We prove a power-saving form of the van der Corput property for cubes. As a consequence, we obtain a power-saving bound ∣A∣≪εN59/60+ε for sets A⊆{1,…,N} with no nonzero cube differences.
Introduction
Answering a question of Lovász, Furstenberg [5] and Sárközy [20] independently proved that if A⊆[N]:={1,…,N} has no nonzero square difference, then ∣A∣=o(N). Sárközy’s proof gave
∣A∣≪N(loglogN)2/3(logN)−1/3.
Pintz, Steiger, and Szemerédi [16 Theorem 1] used a more elaborate version of Sárközy’s density increment strategy to prove
∣A∣≪N(logN)−121loglogloglogN.
Bloom and Maynard [2] later improved this bound to
∣A∣≪N(logN)−clogloglogN
for some absolute constant c>0. Recently, Green and Sawhney [7] combined Sárközy’s density increment strategy with their arithmetic level-d inequality to show that, for some absolute c>0,
∣A∣≪Nexp(−clogN).
Fan and Lott [4] subsequently used the van der Corput property for squares to improve this to
∣A∣≪Nexp(−clogNloglogN).(1)
for some absolute constant c>0.
A longstanding question is whether there is an absolute constant c>0 such that every A⊆[N] with no nonzero square difference satisfies the power-saving bound ∣A∣≪N1−c. Very recently, OpenAI [14] released a preprint claiming such a bound.
The lower bound of Fan and Lott [4 Theorem 1.3] shows that the van der Corput method cannot yield a power saving for sets with no nonzero square difference. For cubes, however, we obtain a power saving by exploiting the oddness of x↦x3, which makes the complete cubic exponential sums real.
Write e(t)=exp(2πit). Let F⊆Z, let N be a positive integer, and let δ>0. Consider a real trigonometric polynomial
P(θ)=a0+n=1∑Nancos(2πnθ),a0,a1,…,aN∈R,(2)
such that
P(θ)≥0 for every θ∈R/Z,
P(0)=1,
an=0 if 1≤n≤N and n∈/F∪(−F),
0≤a0≤δ.
We call a polynomial of the form (2) satisfying (i)–(iii) a van der Corput witness for F of degree at most N. Its nonconstant coefficients may have either sign. In the trigonometric characterization of Kamae and Mendès France [9] and Ruzsa [18], F has the van der Corput property if for every δ>0 there exist an integer N and a witness for F satisfying (iv).
Suppose that A⊆[N] and (A−A)∩F⊆{0}. For any P satisfying (i)–(iv), Fourier orthogonality gives
For the set of shifted primes F={p−1:p prime}, Green [6, Theorems 1.1 and 1.2] constructed a witness of degree at most N with a0≪N−c for some absolute c>0. It follows that ∣A∣≪N1−c whenever A⊆[N] contains no two elements differing by one less than a prime.
Several other sets of forbidden differences admit power savings by the van der Corput method. Fan and Lott [3] proved that if A−A contains no nonzero sum of two squares, then ∣A∣≪εN7/8+ε for every ε>0. Younis [22] proved that ∣A∣≪N1−c for some absolute c>0 if A−A contains no integer of the form n⌊21/3n⌋ with n∈N={1,2,…}. Kalogirou, Lott, Magyar, and Singha Roy [8] proved that for each odd k≥3 and even s≥2 there is a ck,s>0 such that ∣A∣≪k,sN1−ck,s if A−A contains no sum of s positive kth powers.
Matolcsi and Ruzsa [12, Theorem 2.5 and Corollary 2.6] proved that if B⊆Z/qZ contains no two elements whose difference is a nonzero cube modulo q, then ∣B∣≤q1−κ, where κ=0.1195357…. Our construction, like theirs, uses compatible witnesses for cubic residues modulo powers of each prime.
Ninčević and Slijepčević [13, Theorems 1 and 2] studied the van der Corput property for the values of odd polynomials h∈Z[x] of degree k≥3 with positive leading coefficient. They constructed witnesses of degree at most N with nonnegative coefficients and a0≪h(logN)−1/k. For h(n)=nk they also proved that every such witness satisfies a0≫k1/logN.
