alphaFeedback

WorksMathematics

Exponential decay of threshold correlations for symmetric periodic functions

AI contributions
  • GPT-6 Astra
View details

Abstract

We study how often nn distinct integer dilates of a periodic function can all lie above a fixed threshold or all lie below its negative. We consider continuous functions f:R→[−1,1]f:\mathbb R\to[-1,1] that are 11-periodic, even, strictly decreasing on [0,1/2][0,1/2], and satisfy f(0)=1f(0)=1 and f(t+1/2)=−f(t)f(t+1/2)=-f(t). This class includes the cosine and the triangle wave. For 0≤α<10\leqα<1, let ρα∈(0,1/4]ρ_α\in(0,1/4] be determined by f(ρα)=αf(ρ_α)=α, and let Fα(n)F_α(n) denote the infimum of these proportions over all sets of nn distinct positive integer frequencies. We prove that Fα(n)≥4ραnF_α(n)\geq 4ρ_α^n and that the limit lim⁡n→∞Fα(n)1/n\lim_{n\to\infty}F_α(n)^{1/n} exists for every threshold. When ρα−1ρ_α^{-1} is an integer, we obtain \begin{align} F_α(n) &\leq C_αn^{\log_2((1-ρ_α)/(1-2ρ_α))}ρ_α^n, \end{align} and hence the limit equals ραρ_α. Otherwise, the limit belongs to the interval [ρα,⌊ρα−1⌋−1][ρ_α,\lfloorρ_α^{-1}\rfloor^{-1}]. The upper bound in the reciprocal case uses a cyclic covering construction previously studied in the context of circular graphs. We give a self-contained proof of the corresponding optimal modulus.

Fα(n)≤Cαnlog⁡2((1−ρα)/(1−2ρα))ραnF_\alpha(n) \le C_\alpha n^{\log_2((1-\rho_\alpha)/(1-2\rho_\alpha))}\rho_\alpha^n

and hence the limit equals ρα\rho_\alpha. Otherwise, the limit belongs to the interval [ρα,⌊ρα−1⌋−1][\rho_\alpha,\lfloor\rho_\alpha^{-1}\rfloor^{-1}].

The upper bound in the reciprocal case uses a cyclic covering construction previously studied in the context of circular graphs. We give a self-contained proof of the corresponding optimal modulus.

Introduction

Let AA be a finite set of positive integers. We are interested in the proportion of points t∈Tt \in\mathbb{T} for which the functions cos⁡(2πat)\cos(2\pi at), a∈Aa \in A, are either all positive or all negative. We ask how small this proportion can be when the number of frequencies is fixed. Although the cosines are all positive in a neighborhood of the origin, the size of this neighborhood depends on the largest frequency and does not give a bound in terms of ∣A∣|A| alone.

Sign correlations of this kind arose in the study of eigenfunctions of differential operators. Gonçalves, Oliveira e Silva, and Steinerberger studied a universality phenomenon for such correlations, obtaining the sharp two-frequency value 1/31/3 in the cosine model [GOeSS21]. Dou, Goh, Liu, Legate, and Pettigrew subsequently proved that the sharp value for three frequencies is 1/91/9 and characterized the cases of equality [2]. They also observed that the powers of three, for which the common-sign proportion is 31−n3^{1-n}, are not always optimal. Indeed, the set {1,3,11,33}\{1,3,11,33\} gives a proportion of 1/331/33, smaller than the value 1/271/27 obtained from {1,3,9,27}\{1,3,9,27\}. They conjectured that 1/331/33 is optimal for four frequencies. This conjecture was recently proved by Zang, Zhao, Zhao, and Zhou, who also characterized all cases of equality [7].

In this paper we study the asymptotic behavior of these correlations as the number of frequencies increases. In particular, we show that the infimum of the common-sign proportions for nn cosine frequencies is 4−n+o(n)4^{-n+o(n)}. We also consider a threshold version of the problem for a class of symmetric periodic functions that includes the cosine and the triangle wave. We prove a universal lower bound and show that the exponential decay rate exists for every threshold. For an infinite family of thresholds we determine this rate exactly, while for the remaining thresholds we obtain upper and lower bounds.

Main Results

Let T=R/Z\mathbb{T} = \mathbb{R}/\mathbb{Z}, and for t∈Rt \in\mathbb{R}, write ∥t∥T:=min⁡k∈Z∣t−k∣\|t\|_{\mathbb{T}} := \min_{k \in\mathbb{Z}} |t-k|. We denote by τ:T→[−1,1]\tau: \mathbb{T} \to[-1,1] the triangle wave defined by τ(t):=1−4∥t∥T\tau(t) := 1 - 4\|t\|_{\mathbb{T}}.

Definition 1.1. Let W\mathcal{W} denote the class of functions f:R→[−1,1]f : \mathbb{R} \to[-1,1] of the form

f=ϕ∘τ,f = \phi\circ\tau,

where ϕ:[−1,1]→[−1,1]\phi: [-1,1] \to[-1,1] is continuous, strictly increasing, odd, and satisfies ϕ(1)=1\phi(1) = 1. We refer to the functions in W\mathcal{W} as antipodal waves.

The condition ϕ(1)=1\phi(1) = 1 is only a normalization; more generally, one may allow any positive value of ϕ(1)\phi(1) and rescale the resulting function accordingly.

We now formulate the threshold-correlation problem for a fixed antipodal wave. Throughout, N={1,2,…}\mathbb{N} = \{1,2,\ldots\}, and mm denotes normalized Lebesgue measure on T\mathbb{T}. Fix f∈Wf \in\mathcal{W}. For $0 \le \alpha < 1, let ρα∈(0,1/4]\rho_\alpha\in(0,1/4] be the unique number such that f(ρα)=αf(\rho_\alpha)=\alpha. For a finite nonempty set A⊂NA \subset\mathbb{N}, define

Sα(A):={t∈T:f(at)>α for every a∈A, or f(at)<−α for every a∈A}.S_\alpha(A):=\{t\in\mathbb{T}: f(at)>\alpha\text{ for every }a\in A,\text{ or }f(at)<-\alpha\text{ for every }a\in A\}.

For every integer n≥1n\ge1, let Pα(A)=m(Sα(A))P_\alpha(A)=m(S_\alpha(A)) and define

Fα(n):=inf⁡{Pα(A):A⊂N, ∣A∣=n}.F_\alpha(n):=\inf\{P_\alpha(A): A\subset\mathbb{N},\ |A|=n\}.

Theorem 1.2. Let 0≤α<10\le\alpha<1. Then, for every integer n≥1n\ge1,

Fα(n)≥4ραn.F_\alpha(n)\ge4\rho_\alpha^n.

(i) If ρα−1∈N\rho_\alpha^{-1}\in\mathbb{N}, equivalently if α=f(1/m)\alpha=f(1/m) for some integer m≥4m\ge4, then there is a constant Cα>0C_\alpha>0 such that

Fα(n)≤Cαnlog⁡2((1−ρα)/(1−2ρα))ραnF_\alpha(n)\le C_\alpha n^{\log^2((1-\rho_\alpha)/(1-2\rho_\alpha))}\rho_\alpha^n

for every integer n≥1n\ge1. In particular,

lim⁡n→∞Fα(n)1/n=ρα.\lim_{n\to\infty}F_\alpha(n)^{1/n}=\rho_\alpha.

