Pith. sign in

REVIEW 2 major objections 5 minor 9 references

Is it true that most sets are Sidon?

T0 review · 2 major / 5 minor · reviewed 2026-08-06 · deepseek-v4-flash

Pith's one-line read Topologically, most subsets of N are not Sidon sets, and every B_h[g] family is meager.

desk verdict The answer to the title is right, but the printed proof of Theorem 1.1 has a genuine gap; the paper deserves refereeing after small repairs. read the letter →

arxiv 2507.03413 v1 pith:4SFEOUWD submitted 2025-07-04 math.NT math.GN

classification math.NTmath.GN MSC 11B9911B0511B3054E5211B3411B75
keywords SidonsetB_h[g]meagercomeagerCantorspaceBanach-Mazurgamerepresentationfunctionlowerasymptoticdensity
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal

The pith

A machine-rendered reading of the paper's core claim, the machinery that carries it, and where it could break.

The reading

The paper answers the title question with a negative, in a precise topological sense. Identifying subsets of the nonnegative integers with their binary indicator sequences turns $\mathbb{P}(\mathbb{N})$ into the Cantor space, and the paper shows that for every $h \geq 2$ and $g \geq 1$ the family of $B_h[g]$ sets is closed and has empty interior, hence meager (small in the Baire-category sense). Since a countable union of meager sets is meager, the generic subset of $\mathbb{N}$ is not Sidon and is not any $B_h[g]$ set. The paper also shows that the generic set has wild $h$-fold representation counts, oscillating between zero and arbitrarily large spikes, and that even allowing a substitute set $B$ whose symmetric difference with $A$ has lower density less than $1$ cannot produce a $B_h[g]$ set for a comeager set of $A$. In the opposite direction, among finite subsets of a fixed cardinality in a topological vector space, the $B_h[g]$ property is typical.

What carries the argument

The argument is carried by the representation-counting function $r_{A,h}(n)$, which counts unordered $h$-tuples from $A$ summing to $n$; a $B_h[g]$ set is exactly one with $r_{A,h}$ bounded by $g$. The genericity theorems are proved through the Banach–Mazur game on the Cantor space: Player II answers each open constraint by appending a long consecutive block of integers to $A$ and leaving a long gap before it, which simultaneously forces some $h$-fold sums to be absent and others to appear many times, yielding the oscillation in Theorem 1.2 and the perturbation resistance in Theorem 1.3. The finite-set result uses a different mechanism: the complement of the good $n$-tuples in $X^n$ is a finite union of intersections of hyperplanes, and each hyperplane is closed with empty interior because it is the kernel of a nonzero continuous linear functional.

What would settle it

Recompute the lower bound for $|A \cap (k_m, y_m]| / y_m$ from the game construction in Theorem 1.3: if there is a choice of $y_m$ (such as $y_m = (m+1) k_m$) that makes the bound $1 - 1/(m+1)$ valid for all $m$, the proof is repaired; if not, constructing $A$ from the strategy and checking whether the claimed inequality fails on infinitely many $m$ would settle that the theorem as stated is unproved.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The central discovery is that $B_h[g]$ sets are topologically negligible in the Cantor-space topology on $\mathbb{P}(\mathbb{N})$. Theorem 1.1 proves each family $B_{h,g}$ is closed with empty interior, so the union over all $h$ and $g$ is meager. Theorem 1.2 strengthens this by showing that, for any divergent $f(n) = o(n^{h-1})$, a comeager set of $A \subseteq \mathbb{N}$ satisfies $\liminf_n r_{A,h}(n) = 0$ and $\limsup_n r_{A,h}(n)/f(n) = \infty$. Theorem 1.3 adds a robustness statement: the family of $A$ that admit some $B_h[g]$ set $B$ with lower density $d_\star(A \triangle B) < 1$ is meager. Finally, Proposition 1.4 inverts the picture: when $X$ is a real or complex topological vector space and the cardinality is fixed at $n$, the $n$-element $B_h[g]$ subsets form an open dense (hence comeager) subset of $X^n$, so among finite sets of a given size the property is generic rather than negligible.

