Closure bounds for small skew-sumset scalars 2026-10-14
Write and suppose some nonzero has . The mixed-set Plünnecke-Ruzsa inequality gives and . The Ruzsa covering lemma covers by at most translates of . Covering two dilates proves the addition bound. First covering , then both copies of in , proves the multiplication bound. The Ruzsa triangle inequality also gives . These bounds transfer controlled additive expansion through a bounded-complexity expression in scalars.
Doubling constant Created 2026-09-24 Updated 2026-10-13
The doubling constant of a nonempty finite set in an abelian group isIt measures the cardinality of the sumset relative to the original set. For the integer examples, and . A nonconstant arithmetic progression with members has doubling constant , which stays below two as grows. This is the sense in which its sumset has small growth.
In any abelian group, : fixing puts a translated copy inside . The stronger integer bound gives only in that setting. A finite subgroup has , as does every coset , since its sumset is . In particular has doubling constant one.
Small doubling constant is useful because it constrains repeated growth, as in the Plünnecke-Ruzsa inequality. It signals structure such as arithmetic progressions and subgroups; precise descriptions depend on the ambient abelian group and are the subject of the Freiman-Ruzsa theorem. The additive energy bound below gives a simpler immediate consequence: .
Half-size prime cyclic Freiman model 2026-10-14
For a nonempty integer set with doubling constant at most , Plünnecke-Ruzsa inequality bounds by . Embed the set modulo a sufficiently large auxiliary prime , randomly dilate it, and select the more populated of two half-intervals of representatives. Differences of two pair sums on that half have absolute value less than , so the lift preserves original relations. Every nonzero original difference is uniformly dilated among nonzero residues; avoiding all residues represented by nonzero multiples of of absolute value less than has positive probability when . Reduction modulo then yields a Freiman 2-isomorphism on the selected half.
Injective linear modelling of a small sumset 2026-10-14
For a finite subset containing zero, choose and a uniformly random linear map . Each fixed nonzero vector has zero image with probability . The union bound gives a map whose kernel meets only at zero. It is injective on , and . The Plünnecke-Ruzsa inequality makes the image of have density at least if .
If a Freiman 2-isomorphism into uses minimal , every nonzero vector lies in the fourfold sumset. Otherwise quotienting by the line it spans would preserve all additive quadruple relations and would still be injective, contradicting minimality. Since zero also belongs to the fourfold sumset, that sumset is the full model group. Plünnecke-Ruzsa inequality then bounds its size by . A finite subset of the direct sum of countably many binary fields has a finite-dimensional model to start with.
Past exam of the mathematics course of the University of Cambridge 2008 iii Paper 16 2 ii Solution Created 2026-10-03 Updated 2026-10-14
We first prove the needed Petridis minimal-growth lemma. For finite nonempty sets , choose a nonempty minimizing . Thus for every , including the empty set. For any finite , defineThe sets partition . If , then for some , and therefore . The newly contributed portion of consequently has size at mostSum over to obtain . Apply this successively with to get .
Use . The hypothesis implies , so . We also prove the Ruzsa triangle inequality: for finite nonempty ,For each , fix with . The map is injective: summing its coordinates recovers , and then its first coordinate recovers . This proves the inequality.
Apply it with and . Both right-hand factors have cardinality , givingThus . This is the required case of the Plünnecke-Ruzsa inequality, proved here using the minimal-growth argument and the explicit injection. If is empty the conclusion holds directly.
Past exam of the mathematics course of the University of Cambridge 2009 iii Paper 13 3 Solution Created 2026-10-03 Updated 2026-10-14
A Freiman 2-isomorphism between subsets of abelian groups is a bijection such thatBoth directions matter: an injective homomorphism on individual elements may still create new pair-sum relations. More generally a Freiman s-isomorphism preserves equalities of sums of elements in both directions. For a nonempty finite set, its doubling constant is . A Freiman 2-isomorphism preserves this constant, since is a well-defined bijection of the two sumsets.
First let have elements and doubling at most . The permitted Plünnecke-Ruzsa inequality gives . We will obtain the half-size prime cyclic Freiman model for every prime . Choose an auxiliary prime larger than the absolute value of every member of . Such a prime exists: for any integer bound , every prime divisor of exceeds .