By allowing the cosine coefficients to have either sign, we obtain a power saving for cubes.
Theorem 1.1. Let X≥1 and let ε>0. There exists a trigonometric polynomial with real coefficients of the form
PX(θ)=a0+1≤n≤X∑ancos(2πn3θ)(4)
such that
PX(θ)≥0(θ∈R/Z),PX(0)=1,0≤a0≪εX−1/20+ε.(5)
Taking X=⌊N1/3⌋ and applying Theorem 1.1 with 3ε in place of ε gives a witness of degree at most N with a0≪εN−1/60+ε. Applying (3) gives the following corollary.
Corollary 1.2. Let N≥1 be an integer and let A⊆[N] have no nonzero cube difference. Then for every ε>0,
∣A∣≪εN59/60+ε.
Previously, the best upper bound was due to Adajar et al. [1 Theorem 1.1]. They combined the method of Green and Sawhney with exponential sum estimates in the style of Rice [17] to show that for every 0<μ<1/2 there is a cμ>0 such that
∣A∣≤Nexp(−cμ(logN)μ)
for all sufficiently large N.
In the first version of their paper on squares [4 Section 1], Fan and Lott announced the van der Corput power saving for cube differences that we prove here. After they submitted that version to arXiv, OpenAI released a preprint claiming a power saving for intersective polynomial differences by a different method [15 Theorem 1.1]. In the cubic case, Corollary 1.2 gives ∣A∣≪cN1−c for every 0<c<1/60, whereas the parameters in that preprint give c=c3≤[72006(1201!)48001]−1.1
Let D3(N) denote the largest size of a subset of [N] with no nonzero cube difference. Using a construction of Ruzsa [19 Theorem 2] and a computer-assisted search, Lewko [11 Theorem 4] proved that
D3(N)≫Nβ,β=32+3log91log14=0.861681….
There is still a considerable gap between this exponent β and the exponent 59/60 in Corollary 1.2. One may ask whether D3(N)∼CNγ for some C>0 and γ∈[β,59/60]. A weaker conjecture is that the limit
N→∞limlogNlogD3(N)
exists. Ruzsa [19 Section 4] asked the corresponding question for squares.
Acknowledgments
Andrew Lott and Ákos Magyar thank the Erdős Center of the HUN-REN Alfréd Rényi Institute of Mathematics for its support and hospitality during the spring 2026 Simons Semester. Máté Matolcsi and Ákos Magyar were supported by grant NKFIH-154121. Imre Z. Ruzsa was supported by grant NKFIH-146387. This work was funded by a Simons Foundation International grant administered by the Simons Foundation [SFI-MPS-TSM-00026118, Á.M.].
AI disclosure
A large language model (LLM) was used as a sounding board during the developmental phase of the project. The LLM was also used for copyediting. However, the final argument is the authors’ own, and the manuscript was written and verified by the authors, who take full responsibility for the contents of the proof.
Sketch of the proof.
Our starting point is to define local weight functions Wp,K on the groups Z/pKZ, where p is prime and K∈N, attached to a parameter 0<γp<1. These functions are densities, relative to uniform measure, of geometric probability distributions defined by Pr(pj∣n)=γpj. Extending them as pK-periodic functions, we show that the corresponding exponential sums
Fp,m(a)=pm1nmodpm∑Wp,K(n)e(an3/pm)(K=⌈m/3⌉)
are nonnegative. With suitable optimized choices of γp, these sums recover the self-compatible modular witness functions constructed by Matolcsi–Ruzsa; see [12 Lemma 2.4 and Theorem 2.5] and the remark below. We will use simpler parameter choices. The local weights Wp,K are constant on the “valuation shells” {n∈Z/pKZ:vp(n)=k}, where vp(n)=j if pj∥n. Thus they can be expressed as linear combinations of the Ramanujan sums cpk(n):
Wp,K(n)=k=0∑Kbpkcpk(n).
with coefficients bpk independent of the underlying group Z/pKZ. This allows one to define the coefficients bd=∏pk∥dbpk and the global truncated weight function
wR(n):=d≥1bd≥R−1∑bdcd(n).
