Research notes on every problem, and a library of the papers behind them. Built from the open erdos repository.
Updated
Construction (p. 5). Let and . Take
with integers. Then and ; the count, like the ranges, takes to be an integer, which the paper leaves implicit.
Statement. The printed proposition reads: "For the sets defined in (1), we have ." (p. 5).
Proof pointer. Every squared cross distance is the integer . Using , which is where enters, these integers lie in an interval of length below , which gives the upper bound. The point alone has distinct distances to the points , which gives the lower bound. The paper's displayed equality gives the number of integers in the interval as ; the exact number is , so holds only as an upper bound, and the conclusion is unaffected. This correction is this page's observation, not the paper's.
Remark 7 (p. 5) notes that for the same sets span distances, and Corollary 8 (p. 6) lists upper bounds on by range of , the second and third of them from this construction.
Source. Surya Mathialagan, On Bipartite Distinct Distances in the Plane, Electronic Journal of Combinatorics 28(4) (2021), P4.33, DOI 10.37236/9687: Section 2, the construction (1) and Proposition 6 with its proof on p. 5. The paper credits the construction to Elekes, Circle grids and bipartite graphs of distances, Combinatorica 15 (1995), 167--174. The copy read is identified on the source card.
Read depth. Claims checked: the construction, statement and proof were read clause by clause on the published PDF and the two bounds re-derived. Nothing here is independently reviewed.
Bears on. Problem 652: the problem page cites this restatement of Elekes's construction in its Formulation. In it each point of determines at most distances to , which with Theorem 14 shows the order cannot be improved in that range. This page draws no conclusion about the problem's constants .