Choose uniformly from the nonzero residues modulo . For each nonzero , the residue is uniform among the nonzero residues. PutThere are at most such residues, and therefore the probability that any of the nonzero differences is dilated into is at mostThe first cardinal estimate is an upper bound even if some listed residues coincide; the slightly looser probability bound is convenient. Thus there exists with no such bad difference.
For this , let represent . Split these representatives into the two intervals and . Take from the more populated interval, so . For any four elements of , put . Their common half-interval gives , andIf the original difference is zero, then is a multiple of of absolute value less than , so . If the original difference is nonzero, is nonzero, and it cannot be a multiple of : otherwise its residue belongs to , contrary to the choice of . Therefore preserves pair-sum relations in both directions. It is injective as well, by applying the relation test to with any fixed . HenceThis proves the stated polynomial bound, including the prescribed prime rather than just an unspecified cyclic modulus.
Now let . Finiteness of places it in some finite-dimensional coordinate space, so models exist. Choose a Freiman 2-isomorphism with minimal. The doubling constant of is at most .
If a nonzero did not belong to , projection onto would preserve all pair-sum relations in both directions: a new relation would have original difference , whereas in characteristic two every such difference lies in . Projection is also injective on , since by adding any element of twice. This would give a model in dimension , contradicting minimality. Consequently every nonzero vector belongs to ; zero belongs as well, by adding one element four times. Thus .
Using the Plünnecke-Ruzsa inequality once more givesThis is the minimal binary Freiman models have full fourfold sumset argument. It also covers a singleton, with .
Past exam of the mathematics course of the University of Cambridge 2009 iii Paper 13 4 Solution Created 2026-10-03 Updated 2026-10-14
We take , as is necessary for the assertion. The nonvacuous cases have and . Put andWe prove a lower bound for by transferring small sumset growth through algebraic operations on the scalars. This gives a self-contained polynomial skew-sumset expansion over a prime field proof using the permitted Ruzsa triangle inequality, Ruzsa covering lemma and Plünnecke-Ruzsa inequality.
Since , choose . The bound and the mixed-set Plünnecke-Ruzsa inequality giveIn particular and . Here repeated-set sums such as allow independent choices from each copy.
For a scalar , write , and put for the difference set. The Ruzsa covering lemma gives with . Indeed choose a maximal family of disjoint translates , with ; counting their union bounds the family size, and maximality forces every remaining translate to meet one of them.
For any , the containments and give, after covering each copy of ,For the second bound, specifically , and . The Ruzsa triangle inequality also gives , so . These are the closure bounds for small skew-sumset scalars.
We next prove a growth lemma for the scalar sets. For with , letIf , then is not contained in : otherwise equal cardinality would make invariant under addition of one, which generates the entire prime field. Choose . The map on is injective. Indeed a collision with different second coordinates would express as a ratio of two differences from , while equal second coordinates force equal first coordinates. Clearing the nonzero denominator puts its image insideso the latter set has at least elements. Here is the product set, and denotes three independent product terms minus three others, not multiplication by the scalar three.
If , let count the collisions with all four variables in . Summing over givesThe first term comes from equal second coordinates, which force equal first coordinates. For unequal second coordinates, each quadruple determines exactly one scalar. Some consequently satisfies . The Cauchy-Schwarz inequality on the representation counts givesRepresenting as a ratio from and clearing its denominator embeds a dilate of this sumset in , padding with the same product in the positive and negative sums. We have proved the quadratic growth of a sixfold product difference set estimate
Starting from , define . ChooseFor , the growth lemma implies . To see the constants explicitly, put . Then and . Induction gives , and the chosen makes the exponent at least one.
Every has . If on , the closure bounds show that each product has exponent at most , its negative at most , and a sum of six such terms has exponent at most . Thus, withwe have for every . The integer depends only on .
Now apply the collision count to instead of . Summing over all scalars gives at most . Since , some has collision count at most . The Cauchy-Schwarz inequality therefore givesIt follows thatFor this gives , proving the desired positive exponent for all sufficiently large primes.
