arXiv++ Combinatorics

In the present paper we show that if A is a set of n real numbers, and the product set A.A has at most n^(1+c) elements, then the k-fold sumset kA has at least n^(log(k/2)/2 log 2 + 1/2 - f_k(c)) elements, where f_k(c) -> 0 as c -> 0. We believe that the methods in this paper might lead to a much stronger result; indeed, using a result of Trevor Wooley on Vinogradov's Mean Value Theorem and the Tarry-Escott Problem, we show that if |A.A| < n^(1+c), then |k(A.A)| > n^(Omega((k/log k)^(1/3))), for c small enough in terms of k (we believe that a certain modification of this argument can perhaps produce similar conclusions for kA).

We show that under the assumption of a 24-term version of Fermat's Last Theorem, there exists an absolute constant c > 0 such that if S is a set of n > n_0 positive integers satisfying |S.S| < n^(1+c), then the sumset S.S satisfies |S+S| >> n^2. In other words, we prove a weak form of the Erdos-Szemeredi sum-product conjecture, conditional on an extension of Fermat's Last Theorem. Unconditionally, we prove this theorem for when S is a set of n monic polynomials. We also prove an analogue of a theorem of Bourgain and Chang for the ring C[x].

In this paper we show that if one has a grid A x B, where A and B are sets of n real numbers, then there can be only very few ``rich'' lines in certain quite small families. Indeed, we show that if the family has lines taking on n^epsilon distinct slopes, and where each line is parallel to n^epsilon others (so, at least n^(2 epsilon) lines in total), then at least one of these lines must fail to be ``rich''. This result immediately implies non-trivial sum-product inequalities; though, our proof makes use of the Szemeredi-Trotter inequality, which Elekes used in his argument for lower bounds on |C+C| + |C.C|.

In this note, we prove a certain hypergraph generalization of the Balog-Szemeredi-Gowers Theorem. Our result shares some features in common with a similar such generalizsation due to Sudakov, Szemeredi and Vu, though the conclusion of our result is somewhat different.

We present a proof of Roth's theorem that follows a slightly different structure to the usual proofs, in that there is not much iteration. Although our proof works using a type of density increment argument (which is typical of most proofs of Roth's theorem), we do not pass to a progression related to the large Fourier coefficients of our set (as most other proofs of Roth do). Furthermore, in our proof, the density increment is achieved through an application of a quantitative version of Varnavides's theorem, which is perhaps unexpected.

Fix a prime p and a density 0 < d <= 1. Among all functions f : F_p -> [0,1], what can one say about those which assign minimal weight to three-term arithmetic progressions -- that is, the sum of f(a)f(a+x)f(a+2x) is minimal as we sum over all a and x -- subject to the density constraint that the expected value of f equals d? In the present paper we show three things about them: 1) Such f are nearly indicator functions; 2) They enjoy a certain ``local minimal'' property; and, 3) They are approximately indicator functions for certain sumsets A+B.

It is well-known that any sequence of at least N integers contains a subsequence whose sum is 0 (mod N). However, there can be very few subsequences with this property (e.g. if the initial sequence is just N 1's, then there is only one subsequence). When the length L of the sequence is much longer, we might expect that there are 2^L/N subsequences with this property (imagine the subsequences have sum-of-terms uniformly distributed modulo N -- the 0 class gets about 2^L/N subsequences); however, it is easy to see that this is actually false. Nonetheless, we are able to prove that if the initial sequence has length at least 4N, and N is odd, then there is a subsequence of length L > N, having at least 2^L/N subsequences that sum to 0 mod N.

Fix integers a_1,...,a_d satisfying a_1 + ... + a_d = 0. Suppose that f : Z_N -> [0,1], where N is prime. We show that if f is ``smooth enough'' then we can bound from below the sum of f(x_1)...f(x_d) over all solutions (x_1,...,x_d) in Z_N to a_1 x_1 + ... + a_d x_d == 0 (mod N). Note that d = 3 and a_1 = a_2 = 1 and a_3 = -2 is the case where x_1,x_2,x_3 are in arithmetic progression. By ``smooth enough'' we mean that the sum of squares of the lower order Fourier coefficients of f is ``small'', a property shared by many naturally-occurring functions, among them certain ones supported on sumsets and on certain types of pseudoprimes. The paper can be thought of as a generalization of another result of the author, which dealt with a F_p^n analogue of the problem. It appears that the method in that paper, and to a more limited extent the present paper, uses ideas similar to those of B. Green's ``arithmetic regularity lemma'', as we explain in the paper.

It is well known that if S is a subset of the integers mod p, and if the second-largest Fourier coefficient is ``small'' relative to the largest coefficient, then the sumset S+S is much larger than S. We show in the present paper that if instead of having such a large ``spectral gap'' between the largest and second-largest Fourier coefficients, we had it between the kth largest and the (k+1)st largest, the same thing holds true, namely that |S+S| is appreciably larger than |S|. Well, we only do this for k < (log p)/(log 4). We also obtain analogous results for repeated sumsets S+S+...+S, and it turns out that the more terms one includes, the larger the index k that can be used.

