Wiki
Wiki

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

Updated

Problem 791

../

claims/: The 5 claim pages of Problem 791, one per claimant's result; the problem's standing derives from them.


Statement. Let g(n)g(n) be minimal such that there exists $A\subseteq {0,\ldots,n}$ of size g(n)g(n) with {0,…,n}⊆A+A\{0,\ldots,n\}\subseteq A+A. Estimate g(n)g(n). In particular is it true that g(n)∼2n1/2g(n)\sim 2n^{1/2}?

Formulation. The site's wording as of 2026-09-18T15:09Z (page last edited 24 September 2025). Such an AA is a finite additive 22-basis for [0,n][0,n]; it contains 00, since 0∈A+A0\in A+A. The literature works with the inverse function: n(k)n(k), the maximal range of a 22-basis of size kk, where a set AA of non-negative integers has range n(A)n(A) if A+AA+A contains 0,1,…,n(A)0,1,\ldots,n(A) but not n(A)+1n(A)+1, and where Kohonen counts the zero element in kk ("Often in the literature the zero is not counted, but this makes no difference in the asymptotic ratios", [Ko17], p. 1). Then g(n)=min⁡{k:n(k)≥n}g(n)=\min\{k:n(k)\ge n\}: a basis of range at least nn keeps that property when its elements above nn are dropped, and a set counted by g(n)g(n) has range at least nn. The "in particular" question is Rohrbach's conjecture as Erdős reports it: "Rohrbach conjectured g(n)=2n+o(1)g(n)=2\sqrt n+o(1)" ([Er73], printed p. 131, as printed). Rohrbach's own words: "Es ist zu vermuten, daß n2(k)=k24+O(k)n_2(k)=\frac{k^2}4+O(k) ist" ([Ro37], printed p. 9; result page), where n2(k)n_2(k) is his largest nn for which a 22-basis of kk elements for {0,…,n}\{0,\ldots,n\} exists (p. 4; his kk counts the zero, as the site's g(n)g(n) does, so n2(k)n_2(k) is Kohonen's n(k)n(k)); this is g(n)=2n+O(1)g(n)=2\sqrt n+O(1), and the site's g(n)∼2n1/2g(n)\sim2n^{1/2} is its asymptotic form. The two parts of the statement have different status, recorded separately below.

Status. Open, the site's label. The best source-supported bounds are

(2.181…+o(1)) n ≤ g(n)2 ≤ (3.458…+o(1)) n,(2.181\ldots+o(1))\,n\ \le\ g(n)^2\ \le\ (3.458\ldots+o(1))\,n,

the upper bound from Kohonen's equation (1) [Ko17] (J. Number Theory 174 (2017), refereed; result page), lim inf⁡n(k)/k2≥85/294\liminf n(k)/k^2\ge85/294, and the lower bound from Yu's lim sup⁡n(k)/k2≤0.4585\limsup n(k)/k^2\le0.4585 [Yu15] (J. Number Theory 156 (2015), refereed, not held; quoted from [Ko17], p. 1, and the site), converted on this page; each is an accepted partial claim on its claim page (Kohonen, Yu). The site's "in particular" question is answered in the negative. The first refutation in print is Hämmerer and Hofmeister's [HH76] (J. Reine Angew. Math. 1976), n(2,k)>518k2n(2,k)>\frac5{18}k^2 with kk counting the positive elements, so g(n)2≤(185+o(1))ng(n)^2\le(\frac{18}5+o(1))n; it is an accepted partial claim on its claim page. Mrose's construction, received in April 1975 and the one the site credits, gives the stronger g(n)2≤72ng(n)^2\le\frac72n [Mr79] (equation (3), printed p. 118; result page; it is the lim inf⁡n(k)/k2≥2/7\liminf n(k)/k^2\ge2/7 that [Ko17], p. 1, quotes for Mrose), and Kohonen's theorem gives g(n)2≤(3.459+o(1))n<4ng(n)^2\le(3.459+o(1))n<4n directly, so g(n)≤(1.860+o(1))ng(n)\le(1.860+o(1))\sqrt n and g(n)∼2ng(n)\sim2\sqrt n is false; Mrose's refutation is also an accepted partial claim on its claim page. Read on this page, the label concerns the estimate: the wording is a compound of an estimate, which has no truth value, and a displayed particular guess whose negative answer is recorded on the claim pages. Rohrbach's original bounds, the site's (2+c)n≤g(n)2≤4n(2+c)n\le g(n)^2\le4n [Ro37], are these: Satz 3 (printed p. 5), g(n)<2ng(n)<2\sqrt n for n>1n>1, by the explicit basis (6) (result page); the Folgerung to Satz 6 (p. 15), n≤k2/2n\le k^2/2 for every 22-basis of kk elements for nn, so g(n)2≥2ng(n)^2\ge2n; and inequality (47) (p. 18), n<0.4992 k2n<0.4992\,k^2 for every such basis once kk is large, so g(n)2>(2.0032…)ng(n)^2>(2.0032\ldots)n for large nn, the "(2+c)n(2+c)n" with c=0.0032c=0.0032 (result page); these are an accepted partial claim on its claim page, and the proofs of §§ 3--5 behind the lower bounds were not checked. No result determining the constant was found in the search whose scope the Current assessment records; for the estimate this is a bounded negative finding, not a certificate of openness.