(ii) If ρα−1∉N\rho_\alpha^{-1}\notin\mathbb{N}, then there is a constant Cα>0C_\alpha>0 such that

Fα(n)≤Cα⌈ρα−1⌉−nF_\alpha(n)\le C_\alpha\left\lceil\rho_\alpha^{-1}\right\rceil^{-n}

for every integer n≥1n\ge1. Consequently, the following limit exists and satisfies

ρα≤lim⁡n→∞Fα(n)1/n≤1⌈ρα−1⌉.\rho_\alpha\le\lim_{n\to\infty}F_\alpha(n)^{1/n}\le\frac{1}{\left\lceil\rho_\alpha^{-1}\right\rceil}.

The reciprocal upper bound uses a cyclic covering construction closely related to earlier work on the Shannon capacity of circular graphs. The corresponding optimal modulus and cyclic separation construction were obtained by Polak and Schrijver [6 Theorem 9.3.1, 9.3.3] and later recovered in the more general framework of Buys, Polak, and Zuiddam [1]. We state the result in the form needed here and include a self-contained proof.

Theorem 1.3. Let 0≤α<10\le\alpha<1 and suppose that ρα−1∈N\rho_\alpha^{-1}\in\mathbb{N}. For every integer d≥0d\ge0, define

qd=(1−2ρα)ρα−d+ρα1−ρα.q_d=\frac{(1-2\rho_\alpha)\rho_\alpha^{-d}+\rho_\alpha}{1-\rho_\alpha}.

Also, let D1={1}D_1=\{1\}, and, for d≥2d\ge2,

Dd={qd−1}∪{ρα−j:0≤j≤d−2}.D_d=\{q_{d-1}\}\cup\{\rho_\alpha^{-j}:0\le j\le d-2\}.

Then, DdD_d consists of dd distinct positive integers, and for every integer kk with 1≤k<qd1 \le k < q_d, there exists b∈Ddb \in D_d such that

∥bkqd∥T>ρα.\left\| \frac{bk}{q_d} \right\|_{\mathbb{T}} > \rho_\alpha.

Moreover, qdq_d is the largest modulus for which such a strict cyclic cover with dd multipliers is possible. More precisely, if q≥2q \ge2 is an integer and b1,…,bd∈Zb_1,\ldots,b_d \in\mathbb{Z} satisfy

max⁡1≤j≤d∥kbjq∥T>ραfor every 1≤k<q,\max_{1 \le j \le d} \left\| \frac{kb_j}{q} \right\|_{\mathbb{T}} > \rho_\alpha\qquad\text{for every } 1 \le k < q,

then q≤qdq \le q_d.

Since τ\tau maps [0,1/2][0,1/2] bijectively onto [−1,1][-1,1], the representation f=ϕ∘τf = \phi\circ\tau determines ϕ\phi uniquely through

ϕ(s)=f(1−s4),−1≤s≤1.\phi(s) = f\left(\frac{1-s}{4}\right), \qquad-1 \le s \le1.

Proposition 1.4. Let f:R→[−1,1]f:\mathbb{R} \to[-1,1]. f∈Wf \in\mathcal{W} if and only if the following properties hold:

i. ff is 11-periodic.

ii. ff is even.

iii. For every t∈Rt \in\mathbb{R}, f(t+12)=−f(t)f\left(t+\frac{1}{2}\right)=-f(t).

iv. The restriction of ff to [0,1/2][0,1/2] is strictly decreasing.

v. f(0)=1f(0)=1.

vi. ff is continuous.

Moreover, the representation f=ϕ∘τf = \phi\circ\tau is unique.

The class W\mathcal{W} contains a variety of familiar periodic profiles. Table 1 lists several examples together with the corresponding change of scale ϕ\phi and threshold radius ρα\rho_\alpha.

Exampleϕ(s)\phi(s)f(t)=ϕ(τ(t))f(t)=\phi(\tau(t))ρα\rho_\alpha
Triangle wavess1−4∣t∣T1-4|t|_{\mathbb{T}}1−α4\frac{1-\alpha}{4}
Cosine wavesin⁡(πs2)\sin\left(\frac{\pi s}{2}\right)cos⁡(2πt)\cos(2\pi t)arccos⁡(α)2π\frac{\arccos(\alpha)}{2\pi}
Cubic smoothstep wave3s−s32\frac{3s-s^3}{2}3τ(t)−τ(t)32\frac{3\tau(t)-\tau(t)^3}{2}1−ϕ−1(α)4\frac{1-\phi^{-1}(\alpha)}{4}
Hyperbolic-tangent wavetanh⁡(cs)tanh⁡(c)\frac{\tanh(cs)}{\tanh(c)}tanh⁡(cτ(t))tanh⁡(c)\frac{\tanh(c\tau(t))}{\tanh(c)}14−arctanh⁡(αtanh⁡(c))4c\frac{1}{4}-\frac{\operatorname{arctanh}(\alpha\tanh(c))}{4c}

Table 1. Examples of antipodal waves obtained from the triangle wave τ(t)=1−4∥t∥T\tau(t)=1-4\|t\|_{\mathbb{T}} by an odd increasing change of scale.

The cosine is the motivating example in Table 1. In this case 2πρα=arccos⁡α2\pi\rho_\alpha=\arccos\alpha, so the reciprocal thresholds in Theorem 1.2 are precisely α=cos⁡(2π/m)\alpha=\cos(2\pi/m) for integers m≥4m \ge4. In particular, for the original sign-correlation problem α=0\alpha=0, one has ρ0=1/4\rho_0=1/4, and hence

lim⁡n→∞F0(n)1/n=14.\lim_{n \to\infty} F_0(n)^{1/n} = \frac{1}{4}.

Equivalently,

F0(n)=4−n+o(n).F_0(n) = 4^{-n+o(n)}.

Thus 4−n4^{-n} is the sharp exponential scale for the smallest possible proportion of points at which nn integer-frequency cosines have a common sign.

As observed in [2], the torus formulation of the cosine problem is closely related to the geometry underlying the Lonely Runner Conjecture. Integer frequencies may be viewed as runner velocities, while the threshold conditions prescribe arcs in which all runners are required to lie simultaneously. Related correlation questions for runners were studied by Perarnau and Serra [5].

Outline

For later use, we separate the two parts of Sα(A)S_\alpha(A). For a finite nonempty set A⊂NA\subset\mathbb{N}, write

Sα+(A):={t∈T:f(at)>α for every a∈A},S_\alpha^+(A):=\{t\in\mathbb{T}:f(at)>\alpha\text{ for every }a\in A\},
Sα−(A):={t∈T:f(at)<−α for every a∈A}.S_\alpha^-(A):=\{t\in\mathbb{T}:f(at)<-\alpha\text{ for every }a\in A\}.

Thus Sα(A)=Sα+(A)∪Sα−(A)S_\alpha(A)=S_\alpha^+(A)\cup S_\alpha^-(A). We use ordinary letters for scalar variables and bold letters for vectors. All sums and differences of subsets of T\mathbb{T} are taken in the group T\mathbb{T}.

