SearcharxivSearch

arXiv subjects

Maria Janczak

Publications and source records attributed to Maria Janczak.

2 recordsLinked to original sources

A multi-parameter variant of the Erdős distance problem

We study the following variant of the Erdős distance problem. Given $E$ and $F$ a point sets in $\mathbb{R}^d$ and $p = (p_1, \ldots, p_q)$ with $p_1+ \cdots + p_q = d$ is an increasing partition of $d$ define $$ B_p(E,F)=\{(|x_1-y_1|, \ldots, |x_q-y_q|): x \in E, y \in F \},$$ where $x=(x_1, \ldots, x_q)$ with $x_i$ in $\mathbb{R}^{p_i}$. For $p_1 \geq 2$ it is not difficult to construct $E$ and $F$ such that $|B_{p}(E,F)|=1$. On the other hand, it is easy to see that if $γ_q$ is the best know exponent for the distance problem in $\mathbb{R}^{p_i}$ that $|B_p(E,E)| \geq C{|E|}^{\frac{γ_q}{q}}$. The question we study is whether we can improve the exponent $\frac{γ_q}{q}$. We first study partitions of length two in detail and prove the optimal result (up to logarithms) that $$ |B_{2,2}(E)| \gtrapprox |E|.$$ In the generalised two dimensional case for $B_{k,l}$ we need the stronger condition that $E$ is $s$-adaptable for $s<\frac{k}{2}+\frac{1}{3}$, letting $γ_m$ be the best known exponent for the Erdős-distance problem in $\mathbb{R}^m$ for $k \neq l$ we gain a further optimal result of, $$ |B_{k,l}(E)| \gtrapprox |E|^{γ_l}.$$ When $k=l$ we use the explicit $γ_m=\frac{m}{2}-\frac{2}{m(m+2)}$ result due to Solymosi and Vu to gain $$ |B_{k,k}(E)| \gtrapprox |E|^{\frac{13}{14}γ_k}.$$ For a general partition, let $γ_i = \frac{2}{p_i}-\frac{2}{p_i(p_i+2)}$ and $η_i = \frac{2}{2d-(p_i-1)}$. Then if $E$ is $s$-adaptable with $s>d-\frac{p_1}{2}+\frac{1}{3}$ we have $$ B_p(E) \gtrapprox |E|^τ\hspace{0.5cm} \text{where} \hspace{0.5cm} τ= γ_q\left(\frac{γ_1+η_1}{γ_q+(q-1)(γ_1+η_1)}\right).$$ Where $p_i \sim \frac{d}{q}$ implies $τ\sim γ_{q}\left(\frac{1}{q}+\frac{1}{dq}\right)$ and $p_q \sim d$ (with $q<<d$) implies $τ\sim γ_{q}\left(\frac{1}{q}+\frac{1}{q^2}\right)$.

math.CO

A Refutation of the Clique-Based P=NP Proofs of LaPlante and Tamta-Pande-Dhami

In this work, we critique two papers, "A Polynomial-Time Solution to the Clique Problem" by Tamta, Pande, and Dhami, and "A Polynomial-Time Algorithm For Solving Clique Problems" by LaPlante. We summarize and analyze both papers, noting that the algorithms presented in both papers are flawed. We conclude that neither author has successfully established that P = NP.

cs.CC