By exploiting the multiplicative properties of the coefficients bd and the functions cd(n) we obtain the crucial estimate
SR(a,q):=EnwR(n)e(an3/q)≥−CϵR−1qϵ,(a,q)=1
where by Enf(n) we denote the mean value of a periodic function over its period. The reason behind this estimate is that SR(a,q) can be approximated via the complete exponential sum
We will take R=X1/20. A major/minor arc argument then yields the uniform estimate
TX(0)=1+o(1),ReTX(θ)≥−CεX−1/20+ε.
Taking η=CεX−1/20+ε with a sufficiently large constant, we add η and normalize:
PX(θ):=TX(0)+ηReTX(θ)+η.
Then PX≥0, PX(0)=1, and its constant Fourier coefficient is
a0=TX(0)+ηη≪εX−1/20+ε.
providing the witness polynomial in Theorem 1.1. A short, well-known argument then gives Corollary 1.2.
The arithmetic factors
We define the finite exponential sums that appear in the major-arc approximation to TX(θ) and prove their required properties. We begin with nonnegative local modular witnesses attached to primes, following the modular construction of Matolcsi–Ruzsa; see [12 Section 2].
Local weight functions attached to a prime.
Fix a prime p and a parameter 0<γ=γp<1, whose value will be determined later. For K≥1, consider the probability distribution on Z/pKZ that is uniform on each valuation shell {vp(n)=j}, defined by
Pr(pj∣n)=γj(0≤j≤K).(6)
The uniform distribution corresponds to γ=p−1. On Z/pKZ, we use the valuation: vp(n)=j when pj∥n and j<K, while vp(0)=K. Then
Pr(vp(n)=j)=(1−γ)γj(0≤j<K),Pr(vp(n)=K)=γK.(7)
We define the local weight function Wp,K on this group as the density of this probability distribution relative to uniform distribution, namely as
We consider this function as a pK-periodic function on the integers and set Wp,0=1. It is clear from the construction that it has mean value one over any of its periods, i.e. for every m≥K, the numbers p−mWp,K(n), nmodpm also form a probability distribution. The probability distributions modulo pK are compatible as K varies, namely one has the compatibility property
p1t=0∑p−1Wp,K+1(n+tpK)=Wp,K(n)(nmodpK).
If vp(n)=j<K, all lifts n+tpK of n have valuation j, and their weights equal Wp,K(n). For the zero residue modulo pK, one lift has weight (pγ)K+1 and the other p−1 lifts have weight p(1−γ)(pγ)K/(p−1). Hence their average is
p1((pγ)K+1+p(1−γ)(pγ)K)=(pγ)K=Wp,K(0).
This compatibility underlies the construction of the global weight on Z.
Positivity of local modular witness functions.
For p∤a and s≥1, define
Ups(a)=φ(ps)1umodpsp∤u∑e(au3/ps).
where φ is the Euler totient function. The change of variable u↦−u shows that these are real and lie in [−1,1]. We include a proof of the following standard estimate for completeness.
Lemma 3.1. If p=3, then Ups(a)=0 for s≥2. If p=3, then U3s(a)=0 for s≥3. Moreover, for p=3,
Up(a)≥−p−11+2p.
Proof. For p=3 and s≥2, first partition the units u into residue classes modulo ps−1. On the residue class represented by u, replacing u by u+tps−1 multiplies the phase by e(3au2t/p). Summing over tmodp gives zero.
For p=3 and s≥3, the permutation u↦u+3s−2 of the units changes the phase by e(au2/3)=e(a/3)=1. The other terms in the binomial expansion are divisible by 3s, so the sum again vanishes.
Finally, the complete sum ∑xmodpe(ax3/p) has absolute value at most 2p. Indeed, when p≡2(mod3), the map u↦u3 is a permutation and the sum is zero. When p≡1(mod3), the cubic exponential sum is the sum of the two Gauss sums associated with the nontrivial cubic characters, each of absolute value p.
