Union of Two Arithmetic Progressions with the Same Common Difference Is Not Sum-dominant

preprint2020arXivOpen access

Abstract

Given a finite set A⊆NA\subseteq \mathbb{N}, define the sum set A+A={ai+aj∣ai,aj∈A}A+A = \{a_i+a_j\mid a_i,a_j\in A\} and the difference set A−A={ai−aj∣ai,aj∈A}.A-A = \{a_i-a_j\mid a_i,a_j\in A\}. The set AA is said to be sum-dominant if ∣A+A∣>∣A−A∣|A+A|>|A-A|. We prove the following results. 1) The union of two arithmetic progressions (with the same common difference) is not sum-dominant. This result partially proves a conjecture proposed by the author in a previous paper; that is, the union of any two arbitrary arithmetic progressions is not sum-dominant. 2) Hegarty proved that a sum-dominant set must have at least 88 elements with computers' help. The author of the current paper provided a human-verifiable proof that a sum-dominant set must have at least 77 elements. A natural question is about the largest cardinality of sum-dominant subsets of an arithmetic progression. Fix n≥16n\ge 16. Let NN be the cardinality of the largest sum-dominant subset(s) of {0,1,…,n−1}\{0,1,\ldots,n-1\} that contain(s) 00 and n−1n-1. Then n−7≤N≤n−4n-7\le N\le n-4; that is, from an arithmetic progression of length n≥16n\ge 16, we need to discard at least 44 and at most 77 elements (in a clever way) to have the largest sum-dominant set(s). 3) Let R∈NR\in \mathbb{N} have the property that for all r≥Rr\ge R, {1,2,…,r}\{1,2,\ldots,r\} can be partitioned into 33 sum-dominant subsets, while {1,2,…,R−1}\{1,2,\ldots,R-1\} cannot. Then 24≤R≤14524\le R\le 145. This result answers a question by the author et al. in another paper on whether we can find a stricter upper bound for RR.

Explore this paper’s authors, topics and related work.

Building this map preview

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

Reviews 0

Write a reviewWrite

No reviews yet.

Discussion 0

Add a commentWrite

No comments yet.