Source. erdosproblems.com/791, accessed 2026-09-18T15:09Z: the problem page (OPEN, with the site's note that no finite computation can resolve it; last edited 24 September 2025; source key [Er73]; commentary citing [Ro37], [Yu15], [Ko17], [Mr79]; OEIS indicator A066063), its two-comment discussion thread (24 September 2025) and its empty proof-claim tab. Cite as: T. F. Bloom, Erdős Problem #791, https://www.erdosproblems.com/791, accessed 2026-09-18.

References.

  • [Er73] Erdős, P., Problems and results on combinatorial number theory. A survey of combinatorial theory (Proc. Internat. Sympos., Colorado State Univ., Fort Collins, Colo., 1971) (1973), 117--138; Section 9, printed pp. 130--131. Library home: erdos_1973_problems_results_combinatorial_number_theory.
  • [Ro37] Rohrbach, H., Ein Beitrag zur additiven Zahlentheorie. Math. Z. 42 (1937), no. 1, 1--30, DOI 10.1007/BF01160061 (Crossref record read); received 9 April 1936. The problem and its inverse formulation n2(k)n_2(k), printed p. 4; Satz 2 with (6)--(9) and Satz 3, p. 5, and the proof of Satz 3, p. 6; the conjecture n2(k)=k2/4+O(k)n_2(k)=k^2/4+O(k), p. 9; Satz 6, p. 11, and its Folgerung, pp. 14--15; Satz 7 and inequality (47), p. 18. Library home: rohrbach_1937_ein_beitrag_zur_additiven_zahlentheorie.
  • [Mr79] Mrose, A., Untere Schranken für die Reichweiten von Extremalbasen fester Ordnung. Abh. Math. Sem. Univ. Hamburg 48 (1979), no. 1, 118--124, DOI 10.1007/BF02941296 (Crossref); received 25 April 1975. Definitions and equation (3), printed p. 118; the order-2 basis B2B_2, p. 121; the parameters deriving (3) and Satz 2, p. 123. Library home: mrose_1979_untere_schranken_reichweiten_extremalbasen_fester_ordnung.
  • [HH76] Hämmerer, N. and Hofmeister, G., Zu einer Vermutung von Rohrbach. J. Reine Angew. Math. 286/287 (1976), 239--247, DOI 10.1515/crll.1976.286-287.239 (Crossref: issued 1976-11-01; Zbl 0332.10032). Definitions, p. 239; Rohrbach's conjecture as the paper states it, p. 240; inequality (1), printed p. 241. Not cited by the site.
  • [Yu15] Yu, G., A new upper bound for finite additive hh-bases. J. Number Theory 156 (2015), 95--104, DOI 10.1016/j.jnt.2015.04.007 (Crossref record read; the site's reference text gives no volume). Not held; quoted from [Ko17], p. 1, and the site.
  • [Ko17] Kohonen, J., An improved lower bound for finite additive 2-bases. arXiv:1606.04770v2 (10 January 2017, "Author's final version"), 6 pp.; J. Number Theory 174 (2017), 518--524, DOI 10.1016/j.jnt.2016.11.011 (Crossref record read; not compared). Equation (1) and the definitions, p. 1. Library home: kohonen_2017_improved_lower_bound_finite_additive_2.
  • [OEIS] Sequence A066063 (J. W. Layman, 2001; revision 29, last modified 31 May 2026), "Size of the smallest subset SS of T={0,1,2,…,n}T=\{0,1,2,\ldots,n\} such that each element of TT is the sum of two elements of SS": 1,2,2,3,3,4,4,4,4,5,…1,2,2,3,3,4,4,4,4,5,\ldots for n≥0n\ge0, with the comment that (a(n)+12)≥n+1\binom{a(n)+1}2\ge n+1; JSON record read. Its links include Nathanson, M. B., Problems in additive number theory, VII: The structure of additive hh-bases for nn, arXiv:2605.26425 (2026), not held.
  • [WZ26] Weltge, S. and Zyhalko, K., On the number of finite additive 2-bases. arXiv:2605.19449v2 (May 2026); the exponential count of finite additive 2-bases, per its abstract (arXiv API). Context.