Subtracting the term x=0 and dividing by p−1 proves the asserted lower bound.
For m≥1, put K=⌈m/3⌉ and define the local modular witness functions
Lemma 3.2 (Local positivity). For any 0<γ<1 and p∤a, we have
Fp,m+3(a)=γFp,m(a)(m≥0),(10)
with initial values
Fp,1(a)=γ+(1−γ)Up(a),Fp,2(a)=γ+(1−γ)Up2(a).
In particular, with the choices
γ3=21,γp=p+2p1+2p(p=3),(11)
one has Fp,m(a)≥0 for every m≥0 and every a coprime to p.
Proof. Note that if pK∣n then e(an3/pm)=1. If vp(n)=j<K, write n=pju. The conditional average of the phase on this shell is Upm−3j(a). Thus, summing over 0≤j<K gives
Fp,m(a)=γK+(1−γ)j=0∑K−1γjUpm−3j(a).(12)
The first term is the contribution of the residues satisfying pK∣n.
For m≥1, separating the j=0 term for Fp,m+3 and shifting the remaining indices gives
Fp,m+3(a)=(1−γ)Upm+3(a)+γFp,m(a).
The term Upm+3(a) vanishes by Lemma 3.1. The lemma gives Fp,3(a)=γ, proving (10) also for m=0. Formula (12) gives the stated initial values for m=1,2.
Hence Lemma 3.1 implies Fp,1(a)≥0, and it is easy to see that Fp,2(a)=γp>0.
For p=3, the bound U3,U9≥−1 and the choice γ3=1/2 suffice for both initial values to be nonnegative. Finally, the recurrence (10) implies positivity at every higher modulus pm.
Remark. The sums Fp,m(a) can be evaluated explicitly. If m=3j+r with r∈{0,1,2} and p∤a, then
We have chosen the parameters γ=γp above for their simplicity, and have not optimized them. If
tp=max(0,p∤amax(−Up(a)),p∤amax(−Up2(a))),
then Fp,m(a)≥0 for all m≥0 and p∤a if and only if γ≥tp/(1+tp). Extend (9) to all numerators a by the same formula. One may replace Wp,⌈m/3⌉ by Wp,m in that formula: the weights agree below valuation ⌈m/3⌉, and the remaining tail has the same mass and phase 1. Compatibility then gives Fp,m(pa)=Fp,m−1(a) for m≥1. For p=3, choosing γ=tp/(1+tp) recovers the self-compatible family in [12 Lemma 2.4], with the base witness averaged under multiplication by nonzero cubes. For p=3, the optimal choice in this family is γ=cos(π/9)/(1+cos(π/9)); at modulus 27 it gives the invariant optimal base witness used in [12 Theorem 2.5], and the higher powers agree with its recursive extension. Thus the geometric probability laws give a realization of those modular witnesses. We keep the simpler choices in (11); optimizing them does not improve the exponent obtained from the estimates below. The properties of the parameters γp that we need are summarized in the following lemma.
Lemma 3.3. For all primes p, we have
(i)1/p<γp≤p−1/3,and(ii)γp≪p−1/2.(14)
Proof. The second assertion and the inequality 1/p<γp follow immediately from (11). The upper bound in (i) is also immediate for p=3. For p=3, that upper bound is equivalent to
2p(p1/3−1)≤p−p1/3=(p1/3−1)(p2/3+p1/3),
which follows from the arithmetic–geometric mean inequality 2p≤p2/3+p1/3.
Ramanujan sums and the global weight function wR.
We now express Wp,K as a linear combination of cpk, 0≤k≤K. These K+1 functions form an orthogonal basis for the space of functions constant on valuation shells, with respect to the inner product
⟨f,g⟩K=pK1nmodpK∑f(n)g(n).
To be more precise, one has
⟨cpk,cpℓ⟩K={φ(pk),0,k=ℓ,k=ℓ,0≤k,ℓ≤K.(16)
Indeed, after expanding the two Ramanujan sums, a pair of characters has nonzero contribution only if their frequencies agree modulo one. Reduced fractions with denominators pk and pℓ cannot agree mod 1 unless k=ℓ; in that case there are exactly φ(pk) matching pairs.