In § 2, we prove Theorem 1.3 using a base-ρα−1\rho_\alpha^{-1} expansion argument and a cube-packing estimate on the torus. § 3 establishes the universal lower bound by averaging translates of two antipodal boxes and applying a difference-set estimate on T\mathbb{T}.

In § 4, we prove the upper bounds using α\alpha-isolating frequency sets. When ρα−1∈N\rho_\alpha^{-1}\in\mathbb{N}, we begin with {1,2,3}\{1,2,3\} and apply Theorem 1.3 iteratively. When ρα−1∉N\rho_\alpha^{-1}\notin\mathbb{N}, a simpler dilation argument gives the desired estimate. In § 5, we establish the existence of the exponential rate by proving a submultiplicative inequality for FαF_\alpha, using the asymptotic independence of widely separated frequency scales. Finally, § 6 examines the polynomial loss in the reciprocal construction and discusses the remaining open questions.

Concurrent work

Concurrent work. A related preprint by Zang, Zhao, Zhao, and Zhou [7] was submitted to arXiv on October 23, 2026, and appeared in the arXiv announcement dated October 27, 2026. We became aware of their work through this announcement and are submitting the present manuscript on the same day. Our work was developed independently.

For the cosine sign-correlation problem, Theorem 1.3 of [7] gives the same lower bound 41−n4^{1-n} and exponential decay rate 1/41/4 as our Theorem 1.2, together with an upper bound having the same polynomial exponent log⁡2(3/2)\log_2(3/2). The proofs are also related: both lower bounds use an averaging argument and a difference-set inequality on the torus, while both upper bounds rely on the cyclic construction of Polak and Schrijver recorded in [6].

The two papers differ in scope. In [7], the authors also establish sharp results for four frequencies and classify the cases of equality, whereas our work considers arbitrary thresholds for a class of symmetric periodic functions containing the cosine. We establish the existence of the exponential rate for every threshold, determine it when ρα−1∈N\rho\alpha^{-1} \in\mathbb{N}, and obtain bounds in the remaining cases. Their upper-bound construction for general nn uses only odd frequencies, whereas ours includes even frequencies and eliminates the simultaneous negative-threshold set. We also examine the polynomial loss in the maximal iterative construction.

Acknowledgements

J.M. was partially supported by the Simons Foundation Grant #453576. The authors thank Lars Becker for some interesting conversations about this problem.

AI Disclosure

In preparing this manuscript, the authors used GPT-6 Astra to assist with language editing, syntax, and proofreading of author-written drafts, and to identify potentially relevant literature. The mathematical arguments and results are the authors’ own. All AI-generated suggestions were reviewed by the authors, and all literature references identified with AI assistance were independently verified. The authors take full responsibility for the content and accuracy of the manuscript.

The cyclic covering theorem

We begin with a packing estimate that will be used to prove the optimality assertion in Theorem 1.3.

Lemma 2.1. Let 0≤α<10 \le\alpha< 1 and suppose that ρα−1∈N\rho\alpha^{-1} \in\mathbb{N}. If ρα<s≤1/2\rho\alpha< s \le1/2, then the number of axis-parallel cubes of side length ss with disjoint interiors in Td\mathbb{T}^d is at most qdq_d.

Proof. Set ℓ:=ρα−1\ell:= \rho\alpha^{-1}, and let Mj(s)M_j(s) denote the largest number of such cubes in Tj\mathbb{T}^j, with M0(s)=1M_0(s) = 1. A slice perpendicular to the first coordinate meets the interiors of at most Mj−1(s)M_{j-1}(s) cubes. Integrating the number of intersections over the first coordinate gives sMj(s)≤Mj−1(s)sM_j(s) \le M_{j-1}(s). Since s>1/ℓs > 1/\ell, Mj(s)<ℓMj−1(s)M_j(s) < \ell M_{j-1}(s). The packing numbers are integers, and therefore Mj(s)≤ℓMj−1(s)−1M_j(s) \le\ell M_{j-1}(s) - 1. Iterating from M0(s)=1M_0(s) = 1 gives Mj(s)≤qjM_j(s) \le q_j. □\square

Proof of Theorem 1.3. Set ℓ=ρα−1\ell= \rho_{\alpha}^{-1}. The definition of qdq_d becomes

qd=(ℓ−2)ℓd+1ℓ−1.q_d = \frac{(\ell- 2)\ell^d + 1}{\ell- 1}.

and in particular q0=1q_0 = 1 and qd=ℓqd−1−1q_d = \ell q_{d-1} - 1. Thus each qdq_d is an integer and qd≡−1(modℓ)q_d \equiv-1 \pmod{\ell} for d≥1d \ge1. Moreover, for d≥2d \ge2 one has qd−1>ℓd−2q_{d-1} > \ell^{d-2}, so DdD_d consists of dd distinct positive integers.

We first prove the covering property. Fix 1≤k<qd1 \le k < q_d, write q=qdq = q_d, and suppose for contradiction that

∥bkq∥T≤1ℓ\left\lVert\frac{bk}{q} \right\rVert_{\mathbb{T}} \le\frac{1}{\ell}

for every b∈Ddb \in D_d. Let rr be the unique integer with 1≤r<q1 \le r < q such that r≡ℓ−1k(modq)r \equiv\ell^{-1}k \pmod{q}. Since q=ℓqd−1−1q = \ell q_{d-1} - 1, we have qd−1≡ℓ−1(modq)q_{d-1} \equiv\ell^{-1} \pmod{q}. Hence the elements of DdD_d are congruent modulo qq to ℓ−1,1,ℓ,…,ℓd−2\ell^{-1}, 1, \ell, \ldots, \ell^{d-2}, and therefore

{ℓjrq}∈[0,1ℓ]∪[1−1ℓ,1)0≤j≤d−1.\left\{ \ell^j \frac{r}{q} \right\} \in\left[0,\frac{1}{\ell}\right] \cup\left[1-\frac{1}{\ell},1\right) \qquad0 \le j \le d-1.

The two nonzero endpoints cannot occur because q≡−1(modℓ)q \equiv-1 \pmod{\ell}. Thus the first dd digits in the base-ℓ\ell expansion of r/qr/q all belong to {0,ℓ−1}\{0,\ell-1\}. Since ℓ≡1(modℓ−1)\ell\equiv1 \pmod{\ell-1}, it follows that

ℓ−1∣⌊ℓdrq⌋.\ell- 1 \mid\left\lfloor\ell^d \frac{r}{q} \right\rfloor.

On the other hand, (ℓ−1)q=(ℓ−2)ℓd+1(\ell- 1)q = (\ell- 2)\ell^d + 1, so

ℓdrq=(ℓ−1)rℓ−2−r(ℓ−2)q.\ell^d \frac{r}{q} = \frac{(\ell- 1)r}{\ell- 2} - \frac{r}{(\ell- 2)q}.

