). The zeroing and renormalization estimates (12)--(13) therefore apply with ρs\rho_s and its own mean. Combining them with (18) gives

Lρs((Q−EρsQ)2)≤−3−26s3+O(s5/2)<0\mathcal L_{\rho_s}((Q-\mathbb E_{\rho_s}Q)^2) \le-\frac{3-\sqrt2}{6}s^3+O(s^{5/2})<0

for all sufficiently large ss. This rules out this entire mixture repair subject to its first difference capacity. It does not rule out a nonuniform change of the surviving moments.

A weighted test for every positive excess coefficient

Fix 0<β≤10<\beta\le1, let W=s3−βs2+O(s)W=s^3-\beta s^2+O(s) be integers at least ss, and set N=sWN=sW, k=s2k=s^2, D=W−1D=W-1, y=s/Wy=s/W. In this section μs\mu_s samples ss points per WW-point block and rotates, and νs\nu_s is uniform on all kk-subsets. These parameters have (k−N)/N1/4→β/2(k-\sqrt N)/N^{1/4}\to\beta/2. Let ρs=(1−αs)μs+αsνs\rho_s=(1-\alpha_s)\mu_s+\alpha_s\nu_s satisfy EρsrA(1)≤1\mathbb E_{\rho_s}r_A(1)\le1. The same pair formulas as above give

EμsrA(1)=1+β−1s+O(s−2),EνsrA(1)=1+βs+O(s−2),\mathbb E_{\mu_s}r_A(1)=1+\frac{\beta-1}s+O(s^{-2}),\qquad \mathbb E_{\nu_s}r_A(1)=1+\frac\beta s+O(s^{-2}),

and therefore αs≤1−β+O(s−1)\alpha_s\le1-\beta+O(s^{-1}).

Put g(t)=t−1/3g(t)=t-1/3, and use the cyclic quadratic polynomial

F=∑d=1Dg(d/W)Cd,Cd=∑i∈ZNzizi+d=Pd+PN−d.(19)F=\sum_{d=1}^{D}g(d/W)C_d,\qquad C_d=\sum_{i\in\mathbb Z_N}z_i z_{i+d} =P_d+P_{N-d}. \tag{19}

Each unordered short cyclic pair is counted once, since 2D<N2D<N. We will prove

Lρs((F−EρsF)2)=−11270(1−αs)s3+O(s5/2).(20)\mathcal L_{\rho_s}((F-\mathbb E_{\rho_s}F)^2) =-\frac{11}{270}(1-\alpha_s)s^3+O(s^{5/2}). \tag{20}

All errors are uniform in αs∈[0,1]\alpha_s\in[0,1]; their constants may depend on the fixed O(s)O(s) bound in the definition of WW. Equation (20) and the first capacity prove the final statement of the claim.

The two genuine variances and their means

First allow independent labeled samples in each block, counting a coincidence with weight g(0)g(0). On the unit square define

h0(u,v)=g(∣u−v∣),h1(u,v)=1v<ug(1+v−u).h_0(u,v)=g(|u-v|),\qquad h_1(u,v)=\mathbf1_{v<u}g(1+v-u).

The first kernel counts within-block pairs, and the second counts adjacent blocks. Let hj∘h_j^\circ denote the kernel after subtracting its two one-variable projections and adding back its mean. The projections needed here are

A0(u)=u2−u+16,H(u)=∫u1g(t) dt=16+u3−u22.A_0(u)=u^2-u+\frac16,\qquad H(u)=\int_u^1 g(t)\,dt=\frac16+\frac u3-\frac{u^2}{2}.

The two projections of h1h_1 are H(1−u)H(1-u) and H(v)H(v); its mean is 1/61/6, while h0h_0 has mean zero. Direct polynomial integration gives

∫h02=118,∫A02=1180,∫h12=112,∫H2=17540.\int h_0^2=\frac1{18},\quad \int A_0^2=\frac1{180},\quad \int h_1^2=\frac1{12},\quad \int H^2=\frac{17}{540}.

Consequently

∥h0∘∥22=245,∥h1∘∥22=13270.(21)\|h_0^\circ\|_2^2=\frac2{45},\qquad \|h_1^\circ\|_2^2=\frac{13}{270}. \tag{21}

On the discrete WW-point grid these formulas have errors O(1/W)O(1/W). This follows by summing the bounded piecewise polynomial kernels on each side of the diagonal; the diagonal and its adjacent cells have total area O(1/W)O(1/W). The projection identity is exact on that grid: the sum of the within-block row and the two adjacent-block rows is constant in the chosen position. In the full pair statistic their coefficients are s−1,s,ss-1,s,s, so its one-variable projection is just the negative of the within-block projection. Its total variance is O(s2)O(s^2).

The canonical two-variable terms are orthogonal for different label pairs, including pairs sharing one label, exactly as in (4)--(5). There are s(s2)s\binom s2 within-block pairs and s3s^3 adjacent-block pairs. Thus the labeled statistic has variance

(12245+13270)s3+O(s2)=19270s3+O(s2).\left(\frac12\frac2{45}+\frac{13}{270}\right)s^3+O(s^2) =\frac{19}{270}s^3+O(s^2).

