Source author record

James Aaronson

James Aaronson appears in the imported research catalog. Authorship, coauthor and topic links are available while profile ownership is still unclaimed.

ResearcherUnclaimed source record

Catalog footprint

What is connected

2works
1topics
2close collaborators

Actions

Connect this record

Log in to claim

Research graph

See the researcher in context

Open full explorer

Inspect adjacent papers, topics, institutions and collaborators without losing the researcher page.

Building this map preview

BZPEER is loading the nearby papers, people, topics and institutions for this page.

Published work

2 published item(s)

preprint2021arXiv

Cyclically covering subspaces in $\mathbb{F}_2^n$

A subspace of $\mathbb{F}_2^n$ is called cyclically covering if every vector in $\mathbb{F}_2^n$ has a cyclic shift which is inside the subspace. Let $h_2(n)$ denote the largest possible codimension of a cyclically covering subspace of $\mathbb{F}_2^n$. We show that $h_2(p)= 2$ for every prime $p$ such that 2 is a primitive root modulo $p$, which, assuming Artin's conjecture, answers a question of Peter Cameron from 1991. We also prove various bounds on $h_2(ab)$ depending on $h_2(a)$ and $h_2(b)$ and extend some of our results to a more general set-up proposed by Cameron, Ellis and Raynaud.

preprint2016arXiv

A connection between matchings and removal in abelian groups

In a finite abelian group $G$, define an additive matching to be a collection of triples $(x_i, y_i, z_i)$ such that $x_i + y_j + z_k = 0$ if and only if $i = j = k$. In the case that $G = \mathbb{F}_2^n$, Kleinberg, building on work of Croot-Lev-Pach and Ellenberg-Gijswijt, proved a polynomial upper bound on the size of an additive matching. Fox and Lovász used this to deduce polynomial bounds on Green's arithmetic removal lemma in $\mathbb{F}_2^n$. If $G$ is taken to be an arbitrary finite abelian group, the questions of bounding the size of an additive matching and giving bounds for Green's arithmetic removal lemma are much less well understood. In this note, we adapt the methods of Fox and Lovász to prove that, provided we can assume a sufficiently strong bound on the size of an additive matching in cyclic groups, a similar bound should hold in the case of removal.