Suppose that f is a function from Z_p -> [0,1] (Z_p is my notation for the integers mod p, not the p-adics), and suppose that a_1,...,a_k are some places in Z_p. In some additive number theory applications it would be nice to perturb f slightly so that Fourier transform f^ vanishes at a_1,...,a_k, while additive properties are left intact. In the present paper, we show that even if we are unsuccessful in this, we can at least say something interesting by using the principle of the separating hyperplane, a basic ingredient in linear programming duality.

Suppose that f : F_p^n -> [0,1] has expected value t in [p^(-n/9),1] (so, the density t can be quite low!). Furthermore, suppose that support(f) has no three-term arithmetic progressions. Then, we develop non-trivial lower bounds for f_j, which is the jth largest Fourier coefficient of f. This result is similar in spirit to that appearing in an earlier paper [1] by the author; however, in that paper the focus was on the ``small'' Fourier coefficients, whereas here the focus is on the ``large'' Fourier coefficients. Furthermore, the proof in the present paper requires much more sophisticated arguments than those of that other paper.

In this paper we prove a basic theorem which says that if f : F_p^n -> [0,1] has the property that ||f^||_(1/3) is not too ``large''(actually, it also holds for quasinorms 1/2-δin place of 1/3), and E(f) = p^{-n} sum_m f(m) is not too ``small'', then there are lots of triples m,m+d,m+2d such that f(m)f(m+d)f(m+2d) > 0. If f is the indicator function for some set S, then this would be saying that the set has many three-term arithmetic progressions. In principle this theorem can be applied to sets having very low density, where |S| is around p^{n(1-c)} for some small c > 0.

Given a density t in (0,1], and a prime p, let S be any subset of F_p having at least tp elements, and having the least number of three-term arithmetic progressions mod p among all subsets of F_p with at least tp elements. Define N(t,p) to be 1/p^2 times the number of three-term arithmetic progressions in S modulo p. Note that N(t,p) does not depend on S -- it only depends on t and p. An old result of Varnavides shows that for fixed t, N(t,p) > c(t) > 0 for all primes p sufficiently large. But, does N(t,p) converge to a limit as p -> infinity? We prove that it does.

We show that for every $0 < ε\leq 1$ and integer $k\geq 1$, there exists an integer $n = n(ε,k)$ so that for all primes $p$, and integers $0 \leq a \leq p-1$, there exist integers $1 \leq x_1 < ... < x_n \leq p^ε$ such that $a \equiv x_1^{-1} + ... + x_n^{-1} \pmod{p}$. This extends a result of I. Shparlinski.

In this paper we prove: If 0 < d < 1, and p is a sufficiently large prime, then if S is a subset of Z/pZ having the least number of three-term arithmetic progressions among all subsets of Z/pZ having at least dp elements, then S has an arithmetic progression of length at least log^{1/4+o(1)} x.

In this paper we present a method for producing asymptotic estimates for the number of integers in a given S having only ``small'' prime factors. The conditions that need to be verified are simpler than those required by other methods, and we apply our result to give an easy proof of a result which says that dense subsets A and B of {1,2,...,x} always produce asymptotically the expected number of x^r - smooth sums a+b, where a in A and b in B. Recall that a number n is said to be y-smooth if all its prime divisors are at most y.

Assuming the well-known conjecture that [x,x+x^t] contains a prime for t > 0 and x sufficiently large, we prove: For 0 < r < 1, there exists 0 < s < r < 1, 0 < d < 1, and infinitely many primes q such that if S is a subset of Z/qZ having density at least s, and having the least number of 3-term arithemtic progressions among all sets of density at least s, then S is nearly translation invariant in a very strong sense. Namely, there exists 0 <= b <= q-1 such that |S intersect (S + bj)| = (1-g(s))|S|, for every 0 < j < q^d, where g(s) -> 0 as s -> 0. A curious feature of the proof is that Behrend's construction on large subsets of {1,2,...,x} containing no 3-term a.p., is a key ingredient.

Suppose that P is an infinite set of primes such that P = A + B + C, where A,B,C are sets with at least two elements. We show that if P(x) > c x/log^d x (where P(x) = the number of elements of P that are <= x), and if A,B,C is a "regular" triple of sets, then either |A+B| <= d, or |B+C| <= d, or |A+C| <= d.

We prove that if one has k non-intersecting arithmetic progressions of integers, with common differences 2 <= q_1,...,q_k <= x, then k < x exp((-1/6 + o(1)) sqrt(log x loglog x)). This improves a result of Szemeredi and Erdos.