Research notes on every problem, and a library of the papers behind them. Built from the open erdos repository.
Updated
Source. Bloom, arXiv:2112.03726v2, Proposition 2, printed/PDF
pp. 9–12.
Notation and circle-method setup
For a finite set of positive integers B, write
R(B)=n∈B∑n1.
If q is a prime power, define
Bq={n∈B:q∣n and (q,n/q)=1}.
Thus n∈Bpr precisely when pr∥n. Let
QB={q:q is a prime power and Bq=∅}.
For a set P of prime powers, [P] denotes their least
common multiple, with [∅]=1. In particular,
[QB]=lcm(B). Finally put e(x)=e2πix.
The paper describes this as a refinement of Croot's Fourier-analytic method:
it detects reciprocal sums 1/k for arbitrary integer k, and its
short-interval hypothesis is weighted separately on each exact prime-power
class Aq. The application regime stated on p. 9 is
η=N−o(1), k=No(1), and M,K=N1−o(1).
Proposition 2 (precise statement; printed p. 9)
There is an absolute constant c>0 with the following property. Suppose
N≥M≥N3/4,1≤k≤cM,
where k is an integer, and suppose
0<η<1,2M≥K≥N3/4.
Let A⊆[M,N] be a set of integers satisfying all four conditions
below.
The reciprocal sum lies in the half-open interval
R(A)∈[k2−M1,k2).
The integer k divides lcm(A).
Every q∈QA satisfies
q≤cmin(kM,N2(logN)2ηMK2).
For every interval I of length K, at least one of the following
alternatives holds.
(a)
#{n∈A:no element of I is divisible by n}≥logNM.
(b) Define
DI={q∈QA:#{n∈Aq:no element of I is divisible by n}<qηM}.
Then some x∈I is divisible by every q∈DI.
Then there is a subset S⊆A for which
R(S)=k1.
In fact, at least 2Ω(∣A∣) subsets S⊆A have this
reciprocal sum.
Rewritten proof
The proof occupies printed pp. 9--12. Decrease the absolute constant c as
often as needed, and abbreviate
X=cmin(kM,N2(logN)2ηMK2),Q=QA,L=[Q].
Thus every member of Q is at most X, L=lcm(A),
and k∣L.
1. Fourier detection (printed pp. 9--10)
Let F(A) be the number of subsets S⊆A for which kR(S)
is an integer. Every such reciprocal sum satisfies
0≤R(S)≤R(A)<k2.
Moreover, R(S)=0 only for S=∅. Consequently the nonempty
subsets counted by F(A) are exactly the subsets with R(S)=1/k, and
their number is F(A)−1.
For integers a and positive b, additive-character orthogonality gives
1a/b∈Z=b1−b/2<h≤b/2∑e(bha),
where the summation interval contains exactly b integers. Since every
n∈A divides L, each kR(S) has the form km/L with
m∈Z. Apply the orthogonality formula and then sum independently
over the choice of each element of S:
F(A)=L1−L/2<h≤L/2∑n∈A∏(1+e(nkh)).(1)
The term h=0 is 2∣A∣/L. If L is even, the endpoint
h=L/2 contributes
L1n∈A∏(1+e(2nkL))≥0,
because L/n is an integer and hence every exponential in the product is
1 or −1. Set
J=(−L/2,L/2)∩Z∖{0}.
After discarding only the nonnegative endpoint term from (1), it follows that
F(A)≥L2∣A∣+L1h∈J∑n∈A∏(1+e(nkh)).(2)
2. Nonnegative major arcs (printed pp. 10--11)
For each t∈Z, define
M(t)={h∈J:h−ktL≤2kK}.
The centers are integers because k∣L. They are separated by L/k,
whereas each arc has radius K/(2k). Since
L≥minA≥M≥2K, the arcs are disjoint. Let
m=J∖t∈Z⋃M(t)
be the minor arcs.
If h=tL/k+r∈M(t), then r is an integer and
e(tL/n)=1 for every n∈A. The identity
1+e(θ)=2e(θ/2)cos(πθ)
therefore turns the contribution of M(t) to the second term in
(2) into
for n∈A, so each cosine in the product is nonnegative. Also condition
1 lets us write
kR(A)=2−ε,0<ε≤Mk.
Because r is an integer,
cos(πkrR(A))=cos(2πr−πrε)=cos(πrε)≥0,
the final inequality following from
0≤rε≤K/(2M)≤1/4. Hence all the major arcs make a
nonnegative contribution to (2).
For later use, set
C(B;h)=n∈B∏cos(nπkh).
It is enough to prove
h∈m∑C(A;h)≤21.(5)
Indeed, the absolute value of the total minor-arc contribution in (2) is at
most 2∣A∣/L times the left side of (5), so (5) gives
F(A)≥L2∣A∣−1.(6)
The paper displays the stronger target 1/4 at its equation (5), but the
bound 1/2 is the one needed for its stated conclusion (6); see the source
note below about signed frequencies.
There is at most one maximal member of Q above each underlying prime, so
L≤Xπ(X)≤eO(X).
Here the second inequality is Chebyshev's estimate
π(X)≪X/logX. On the other hand,
∣A∣≥MR(A)≥kM
after decreasing c≤1, while X≤cM/k. Choosing c sufficiently
small therefore makes
L≤2∣A∣/2.
