Research notes on every problem, and a library of the papers behind them. Built from the open erdos repository.
Updated
Claim. For a set of positive integers with , let be the maximal number of different sums below . Then for every and all large
(Proposition 1, printed p. 203). P. Erdős and R. Freud, On sums of a Sidon-sequence, J. Number Theory 38 (1991), no. 2, 196--205, cited as [ErFr91] on the problem page. Library home erdos_freud_1991_sums_sidon_sequence; result page Proposition 1. In the notation of Problem 819, whose is the maximal over with , the proposition gives , since adding elements of loses no sum and removing elements from a set of loses sums (a one-line step recorded on the result page). The lower bound is the set for a maximally dense Sidon set : the set has about elements, every sum and lies below , and all sums are distinct except those of the form , which equal . The upper bound is the count of all formal sums. Remark 2 (p. 204) notes that both bounds hold when only the values with a unique representation are counted, and p. 204 states that any improvement of the upper bound is equivalent to lowering the coefficient in the trivial quasi-Sidon bound below , the connection to Problem 840 that the site's commentary records.
Covers. The lower bound . The upper bound is the trivial count of all sums and settles nothing beyond it. Not covered: the asymptotic size of between and , which the problem asks for; the pending claim of 2026 asserts the larger lower constant .
Depends on. No page of this wiki; the proof uses the existence of Sidon sets of about elements in and nothing else.
Acceptance. Refereed: the paper is the publisher's version of record in
the Journal of Number Theory (the Crossref record gives the issue month,
June 1991, and no day, so this page is dated by the first day of its year).
The site's curator, Thomas F. Bloom, credits the bounds to Erdős and Freud
in the problem page's commentary, with the label OPEN; the problem is not
marked settled there, so the credit is recorded here and is not listed as
reviewed. No independent review is recorded.