A crucial fact is that the coefficients bpk do not depend on the truncation level K≥k. This allows us to extend them multiplicatively, defining bd:=∏pk∥dbpk with b1=1. Note that for p=3, our choice of the γp parameters gives bp=2/(p+2), while b3=1/4. Since 0<bp≤γp, we obtain
0<bd≤pk∥d∏γpk≤d−1/3.(19)
For R≥1, define the global weight function
wR(n):=d∈ER∑bdcd(n),ER:={d≥1:bd≥R−1}.(20)
By (19), ER⊆[1,R3], so the defining sum is finite. Although every local weight Wp,K is nonnegative, the truncated global weight wR may have either sign.
Lower bounds for the global witness function at rational points a/q.
Our aim is to show that the periodic mean of wR(n)e(an3/q) is bounded below by a small negative quantity. We write Enf(n) for the mean of a periodic function f:Z→C over any of its periods; the value is independent of the period chosen.
Proposition 3.4. Let (a,q)=1. For every ε>0, uniformly for all reduced fractions a/q and R≥1, we have
SR(a,q):=EnwR(n)e(an3/q)≥−CεR−1qε.(21)
Moreover SR(0,1)=1.
Let
Cd(a,q):=Encd(n)e(an3/q)(22)
denote the mean value of the periodic phase function cd(n)e(an3/q) over its period. By (20),
SR(a,q)=d∈ER∑bdCd(a,q).
The means Cd(a,q) and SR(a,q) are real: replacing n by −n conjugates the phase and leaves the weights unchanged. The key is to show that SR(a,q) is a truncated divisor sum.
Lemma 3.5. For (a,q)=1, let
D(q):=pm∥q∏p⌈m/3⌉,D(1)=1.(23)
Then
Cd(a,q)=0unless d∣D(q),
and ∣Cd(a,q)∣≤2ω(d), where ω(d) is the number of distinct prime factors of d.
Proof. A common period of the functions cd(n) and e(an3/q) is Δ=[d,q]. For every prime p∣Δ, write kp=vp(d), mp=vp(q), and ℓp=max(kp,mp). If p∣q, set
qp=q/pmp,ap≡aqp−1(modpmp).
The inverse qp−1 (mod pmp) exists, and ap is coprime to p. The additive character and the Ramanujan sum factor as
Indeed, the first identity follows from the fact that 1/q≡∑p∣qqp−1/pmp(mod1). The Chinese remainder theorem applied to Δ=∏p∣Δpβp yields the factorization
Cd(a,q)=p∣Δ∏Lp(kp,mp;ap),(24)
where, for m≥1 and ℓ=max(k,m),
Lp(k,m;ap)=pℓ1xmodpℓ∑cpk(x)e(apx3/pm).(25)
with cp0=1. For m=0, the exponential is interpreted as 1 and no numerator is needed.
If m=0 and k≥1, the local factor is the mean of cpk, hence zero. Suppose now that m≥1 and k≥1. For 0≤r≤k, put
Ar=pℓprxmodpℓpr∣x∑e(apx3/pm).
This is a normalized exponential sum, so ∣Ar∣≤1. The identity cpk(n)=pk1pk∣n−pk−11pk−1∣n implies Lp(k,m;ap)=Ak−Ak−1. If k>⌈m/3⌉, then 3(k−1)≥m, so the phase is one on both supports and Ak=Ak−1=1. This proves the asserted support property. It also gives ∣Lp∣≤2 when k≥1; when k=0, the local factor is an average of numbers of modulus one and has absolute value at most one. The stated bound follows from (24).
Proof of Proposition 3.4. Let D=D(q). Multiplicativity and (17) give
Together with the nonnegativity in (26), this proves (21). Finally, for q=1 only d=1 contributes, so SR(0,1)=1.
Lifting to integer cubes via the circle method.