For completeness, the same conclusion with a possibly smaller exponent holds for the remaining primes. Choose an integerIf , choose any nonzero . We have . If , all its translates for would coincide. Two distinct such would make invariant under a nonzero translation, forcing , a contradiction. Thus by the definition of the second exponent. Together with the large-prime case this provesPositivity of the parameters cannot be dropped: at , taking prevents any expansion; at , the allowed set prevents expansion of any proper with more than one element. No external sum-product theorem was invoked: the scalar growth and transfer arguments were proved above.
Past exam of the mathematics course of the University of Cambridge 2010 iii Paper 11 3 Solution Created 2026-10-03 Updated 2026-10-14
The printed statement needs : for the empty set every linear subspace has cardinality at least one, so the requested bound is impossible. We prove the intended nonempty version of the Freiman-Ruzsa theorem over a finite field. Necessarily , because any one translate of inside has size .
We first prove all sumset estimates needed below. For finite nonempty and finite in an abelian group, choose one representation for each . The mapis injective: subtracting the outputs recovers , hence its chosen representation and then . This proves the Ruzsa triangle inequality
Choose nonempty minimizing , where is any set with . We prove the Petridis minimal-growth lemma for every finite . List , and let consist of those for which was not already in . The disjoint pieces partition .
Every was already covered in . The new part at step therefore has size at mostHere minimality of applies to every nonempty subset , and the empty case has size zero. Summing proves the lemma. Iteration gives . Apply the Ruzsa triangle inequality with , to obtainThis derives the required Plünnecke-Ruzsa inequality. In characteristic two, subtraction is addition, so for every positive integer .
Fix and translate to , which contains zero, has size , and has the same doubling constant. Choose . A uniformly random linear map kills each specified nonzero vector with probability . The union bound shows that some satisfiesBecause , all lower iterated sumsets lie in . In particular is injective on , since the difference of two elements belongs to . For , the density is at least . This proves injective linear modelling of a small sumset.
We next prove the Finite-field Bogolyubov lemma in this model. Write and use normalized real Fourier coefficients on a finite abelian group . LetBy Parseval identity, . Thus is a vector subspace of codimension at most .
For , Fourier inversion of the fourfold normalized convolution givesAll terms with are nonnegative, and the zero-frequency term is . The absolute contribution from the remaining frequencies is at mostHence the convolution is positive and . Also .
For each , choose its lift . It is unique because two lifts differ by an element of , which is zero. For , the discrepancybelongs to , so it vanishes. Also . Therefore is a linear map and its image is a vector subspace with . This establishes lifting a subspace through a Freiman model without assuming that arbitrary choices of preimages preserve addition.
Finally, is a union of -cosets. The number of these cosets is at mostChoose representatives from . Then , so adjoining these representatives and to gives a vector subspace containing . Over , adjoining each vector multiplies the size by at most two. Since , the Freiman-Ruzsa bound from Bogolyubov and linear modelling yieldsThis bound depends only on , as required, and every sumset estimate used in its derivation has been proved.
Past exam of the mathematics course of the University of Cambridge 2014 iii Paper 79 3 Solution Created 2026-10-03 Updated 2026-10-07
We will prove a polynomial progression in a high-energy fourfold difference set. The route is to extract a large subset with a small difference set, construct a dense Freiman s-isomorphism model, and use the Bogolyubov lemma and the pigeonhole principle. To respect the proof requirement, every ingredient beyond the elementary rules for Freiman homomorphisms is established below.
Assume . Since three entries of an additive quadruple determine the fourth, , so a nonvacuous hypothesis has . Let . Then and . Define the popular sum set . The contribution to additive energy from its complement is at most . Since , the bipartite graph on two copies of whose edges have sums in has at least edges. Moreover .
Put and . Here is a dependent random choice argument producing the small difference set. Independently choose two right vertices, allowing repetition, and let be their common left neighbourhood. The Cauchy-Schwarz inequality gives . Call an ordered pair of left vertices bad if its common right neighbourhood has fewer than elements. The expected number of bad ordered pairs in is at most , because a fixed bad pair survives both random choices with probability at most . ThusChoose a realization attaining at least this expectation. Then , and . Remove from every vertex having more than bad partners in . At most vertices are removed. The remaining set has , and any have at least vertices for which both and are good.