Load-bearing premise

The perturbation theorem rests on the claim that after forcing the block $(k_m, y_m]$ into $A$, its density within $[0, y_m]$ is at least $1 - 1/(m+1)$, but the stated choice $y_m > m k_m$ only guarantees the weaker level $1 - 1/m$, so the proof needs an extra density argument or an index shift to go through.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • The family of all $B_h[g]$ sets for some $h \geq 2$ and $g \geq 1$ is meager, so in particular the Sidon sets form a topologically negligible subset of $\mathbb{P}(\mathbb{N})$.
  • For every $f(n) = o(n^{h-1})$, a comeager set of subsets $A$ has arbitrarily long gaps in its $h$-fold sums ($\liminf r_{A,h}(n) = 0$) and arbitrarily large spikes ($\limsup r_{A,h}(n)/f(n) = \infty$).
  • A comeager set of $A \subseteq \mathbb{N}$ has no close $B_h[g]$ approximation in the sense of lower density of the symmetric difference being less than $1$.
  • For any topological vector space $X$ and fixed cardinality $n$, the $n$-element $B_h[g]$ subsets are open dense in $X^n$, so among finite configurations the property is typical.
  • The quantitative estimate for the full interval, $r_{\{0,1,\dots,n\},h}(n) \sim n^{h-1}/(h!(h-1)!)$, marks the threshold: anything asymptotically larger than $n^{h-1}$ can be beaten by the generic set's spikes.

Reading between the lines

Editorial extensions of the paper, not claims the author makes directly.

  • The paper works entirely in the category of Baire genericity; a natural testable extension is to check whether the same conclusions hold for almost every subset under the fair-coin product measure on $\{0,1\}^{\mathbb{N}}$, where the independence of bits would likely produce similar oscillation phenomena.
  • The reversal in Proposition 1.4 suggests that Sidon-type constraints are purely asymptotic: every finite configuration can be realized inside a set with the property, so the topological rarity in $\mathbb{P}(\mathbb{N})$ is driven entirely by infinite-tail behavior.
  • The sharpness condition $f(n) = o(n^{h-1})$ implies a scaling law for generic deviation: the number of representations of $n$ as a sum of $h$ elements of a generic set fluctuates between zero and arbitrarily large multiples of any prescribed sub-$n^{h-1}$ rate.
  • Read as a statement about convolution, Theorem 1.2 says the $h$-fold additive convolution of a generic $0$-$1$ sequence is unbounded in a sparse way; this could be connected to combinatorial models where sparsity forces unusual limit points.
Share X Bluesky LinkedIn Reddit HN

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

Desk editor's note, referee report, and a circularity audit.

Referee Report

2 major / 5 minor

Summary. The paper studies the family of Bh[g] subsets of the nonnegative integers (with Sidon sets as the case h=2, g=1) from the topological point of view of the Cantor space P(N)={0,1}^N. Theorem 1.1 claims that each Bh,g is closed and has empty interior, hence is meager. Theorem 1.2 states that for every f(n)=o(n^{h-1}), the generic A satisfies liminf r_{A,h}(n)=0 and limsup r_{A,h}(n)/f(n)=∞. Theorem 1.3 claims that the family of A that are within lower-density distance <1 from some Bh[g] set is meager. Proposition 1.4 claims an open dense (hence comeager) statement for n-element Bh[g] subsets of a topological vector space. The proofs use basic cylinders, the Banach–Mazur game, and the Erdős–Lehner asymptotic (1).

Significance. If the gaps noted below are repaired, the paper gives a clean and convincing topological answer: almost all subsets of N are not Sidon or Bh[g], and the generic behavior of representation functions is extreme. Theorem 1.2 is optimal in view of the asymptotic (1), and Theorem 1.3 shows a form of stability under small perturbations of lower density. The arguments are short, transparent, and rely only on standard external results; there are no free parameters and no circular dependencies. The paper is therefore a useful contribution to the combinatorial number theory literature. As printed, however, two load-bearing steps in the proofs of Theorems 1.1 and 1.3 are not valid, so the central claims are not yet fully established.