Using a major/minor arc decomposition, we approximate ReTX(θ) on the major arcs by the product of the real arithmetic factor SR(a,q) and a nonnegative Archimedean term. The two elementary formulas for cd in (15) serve different purposes: the divisor formula is used in the major-arc approximation, and the character formula allows us to apply Weyl’s inequality on the minor arcs.
A preliminary bound.
The quantity
AR=d∈ER∑bdf∣d∑∣μ(d/f)∣f(27)
appears in both the major-arc approximation and the minor-arc estimate. We will use the following bound.
Lemma 4.1. For every ε>0 and R≥1,
AR≪εR3+ε.(28)
Proof. Note that on ER one has 1≤(Rbd)3+ε. Extending a sum of non-negative terms to all integers and using multiplicativity, we obtain
For sufficiently large p, the estimate γp≪p−1/2 gives rp=Oε(p−1−ε/2). Thus the local factor is 1+Oε(p−1−ε/2), and the finitely many remaining factors are finite. This proves (28).
Approximation on the major arcs.
We derive the major-arc approximation by partial summation.
Lemma 4.2. Let (a,q)=1 and θ=a/q+β. Then
ReTX(θ)=SR(a,q)J(βX3)+O(XqAR(1+∣β∣X3)).
where
J(t)=2∫01(1−u)cos(2πtu)du=(πtsinπt)2,J(0)=1.
In particular, 0≤J(t)≤1.
Proof. We use the divisor formula
cd(n)=f∣d∑μ(d/f)f1f∣n.
For a fixed divisor f, the function f1f∣ne(an3/q) has period fq and its mean value over its period is
Af(a,q)=q1xmodq∑e(af3x3/q).
Its partial sums, after subtracting the mean times the number of terms, are O(fq). Indeed, the sum of the absolute values over a period is fq, and ∣Af(a,q)∣≤1. After subtracting the mean, complete periods cancel and the remaining terms contribute at most O(fq).
The function H(t)=hX(t)e(βt3) vanishes at both endpoints of [0,X] and satisfies
We are now in a position to prove the main result. First we show the existence of the witness function PX(θ).
Proof of Theorem 1.1. It suffices to treat 0<ε<1/20 and sufficiently large X. Apply the preceding estimates with ε/2 in place of ε, and put R=X1/20, Q=X4/5. Given θ∈T=R/Z, Dirichlet approximation with H=⌊X3/Q⌋ gives a reduced fraction a/q such that
If q>Q, Lemma 4.3 yields ∣TX(θ)∣≪εARXε/2Q−1/4. Lemma 4.1 therefore reduces the three errors, up to factors bounded by Xε, to
R−1=X−1/20,R3Q/X=X−1/20,R3Q−1/4=X−1/20.
This implies the lower bound ReTX(θ)≥−CεX−1/20+ε uniformly in θ.
If θ=0, we have a=0, q=1, and β=0 in Lemma 4.2. Since SR(0,1)=J(0)=1, it follows
TX(0)=1+O(AR/X)=1+Oε(X−17/20+ε).
Take η=CεX−1/20+ε, with Cε large enough that ReTX(θ)+η≥0 for all θ. Since TX(0)=1+o(1), the denominator TX(0)+η is positive for sufficiently large X. Define
PX(θ)=TX(0)+ηReTX(θ)+η.
Then PX≥0, PX(0)=1, and its constant Fourier coefficient is
a0=TX(0)+ηη≪εX−1/20+ε.
All nonzero frequencies are ±n3 with 1≤n≤X, and the cosine coefficients are real because hX(n)wR(n) is real. For X in a bounded range, use PX≡1 and enlarge the implied constant. This completes the proof for all X≥1. □
Corollary 1.2 now follows from the following short, well-known argument.
Proof of Corollary 1.2. Put X=⌊N1/3⌋ and apply Theorem 1.1 with 3ε in place of ε. Embed A in the cyclic group G=Z/LZ, where L=2N+1, and set 1A(j)=∑a∈Ae(aj/L). By orthogonality we have
L1j=0∑L−1PX(j/L)∣1A(j)∣2=a0∣A∣.(30)
Indeed, a nonconstant term could contribute only if a−b≡±n3(modL) for some a,b∈A. Since ∣a−b∣≤N−1 and n3≤N, the congruence would be an equality in Z, contradicting our assumption on the set A.
