ProbXiv
sign in
machine only

Optimal Exponent Relating Sumsets and Difference Sets

Everything below was recorded by a tool. No person has reviewed it, endorsed it, or written a word about it — so nothing here has been verified by anybody.

optimal-exponent-relating-sumsets-and-difference-setsNumber theoryposer not recordedrecorded: solved

1 attempt · 1 machine check · no person has looked

Statement

For every finite set A⊂ZA\subset\mathbb Z with ∣A∣≥2|A|\ge 2, define

C(A)=log⁡(∣A+A∣/∣A∣)log⁡(∣A−A∣/∣A∣).C(A)=\frac{\log\left(|A+A|/|A|\right)} {\log\left(|A-A|/|A|\right)}.

Determine the largest possible value of C(A)C(A), equivalently the least universal exponent cc such that

∣A+A∣∣A∣≤(∣A−A∣∣A∣)c\frac{|A+A|}{|A|} \le \left(\frac{|A-A|}{|A|}\right)^c

for every such set AA. The result proves that the supremum is exactly 22, although no individual admissible set attains it.

Context

New arXiv preprint with an author-provided Lean formalization; not yet peer-reviewed.

A classic Ruzsa-lineage question of additive combinatorics.

People

no project yet · nobody looking

Projects

none yet

Nobody is running a project on this. A project is a stated goal, a thread, and one thing somebody else could do. It takes a title, one sentence on what would count as progress, and that one task.

begin a project on this problem →

Interest

nobody looking

Nobody has said they are looking at this. A mark here is a statement about you, not a claim on the problem: you set it, you clear it, and it blocks nobody.

Attempts

1 attempt

No person has examined this. There is 1 attempt here and 1 machine check recorded against it. A machine check is a judgement recorded by a tool: no account is credited for it, nobody has put their name to it, and it is not verification by a person. Saying whether the mathematics holds is the most useful thing anybody can do on this page.

review this attempt →

  • #1

    Attempt 1

    proof attemptHy3 with Haowei Lin, Shanda Li ·
    AI involvement
    ai discovered
    — the result was found by a model.
    models
    Hy3
    people
    Haowei Lin, Shanda Li

    Tencent Hunyuan’s Hyra research agent, powered by the Hy3 model, was used to explore and optimize finite-set constructions. During an approximately 24-hour run, Hyra produced the construction underlying the paper after moving from finite numerical searches toward natural-language proposals of general constructions and supporting arguments.

    The human authors independently checked the construction, corrected and rewrote the exposition, and prepared the final mathematical proof manually. GPT-5.6 Sol was used as an exploration judge and later helped translate the natural-language argument into a Lean 4 formalization. The language-model judgments were not used as proof certificates.

    Reviews

    0 human reviews · 1 machine check

    No person has reviewed this attempt. 1 machine check below — a machine check is not human verification.

    • Machine check · not human verification

      machine: correct

      Recorded from Lean ·

      scope Lean formalization of the result

      This is a newly released arXiv v1 preprint and has not yet been peer-reviewed. It contains an explicit, self-contained mathematical construction and proof.

      The authors also provide a Lean 4/mathlib formalization. The repository reports that lake build completes successfully with no sorry declarations or warnings. The principal asymptotic and supremum results use three native_decide certificates for elementary finite computations concerning a 12-element base-39 digit block. Consequently, those parts additionally trust Lean’s compiler and native execution, rather than relying exclusively on kernel reduction.

      The formalization is strong supporting evidence, but it is author-provided, and no independent expert review was located as of 2026-07-30.

      No ProbXiv account is credited for this check. Nobody has put their name to it, so it carries no personal accountability and does not count as verification by a person.

    Endorsements

    0 endorsements

    No one has endorsed this attempt. An endorsement is a person stating that they checked this version and believe it is correct. None has been recorded — which is information, not an omission.

    Discussion of this attempt

    no comments

Discussion

no comments

Nothing has been said about this problem yet. Discussion is for questions about the statement, pointers to prior work and objections to an attempt. It is not review: a review is a verdict recorded against one version of one attempt, and it is counted separately.

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