Write r=(ℓ−2)u+sr = (\ell- 2)u + s with 0≤s≤ℓ−30 \le s \le\ell- 3. If s=0s = 0, then

⌊ℓdrq⌋=(ℓ−1)u−1,\left\lfloor\ell^d \frac{r}{q} \right\rfloor= (\ell- 1)u - 1,

while if 1≤s≤ℓ−31 \le s \le\ell- 3, then

⌊ℓdrq⌋=(ℓ−1)u+s.\left\lfloor\ell^d \frac{r}{q} \right\rfloor= (\ell- 1)u + s.

In either case this integer is not divisible by ℓ−1\ell-1, a contradiction. Hence, for every 1≤k<qd1 \le k < q_d, there is b∈Ddb \in D_d such that

∥bkqd∥T>ρα.\left\lVert\frac{bk}{q_d} \right\rVert_{\mathbb{T}} > \rho_\alpha.

It remains to prove optimality. Suppose that q≥2q \ge2 and b1,…,bd∈Zb_1,\ldots,b_d \in\mathbb{Z} satisfy

max⁡1≤j≤d∥kbjq∥T>ραfor every 1≤k<q.\max_{1 \le j \le d} \left\lVert\frac{kb_j}{q} \right\rVert_{\mathbb{T}} > \rho_\alpha \qquad\text{for every } 1 \le k < q.

For 0≤k<q0 \le k < q, define

zk:=(kb1q,…,kbdq)∈Td.z_k := \left(\frac{kb_1}{q},\ldots,\frac{kb_d}{q}\right) \in\mathbb{T}^d.

The points z0,…,zq−1z_0,\ldots,z_{q-1} are distinct. Moreover, the difference of any two distinct points has some coordinate at distance greater than ρα\rho_\alpha from zero. Since there are finitely many such differences, their minimum distance in the toroidal supremum norm is some s>ραs > \rho_\alpha, with s≤1/2s \le1/2.

The axis-parallel cubes of side length ss centered at z0,…,zq−1z_0,\ldots,z_{q-1} therefore have disjoint interiors. Lemma 2.1 gives q≤qdq \le q_d, proving the optimality assertion. □

The universal lower bound

Proposition 3.1. Let 0≤α<10 \le\alpha< 1. For every integer n≥1n \ge1 and every nn-element set A⊂NA \subset\mathbb{N},

Pα(A)≥4ραn.P_\alpha(A) \ge4\rho_\alpha^n.

Consequently, Fα(n)≥4ραnF_\alpha(n) \ge4\rho_\alpha^n.

Proof. Write A={a1,…,an}A = \{a_1,\ldots,a_n\} and consider the homomorphism Φ:T→Tn\Phi: \mathbb{T} \to\mathbb{T}^n, with Φ(t)=(a1t,…,ant)\Phi(t) = (a_1t,\ldots,a_nt). Let

C:=(0,ρα)n,h:=(12,…,12).C := (0,\rho_\alpha)^n,\qquad h := \left(\frac{1}{2},\ldots,\frac{1}{2}\right).

Since ρα≤1/4\rho_\alpha\le1/4, the sets CC and C+hC+h are disjoint. For v∈Tnv \in\mathbb{T}^n, define

Ev:=Φ−1((v+C)∪(v+C+h)).E_v := \Phi^{-1}\bigl((v+C)\cup(v+C+h)\bigr).

For each fixed t∈Tt \in\mathbb{T}, the set of v∈Tnv \in\mathbb{T}^n for which Φ(t)∈v+C\Phi(t) \in v+C has measure ραn\rho_\alpha^n, and the same is true with C+hC+h in place of CC. Since the corresponding sets of translations are disjoint, Fubini’s theorem gives

∫Tnm(Ev) dv=2ραn.\int_{\mathbb{T}^n}m(E_v)\,dv = 2\rho_\alpha^n.

Hence there exists v∈Tnv \in\mathbb{T}^n such that m(Ev)≥2ραnm(E_v) \ge2\rho_\alpha^n. Fix such a vv and write E=EvE=E_v. Notice that EE is a finite union of open arcs.

We claim that E−E⊂Sα(A)E-E \subset S_\alpha(A). Indeed, let x,y∈Ex,y \in E. If Φ(x)\Phi(x) and Φ(y)\Phi(y) belong to the same one of the two boxes v+Cv+C and v+C+hv+C+h, then, for every 1≤i≤n1 \le i \le n,

∥ai(x−y)∥T<ρα.\lVert a_i(x-y)\rVert_{\mathbb{T}} < \rho_\alpha.

Thus x−y∈Sα+(A)x-y \in S_\alpha^+(A). If Φ(x)\Phi(x) and Φ(y)\Phi(y) belong to opposite boxes, then, for every 1≤i≤n1 \le i \le n,

∥ai(x−y)−12∥T<ρα,\left\lVert a_i(x-y)-\frac{1}{2}\right\rVert_{\mathbb{T}} < \rho_\alpha,

and therefore x−y∈Sα−(A)x-y \in S_\alpha^-(A). The classical sumset inequality on the torus [4] gives, for every finite union of open arcs E⊂TE \subset\mathbb{T}, m(E−E)≥min⁡{1,2m(E)}m(E-E) \ge\min\{1,2m(E)\}. To see this, put K=E‾K=\overline{E} and D=K−KD=K-K. Since EE is a finite union of open arcs, m(D)=m(E−E)m(D)=m(E-E). If D=TD=\mathbb{T}, the assertion is immediate. Otherwise, choose u∈∂Du \in\partial D and write u=a−bu=a-b with a,b∈Ka,b \in K. Then E−aE-a and E−bE-b are disjoint subsets of DD: otherwise, if z∈(E−a)∩(E−b)z \in(E-a)\cap(E-b), then

u=(z+a)−(z+b)∈E−E,u=(z+a)-(z+b)\in E-E,

which contradicts u∈∂Du \in\partial D because E−EE-E is open. Hence

m(E−E)=m(D)≥m(E−a)+m(E−b)=2m(E).\begin{aligned} m(E-E)&=m(D)\\ &\ge m(E-a)+m(E-b)\\ &=2m(E). \end{aligned}

Combining this estimate with the inclusion E−E⊂Sα(A)E-E \subset S_\alpha(A) gives

Pα(A)=m(Sα(A))≥m(E−E)≥min⁡{1,2m(E)}≥4ραn,\begin{aligned} P_\alpha(A)&=m(S_\alpha(A))\\ &\ge m(E-E)\\ &\ge\min\{1,2m(E)\}\\ &\ge4\rho_\alpha^n, \end{aligned}

where the last inequality follows from m(E)≥2ραnm(E)\ge2\rho_\alpha^n and 4ραn≤14\rho_\alpha^n\le1. Taking the infimum over all nn-element sets A⊂NA\subset\mathbb{N} gives the desired bound for Fα(n)F_\alpha(n). □

Remark 3.2. The proof remains valid for a list of nonzero integer frequencies, even with repetitions. The two factors of 2 in the lower bound have separate origins: the first comes from averaging a pair of antipodal boxes, while the second comes from the difference-set estimate. The argument concerns the un-shifted family f(at)f(at); no common phase is implicit.

The upper bounds

Both upper bounds use the following notion.