The terms on the left of (30) are nonnegative; hence, using the fact that PX(0)=1, we have
L∣A∣2≤a0∣A∣.
For A=∅, this implies
∣A∣≤La0≪εNX−1/20+3ε≪εN1−1/60+ε.
□
Steve Fan, Andrew Lott, and Ákos Magyar
Department of Mathematics, University of Georgia, Athens, GA 30602, USA
[1]C. F. E. Adajar, R. Agrawal, M. R. Choudhuri, C. Y. Chuah, S. Fan, S. Hegde, A. Lott, K. Nandakumar, and N. R. Pongandla, Extensions of the Furstenberg–Sárközy theorem via the arithmetic level-d inequality, arXiv:2605.16216v2 (2026).arxiv.org/abs/2605.16216
[2]T. F. Bloom and J. Maynard, A new upper bound for sets with no square differences, Compos. Math. 158 (2022), 1777–1798.arxiv.org/abs/2011.13266
[3]S. Fan and A. Lott, The van der Corput property for sums of two squares, arXiv:2606.29185v2 (2026).arxiv.org/abs/2606.29185
[4]S. Fan and A. Lott, The optimal van der Corput property for squares, arXiv:2610.07765v2 (2026).arxiv.org/abs/2610.07765
[5]H. Furstenberg, Ergodic behavior of diagonal measures and a theorem of Szemerédi on arithmetic progressions, J. Analyse Math. 31 (1977), 204–256.DOI
[7]B. Green and M. Sawhney, New bounds for the Furstenberg–Sárközy theorem, arXiv:2411.17448v2 (2025).arxiv.org/abs/2411.17448
[8]A. Kalogirou, A. Lott, Á. Magyar, and A. Singha Roy, The Furstenberg–Sárközy theorem for sums of an even number of odd powers, arXiv:2609.16595 (2026).arxiv.org/abs/2609.16595
[9]T. Kamae and M. Mendès France, Van der Corput’s difference theorem, Israel J. Math. 31 (1978), 335–342.DOI
[11]M. Lewko, An improved lower bound related to the Furstenberg–Sárközy theorem, Electron. J. Combin. 22 (2015), Paper P1.32.DOI
[12]M. Matolcsi and I. Z. Ruzsa, Difference sets and positive exponential sums. II: Cubic residues in cyclic groups, Proc. Steklov Inst. Math. 314 (2021), 138–143.DOI
[14]OpenAI, A power saving for square-difference-free sets, preprint (2026), with accompanying Lean formalization.hub.valency.io/works/W_a9yjw7uw
[15]OpenAI, A power saving for intersective polynomial differences with an exponent depending only on the degree, preprint (2026).hub.valency.io/works/W_86qmxgsn
[16]J. Pintz, W. L. Steiger, and E. Szemerédi, On sets of natural numbers whose difference set contains no squares, J. London Math. Soc. (2) 37 (1988), 219–231.DOI
[17]A. Rice, A maximal extension of the best-known bounds for the Furstenberg–Sárközy theorem, Acta Arith. 187 (2019), 1–41.arxiv.org/abs/1612.01760
[18]I. Z. Ruzsa, Connections between the uniform distribution of a sequence and its differences, in Topics in Classical Number Theory, vol. II, Colloq. Math. Soc. János Bolyai, vol. 34, North-Holland, Amsterdam, 1984, pp. 1419–1443.
[19]I. Z. Ruzsa, Difference sets without squares, Period. Math. Hungar. 15 (1984), 205–209.DOI
[20]A. Sárközy, On difference sets of sequences of integers. I, Acta Math. Acad. Sci. Hungar. 31 (1978), 125–149.DOI
[21]R. C. Vaughan, The Hardy–Littlewood Method, 2nd ed., Cambridge Tracts in Mathematics, vol. 125, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 1997.DOI