Research notes on every problem, and a library of the papers behind them. Built from the open erdos repository.
Updated
On the dimension of additive sets
P. Candela and H. A. Helfgott, "On the dimension of additive sets," Acta Arithmetica 167 (2015), no. 1, 91--100. DOI 10.4064/aa167-1-5. Preprint: arXiv:1407.4987 (2014). The file prints "© Instytut Matematyczny PAN, 2015" in the footer of its first page (printed p. 91); IMPAN's record for the article offers the PDF "Free download under CC-BY license", no version named (https://www.impan.pl/get/doi/10.4064/aa167-1-5, read 2026-10-02), and that named license on the publisher's page decides over the printed line; the site footer "Copyright © 2026 by IMPAN. All rights reserved." speaks for the site, not the article.
Local artifact. The complete Markdown reading copy marks its ten physical pages; physical pages 1--10 correspond to printed pages 91--100. The locators below give the paper's labels and printed pages.
Read status: claims checked. Definitions 1.1--1.3, Theorems 1.4--1.6, Propositions 2.1 and 2.3, and the interval results in Lemmas 3.1--3.2 and Propositions 3.3--3.4 were read clause by clause. Their proofs have not been verified here.
Four different dimensions
Definition 1.1 (p. 91). A set in an abelian group is dissociated when its subset sums are pairwise distinct, equivalently when the only relation
has every coefficient zero. An inclusion-maximal dissociated subset of is one that has no proper dissociated superset inside .
Definition 1.2 (p. 91). The dissociativity dimension is
while the lower dissociativity dimension is
Thus is the size of a maximum-cardinality dissociated subset; is the minimum cardinality among inclusion-maximal dissociated subsets. Definition 1.2 itself uses “maximal” once for a set of cardinality , but that wording must not collapse the two parameters.
Definition 1.3 (p. 92). The -span of is
A -spanning set for has . The internal and ambient versions of the span dimension are respectively
Every inclusion-maximal dissociated subset of -spans , hence (p. 92)
Main comparison results
Theorem 1.4 (p. 92, equation (1.1)). For every additive set ,
Theorem 1.5 (p. 93, equation (1.2)). For each positive integer there is an such that
and
Theorem 1.6 (p. 93). For ,
The second rounding sign is a ceiling in the print (p. 93), as Propositions 3.3--3.4 below require.
Proposition 2.1 (p. 94, equation (2.1)). If is dissociated and -spans , then
This is the quantitative input for Theorem 1.4.
Proposition 2.3 (pp. 95--96). Write for the standard basis of and , and take a nonempty dissociated set . Then
satisfies
Combining this with a dissociated of size proves Theorem 1.5 (p. 96).
Interval results
Lemma 3.1 (p. 97). For ,
Lemma 3.2 (p. 97). If is dissociated and , then is inclusion-maximal dissociated in .
Put and . Proposition 3.3 (pp. 97--98) says that if and only if
the set is simultaneously a minimum internal -spanning set and an inclusion-maximal dissociated subset of ; in that case
For the complementary case, let
Proposition 3.4 (p. 98) says that if and only if
the set has those same two properties; in that case
Equality between the two case thresholds cannot occur for integral , so these propositions give Theorem 1.6.
Bears on
- E0963 asks for over finite , and in particular whether . Candela--Helfgott supply precise vocabulary for its maximum-cardinality parameter and note on p. 93 that the classical interval problem asks for . They explicitly do not pursue that problem.
- Their exact base- interval formula is instead for and . It does not compute , determine , or prove the proposed base- universal lower bound. More generally, maximality plus -spanning gives only the elementary base- count for an inclusion-maximal . Reading Theorem 1.6 as an answer to E0963 would therefore confuse the minimum size of an inclusion-maximal set with the maximum size of a dissociated set.