Research notes on every problem, and a library of the papers behind them. Built from the open erdos repository.
Updated
Statement
For a finite or infinite sequence of positive integers, is the set of sums over finite , and is complete when every sufficiently large positive integer lies in (p. 1). Write .
Theorem 1 (p. 1). There is a strictly increasing sequence of positive integers such that
- (1) is complete for every finite subsequence of ;
- (2) is incomplete for every infinite subsequence of ;
- (3) for every ;
- (4) for some increasing sequence ,
In particular the sequence does not converge.
The paper's introduction (p. 1) states the question of Erdős and Graham ([1, p. 57] of the paper): whether a sequence with deletion properties (1) and (2) and for some must satisfy . Its abstract (p. 1) says that the construction gives a negative answer to Erdős Problem 346.
Source. GPT Pro, A counterexample to Erdős Problem 346, preprint (2026), 5 pp.; Theorem 1 on p. 1, its proof in Section 3, pp. 3--5. The edition read is identified on the source card.
Read depth. Claims checked: the statement was read clause by clause on the printed page. The proof was read for structure only.
Proof pointer
Section 3, pp. 3--5. Start from , write , and for choose integers with and (the paper's (3.1), p. 3); such sequences are called admissible and are strictly increasing. Lemma 3 (p. 3) shows that deleting any infinite subsequence from an admissible sequence leaves an incomplete one, which is part (2). The unperturbed choice makes satisfy Graham's recurrence, so Lemma 2 applies to it (p. 4). Lemma 4 (p. 4) gives a finite interval certificate that keeps a tail complete under every later admissible choice, and Lemma 5 (p. 4) shows that an unperturbed continuation eventually yields such certificates for any finitely many tails. The sequence takes , , runs unperturbed stretches up to indices chosen so that the tails from , , are certified and the ratios and lie within of , and then sets (the paper's (3.7), p. 5). This gives part (1), the bound from the initial quotients and (3.2), and the two limits in part (4) (p. 5).
Dependencies
Lemma 2 (p. 1) and Lemmas 3, 4 and 5 of the same paper (pp. 3--4).
Bears on
- Problem 346: the theorem gives a sequence with both deletion properties and for every whose ratios do not converge, so these hypotheses do not force . It does not address sequences whose ratios are assumed to converge.