major comments (2)
  1. [§2, proof of Theorem 1.1] The empty-interior argument is not valid as written. The contradiction only rules out the existence of a finite F0 such that every superset A⊇F0 belongs to Bh,g, i.e. an upward-closed open set of the form {A:F0⊆A}. A nonempty basic cylinder [F]_k={A:A∩[0,k]=F} need not contain any set of that form; for example, C={A:A∩[0,1]={0}} contains no set {A:F0⊆A} because any such set contains an A with 1∈A. Thus the proof does not establish that every cylinder contains a point outside Bh,g. The gap is repairable: given [F]_k, set x0=k+1 instead of 1+max F0; the same construction yields A∈[F]_k with r_{A,h}(h(x0+g))≥g+1. This repair must be inserted for the main meagerness claim to follow.
  2. [§2, proof of Theorem 1.3] The inequality 'ym > m km implies |A∩[1,ym]|/ym ≥ 1 - 1/(m+1)' is false. Since A∩[0,ym]=Fm∪{km+1,...,ym}, the ratio equals (ym-km)/ym = 1 - km/ym, and the condition ym > m km gives only km/ym < 1/m, hence 1 - km/ym > 1 - 1/m, which is strictly smaller than 1 - 1/(m+1). Consequently the lower bound '≥ c' with c = 1/m0 - 1/(m0+1) does not follow for all m≥m0. The proof is repairable by choosing ym > (m+1)km, or by applying the estimate for all sufficiently large m after a finite initial segment is discarded, but as printed this is a load-bearing gap.
minor comments (5)
  1. [Title, Abstract] The abstract 'No.' is a stylistic oddity that should be replaced by a genuine one-sentence summary for a journal publication.
  2. [Throughout] There are several typos: 'pertubations' in Section 1, 'we define define' in the proof of Theorem 1.2, 'this is obvious is' in the proof of Theorem 1.1, and 'a winning for Player II' in Theorem 1.2.
  3. [§2, proof of Theorem 1.3] After showing that each M_{h,g} is comeager for fixed h and g, the proof should explicitly say that taking the countable intersection over h≥2 and g≥1 yields the theorem; the countable intersection of comeager sets is comeager.
  4. [§2, Proposition 1.4] The conclusion that the family of n-element Bh[g] subsets is a 'dense Gδ subset of X^n' for arbitrary topological vector spaces X requires X^n to be a Baire space. The weaker conclusion 'comeager' follows without any Baire assumption, and the proof establishes only that. Either add a Baire assumption on X or weaken the final sentence accordingly.
  5. [§2, Proposition 1.4] The identification of n-element subsets with vectors in X^n is not one-to-one because of permutations; the statement is harmless since the set V is permutation-invariant, but it should be phrased carefully.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 0.0 of 10

No significant circularity: the meagerness and comeagerness arguments rest on external textbook theorems (Kechris, Erdős–Lehner, Bogachev–Smolyanov); the two self-citations are motivational, not load-bearing.

full rationale

Walking the derivation chain shows no step that reduces to its own inputs. Theorem 1.1: Bh,g is defined by the standard bound r_{A,h}(x) ≤ g; closedness is proved directly from that definition, and the empty-interior argument constructs, from a finite F0, a superset A with at least g+1 representations of h(x0+g), so the meagerness conclusion is not assumed in the premise. Theorem 1.2: the strategy for Player II uses Kechris's Banach–Mazur theorem [4, Theorem 8.33] and the external Erdős–Lehner asymptotic (1) only to guarantee existence of the integers tm; neither source encodes the claimed liminf = 0 / limsup = ∞ behavior. Theorem 1.3 runs the same Banach–Mazur strategy with a counting argument; Proposition 1.4 is proved from finite intersections of hyperplanes with empty interior, citing only Bogachev–Smolyanov hyperplane facts. The self-citations are not load-bearing: [5] (Leonetti 2023) is cited only as the 'analogue direction' for the perturbation claim, and [6] (Leonetti–Tringali 2020) only for the definition of lower density; the extension of Nathanson's preprint [7] is proved in the paper, not imported from it. The reviewer-flagged gaps — Theorem 1.1's contradiction handles only cylinders of the form {A : F0 ⊆ A} rather than an arbitrary basic cylinder {A : A ∩ [0,k] = F}, and Theorem 1.3 derives |A∩(k_m,y_m]|/y_m ≥ 1 − 1/(m+1) from y_m > m k_m, which only yields 1 − 1/m — are correctness risks that may invalidate the printed proofs; they are not circularity, since neither gap consists in assuming the target result, fitting a parameter renamed as a prediction, or importing the conclusion from a self-citation. The post-Proposition 1.4 dense Gδ remark silently assumes X^n is Baire, again a correctness gap rather than a circular step. The paper is self-contained against external benchmarks, so the honest finding is no significant circularity.