For such a , there are at least right vertices adjacent to , and at least right vertices adjacent to . These paths givea representation with four members of . For fixed , the tuple of four sums determines uniquely, so there are at least distinct tuples. Select one ordered pair for each member of . Tuples belonging to different differences are disjoint. Counting all possible tuples in provesIn particular, with , we have and for . This is the required small-difference set form of the Balog-Szemerédi-Gowers theorem, proved by counting paths rather than cited.
We next control higher iterated sumsets. Choose a nonempty minimizing , so . We prove the Petridis minimal-growth lemma in the form for finite . Order , and let consist of those for which is new in the union of the translates . Then . Every member of already occurs in an earlier translate of . By minimality, , also when the complement is empty. Thus the new contribution from is at most . Sum over to prove the lemma. Iterating with gives .
For completeness, the Ruzsa triangle inequality in the needed form isFor each , fix . The map is injective: adding the coordinates recovers , and then . Take , , and apply the preceding bounds. We obtain the Plünnecke-Ruzsa inequalityIn particular has at most elements.
We now prove a slightly wasteful version of the Ruzsa modeling lemma, avoiding any assumption about the diameter of . Set . Choose a prime larger than all , , and much larger than . Arbitrarily large primes exist by the elementary argument that a prime divisor of one plus the product of all primes up to a given bound exceeds that bound. For a uniformly chosen nonzero multiplier modulo , each nonzero has uniform among the nonzero residues. Call a multiplier forbidden if some such agrees modulo with , where . There are at most such residues. For , a union bound therefore makes the probability of being forbidden less thanChoose a nonforbidden . Represent by integers in and partition that interval into sixteen consecutive pieces of diameter less than . One piece contains the images of a subset with . Let be the integer representative of in that piece, reduced modulo .
A difference of eight sums of these representatives has absolute value less than . If its original difference in is zero, it is a multiple of , hence zero. Conversely, if its reduction modulo is zero, it equals with ; our choice of forces its original difference to be zero. This proves that is a Freiman s-isomorphism of order eight. Injectivity follows by padding a one-term equality to eight terms with a fixed element. Consequently has subset densityNo primality of is needed.
Here is the cyclic Bogolyubov lemma with all its Fourier analysis on a finite abelian group details. Use , , and normalized convolution on a finite group. A finite geometric series proves orthogonality, and expanding the finite sums proves the Parseval identity on a finite group, Fourier inversion on a finite group, and . For , the nonnegative functionhas support exactly and Fourier coefficients on a finite abelian group . Put . The Parseval identity on a finite group gives . The total fourth moment of the frequencies outside is at most .
If for every , then . The zero frequency contributes with no loss. Separating the large and small frequencies in Fourier inversion on a finite group yieldsThus contains the Bohr set expressed in distance coordinates by . This is consistent with the existing character-distance convention for a Bohr set: here it is enough that each character lies in the corresponding short arc around one.
We finally prove the needed nonwrapping progression in a cyclic Bohr set, including for composite . Write and . Partition the -dimensional unit cube into boxes. The points with coordinates modulo one, , give by the pigeonhole principle an integer with for all . ThenThese points are distinct modulo , since their integer representatives lie between zero and . Their number is at least . For the same argument simply chooses .
The Freiman s-isomorphism induces a bijection : define it on a representation by taking the same two positive and two negative images. Equality of representations uses an order-four relation, and injectivity uses the converse relation. If three consecutive members of satisfy , their preimages satisfy the same equality, since its expansion is an equality of eight-term sums in . Hence the inverse image of is an ordinary arithmetic progression in , with distinct terms.
To remove the multiplicative constant from the length bound, let and . The length just proved is at least , where . Choose so that for , and set . For , two distinct members of give a nonzero , and has length three, at least . For , the singleton suffices. In every nonempty case,with depending only on . If empty sets are permitted, the required length is zero and there is no substantive assertion.
Past exam of the mathematics course of the University of Cambridge 2015 iii Paper 12 3 Solution Created 2026-10-03 Updated 2026-10-06
An additive form of the Plünnecke inequality is the following. If are nonempty finite subsets of an abelian group and , then there is one nonempty such that, simultaneously for every integer ,Here is an iterated sumset and . In particular, its Plünnecke-Ruzsa inequality consequence isWe prove both statements, so that the sumset and difference set formulations are covered.