Definition 4.1. Let 0≤α<10\le\alpha<1. A finite set B⊂NB\subset\mathbb{N} is called α\alpha-isolating if 1∈B1\in B and, writing

N=max⁡B,N=\max B,
Sα+(B)={t∈T:∥t∥T<ρα/N},andSα−(B)=∅.S_\alpha^+(B)=\{t\in\mathbb{T}:\|t\|_{\mathbb{T}}<\rho_\alpha/N\},\qquad\text{and}\qquad S_\alpha^-(B)=\varnothing.

For such a set, Pα(B)=2ρα/NP_\alpha(B)=2\rho_\alpha/N.

Proposition 4.2. Suppose that 0≤α<10 \le\alpha< 1 and ρα−1∈N\rho_{\alpha}^{-1} \in\mathbb{N}. Then there is a constant Cα>0C_{\alpha} > 0 such that for every integer n≥1n \ge1,

Fα(n)≤Cαnlog⁡2((1−ρα)/(1−2ρα))ραn.F_{\alpha}(n) \le C_{\alpha} n^{\log^{2}\left((1-\rho_{\alpha})/(1-2\rho_{\alpha})\right)}\rho_{\alpha}^{n}.

Proof. The set B0={1,2,3}B_0 = \{1,2,3\} is α\alpha-isolating. Indeed, by the threshold-set description, if t∈Sα+(B0)t \in S_{\alpha}^{+}(B_0) then ∥t∥T<ρα\lVert t\rVert_{\mathbb{T}} < \rho_{\alpha} and ∥3t∥T<ρα\lVert3t\rVert_{\mathbb{T}} < \rho_{\alpha}. Choosing the representative with ∣t∣<ρα|t| < \rho_{\alpha}, the inequality ρα≤1/4\rho_{\alpha} \le1/4 gives ∣3t∣<1−ρα|3t| < 1-\rho_{\alpha}, and therefore ∣t∣<ρα/3|t| < \rho_{\alpha}/3. Conversely, if ∥t∥T<ρα/3\lVert t\rVert_{\mathbb{T}} < \rho_{\alpha}/3, then ∥jt∥T<ρα\lVert jt\rVert_{\mathbb{T}} < \rho_{\alpha} for j=1,2,3j=1,2,3. Thus Sα+(B0)={t∈T:∥t∥T<ρα/3}S_{\alpha}^{+}(B_0) = \{t \in\mathbb{T} : \lVert t\rVert_{\mathbb{T}} < \rho_{\alpha}/3\}. For the negative set, write t=1/2+st = 1/2+s with ∣s∣<ρα|s| < \rho_{\alpha}. If the frequencies 1 and 3 are both below −α-\alpha, then ∥3s∥T<ρα\lVert3s\rVert_{\mathbb{T}} < \rho_{\alpha}, and the same argument gives ∣s∣<ρα/3|s| < \rho_{\alpha}/3. Hence ∥2t∥T=∥2s∥T<ρα\lVert2t\rVert_{\mathbb{T}} = \lVert2s\rVert_{\mathbb{T}} < \rho_{\alpha}, so the frequency 2 is above α\alpha. Therefore Sα−(B0)=∅S_{\alpha}^{-}(B_0) = \varnothing.

We next establish the iterative step. Let BB be α\alpha-isolating, let N=max⁡BN = \max B, and suppose that d≥1d \ge1 satisfies qd−1≤Nq_{d-1} \le N. Since max⁡Dd=qd−1<qd=min⁡(qdB)\max D_d = q_{d-1} < q_d = \min(q_dB), the two blocks are disjoint, and hence ∣Dd∪qdB∣=∣B∣+d|D_d \cup q_dB| = |B|+d and max⁡(Dd∪qdB)=qdN\max(D_d \cup q_dB) = q_dN.

Suppose first that t∈Sα+(qdB)t \in S_{\alpha}^{+}(q_dB). Since BB is α\alpha-isolating, there are k∈Zk \in\mathbb{Z} and u∈Ru \in\mathbb{R} so that

t=k+uqd,∣u∣<ραN.t = \frac{k+u}{q_d}, \qquad|u| < \frac{\rho_{\alpha}}{N}.

Assume that k≢0(modqd)k \not\equiv0 \pmod{q_d}. By Theorem 1.3, there is b∈Ddb \in D_d such that

∥bkqd∥T>ρα.\left\lVert\frac{bk}{q_d} \right\rVert_{\mathbb{T}} > \rho_{\alpha}.

Since qd=ℓqd−1−1q_d = \ell q_{d-1}-1 with ℓ=ρα−1\ell= \rho_{\alpha}^{-1}, the point bk/qdbk/q_d lies at distance at least ρα/qd\rho_{\alpha}/q_d from the boundary of the interval {x∈T:∥x∥T<ρα}\{x \in\mathbb{T} : \lVert x\rVert_{\mathbb{T}} < \rho_{\alpha}\}. On the other hand,

∣buqd∣<bραNqd≤ραqd.\left|\frac{bu}{q_d}\right| < \frac{b\rho_{\alpha}}{Nq_d} \le\frac{\rho_{\alpha}}{q_d}.

Thus ∥bt∥T≥ρα\lVert bt\rVert_{\mathbb{T}} \ge\rho_{\alpha}, so t∉Sα+(Dd∪qdB)t \notin S_{\alpha}^{+}(D_d \cup q_dB).

If k≡0(modqd)k \equiv0 \pmod{q_d}, then modulo 1 we may write t=u/qdt = u/q_d. For every b∈Ddb \in D_d,

∣bt∣<bραNqd≤ραqd<ρα.|bt| < \frac{b\rho_{\alpha}}{Nq_d} \le\frac{\rho_{\alpha}}{q_d} < \rho_{\alpha}.

Hence all the frequencies in DdD_d are positive at tt. It follows that

Sα+(Dd∪qdB)={t∈T:∥t∥T<ραqdN}.S_{\alpha}^{+}(D_d \cup q_dB) = \left\{t \in\mathbb{T} : \lVert t\rVert_{\mathbb{T}} < \frac{\rho_{\alpha}}{q_dN}\right\}.

Furthermore, Sα−(Dd∪qdB)⊂Sα−(qdB)=∅S_{\alpha}^{-}(D_d \cup q_dB) \subset S_{\alpha}^{-}(q_dB) = \varnothing, because t∈Sα−(qdB)t \in S_{\alpha}^{-}(q_dB) would imply qdt∈Sα−(B)q_dt \in S_{\alpha}^{-}(B). Thus Dd∪qdBD_d \cup q_dB is again α\alpha-isolating.

The preceding step also gives

ρα−(∣B∣+d)Pα(Dd∪qdB)=ρα−∣B∣Pα(B)ραdqd.=ρα−∣B∣Pα(B)ℓ−1ℓ−2+ℓ−d<ρα−∣B∣Pα(B)ℓ−1ℓ−2.\begin{aligned} \rho_{\alpha}^{-(|B|+d)}P_{\alpha}(D_d \cup q_dB) = \rho_{\alpha}^{-|B|}P_{\alpha}(B)\frac{\rho_{\alpha}^{d}}{q_d}. \\ &= \rho_{\alpha}^{-|B|} P_{\alpha}(B) \frac{\ell-1}{\ell-2+\ell^{-d}} \\ &< \rho_{\alpha}^{-|B|} P_{\alpha}(B) \frac{\ell-1}{\ell-2}. \end{aligned}

We now iterate using the largest admissible value of dd. Starting from B0={1,2,3}B_0=\{1,2,3\}, suppose that BjB_j has been constructed, and write Nj:=max⁡BjN_j:=\max B_j. Choose djd_j maximally subject to qdj−1≤Njq^{d_j-1}\le N_j, and set

Bj+1:=Ddj∪qdjBj.B_{j+1}:=D_{d_j}\cup q^{d_j}B_j.

