Sums and products along sparse graphs
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In their seminal paper from 1983, Erdős and Szemerédi showed that any $n$ distinct integers induce either $n^{1+ε}$ distinct sums of pairs or that many distinct products, and conjectured a lower bound of $n^{2-o(1)}$. They further proposed a generalization of this problem, in which the sums and products are taken along the edges of a given graph $G$ on $n$ labeled vertices. They conjectured a version of the sum-product theorem for general graphs that have at least $n^{1+ε}$ edges. In this work, we consider sum-product theorems for sparse graphs, and show that this problem has important consequences already when $G$ is a matching (i.e., $n/2$ disjoint edges): Any lower bound of the form $n^{1/2+δ}$ for its sum-product over the integers implies a lower bound of $n^{1+δ}$ for the original Erdős-Szemerédi problem. In contrast, over the reals the minimal sum-product for the matching is $Θ(\sqrt{n})$, hence this approach has the potential of achieving lower bounds specialized to the integers. We proceed to give lower and upper bounds for this problem in different settings. In addition, we provide tight bounds for sums along expanders. A key element in our proofs is a reduction from the sum-product of a matching to the maximum number of translates of a set of integers into the perfect squares. This problem was originally studied by Euler, and we obtain a stronger form of Euler's result using elliptic curve analysis.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.003 | 0.015 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.005 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.005 | 0.015 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.005 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.006 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.015 | 0.003 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".