When Sets Are Not Sum-dominant
Abstract
Given a set of nonnegative integers, define the sum set and the difference set The set is said to be sum-dominant if . In answering a question by Nathanson, Hegarty used a clever algorithm to find that the smallest cardinality of a sum-dominant set is . Since then, Nathanson has been asking for a human-understandable proof of the result. We offer a computer-free proof that a set of cardinality less than is not sum-dominant. Furthermore, we prove that the introduction of at most two numbers into a set of numbers in an arithmetic progression does not give a sum-dominant set. This theorem eases several of our proofs and may shed light on future work exploring why a set of cardinality is not sum-dominant. Finally, we prove that if a set contains a certain number of integers from a specific sequence, then adding a few arbitrary numbers into the set does not give a sum-dominant set.
Keywords
Cite
@article{arxiv.1903.03533,
title = {When Sets Are Not Sum-dominant},
author = {Hung Viet Chu},
journal= {arXiv preprint arXiv:1903.03533},
year = {2019}
}
Comments
16 pages, published in J. Integer Seq