Research notes on every problem, and a library of the papers behind them. Built from the open erdos repository.
Updated
Statement
Setting (p. 116). For , is the sequence (the paper uses in the proof) and its set of subset sums, as in Theorem 1. Definition 3 prints
with "" [sic], and glosses it: is the biggest gap in . The same page states that is subcomplete if and only if is a finite dyadic fraction.
Theorem 3 (pp. 116--117).
-
.
-
As printed: "For almost all we have ." [sic] The proof (p. 121) concludes instead that for almost all (Lebesgue measure), as , and that is the statement proved.
-
For a parameter let
and .
Then , where is Lebesgue measure and .
In part 3 the denominator is printed , with no base on the logarithm; the proof (p. 121) works with the condition and with binary digits, which matches the base- normalization. The paper does not state the range of or of .
Source. N. Hegyvári, On sumset of certain sets, Publ. Math. Debrecen 45 (1994), no. 1--2, 115--122: Definition 3 and the statement on pp. 116--117, the proof in Section 4, pp. 120--122.
Read depth. Claims checked: the definition and the three parts were read clause by clause on the journal print. The proof was read but not checked step by step.
Proof pointer
Section 4, pp. 120--122. Lemma 3.1 (p. 120): the biggest gap in is the interval , of length , proved by induction from . For this gives part 1, since . Part 2 follows because in almost every number the binary digit has frequency (Lemma 3.2, p. 121, a special case of Theorem 148 of Hardy and Wright). Part 3 compares with the sets of in whose first digits sum to less than , and similarly with , and applies the normal approximation to the binomial distribution (p. 122).
Bears on
No Erdős problem page in this corpus cites this theorem. It concerns the subset sums of the single sequence , not the pairs of Problem 354.