arxiv: v2 [math.nt] 4 Nov 2012

Transcription

1 INVERSE ERDŐS-FUCHS THEOREM FOR k-fold SUMSETS arxiv: v2 [mathnt] 4 Nov 2012 LI-XIA DAI AND HAO PAN Abstract We generalize a result of Ruzsa on the inverse Erdős-Fuchs theorem for k-fold sumsets 1 Introduction For r > 0, let N(r) count the number of lattice points inside the boundary of a circle with the center at the origin and radius r The famous Gauss circle problem says that N(r) = πr 2 +O(r 1/2+ǫ ) However, thecurrentbestresultisthathereo(n 1/2+ǫ )canbereplacedbyo(n 131/208 ) On the other hand, using the techniques of the Fourier analysis, Hardy proved that N(r) = πr 2 +O(r 1/2 (logr) 1/4 ) can t hold for all sufficiently large r Consider a sequence A = {a 1 a 2 a 3 } of non-negative integers with lim n a n = For a positive integer n, define r ka (n) = {(i 1,i 2,,i k ) : a i1 +a i2 + +a ik = n, a i1,,a ik A}, ie, r ka (n) counts the number of representations of n as the sum of k elements in A It is easy to see that N(r) = m r 2 r 2A (m) provided A = {0,1,4,9,16,} In [2], Erdős and Fuchs proved that for any sequence A and constant C > 0, (11) r 2A (m) = Cn+o(n 1/4 (logn) 1/2 ) can t hold for all sufficiently large n Although here o(n 1/4 (logn) 1/2 ) is slightly weaker than Hardy s bound O(n 1/4 (logn) 1/4 ), the Erdős and Fuchs theorem is valid for any sequence A of non-negative integers, rather than only for A = {0, 1, 4, 9, 16,} Subsequenty, Jurkat(unpublished), and Montgomery and Vaughan [7] removed (logn) 1/2 in (11) Nowadays, there are several different generalizations of the Erdős-Fuchs theorem (cf [1, 4, 5, 6, 9]) For example, Tang [9] proved 1

2 that for k 2, r ka (m) = Cn+o(n 1/4 ) can t hold for all sufficiently large n In the opposite direction, Vaughan asked whether there exists a sequence A and C > 0 such that r 2A (m) = Cn+O(n 1/4+ǫ ) With help of a probabilistic discussion, Ruzsa [8] gave an affirmative answer to this question In fact, he proved that there exists a sequence A = {a 1 a 2 } satisfying r 2A (m) = Cn+O(n 1/4 logn) for all sufficiently large n It is natural to ask whether Ruzsa s result can be generalized to the k-fold sums In this note, we shall prove that Theorem 11 Suppose that k 2 is an integer and β < k is a positive real number Then there exists a sequence A = {a 1 a 2 a 2 } of positive integers, satisfying O(n β β(k+β)/k2 logn), if k > 2β, r ka (m) Cn β = O(n β 3β/(2k) logn), if k < 2β, O(n β 3/4 logn), if k = 2β, where C is a constant The proofof Theorem 11 will begiven inthe next two sections And throughout this paper, the implied constants in O,, only depend on β and k 2 The probabilistic approach Let θ i be independent random variables which is uniformly distributed in the interval [i,i+1] Let a i = θ α i, where α = k/β Clearly a i a j provided i j Now assume that n is sufficiently large Let Ω = {(x 1,x 2,,x k ) : x α 1 + +x α k n, x i 0} It is easy to see that the volume of Ω vol(ω) = C k,α n k/α, where C k,α is a constant only depending on k and α For i 1,,i k 0, let d i1,,i k denote the volume of the intersection of Ω and the hypercube [i 1,i 1 +1] [i 2,i 2 +1] [i k,i k +1] 2

