Wiki
Wiki

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

Updated


Source. Proposition 3.4, pp. 5–6, with the definition of ΦU,V\Phi_{U,V} on p. 4 and Lemmas 3.1–3.3 (pp. 4–5), of David Turturean, A Negative Answer to Erdős Problem #870, preprint dated April 2026 (11 pp.), https://www.overleaf.com/read/gknkvvxrymfv; the edition read is named on the source card.

Setting

P. 4. For finite U,V⊆Z≥0U,V\subseteq\mathbb Z_{\ge0} and D⊆ND\subseteq\mathbb N, ΦU,V(D)=(U+(D∪(D+D)))∪(V+D)\Phi_{U,V}(D)=\bigl(U+(D\cup(D+D))\bigr)\cup(V+D), so xx lies in it when x−u∈D∪(D+D)x-u\in D\cup(D+D) for some u∈Uu\in U or x−v∈Dx-v\in D for some v∈Vv\in V. rAr_A and A(x)A(x) are as in Proposition 2.3.

Statement

Proposition 3.4 (pp. 5–6). There is an absolute constant η3>0\eta_3>0 with the following property. Let P={(Uλ,Vλ):λ∈Λ}\mathcal P=\{(U_\lambda,V_\lambda):\lambda\in\Lambda\} be any finite list of pairs of finite subsets of Z≥0\mathbb Z_{\ge0}, each UλU_\lambda nonempty, and let P0⊂NP_0\subset\mathbb N be finite. There is a set A⊆NA\subseteq\mathbb N such that

  1. A∩P0=∅A\cap P_0=\varnothing;
  2. A+AA+A is cofinite;
  3. rA(n)≥η3log⁡nr_A(n)\ge\eta_3\log n for all sufficiently large nn;
  4. A(x)=o(x)A(x)=o(x);
  5. for every (U,V)∈P(U,V)\in\mathcal P, every D⊆AD\subseteq A and every finite exceptional set F0⊆DF_0\subseteq D: if ΦU,V(D)\Phi_{U,V}(D) is cofinite, then there is d∈D∖F0d\in D\setminus F_0 such that, with D′=D∖{d}D'=D\setminus\{d\}, the set ΦU,V(D′)\Phi_{U,V}(D') is still cofinite and D′D' is an additive basis of order 3.

The proof (p. 7) takes η3=15/(512log⁡2)\eta_3=15/(512\log2).

Proof pointer

Pp. 6–8. The Larsen–Larsen construction is run with lag 10 and a Bernoulli constant chosen in terms of P\mathcal P, but each canary is replaced by a cluster y−uy-u, u∈Uλu\in U_\lambda, around a random center yy, with restoration elements y−u−sy-u-s for old control summands ss. Lemma 3.2 supplies, for each robust element, many representations whose summands avoid the fixed shift differences, which rules out same-cluster accidental representations; Lemma 3.1, a hypergeometric and difference-set estimate, gives a summable Borel–Cantelli bound that rules out accidental representations across clusters and keeps the points y−vy-v, v∈Vv\in V, out of AA. Lemma 3.3 makes fixed differences between canaries outside ΩB−ΩB\Omega_B-\Omega_B occur only finitely often, which gives the order-3 property of D′D'. The set P0P_0 is avoided by deleting finitely many Bernoulli variables at the outset.

Dependencies

Lemmas 3.1–3.3 and the construction of D. Larsen and M. Larsen, Robust additive bases without minimal subbases, arXiv:2601.18507 (2026), whose Lemmas 2, 6 and 7, Proposition 5, p. 8 bound and finite-incidence argument the paper cites.

Read depth: claims checked. The statement was read clause by clause on the print and the proof followed in outline; the cited Larsen–Larsen results were not read.

Bears on