Formalization. None. No file ErdosProblems/791.lean exists in google-deepmind/formal-conjectures (main, on 2026-09-18 and on 2026-10-07); the page's indicator read "Formalised statement? No", and the community database (2026-09-18T15:04Z; its copy of 2026-10-06 agrees) records the problem open, unformalized, with the OEIS entry A066063 and no formal proof.

Current assessment

The question (site formulation of 2026-09-18T15:09Z). The statement above; OPEN; last edited 24 September 2025. The commentary names such a set a finite additive 22-basis, attributes the problem to Rohrbach with his bounds (2+c)n≤g(n)2≤4n(2+c)n\le g(n)^2\le4n for a small c>0c>0 [Ro37], gives the best known bounds as (2.181⋯+o(1))n≤g(n)2≤(3.458⋯+o(1))n(2.181\cdots+o(1))n\le g(n)^2\le(3.458\cdots+o(1))n, the lower due to Yu [Yu15] and the upper to Kohonen [Ko17], and credits the disproof of g(n)∼2n1/2g(n)\sim2n^{1/2} to Mrose [Mr79], whose construction gives g(n)2≤72ng(n)^2\le\frac72n. The thread: a comment of 24 September 2025 asking how to prove (21/2+c)n1/2≤g(n)≤2n1/2(2^{1/2}+c)n^{1/2}\le g(n)\le2n^{1/2}, and the site's author's reply the same day that, prompted by it, he had found the literature and updated the page. The proof-claim tab is empty. The community database record says open (31 August 2025), unformalized, OEIS A066063.