3 It is easy to see that Define and let i 1,,i k 0 δ i1,,i k = d i1,,i k = vol(ω) = C k,α n β { 1 if θ α i 1 + +θ α i k n, 0 otherwise, σ n = i 1,,i k 0 δ i1,,i k Let A = {a 1,a 2,} Since θi α θi α k θi α 1 + +θi α k θi α θi α k +k, clearly we have σ n r ka (m) σ n+k Note that δ i1,,i k = d i1,,i k if (i 1 +1) α + +(i k +1) α n or i α 1 + +iα k n So we only need to consider those i 1,,i k such that i α 1 ++iα k < n < (i 1 +1) α ++(i k +1) α Lemma 21 Suppose that a 1,,a k are positive integers Then {(i 1,,i k ) : a 1 i α 1+ +a k i α k < n < a 1 (i 1 +1) α + +a k (i k +1) α } = O(n (k 1)/α ), where the implied constant in O only depends on a 1,,a k Proof Consider Clearly where C (a 1,,a k ) k,α have Hence implies that Ω (a 1,,a k ) R = {(x 1,,x k ) : a 1 x α 1 + +a k x α k R α, x i 0} vol(ω (a 1,,a k ) R ) = C (a 1,,a k ) k,α R k, is a constant In view of the differential mean value theorem, we (x+1) α x α α(x+1) α 1 a 1 i α 1 + +a ki α k < n < a 1(i 1 +1) α + +a k (i k +1) α and n (a 1 + +a k )(n 1 1/α +1) < a 1 i α 1 ++a ki α k a 1 (i 1 +1) α + +a k (i k +1) α < n+(a 1 + +a k )(n 1 1/α +1) 3

4 That is, the hypercube [i 1,i 1 +1] [i k,i k +1] is completely contained in However, Ω (a 1,,a k ) (n+(a 1 + +a k )(n 1 1/α +1)) 1/α \Ω (a 1,,a k ) (n (a 1 + +a k )(n 1 1/α +1)) 1/α (n+(a 1 + +a k )(n 1 1/α +1)) k/α (n (a 1 + +a k )(n 1 1/α +1)) k/α 2k α (a 1 + +a k )(n 1 1/α +1) (n+(a 1 + +a k )(n 1 1/α +1)) k/α 1 n (k 1)/α Let I = {(i 1,,i k ) : i 1 > > i k, i α 1 ++i α k < n < (i 1 +1) α ++(i k +1) α } By Lemma 21, we have {(i 1,,i k 1 ) : i α 1 ++2i α k 1 < n < (i 1 +1) α ++2(i k+1 +1) α } n (k 2)/α It follows that σ n vol(ω) = k! (i 1,,i k ) I (δ i1,,i k d i1,,i k )+O(n (k 2)/α ) For i 1 > > i k, since α i1,,α ik are independent, it is evident that ( ) E (δ i1,,i k d i1,,i k ) = 0 (i 1,,i k ) I Lemma 22 ([3, Theorem 12]) Let ξ 1,,ξ k be independent bounded real random variables Suppose that a i ξ i b i and k (b i a i ) 2 D Then for every y, where η = ξ 1 + +ξ k i=1 P(η E(η) yd) exp( 2y 2 ), Unfortunately, those δ i1,,i k with (i 1,,i k ) I are not independent In order to apply Lemma 22, our main difficulty is to give a suitable partition of I The following lemma is the key of our proof of Theorem 11 And its proof will be given in the next section Lemma 23 Let I = {(i 1,,i k 1 ) : (i 1,,i k 1,i k ) I for some i k }, and for (i 1,,i k 1 ) I, let I i1,,i k 1 = {i k : (i 1,,i k 1,i k ) I} 4

