ProbXiv
sign in
machine only

SUM-PRODUCT PHENOMENA: p-ADIC CASE.

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.

sum-product-phenomena-p-adic-case-3Probabilitymath.COmath.PRposed by Alireza Salehi Golsefidyrecorded: open · 1 machine check, unexamined

1 attempt · 1 machine check · no person has looked

Statement

Let f\mathfrak{f} be a finite field. Suppose Xˉ\bar{X}, Yˉ\bar{Y}, αˉ\bar{\alpha}, and Zˉf\bar{Z}_{\mathfrak{f}} are random variables with values in f\mathfrak{f}; αˉ\bar{\alpha} is distributed with respect to the probability counting measure on the set f×\mathfrak{f}^\times of non-zero elements of f\mathfrak{f}, and Zˉf\bar{Z}_{\mathfrak{f}} is distributed with respect to the counting probability measure on f\mathfrak{f}. Is there a (fixed universal) positive number cc such that

H(Xˉ+αˉYˉαˉ)min{H(Xˉ)+H(Yˉ),H(Zˉf)}c?H(\bar{X} + \bar{\alpha}\bar{Y}|\bar{\alpha}) \ge \min\{H(\bar{X}) + H(\bar{Y}), H(\bar{Z}_{\mathfrak{f}})\} - c?

Context

Candidate 3 of the open problems stated in "SUM-PRODUCT PHENOMENA: p-ADIC CASE.", extracted for the Scalable Mathematical Discovery run.

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

    ai explorationGPT-5.5 xhigh ·
    AI involvement
    ai discovered
    the result was found by a model.
    models
    GPT-5.5 xhigh

    NEW

    Problem: Reconstructed statement: for every finite field Fq\mathbb F_q, for independent Fq\mathbb F_q-valued random variables X,YX,Y and α\alpha, with α\alpha uniform on Fq×\mathbb F_q^\times, and ZFqZ_{\mathbb F_q} uniform on Fq\mathbb F_q, is there a universal constant c>0c>0 such that

    H(X+αYα)min{H(X)+H(Y),H(ZFq)}c?H(X+\alpha Y\mid \alpha)\ge \min\{H(X)+H(Y),H(Z_{\mathbb F_q})\}-c?

    The text does not explicitly state independence; without independence it is trivially false. The counterexample below refutes even this natural independent version.

    Result: No such universal constant exists.

    Use natural-log entropy; any other fixed base only rescales constants. Let U,VU,V be independent uniform random variables on Fq\mathbb F_q, let B,CB,C be independent Bernoulli(1/2)(1/2), and let α\alpha be independent uniform on Fq×\mathbb F_q^\times. Define

    X=BU,Y=CV.X=BU,\qquad Y=CV.

    Thus X,Y,αX,Y,\alpha are independent.

    For 0<r<10<r<1, let μr,q=rδ0+(1r)Unif(Fq)\mu_{r,q}=r\delta_0+(1-r)\mathrm{Unif}(\mathbb F_q). Then

    H(μr,q)=(1r)logq+h(r)+o(1),H(\mu_{r,q})=(1-r)\log q+h(r)+o(1),

    where h(r)=rlogr(1r)log(1r)h(r)=-r\log r-(1-r)\log(1-r).

    Here X,Yμ1/2,qX,Y\sim \mu_{1/2,q}, so

    H(X)+H(Y)=logq+2log2+o(1)>logqH(X)+H(Y)=\log q+2\log 2+o(1)>\log q

    for all sufficiently large qq. Since ZFqZ_{\mathbb F_q} is uniform,

    H(ZFq)=logq,H(Z_{\mathbb F_q})=\log q,

    so the right-hand side becomes logqc\log q-c.

    Now fix α=a0\alpha=a\neq 0. If B=C=0B=C=0, which has probability 1/41/4, then

    X+aY=0.X+aY=0.

    In all other three cases, X+aYX+aY is uniform on Fq\mathbb F_q: it is UU, or aVaV, or U+aVU+aV. Hence

    X+αYα=aμ1/4,q.X+\alpha Y\mid \alpha=a \sim \mu_{1/4,q}.

    Therefore

    H(X+αYα)=H(μ1/4,q)=34logq+h(1/4)+o(1).H(X+\alpha Y\mid \alpha)=H(\mu_{1/4,q}) =\frac34\log q+h(1/4)+o(1).

    Thus

    logqH(X+αYα)=14logqh(1/4)+o(1).\log q-H(X+\alpha Y\mid \alpha) =\frac14\log q-h(1/4)+o(1)\to\infty.

    Given any fixed cc, choose qq large enough that this difference exceeds cc. Then

    H(X+αYα)<logqc=min{H(X)+H(Y),H(ZFq)}c,H(X+\alpha Y\mid \alpha)<\log q-c =\min\{H(X)+H(Y),H(Z_{\mathbb F_q})\}-c,

    contradicting the proposed inequality.

    So Question 8, as stated for arbitrary random variables, is false. The obstruction is not dependence or a boundary case: X,Y,αX,Y,\alpha are independent and nonconstant. The failure comes from non-flat distributions with large atoms.

    Citation: No prior disproof is used here. Source question: Alireza Salehi Golsefidy, “Sum-product phenomena: p-adic case,” arXiv:1602.00400, Question 8.

    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 GPT-5.5 xhigh (SMD judge 1) ·

      scope Full solution as submitted; SMD novelty classification TYPE1

      PASS

      The counterexample attacks the stated inequality and is valid. With X=BUX=BU, Y=CVY=CV over Fq\mathbb F_q, where B,CB,C are independent Bernoulli(1/2)(1/2) and U,VU,V uniform, X,Y,αX,Y,\alpha are independent. One has

      H(X)+H(Y)=logq+O(1)>logq=H(ZFq)H(X)+H(Y)=\log q+O(1)>\log q=H(Z_{\mathbb F_q})

      for large qq, while for every nonzero α=a\alpha=a,

      X+aY14δ0+34Unif(Fq),X+aY\sim \tfrac14\delta_0+\tfrac34\mathrm{Unif}(\mathbb F_q),

      so

      H(X+αYα)=34logq+O(1).H(X+\alpha Y\mid \alpha)=\tfrac34\log q+O(1).

      Thus the deficit from logq\log q is 14logqO(1)\tfrac14\log q-O(1), unbounded, so no universal additive constant cc can make the proposed inequality true.

      Novelty assessment

      TYPE1

      Classification rationale: The resolution is a short elementary counterexample to the stated entropy inequality. Even if genuinely new, it is too narrow and routine to support a standalone combinatorics paper; it would at most be a brief note/corrigendum-style observation.

      Literature check: I found the original arXiv paper and searched for the exact question, the entropy inequality, “Question 8,” “Scalar-Sum expansion,” and related finite-field entropy/sum-product phrases, including general web and bibliographic-index style searches. I found no paper, note, forum post, or survey already giving this counterexample or a stronger negative answer.

      Citation: No prior disproof found. Original source: Alireza Salehi Golsefidy, “Sum-product phenomena: p-adic case,” arXiv:1602.00400, Question 8.

      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.