Together with (6), this gives
F(A)≥2∣A∣/2−1>1.(7)
The choice k≤cM, with c small, also gives an absolute lower bound
on ∣A∣, so the final strict inequality causes no small-cardinality issue.
Once (5) is proved, (7) yields the desired nonempty subset. It also gives
F(A)−1≥2∣A∣/2−2 after another harmless decrease of c, proving the
claimed 2Ω(∣A∣) count.
3. Minor arcs of type (a) (printed p. 11)
It remains to prove (5). Since C(A;−h)=C(A;h) and 0∈/m,
it is enough to bound positive minor-arc frequencies and double the result.
For h>0, take the closed interval
Ih=[kh−K/2,kh+K/2], which has length K.
For each n∈A, choose a residue hn satisfying
kh≡hn(modn),∣hn∣≤2n.
The distance from kh to the nearest multiple of n is ∣hn∣.
Consequently no element of Ih is divisible by n exactly when
∣hn∣>K/2. Define
Dh=DIh={q∈Q:#{n∈Aq:∣hn∣>K/2}<qηM}.
Partition m+=m∩Z>0 into
m1, where alternative 4(a) holds for Ih, and
m2=m+∖m1.
For 0≤x≤1/2,
cos(πx)≤1−x2≤e−x2.
Using the chosen residue of kh modulo n, this implies
cos(nπkh)≤exp(−n2hn2).(8)
If h∈m1, then ∣hn∣>K/2 for at least
M/logN members of A. Since every such n≤N, (8) gives
C(A;h)≤exp(−n∈A∑n2hn2)≤exp(−4N2logNK2M).
There are fewer than L possible frequencies in J, and
L≤eO(X), hence
h∈m1∑C(A;h)≤eO(X)exp(−4N2logNK2M).(9)
Because 0<η<1, the definition of X gives
X≤N2(logN)2cK2M≤N2logNcK2M.
Thus, after taking c small enough, (9) is at most 1/8. The lower
bounds M,K≥N3/4 make the remaining negative exponent grow with
N; decreasing c also disposes of the bounded admissible cases.
4. Minor arcs of type (b) (printed pp. 11--12)
We first prove the pointwise estimate
C(A;h)≤N−4∣Q∖Dh∣(h∈m2).(10)
Assume (10) for the moment. Since alternative 4(a) fails for
h∈m2, alternative 4(b) gives a multiple of [Dh] within
distance K/2 of kh. Fix D⊆Q. Each multiple of [D]
in [1,kL] can lie within K/2 of kh for at most
K/k+1≤M positive integers h. Therefore
#{h∈m2:Dh=D}≤[D]MkL≤Mkq∈Q∖D∏q≤kN∣Q∖D∣+1.(11)
The loose interval [1,kL] contains every relevant multiple: for positive
h∈J, one has kh<kL/2, and the minor-arc condition keeps the
interval Ih away from zero.
If Dh=Q, alternative 4(b) would put a multiple of [Q]=L within
K/2 of kh, contradicting h∈m. Hence
Dh=Q. Combining (10) and (11), and using ∣Q∣≤N, gives
Take c small enough that this is at most 1/8. Together with the type
(a) estimate,
h∈m+∑C(A;h)≤41.
Doubling by symmetry proves (5).
It remains to establish (10). For each n∈A, the number of
q∈Q for which n∈Aq is exactly ω(n), because there is
one exact prime power pvp(n) for each prime divisor p of n.
In particular it is at most (logN)/(log2). Choose an absolute
a>0 so small that
logNa#{q∈Q:n∈Aq}≤1
for every n∈A. Since every cosine factor lies in [0,1],
C(A;h)≤q∈Q∏C(Aq;h)a/logN.(12)
Now let q∈Q∖Dh. The definition of Dh says that at
least ηM/q members n∈Aq have ∣hn∣>K/2. Applying (8) on
this class and using n≤N,
For any prescribed large absolute B, a sufficiently small choice of
c therefore makes (13) at most
e−B(logN)2=N−BlogN.
In (12), discard the factors indexed by Dh, since they are at most one,
and use this estimate for every q∈/Dh. Choosing B so that
aB≥4 yields
C(A;h)≤q∈Q∖Dh∏(N−BlogN)a/logN≤N−4∣Q∖Dh∣,
which is (10). This completes the minor-arc estimate, hence the proof of the
proposition and its exponential multiplicity assertion.
External dependencies
The proof does not invoke an earlier numbered result from the paper. Its only
external analytic input is the standard Chebyshev bound
π(x)≪x/logx, used to obtain [Q]≤eO(X). Additive-character
orthogonality is written explicitly above. The cosine estimates and
ω(n)≪logn are elementary. Croot [2] is methodological background,
not a logical dependency of Proposition 2.
Source details
The source defines its fiber sets for nonnegative frequencies but later
sums over signed frequencies. The rewrite explicitly estimates positive
frequencies and doubles, obtaining a signed bound 1/2. This suffices for
F(A)≥2∣A∣−1/L, although the paper displays the stronger target
1/4. The parameter mismatch in the downstream application is recorded
on Proposition 1;
it does not alter the present proposition.