5 Then there exists a partition I = U 1 U 2 U s satisfying that (1) s = O(n (k 2)/α ) (2) U t = O(n 1/α ) for 1 t s (3) For any 1 t s and distinct (i 1,,i k 1 ),(j 1,,j k 1 ) U t, we have I i1,,i k 1 I j1,,j k 1 = and i r j r for every 1 r k 1 (4) For any 1 t s, O(n 2(α 1)/α2 ), if α > 2, 2 = O(n (i 1,,i k 1 ) U t 1/α ), if α < 2, O(n 1/2 logn), if α = 2 Let s see how Theorem 11 can be deduced from Lemma 23 For (i 1,,i k 1 ) I, let ξ i1,,i k 1 = δ i1,,i k 1,i k i k I i1,,i k 1 Clearly the possible values of ξ i1,,i k 1 lie between 0 and For 1 t s, define η t = ξ i1,,i k 1 (i 1,,i k 1 ) U t In view of (3) of Lemma 23, for distinct (i 1,,i k 1 ),(j 1,,j k 1 ) U t, ξ i1,,i k 1 and ξ j1,,j k 1 are independent And by (4) of Lemma 23 we have C 1 n (α 1)/α2, if α > 2, 2 D = C 1 n (i 1,,i k 1 ) U t 1/(2α), if α < 2, C 1 n 1/4 logn, if α = 2, for some constant C 1 Applying Lemma 22 with y = ((k 2)/α+2)logn, we can obtain s P( σ n E(σ n ) syd) P( η t E(η t ) yd) 2sexp( 2y 2 ) = O(n(k 2)/α ) n 1 2(k 2)/α+4 n 2, t=1 for sufficiently large n Then with the help of the Borel-Cantelli lemma, we have ie, we almost surely have P( σ n E(σ n ) syd for infinitely many n) = 0, σ n = E(σ n )+O(n (k 2)/α lognd) for sufficiently large n 5

6 and 3 Proof of Lemma 23 In this section we shall prove Lemma 23 For t 0, define X t = {(i 1,,i k 1 ) I : 4ktαn 1 1/α i α 1 + +iα k 1 < (4kt+2k)αn1 1/α } X t = {(i 1,,i k 1 ) I : (4kt+2k)αn 1 1/α i α 1 + +iα k 1 < 4k(t+1)αn1 1/α } Suppose that (i 1,,i k 1 ) X s and (j 1,,j k 1 ) X t where s t We claim that I i1,,i k 1 I j1,,j k 1 = Assume on the contrary that u I i1,,i k 1 I j1,,j k 1 Without loss of generality, suppose that s < t Then we have j α 1 + +j α k 1 +u α n (i 1 +1) α + +(i k 1 +1) α +(u+1) α Since i 1,,i k 1,u n 1/α and (x+1) α x α α(x+1) α 1 for x 0, we get j α 1 + +j α k 1 +u α i α 1 + +iα k 1 +uα +α((i 1 +1) α 1 + +(i k 1 +1) α 1 +(u+1) α 1 ) i α 1 + +i α k 1 +u α +kα(n 1/α +1) α 1 On the other hand, by the definition of X t, we have i α 1 + +iα k 1 <(4ks+2k)αn1 1/α (4kt 2k)αn 1 1/α j α 1 + +j α k 1 2kαn 1 1/α This evidently leads an contradiction Similarly, for s t, if (i 1,,i k 1 ) X s and (j 1,,j k 1 ) X t, we also have I i1,,i k 1 I j1,,j k 1 = Let d = 2k 2 α +k For s 1,s 2,,s k 2, define Y s1,,s k 2 = {(i 1,,i k 1 ) I : i 1 +di v = s v 1 for each 2 v k 1} Clearly for distinct (i 1,,i k 1 ),(j 1,,j k 1 ) Y s1,,s k 2, we must have i v j v for all v Below we shall show that Y s1,,s k 2 X t 1 for arbitrary s 1,,s k 2,t Assume thatthereexist distinct (i 1,,i k 1 ),(j 1,,j k 1 ) Y s1,,s k 2 X t Without loss of generality, suppose that i 1 < j 1 For all v, since i 1 +di v = j 1 +dj v, we must have j 1 i 1 = dq and i v j v = q for some positive integer q Hence i α 1 +i α 2 + +i α k 1 = (j 1 dq) α +(j 2 +q) α + +(j k +q) α Clearly, j1 α iα 1 = jα 1 (j 1 dq) α dq α(j 1 dq) α 1 = dqαi α 1 1, and for 2 v k 1, i α v jα v = (j v +q) α j α v q α(j v +q) α 1 = qαi α 1 v Recalling i 1 > i 2 > > i k 1, we have i 1 > (n/k) 1/α Thus (j α 1 +jα 2 + +jα k 1 ) (iα 1 +iα 2 + +iα k 1 ) dqαi α 1 1 qα(i α i α 1 k 1 ) (d k +1)qαiα 1 1 > 2kαn 1 1/α 6