By maximality, qdj−1≤Nj<qdjq^{d_j-1}\le N_j<q^{d_j}, and so Nj+1=Njqdj>Nj2N_{j+1}=N_jq^{d_j}>N_j^2. Thus log⁡ℓNj≥2jlog⁡ℓ3\log_{\ell}N_j\ge2^j\log_{\ell}3. Also log⁡ℓNj<∣Bj∣\log_{\ell}N_j<|B_j| for every jj: this holds initially and is preserved because qd<ℓdq^d<\ell^d.

Fix n≥3n\ge3 and choose jj such that ∣Bj∣≤n<∣Bj+1∣|B_j|\le n<|B_{j+1}|. If n=∣Bj∣n=|B_j|, take A=BjA=B_j. Otherwise, 1≤n−∣Bj∣<dj1\le n-|B_j|<d_j, and

qn−∣Bj∣−1≤qdj−1≤Nj,q^{n-|B_j|-1}\le q^{d_j-1}\le N_j,

so the same construction with Dn−∣Bj∣D_{n-|B_j|} gives an α\alpha-isolating set AA with exactly nn elements. The number of construction steps used to obtain AA is at most j+1j+1. Since 2jlog⁡ℓ3≤log⁡ℓNj<∣Bj∣≤n2^j\log_{\ell}3\le\log_{\ell}N_j<|B_j|\le n, we have

(ℓ−1ℓ−2)j+1≤Cαnlog⁡2((ℓ−1)/(ℓ−2)).\left(\frac{\ell-1}{\ell-2}\right)^{j+1}\le C_{\alpha}n^{\log_2((\ell-1)/(\ell-2))}.

Finally, ρα−3Pα(B0)=2ℓ2/3\rho_{\alpha}^{-3}P_{\alpha}(B_0)=2\ell^2/3. Repeated application of the preceding estimate therefore gives

ρα−nPα(A)≤2ℓ23(ℓ−1ℓ−2)j+1≤Cαnlog⁡2((ℓ−1)/(ℓ−2))=Cαnlog⁡2((1−ρα)/(1−2ρα)).\begin{aligned} \rho_{\alpha}^{-n}P_{\alpha}(A)\le\frac{2\ell^2}{3}\left(\frac{\ell-1}{\ell-2}\right)^{j+1} \\ &\le C_{\alpha}n^{\log_2((\ell-1)/(\ell-2))} \\ &= C_{\alpha}n^{\log_2((1-\rho_{\alpha})/(1-2\rho_{\alpha}))}. \end{aligned}

Multiplying by ραn\rho_{\alpha}^n gives the desired estimate for n≥3n\ge3. An appropriate choice of CαC_{\alpha} takes care of n=1,2n=1,2. □

Remark 4.3. The use of an even frequency in the isolating construction is essential for breaking a symmetry that is present for odd frequencies. Indeed, if every a∈Aa\in A is odd, then periodicity and the antipodal symmetry of ff give

f(a(t+12))=−f(at).f\left(a\left(t+\frac{1}{2}\right)\right)=-f(at).

Consequently, translation by 1/21/2 interchanges Sα+(A)S_{\alpha}^{+}(A) and Sα−(A)S_{\alpha}^{-}(A), and in particular

m(Sα+(A))=m(Sα−(A)).m(S_{\alpha}^{+}(A))=m(S_{\alpha}^{-}(A)).

The frequency 22 in the seed B0={1,2,3}B_0 = \{1,2,3\} breaks this symmetry and allows the simultaneous negative set to be empty while the simultaneous positive set remains nonempty. This asymmetry is then preserved by the subsequent isolating construction.

Proposition 4.4. Suppose that 0≤α<10 \le\alpha< 1 and ρα−1∉N\rho_\alpha^{-1} \notin\mathbb{N}. Then there is a constant Cα>0C_\alpha> 0 such that for every integer n≥1n \ge1,

Fα(n)≤Cα∣ρα−1∣−n.F_\alpha(n) \le C_\alpha\left\lvert\rho_\alpha^{-1} \right\rvert^{-n}.

Proof. Set ℓ=⌊ρα−1⌋\ell= \lfloor\rho_\alpha^{-1} \rfloor. Then ℓ≥4\ell\ge4 and ρα<1/ℓ\rho_\alpha< 1/\ell. Let B0={1,…,N}B_0 = \{1,\ldots,N\}, where

N:=max⁡{3,⌈ρα1−ℓρα⌉}.N := \max\left\{3,\left\lceil\frac{\rho_\alpha}{1-\ell\rho_\alpha}\right\rceil\right\}.

We first observe that B0B_0 is α\alpha-isolating. Certainly, if ∥t∥T<ρα/N\|t\|_{\mathbb{T}} < \rho_\alpha/N, then ∥jt∥T<ρα\|jt\|_{\mathbb{T}} < \rho_\alpha for every 1≤j≤N1 \le j \le N. Conversely, suppose that t∈Sα+(B0)t \in S_\alpha^+(B_0). The frequency 11 gives ∥t∥T<ρα\|t\|_{\mathbb{T}} < \rho_\alpha, so choose the representative satisfying ∣t∣<ρα|t| < \rho_\alpha. If ∣t∣≥ρα/N|t| \ge\rho_\alpha/N, let j=⌈ρα/∣t∣⌉j = \lceil\rho_\alpha/|t| \rceil. Then 1≤j≤N1 \le j \le N and

ρα≤j∣t∣<2ρα≤12.\rho_\alpha\le j|t| < 2\rho_\alpha\le\frac{1}{2}.

Hence ∥jt∥T≥ρα\|jt\|_{\mathbb{T}} \ge\rho_\alpha, a contradiction. Therefore

Sα+(B0)={t∈T:∥t∥T<ραN}.S_\alpha^+(B_0) = \left\{t \in\mathbb{T} : \|t\|_{\mathbb{T}} < \frac{\rho_\alpha}{N}\right\}.

Moreover, B0B_0 contains {1,2,3}\{1,2,3\}, whose frequencies have no common negative point, as observed in the preceding proof. Thus Sα−(B0)=∅S_\alpha^-(B_0) = \varnothing.

Now let BB be α\alpha-isolating with max⁡B≥N\max B \ge N, and set B~:={1}∪ℓB\widetilde{B} := \{1\} \cup\ell B. If t∈Sα+(ℓB)t \in S_\alpha^+(\ell B), then there are k∈{0,…,ℓ−1}k \in\{0,\ldots,\ell-1\} and u∈Ru \in\mathbb{R} such that

t=k+uℓ,∣u∣≤ραmax⁡B.t = \frac{k+u}{\ell}, \qquad|u| \le\frac{\rho_\alpha}{\max B}.