The coupling (10) applies because W≍s3W\asymp s^3. Moving one label changes the weighted statistic by at most 3s3s, so the L2L^2 change is O(s)O(s). It follows that

Var⁡μsF=19270s3+O(s5/2).(22)\operatorname{Var}_{\mu_s}F =\frac{19}{270}s^3+O(s^{5/2}). \tag{22}

For the uniform law, view (19) as a weighted graph on the cycle. Write Sj=∑d=1Dg(d/W)jS_j=\sum_{d=1}^{D}g(d/W)^j for j=1,2j=1,2. The total edge weight is M1=NS1M_1=NS_1, the sum of squared edge weights is M2=NS2M_2=NS_2, and every vertex has weighted degree 2S12S_1. The intersection count (16), with weights, is

Var⁡νsF=M2(p2−2p3+p4)+M12(4N(p3−p4)+p4−p22).\operatorname{Var}_{\nu_s}F =M_2(p_2-2p_3+p_4) +M_1^2\left(\frac4N(p_3-p_4)+p_4-p_2^2\right).

The leading terms in the parentheses cancel as before, leaving O(s2)O(s^2) after multiplication by M12M_1^2. Also S2=W/9+O(1)S_2=W/9+O(1) and Ny2W=s3Ny^2W=s^3. Therefore

Var⁡νsF=19s3+O(s2).(23)\operatorname{Var}_{\nu_s}F=\frac19s^3+O(s^2). \tag{23}

There is no large mixture-of-means term in this direction. Indeed, the two exact sums

∑d=1W−1g(d/W)=W−16,∑d=1W−1g(d/W)(W−d)=W−16\sum_{d=1}^{W-1}g(d/W)=\frac{W-1}{6},\qquad \sum_{d=1}^{W-1}g(d/W)(W-d)=\frac{W-1}{6}

give

EνsF−EμsF=k(1−y)6(1W−W−1N−1)=O(s).\mathbb E_{\nu_s}F-\mathbb E_{\mu_s}F =\frac{k(1-y)}6\left(\frac1W-\frac{W-1}{N-1}\right)=O(s).

The variance formula for a mixture and (22)--(23) hence give

Var⁡ρsF=((1−αs)19270+αs9)s3+O(s5/2).(24)\operatorname{Var}_{\rho_s}F =\left((1-\alpha_s)\frac{19}{270}+\frac{\alpha_s}{9}\right)s^3 +O(s^{5/2}). \tag{24}

What ordinary Sidon zeroing removes

Every short ordinary repeated-difference term has non-Sidon support. Its total contribution to F2F^2 is

R=∑d=1Dg(d/W)2rA(d)(rA(d)−1).R=\sum_{d=1}^{D}g(d/W)^2 r_A(d)(r_A(d)-1).

The uniform inclusion estimate (11) holds for the mixture as well. The count proving (2) therefore gives EρsR=S2(1+O(s−1))=s3/9+O(s2)\mathbb E_{\rho_s}R=S_2(1+O(s^{-1}))=s^3/9+O(s^2). All other erased terms contribute only O(s2)O(s^2) in absolute value, including terms with negative weights. Here is a count that accounts for those signs.

For fixed short cyclic lengths d,ed,e, the corresponding ordinary lengths are among d,N−dd,N-d and e,N−ee,N-e. If two disjoint edges have different ordinary lengths, their union can be non-Sidon only at a bounded number of relative offsets: a collision of their other pairings determines their relative starting point, or one of the four triples is a three-term progression and does the same. There are therefore O(ND2)O(ND^2) such configurations, with total moment O(ND2y4)=O(s2)O(ND^2y^4)=O(s^2). Equal ordinary lengths at most DD are already counted in RR. Equal lengths N−dN-d have at most d2d^2 ordered edge pairs, giving total O(D3y4)=O(s)O(D^3y^4)=O(s). A forbidden three-point support is a progression; for two of its edges to have cyclic length at most D<N/2D<N/2, its ordinary step must be at most DD. These give O(ND)O(ND) supports and total moment O(NDy3)=O(s)O(NDy^3)=O(s). All polynomial coefficients in these estimates are bounded in absolute value by a universal constant.

Thus zeroing, with no renormalization, gives the equality with error

L0((F−EρsF)2)=Var⁡ρsF−19s3+O(s2).(25)\mathcal L_0((F-\mathbb E_{\rho_s}F)^2) =\operatorname{Var}_{\rho_s}F-\frac19s^3+O(s^2). \tag{25}

As before at=1+O(s−4)a_t=1+O(s^{-4}). To bound the effect despite the signed coefficients, replace every edge weight by its absolute value. The square of that statistic has expectation O(s6)O(s^6): count two edges with two, three, or four distinct endpoints and use p(T)=O(y∣T∣)p(T)=O(y^{|T|}). It dominates the absolute coefficients of F2F^2. Renormalization therefore changes (25) by only O(s2)O(s^2). Equations (24)--(25) prove (20).

The mixture class here has capacity-feasible examples at every fixed 0<β<10<\beta<1. If 0≤α<1−β0\le\alpha<1-\beta is constant, then uniformly for d=xW<Wd=xW<W its difference expectation is at most 1+(β−1+α−αx)/s+O(s−2)<11+(\beta-1+\alpha-\alpha x)/s+O(s^{-2})<1. For d≥Wd\ge W it is at most (N−W)y2=1−(1−β)/s+O(s−2)<1(N-W)y^2=1-(1-\beta)/s+O(s^{-2})<1. Every sum expectation is at most Ny2/2+y=1/2+O(s−1)Ny^2/2+y=1/2+O(s^{-1}). The obstruction is therefore not due to an empty input class. It rules out the specified zeroing and uniform renormalization throughout that class, while leaving general nonuniform completions open.