7 It is impossible since both (i 1,,i k 1 ) and (j 1,,j k 1 ) lie in X t Similarly, Y s1,,s k 2 X t 1 for arbitrary s 1,,s k 2,t Now let ) (Y s1,,sk 2 X t and U s1,,s k 2 = t U s 1,,s k 2 = t ( ) Y s1,,s k 2 X t Below we shall only verify the requirements (1)-(4) for U s1,,s k 2, since all are similar to U s 1,,s k 2 Note that X t implies that Thus clearly 2ktαn 1 1/α i α 1 + +i α k 1 < n {t : X t } = O(n 1/α ), ie, U s1,,s k 2 = O(n 1/α ) Furthermore, since all those s 1,,s k 2 are less than we have (d+1)i 1 (d+1)n 1/α, {(s 1,,s k 2 ) : Y s1,,s k 2 } = O(n (k 2)/α ) Hence the number of U s1,,s k 2 is O(n (k 2)/α ) Clearly, (n i α 1 iα k 1 )1/α (min{n (i 1 +1) α (i k 1 +1) α,0}) 1/α +1 If (i 1 +1) α + +(i k 1 +1) α < n n (α 1)/α, then (n i α 1 iα k 1 )1/α (n (i 1 +1) α (i k 1 +1) α ) 1/α +1 (i 1 +1) α + +(i k 1 +1) α i α 1 iα k 1 (n (i 1 +1) α (i k 1 +1) α ) 1 1/α (i 1 +1) α 1 + +(i k 1 +1) α 1 (n (i 1 +1) α (i k 1 +1) α ) 1 1/α Note that for any U s1,,s k 2 and (i 1,,i k 1 ),(j 1,,j k 1 ) U s1,,s k 2, we have Since i α 1 + +iα k 1 (jα 1 + +jα k 1 ) 4kαn1 1/α (i 1 +1) α + +(i k 1 +1) α i α 1 i α k 1 n (α 1)/α, the number of (i 1,,i k 1 ) U s1,,s k 2 satisfying (i 1 +1) α + +(i k 1 +1) α n n (α 1)/α 7

8 is at most O(1) Thus (i 1,,i k 1 ) U s1,,s k 2 2 = (i 1,,i k 1 ) U s1,,s k 2 (i 1 +1) α + +(i k 1 +1) α n n (α 1)/α n 1/α 1( (n (α 1)/α2 ) 2 + That is, 0 n 1 1/α (n tn 1 1/α ) 1 1/α (i 1,,i k 1 ) U s1,,s k 2 (i 1 +1) α + +(i k 1 +1) α <n n (α 1)/α ) 2 dt O(n 2(α 1)/α2 ), if α > 2, 2 = O(n (i 1,,i k 1 ) U s1 1/α ), if α < 2,,,s k 2 O(n 1/2 logn), if α = 2 References [1] Y G Chen and M Tang, A quantitative Erdős-Fuchs theorem and its generalization, Acta Arith, 149(2011), [2] P Erdős and W J Fuchs, On a problem of additive number theory, J London Math Soc, 31(1956), [3] W Hoeffding, Probability inequalities for sums of bounded random variables, J Amer Statist Assoc, 58(1963), 130 [4] G Horváth, On a generalization of a theorem of Erdős and Fuchs, Acta Math Hungar, 92(2001), [5] G Horváth, On a theorem of Erdős and Fuchs, Acta Arith, 103(2002), [6] G Horváth, An improvement of an extension of a theorem of Erdős and Fuchs, Acta Math Hungar, 104(2004), [7] H L Montgomery and R C Vaughan, On the Erdős-Fuchs theorems, A tribute to Paul Erdős, , Cambridge Univ Press, Cambridge, 1990 [8] I Z Ruzsa, A converse to a theorem of Erdős and Fuchs, J Number Theory, 62(1997), [9] M Tang, On a generalization of a theorem of Erdős and Fuchs, Discrete Math, 309(2009), address: lilidainjnu@163com School of Mathematical Sciences, Nanjing Normal University, Nanjing , People s Republic of China address: haopan79@yahoocomcn Department of Mathematics, Nanjing University, Nanjing , People s Republic of China 8