Choose a nonempty minimizing the ratio , and denote this minimum by . Such a minimizer exists because is finite, and . Every satisfies , with the empty case also valid. We first prove the Petridis minimal-growth lemmafor every finite nonempty .
List . Let and . DefineThe new points of are exactly , so . Since , the sumset is already contained in . It follows that the new points introduced into are contained inAs , their number is at mostSumming these increments proves the Petridis minimal-growth lemma. Taking for and iterating now givesThis proves the Plünnecke inequality with the same minimizing set for every .
To obtain the difference set bound, we also prove the required Ruzsa triangle inequality. For finite with , choose one representation of each . The mapis an injection: the sum of the output coordinates recovers , and the first coordinate then recovers because was fixed. ThusUse , , and . The already proved Plünnecke inequality yieldsThis finishes the proof of the stated Plünnecke-Ruzsa inequality. The use of an abelian group is essential in commuting the translates and sumsets in the minimal-growth argument.
Past exam of the mathematics course of the University of Cambridge 2019 iii Paper 149 1 a Solution 2026-10-03
The Plünnecke-Ruzsa inequality states that, for all nonnegative integers ,Here is the iterated sumset of copies of , with . In particular, .
Past exam of the mathematics course of the University of Cambridge 2019 iii Paper 149 1 c Solution 2026-10-03
By the Plünnecke-Ruzsa inequality,Apply the Ruzsa covering lemma to and . Since , there is a set with such thatAdding and reusing this inclusion inductively gives
A sum of members of the fixed set depends only on the multiplicity of each member. The number of possible multiplicity vectors is at most , and thereforeSince , it follows thatFor fixed , this differs from the Plünnecke–Ruzsa bound only by a polynomial factor in , so both have the same leading exponential function factor .
Past exam of the mathematics course of the University of Cambridge 2021 iii Paper 129 4 c Solution 2026-09-28
The Dense Bogolyubov-Ruzsa lemma says that, for every , if has density at least in a cyclic group of prime order, then contains a proper generalized arithmetic progression of rank and size .
Now suppose and . The Ruzsa modelling lemma, taken at a sufficiently high fixed Freiman order, supplies with and a Freiman isomorphism from to a subset , where is prime, , and . Apply the dense Bogolyubov-Ruzsa lemma to and transfer the resulting progression back through the Freiman model. We obtain a proper progressionof rank and size .
The Plünnecke-Ruzsa inequality givesThere are pairs with and , distributed among the sums in . Some therefore has at least representations . Equivalently,Set . Translation and negation preserve properness and rank. Moreover and another use of Plünnecke gives . Thusas required.
Past exam of the mathematics course of the University of Cambridge 2022 iii Paper 129 2 ii Solution 2026-09-28
Let and letFor each fixed first coordinate , the second coordinates occurring in are values of , of which there are at most . ThereforeThe difference-set form of the Plünnecke-Ruzsa inequality now gives
Every has the formso . ConsequentlyThe set on the left has exactly elements, since its fiber over each is . It follows thatand hence .
Past exam of the mathematics course of the University of Cambridge 2024 iii Paper 129 1 iii Solution Created 2026-09-24 Updated 2026-09-25
Assume and putThis set is symmetric, contains zero, and the Plünnecke-Ruzsa inequality givesIt also contains , so for every ,
To control , observe again by Plünnecke-Ruzsa thatApply the Ruzsa covering lemma with and . There is a set with such thatConsequently is a -approximate group. Taking a sufficiently large absolute constant gives
Past exam of the mathematics course of the University of Cambridge 2024 iii Paper 129 1 i Solution Created 2026-09-24 Updated 2026-09-25
The Plünnecke-Ruzsa inequality says that if are finite nonempty subsets of an abelian group andthen for all nonnegative integers ,
Choose a nonempty minimizingthen . We first prove the Petridis minimal-growth lemmafor every finite , by induction on . Remove , write , and letThe new points contributed to by are exactly . Moreover, , soThe induction hypothesis, the identity , and minimality, which gives , yieldIteration with gives