The origin. [Er73], printed pp. 130--131, introduces the problem as one of Rohrbach's, from the papers of Rohrbach and Stöhr on additive number theory, and states it in Erdős's words: "Let 0≤a1<⋯<ak≤n0\le a_1<\cdots<a_k\le n be a sequence of integers so that every integer 0≤m≤n0\le m\le n can be written in the form ai+aja_i+a_j. Put g(n)=min⁡kg(n)=\min k." It records Rohrbach's observation 2n≤g(n)≤2n\sqrt{2n}\le g(n)\le2\sqrt n and his proof of g(n)>(1+ε)2ng(n)>(1+\varepsilon)\sqrt{2n} for some ε>0\varepsilon>0, notes that Moser improved the result with a still very small ε\varepsilon, and ends: "Rohrbach conjectured g(n)=2n+o(1)g(n)=2\sqrt n+o(1). We are very far from being able to prove this." This is the site's statement with its "in particular" question; the site's (2+c)n≤g(n)2≤4n(2+c)n\le g(n)^2\le4n is Erdős's g(n)>(1+ε)2ng(n)>(1+\varepsilon)\sqrt{2n} squared together with the trivial upper bound. The trivial bounds in [Ko17]'s notation (p. 1): n(k)≤k2/2+k/2n(k)\le k^2/2+k/2 by counting pairs, and n(k)≥k2/4n(k)\ge k^2/4 from A={0,1,…,t,2t,…,t2}A=\{0,1,\ldots,t,2t,\ldots,t^2\}. In Rohrbach's paper itself the problem is posed in the site's exact form, g(n)g(n) being the least kk with n2(k)≥nn_2(k)\ge n (p. 4); the upper bound is Satz 3 (p. 5), g(n)<2ng(n)<2\sqrt n for n>1n>1, proved by the symmetric basis (6) of Satz 2, whose kk elements reach n=k2/4+32k−γn=k^2/4+\frac32k-\gamma with γ≤114\gamma\le\frac{11}4 (equation (9)), a construction rather than the trivial bound; the lower bound is the Folgerung to Satz 6 (p. 15), n≤k2/2n\le k^2/2, sharpened by (47) (p. 18), n<0.4992 k2n<0.4992\,k^2 for large kk, so Erdős's ε\varepsilon is about 0.00080.0008; and the conjecture is printed on p. 9 as n2(k)=k2/4+O(k)n_2(k)=k^2/4+O(k), that is g(n)=2n+O(1)g(n)=2\sqrt n+O(1).

The bounds in hand. Equation (1) of [Ko17] (p. 1, checked clause by clause): lim inf⁡k→∞n(k)/k2≥85/294>0.2891\liminf_{k\to\infty}n(k)/k^2\ge85/294>0.2891, by a generalized Mrose basis built from three elementary segments placed at multiples of t2t^2 (Facts 1--3 and equation (2), p. 2). The placement is Theorem 1 (pp. 3--4), whose proof's covering steps were followed at claims-checked depth, with Facts 1--3 not reproved and nothing independently reviewed. The introduction quotes Mrose's and Kløve--Mossige's lim inf⁡≥2/7>0.2857\liminf\ge2/7>0.2857 and Yu's lim sup⁡n(k)/k2≤0.4585\limsup n(k)/k^2\le0.4585 as the previous record and the best upper bound, and records that n(k)n(k) is known exactly up to n(25)=212n(25)=212. Conversion to the site's function, an authored one-line derivation: since g(n)=min⁡{k:n(k)≥n}g(n)=\min\{k:n(k)\ge n\}, if n(k)≥(85/294−ε)k2n(k)\ge(85/294-\varepsilon)k^2 for all k≥k0(ε)k\ge k_0(\varepsilon) then for large nn the integer k=⌈n/(85/294−ε)⌉k=\lceil\sqrt{n/(85/294-\varepsilon)}\rceil has n(k)≥nn(k)\ge n, so g(n)≤kg(n)\le k and g(n)2≤(294/85+o(1))ng(n)^2\le(294/85+o(1))n, with 294/85=3.4588…294/85=3.4588\ldots, the site's 3.458⋯3.458\cdots; and if n(k)≤(0.4585+ε)k2n(k)\le(0.4585+\varepsilon)k^2 for all large kk then, as g(n)→∞g(n)\to\infty, n≤n(g(n))≤(0.4585+ε)g(n)2n\le n(g(n))\le(0.4585+\varepsilon)g(n)^2, so g(n)2≥(1/0.4585−o(1))ng(n)^2\ge(1/0.4585-o(1))n with 1/0.4585=2.1810…1/0.4585=2.1810\ldots, the site's 2.181⋯2.181\cdots. The Yu bound is second-hand (the paper is not held); Mrose's 2/72/7, his equation (3) n2(k)≥87(k2)2+O(k)n_2(k)\ge\frac87(\frac k2)^2+O(k) with kk counting the positive elements ([Mr79], p. 118; result page), gives g(n)2≤(7/2+o(1))ng(n)^2\le(7/2+o(1))n, the site's "≤72n\le\frac72n", by the same step. Acceptance: J. Number Theory is refereed for [Ko17] and [Yu15]; Mrose's and Rohrbach's papers are in refereed journals. Read depth: claims checked for [Ko17]'s definitions, equation (1), quoted bounds and Theorem 1, with the proof's covering steps followed, for [Mr79]'s definitions, equation (3), the basis B2B_2 and Satz 2, and for [Ro37]'s formulation, Satz 2, Satz 3, the conjecture of p. 9, Satz 6 with its Folgerung, Satz 7 and (47); the proof of [Ro37]'s Satz 3 was followed, the proofs of its §§ 3--5 were not checked, Mrose's construction was not verified, and [Ko17]'s Facts 1--3 were not reproved; [Yu15] is not held.

