Union of Two Arithmetic Progressions with the Same Common Difference Is Not Sum-dominant
Abstract
Given a finite set , define the sum set and the difference set The set is said to be sum-dominant if . 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 elements with computers' help. The author of the current paper provided a human-verifiable proof that a sum-dominant set must have at least elements. A natural question is about the largest cardinality of sum-dominant subsets of an arithmetic progression. Fix . Let be the cardinality of the largest sum-dominant subset(s) of that contain(s) and . Then ; that is, from an arithmetic progression of length , we need to discard at least and at most elements (in a clever way) to have the largest sum-dominant set(s). 3) Let have the property that for all , can be partitioned into sum-dominant subsets, while cannot. Then . This result answers a question by the author et al. in another paper on whether we can find a stricter upper bound for .
Keywords
Cite
@article{arxiv.1906.03793,
title = {Union of Two Arithmetic Progressions with the Same Common Difference Is Not Sum-dominant},
author = {Hung Viet Chu},
journal= {arXiv preprint arXiv:1906.03793},
year = {2020}
}
Comments
12 pages. arXiv admin note: text overlap with arXiv:1906.00470