If k≠0k \ne0, then

∥t∥T>1ℓ−ραℓmax⁡B≥ρα,\|t\|_{\mathbb{T}} > \frac{1}{\ell} - \frac{\rho_\alpha}{\ell\max B} \ge\rho_\alpha,

where the last inequality follows from max⁡B≥N≥ρα/(1−ℓρα)\max B \ge N \ge\rho_\alpha/(1-\ell\rho_\alpha). Thus the frequency 11 excludes every noncentral component.

If k=0k = 0, then

∥t∥T<ραℓmax⁡B<ρα,\|t\|_{\mathbb{T}} < \frac{\rho_\alpha}{\ell\max B} < \rho_\alpha,

so the frequency 11 is positive there. It follows that

Sα+(B~)={t∈T:∥t∥T<ραℓmax⁡B}.S_\alpha^+(\widetilde{B}) = \left\{t \in\mathbb{T} : \|t\|_{\mathbb{T}} < \frac{\rho_\alpha}{\ell\max B}\right\}.

Also, Sα−(B~)⊂Sα−(ℓB)=∅S_\alpha^-(\widetilde{B}) \subset S_\alpha^-(\ell B) = \varnothing. Hence B~\widetilde{B} is again α\alpha-isolating. Starting from B0B_0, define recursively Bj+1:={1}∪ℓBjB_{j+1}:=\{1\}\cup\ell B_j. Then each BjB_j is α\alpha-isolating, ∣Bj∣=N+j|B_j|=N+j, and max⁡Bj=Nℓj\max B_j=N\ell^j. Consequently,

Pα(Bj)=2ραNℓj.P_\alpha(B_j)=\frac{2\rho_\alpha}{N\ell^j}.

For every n≥Nn\ge N, taking j=n−Nj=n-N therefore gives

Fα(n)≤2ραℓNNℓ−n.F_\alpha(n)\le\frac{2\rho_\alpha\ell^N}{N}\ell^{-n}.

An appropriate choice of CαC_\alpha takes care of the finitely many 1≤n<N1\le n<N, and so for all n≥1n\ge1,

Fα(n)≤Cα[ρα−1]−n.F_\alpha(n)\le C_\alpha\left[\rho_\alpha^{-1}\right]^{-n}.

The exponential rate

We complete the proof of Theorem Theorem 1.2 by establishing the following submultiplicative inequality.

Proposition 5.1. Let 0≤α<10\le\alpha<1. For all integers n,m≥1n,m\ge1,

Fα(n+m)≤Fα(n)Fα(m).F_\alpha(n+m)\le F_\alpha(n)F_\alpha(m).

Consequently, the limit exists.

Proof. Fix ε>0\varepsilon>0, and choose sets A,B⊂NA,B\subset\mathbb{N} with ∣A∣=n|A|=n and ∣B∣=m|B|=m such that

Pα(A)≤Fα(n)+ε,P_\alpha(A)\le F_\alpha(n)+\varepsilon,
Pα(B)≤Fα(m)+ε.P_\alpha(B)\le F_\alpha(m)+\varepsilon.

For an integer K≥1K\ge1, let KB={Kb:b∈B}KB=\{Kb:b\in B\}. If K>max⁡AK>\max A, then AA and KBKB are disjoint, so ∣A∪KB∣=n+m|A\cup KB|=n+m.

We use the elementary fact that if E,F⊂TE,F\subset\mathbb{T} are finite unions of open arcs, then

m(E∩{t∈T:Kt∈F})⟶m(E)m(F)m\left(E\cap\{t\in\mathbb{T}:Kt\in F\}\right)\longrightarrow m(E)m(F)

as K→∞K\to\infty. Indeed, it is enough to check this when EE and FF are arcs, in which case we can partition the circle into KK intervals of length 1/K1/K, and see that on each complete interval contained in EE, the pre-image of FF occupies measure m(F)/Km(F)/K. Only the at most two intervals intersecting the endpoints of EE contribute an error of order 1/K1/K.

Since

Sα+(A∪KB)=Sα+(A)∩{t∈T:Kt∈Sα+(B)},S_\alpha^+(A\cup KB)=S_\alpha^+(A)\cap\{t\in\mathbb{T}:Kt\in S_\alpha^+(B)\},
Sα−(A∪KB)=Sα−(A)∩{t∈T:Kt∈Sα−(B)},S_\alpha^-(A\cup KB)=S_\alpha^-(A)\cap\{t\in\mathbb{T}:Kt\in S_\alpha^-(B)\},

we obtain

Pα(A∪KB)⟶m(Sα+(A))m(Sα+(B))+m(Sα−(A))m(Sα−(B))≤Pα(A)Pα(B).\begin{aligned} P_{\alpha}(A\cup KB)\longrightarrow m(S_{\alpha}^{+}(A))m(S_{\alpha}^{+}(B))+m(S_{\alpha}^{-}(A))m(S_{\alpha}^{-}(B)) \\ &\le P_{\alpha}(A)P_{\alpha}(B). \end{aligned}

Therefore, for all sufficiently large KK,

Fα(n+m)≤Pα(A∪KB)≤Pα(A)Pα(B)+ε≤(Fα(n)+ε)(Fα(m)+ε)+ε.\begin{aligned} F_{\alpha}(n+m)\le P_{\alpha}(A\cup KB) \\ &\le P_{\alpha}(A)P_{\alpha}(B)+\varepsilon\\ &\le(F_{\alpha}(n)+\varepsilon)(F_{\alpha}(m)+\varepsilon)+\varepsilon. \end{aligned}

Letting ε→0\varepsilon\to0 gives Fα(n+m)≤Fα(n)Fα(m)F_{\alpha}(n+m)\le F_{\alpha}(n)F_{\alpha}(m). Moreover, by Proposition 3.1, Fα(n)>0F_{\alpha}(n)>0 for every nn. Hence log⁡Fα(n)\log F_{\alpha}(n) is subadditive, and Fekete’s lemma shows that

lim⁡n→∞1nlog⁡Fα(n)=inf⁡n≥11nlog⁡Fα(n).\lim_{n\to\infty}\frac{1}{n}\log F_{\alpha}(n)=\inf_{n\ge1}\frac{1}{n}\log F_{\alpha}(n).

Exponentiating proves that the limit exists.

Proof of Theorem 1.2. Proposition 3.1 gives the lower bound, while Propositions 4.2 and 4.4 give the upper bounds in parts (i) and (ii), respectively. Proposition 5.1 shows that the limit of the exponential rate exists.

If ρα−1∈N\rho_{\alpha}^{-1}\in\mathbb{N}, taking nnth roots in the lower and upper bounds gives ρα≤lim⁡n→∞Fα(n)1/n≤ρα\rho_{\alpha}\le\lim_{n\to\infty}F_{\alpha}(n)^{1/n}\le\rho_{\alpha}, and hence lim⁡n→∞Fα(n)1/n=ρα\lim_{n\to\infty}F_{\alpha}(n)^{1/n}=\rho_{\alpha}. If ρα−1∉N\rho_{\alpha}^{-1}\notin\mathbb{N}, the same argument produces the desired inequality.