The two questions. The estimate of g(n)g(n), or of lim⁡g(n)2/n\lim g(n)^2/n if it exists, is open between 2.1812.181 and 3.4593.459; no source was found bounding the constant further, so the estimate part of the problem is open as the site says. The "in particular" question is settled negatively, first by [HH76] (inequality (1)), then by [Mr79] (equation (3)) and [Ko17]: any construction with lim inf⁡n(k)/k2>1/4\liminf n(k)/k^2>1/4 gives lim sup⁡g(n)/n<2\limsup g(n)/\sqrt n<2. Read on this page, the label concerns the estimate: the wording is a compound, and the settled subquestion is the accepted partial claim of Hämmerer and Hofmeister and of Mrose.

Search scope. None of the routes below found a bound improving 85/29485/294 or 0.45850.4585, a determination of the limit, or a proof claim.

  • The site: problem page, discussion thread and proof-claim tab as of 2026-09-18; the formal-conjectures directory listing (no file) and the community database, both on 2026-09-18; the OEIS record of A066063 (JSON).
  • The primary sources, at the pages cited: [Ko17] pp. 1--2; [Er73] pp. 130--131.
  • arXiv API: the record of 1606.04770 (v1 15 June 2016, v2 10 January 2017, journal reference J. Number Theory 174 (2017) 518--524); the search abs:"additive 2-basis" OR abs:"additive 2-bases" OR abs:"additive h-bases" OR abs:"finite additive basis" sorted by date (five records: [WZ26], [Ko17], two 2014 Journal of Integer Sequences papers on restricted bases and addition chains, and a 2008 paper on numerical sets; none improves the bounds).
  • Crossref: the records of [Ro37], [Mr79] and [Yu15] and the bibliographic query for [Ko17].
  • Open-archive and repository searches for copies of [Yu15] (Elsevier's open archive), without result, and of [Ro37] (EuDML, GDZ): EuDML's record of [Ro37] (https://eudml.org/doc/168701) links a free GDZ scan of the print, whose terms forbid further reproduction without written permission.

Not searched: MathSciNet, zbMATH, Google Scholar, X; the Nathanson 2026 preprint linked by the OEIS entry. Not held on that date: [Ro37], [Mr79], [Yu15], the Kløve--Mossige paper, the journal text of [Ko17].

Remaining gaps. (1) The lower bound 2.181…2.181\ldots rests on [Yu15], not held; reopening condition: a copy of the paper. (2) Rohrbach's Satz 3 was read with its proof; his lower bounds, the Folgerung to Satz 6 and (47), were read at statement depth, and the numerical case analysis of §§ 3--5 that proves them was not checked. Mrose's equation (3) was read at statement depth; the parameter optimization behind it is not printed. (3) The label-versus-subquestion split above treats the wording as a compound: the estimate's status in the Status sentence and the subquestion's negative answer on its claim pages. (4) [Ko17]'s construction was followed at claims-checked depth, with Facts 1--3 not reproved and no independent review, and the OEIS terms were not recomputed.

Linked library material

These entries are derived from explicit links on library pages. They are navigation only and do not by themselves record mathematical progress.