Assumptions & free parameters 0 free parameters · 5 assumptions · 0 invented entities

The paper introduces no free parameters and no new entities. Its main external inputs are standard descriptive set theory, TVS facts, and a classical partition asymptotics formula. The only fragile items are the unstated Baire assumption for the dense G_delta claim and a density inequality in the proof of Theorem 1.3.

assumptions (5)
  • standard math The Cantor space {0,1}^N is a Polish space; meager sets form a sigma-ideal; the Banach-Mazur game characterizes comeager sets (Kechris Theorem 8.33).
    Used in the proofs of Theorems 1.1-1.3 to interpret 'most' as Baire genericity and to construct winning strategies.
  • standard math Asymptotic formula r_{0,1,...,n,h}(n) ~ n^{h-1}/(h!(h-1)!) as n tends to infinity, equation (1), cited from [3], [9], and [8].
    Used in Theorem 1.2 to guarantee the existence of t_m with r_{[x_m,t_m],h}(t_m) >= m f(t_m) for f(n)=o(n^{h-1}).
  • standard math For a nonzero continuous linear functional on a Hausdorff topological vector space, its kernel is closed and has empty interior.
    Used in Proposition 1.4 to show that X^n minus the good set is a finite union of finite intersections of nowhere dense hyperplanes.
  • domain assumption X^n is a Baire space, for example when X is a Banach or Frechet space, so a countable intersection of dense open sets is dense G_delta.
    The conclusion after Proposition 1.4 that the intersection over h and g is dense G_delta in X^n requires this; it is not stated for arbitrary topological vector spaces.
  • standard math Definition and basic properties of lower asymptotic density d_*, including that d_*(A triangle B) < 1 implies the symmetric difference is eventually smaller than n(1 - 1/m0).
    Used in the proof of Theorem 1.3 to derive a positive density of B in the intervals (k_m, y_m].

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Is it true that most sets are Sidon?." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/4SFEOUWD

@misc{pith2026250703413,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Is it true that most sets are Sidon?},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/4SFEOUWD}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2507.03413}
}
read the original abstract

No.

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

9 extracted references · 9 canonical work pages

  1. [5]

    Leonetti, Almost all sets of nonnegative integers and their small perturbations are not sumsets, Proc

    P. Leonetti, Almost all sets of nonnegative integers and their small perturbations are not sumsets, Proc. Amer. Math. Soc.151 (2023), no. 9, 3681–3689

  2. [1]

    V. I. Bogachev and O. G. Smolyanov, Topological vector spaces and their applications, Springer Monographs in Mathematics, Springer, Cham, 2017

  3. [2]

    Cilleruelo, I

    J. Cilleruelo, I. Ruzsa, and C. Vinuesa,Generalized Sidon sets, Adv. Math.225 (2010), no. 5, 2786–2807

  4. [3]

    Erdös and J

    P. Erdös and J. Lehner,The distribution of the number of summands in the partitions of a positive integer, Duke Math. J.8 (1941), 335–345

  5. [4]

    A. S. Kechris, Classical descriptive set theory, Graduate Texts in Mathematics, vol. 156, Springer-Verlag, New York, 1995

  6. [6]

    Leonetti and S

    P. Leonetti and S. Tringali,On the notions of upper and lower density, Proc. Edinb. Math. Soc. (2) 63 (2020), no. 1, 139–167

  7. [7]

    M. B. Nathanson, Bh-sets of reals and complex numbers, preprint, last updated: Mar 05, 2025 (arXiv:2502.21272)

  8. [8]

    , Partitions with parts in a finite set, Proc. Amer. Math. Soc. 128 (2000), no. 5, 1269–1273

Show all 9 references
  1. [9]

    J. L. Ramírez Alfonsín, The Diophantine Frobenius problem, Oxford Lecture Series in Mathematics and its Applications, vol. 30, Oxford University Press, Oxford, 2005. Is it true that most sets are Sidon? 7 Department of Economics, Università degli Studi dell’Insubria, via Monte...

Pith tools

Reviewed August 6, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.