ProbXiv
sign in

North-East Lattice Paths with Few Collinear Vertices

Combinatorics · posed by Joseph L. Gerver, L. Thomas Ramsey, 1979 · partial

1 attempt

Statement

Let A(k)A(k) be the largest possible number of moves in a north-east lattice path whose visited vertices contain no kk collinear points. Gerver (1979) and Gerver and Ramsey (1979) bounded A(k)A(k) by exp(Ω(log(k)2))A(k)exp(O(k4)),\exp\left(\Omega\left(\log(k)^2\right)\right) \le A(k) \le \exp\left(O\left(k^4\right)\right), and determining the true growth rate has been open since. Both bounds are improved to exp(Ω(k1/3))A(k)exp(O(k2)),\exp\left(\Omega\left(k^{1/3}\right)\right) \le A(k) \le \exp\left(O\left(k^2\right)\right), with the upper bound proved in the sharper form exp((2e+o(1))(k1)2)\exp\left(\left(\tfrac{2}{e}+o(1)\right)(k-1)^2\right).

Context

Both bounds move, and the gap stays enormous: the lower bound rises from exp(Ω(log2k))\exp(\Omega(\log^2 k)) to exp(Ω(k1/3))\exp(\Omega(k^{1/3})) and the upper falls from exp(O(k4))\exp(O(k^4)) to exp(O(k2))\exp(O(k^2)), so A(k)A(k) is still undetermined between an exponent of k1/3k^{1/3} and one of k2k^2. The paper's own closing discussion argues its lower-bound construction is near the limit of the method and that beating it needs additional randomness, a sharper line-counting step, or a different model entirely.

A named problem - the Gerver-Ramsey collinearity problem - from two 1979 Pacific J. Math. papers, catalogued in Brass-Moser-Pach's standard problem book and still drawing work in 2024 and 2026. Forty-seven years open with a genuine literature, but firmly inside discrete geometry: the named specialist band at 15.

People

Attempts

1 attempt

No person has examined this. 1 attempt is published here and nothing has been checked against it at all. Saying whether the mathematics holds is the most useful thing anybody can do on this page.

review this attempt

  • #1

    Attempt 1

    proof attemptGPT-5.5 Pro with Samuel Korsky ·
    AI involvement
    ai assisted
    a person led the work and used a model along the way.
    models
    GPT-5.5 Pro
    people
    Samuel Korsky

    The acknowledgement in full: the author was assisted by GPT-5.5 Pro in preparing the paper, but "the main construction ideas, including the dyadic-interval random variables in the lower bound and the density-increment framework in the upper bound, were due to the author". AI tools checked computations, assisted with drafting, and improved the upper-bound constant by suggesting the use of the mediant of the relevant Farey fractions. That last contribution is traceable in the text: it lifts the density increment from (1/8o(1))(k1)2(1/8-o(1))(k-1)^{-2} to (1/4o(1))(k1)2(1/4-o(1))(k-1)^{-2}, which is what produces the 2/e2/e constant. So the model sharpened the constant inside the new upper bound rather than the exponent, which is the lower tier by this site's definition.

    Reviews

    No person has reviewed this attempt. It has not been checked at all.

    Discussion of this attempt

    no comments

Solve with an agent

Open the statement in a chat, with the problem and the ground rules already written into the prompt.

This opens a third-party site. Nothing is posted back to ProbXiv and nothing you write there is recorded here — what a model gives you is an attempt, which a person still has to check.

Discussion

no comments

Nothing has been said about this problem yet.

Reading every thread is open to everyone. Posting needs an account with posting rights — sign in to check yours.