The remaining loss and open questions

Proposition 6.1. Suppose that 0≤α<10\le\alpha<1 and ρα−1∈N\rho_{\alpha}^{-1}\in\mathbb{N}, and let BjB_j be the maximal sequence constructed in the proof of Proposition 4.2. Then

Pα(Bj)≍∣Bj∣log⁡2((1−ρα)/(1−2ρα))ρα∣Bj∣(j→∞),P_{\alpha}(B_j)\asymp|B_j|^{\log_2((1-\rho_{\alpha})/(1-2\rho_{\alpha}))}\rho_{\alpha}^{|B_j|}\qquad(j\to\infty),

where the implicit constants depend only on α\alpha.

Proof. Set ℓ=ρα−1\ell=\rho_{\alpha}^{-1}, Nj=max⁡BjN_j=\max B_j, and let djd_j denote the size of the jjth construction step. By maximality, qdj−1≤Nj<qdjq_{d_j-1}\le N_j<q_{d_j}. Since qd=ℓqd−1−1q_d=\ell q_{d-1}-1, we have Nj<qdj≤ℓNj−1N_j<q_{d_j}\le\ell N_j-1. Thus, writing Lj=log⁡ℓNjL_j=\log_{\ell}N_j, 2Lj<Lj+1<2Lj+12L_j<L_{j+1}<2L_j+1, and consequently Lj≍2jL_j\asymp2^j. Moreover, qdj>Njq_{d_j}>N_j and qdj<ℓdjq_{d_j}<\ell^{d_j} imply dj>Ljd_j>L_j.

The exact loss at the jjth step is

ℓdjqdj=ℓ−1ℓ−2(1+ℓ−djℓ−2)−1.\frac{\ell^{d_j}}{q_{d_j}}=\frac{\ell-1}{\ell-2}\left(1+\frac{\ell^{-d_j}}{\ell-2}\right)^{-1}.

Therefore

ρα−∣Bj∣Pα(Bj)=2ℓ23(ℓ−1ℓ−2)j∏i=0j−1(1+ℓ−diℓ−2)−1.\rho_{\alpha}^{-|B_j|}P_\alpha(B_j)=\frac{2\ell^2}{3}\left(\frac{\ell-1}{\ell-2}\right)^j\prod_{i=0}^{j-1}\left(1+\frac{\ell^{-d_i}}{\ell-2}\right)^{-1}.

Since di>Li≳2id_i>L_i\gtrsim2^i, the sum ∑iℓ−di\sum_i\ell^{-d_i} converges, and hence the product converges to a positive limit. It follows that

ρα−∣Bj∣Pα(Bj)≃(ℓ−1ℓ−2)j.\rho_{\alpha}^{-|B_j|}P_\alpha(B_j)\simeq\left(\frac{\ell-1}{\ell-2}\right)^j.

On the other hand,

log⁡ℓ(ρα−∣Bj∣Pα(Bj))=∣Bj∣−Lj+log⁡ℓ(2ℓ),\log_\ell\left(\rho_{\alpha}^{-|B_j|}P_\alpha(B_j)\right)=|B_j|-L_j+\log_\ell\left(\frac{2}{\ell}\right),

so ∣Bj∣=Lj+O(j)|B_j|=L_j+O(j). Hence ∣Bj∣≃2j|B_j|\simeq2^j, and therefore

(ℓ−1ℓ−2)j≃∣Bj∣log⁡2((ℓ−1)/(ℓ−2)).\left(\frac{\ell-1}{\ell-2}\right)^j\simeq|B_j|^{\log_2((\ell-1)/(\ell-2))}.

Since log⁡2((ℓ−1)/(ℓ−2))=log⁡2((1−ρα)/(1−2ρα))\log_2((\ell-1)/(\ell-2))=\log_2((1-\rho_\alpha)/(1-2\rho_\alpha)), the result follows. □

This leaves open whether the polynomial loss is a feature of the problem itself or only of the construction.

Question 6.2. Suppose that 0≤α<10\leq\alpha<1 and ρα−1∈N\rho_\alpha^{-1}\in\mathbb{N}. Is there a constant Cα>0C_\alpha>0 such that Fα(n)≤CαραnF_\alpha(n)\leq C_\alpha\rho_\alpha^n for every integer n≥1n\geq1?

Theorem 1.3 also shows that a strict cyclic cover with dd multipliers cannot have modulus qq satisfying qραd→1q\rho_\alpha^d\to1: the largest possible ratio tends to

1−2ρα1−ρα<1.\frac{1-2\rho_\alpha}{1-\rho_\alpha}<1.

Thus this particular modification of the covering step cannot remove the accumulated loss. Neither this restriction nor Proposition 6.1, however, gives a lower bound forcing ρα−nFα(n)\rho_\alpha^{-n}F_\alpha(n) to diverge.

When ρα−1∉N\rho_\alpha^{-1}\notin\mathbb{N}, the lower and upper exponential bounds in Theorem 1.2 do not in general coincide. Determining the exact value of the limit in this case remains beyond the present argument.

References

Department of Mathematics, Virginia Tech, Blacksburg, VA, USA

Email address: [email protected]

Department of Mathematics, Virginia Tech, Blacksburg, VA, USA

Email address: [email protected]

References

  1. [1]Pjotr Buys, Sven Polak, and Jeroen Zuiddam, A group-theoretic approach to Shannon capacity of graphs and a limit theorem from lattice packings (2025), available at arXiv:2506.14654.arxiv.org/abs/2506.14654
  2. [2]S. Dou, A. Goh, K. Liu, M. Legate, and G. Pettigrew, Cosine sign correlation, J. Fourier Anal. Appl. 30 (2024), 13, DOI 10.1007/s00041-024-10067-1.DOI
  3. [4][Mac53] A. M. Macbeath, On measure of sum sets II. The sum-theorem for the torus, Proc. Cambridge Philos. Soc. 49 (1953), no. 1, 40–43, DOI 10.1017/S0305004100028012.DOI
  4. [5][PS16] G. Perarnau and O. Serra, Correlation among runners and some results on the Lonely Runner Conjecture, Electron. J. Combin. 23 (2016), no. 1, Paper 1.50, 22 pp., DOI 10.37236/5123.DOI
  5. [6][Pol19] Sven C. Polak, New Methods in Coding Theory: Error-Correcting Codes and the Shannon Capacity, Ph.D. thesis, University of Amsterdam, 2019, arXiv:2005.02945.arxiv.org/abs/2005.02945
  6. [7][ZZZZ26] Shengyang Zang, Yingyu Zhao, Yunhao Zhao, and Chen Zhou, Extremal cosine sign correlations (2026), available at arXiv:2610.33190.

Paper details

vlnc:W_agje8agz
v1 · latestHistory (1)

published · Fresh — added to the Hub within the last 30 days

added ·

Usage

views · 0

downloads · 0

A view counts once per browser per day, a download each time the PDF is requested.

CC BY 4.0

Original source

  • Mathematics

GPT-6 Astra · View statement →

Looking for related papers…
Contents