Pith. sign in

REVIEW 1 major objections 4 minor 49 references

Lebesgue measure of distance sets with regular pins and multi-scale Mizohata-Takeuchi-type estimates

T0 review · 1 major / 4 minor · reviewed 2026-08-02 · deepseek-v4-flash

Challenge this review Re-run · record.json Download PDF Read on arXiv ↗ Review JSON

Pith's one-line read The paper establishes that in the plane, if E has Hausdorff dimension above 1 and F is a regular set whose dimension pushes the sum above 2, then some point y in F has a pinned distance set of positive Lebesgue measure.

desk verdict Genuinely new regular-case pinned distance theorem at the natural threshold — likely correct, but the write-up skips a load-bearing measure-splitting step. read the letter →

arxiv 2603.15328 v3 pith:QZ4VRXSI submitted 2026-03-16 math.CA math.APmath.CO

Bochen Liu This is my paper · ORCID
classification math.CAmath.APmath.CO MSC 28A7842B1042B20
keywords pinneddistancesetLebesguemeasureproblemHausdorffdimensionpackingGood-BaddecompositionMizohata–Takeuchi-typeestimateFourierrestriction
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 proves a planar distance-set statement: whenever a Borel set E has Hausdorff dimension above 1 and a second Borel set F has equal Hausdorff and packing dimension with the two dimensions summing above 2, some point y in F sees a pinned distance set of positive Lebesgue measure. This is the regular case of the long-standing distance-set problem, and it improves on earlier results that required the pin set to have dimension above 1 or stronger dimension-sum conditions. The proof works through a multi-scale decomposition of the measure on E into good and bad directional components, together with new multi-scale weighted extension estimates whose power loss is an arbitrarily small R^{Cδ}. If correct, the argument reduces the distance-set question for regular sets to a measure-selection step plus these harmonic-analysis estimates.

What carries the argument

The engine is a multi-scale Good-Bad decomposition. At each dyadic scale, a tube is declared bad if the normalized measure on the pin set F assigns it more than R^{10δ}(r_j/r_{j+1})^{min(t,1)} of the mass of the containing cube, where t is the dimension of F; bad tubes are removed and their L¹ contribution is bounded through a radial-projection incidence estimate. The surviving good tubes are controlled by a new L² ball-inflation lemma, which iteratively passes from small spatial cubes to larger ones while losing only a factor R^{Cδ} per step. This yields a multi-scale Mizohata–Takeuchi-type estimate—a weighted Fourier-extension bound in terms of the best weight on tubes—with arbitrary small

What would settle it

A direct falsifier would be a pair of Borel sets E,F⊂[0,1]² with dim_H E > 1, dim_H E + dim_H F > 2, and dim_H F = dim_P F such that |Δ_y(E)| = 0 for every y∈F. A more targeted check is to test the measure-reduction step: exhibit such E,F of overlapping support for which no disjointly supported probability measures µ on E and ν on F satisfy I_s(µ) < ∞ for some s > 1, ν(B(x,r)) ≤ C r^t with t > 2−s, and the upper Minkowski dimension of supp ν strictly below t+δ²; this would invalidate the proof's reduction even if the theorem remains true.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The central claim is Theorem 1.1: for Borel E,F⊂R² with Hausdorff dimension of E greater than 1, Hausdorff dimension of E plus Hausdorff dimension of F greater than 2, and F having equal Hausdorff and packing dimension, there exists y∈F for which the pinned distance set Δ_y(E) = {|x−y| : x∈E} has positive Lebesgue measure. In particular, every planar set with equal Hausdorff and packing dimension greater than 1 contains a pin whose pinned distance set has positive length. The proof splits the measure of E at every scale into 'good' tubes, directed along caps that are light for the measure on F, and 'bad' tubes, which are controlled by a geometric incidence estimate. The good part is handled

Load-bearing premise

Everything hinges on the assertion in the final proof that from dim_H E > 1, dim_H E + dim_H F > 2, and dim_H F = dim_P F one can choose probability measures on E and F that are disjointly supported and satisfy the energy, Frostman, and upper-Minkowski-dimension conditions used in Propositions 3.2 and 4.1; the paper states this step without proving the reduction when E and F overlap.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • Any planar set E with equal Hausdorff and packing dimension greater than 1 has a point y∈E whose pinned distance set has positive Lebesgue measure.
  • The proof admits pin sets F of Hausdorff dimension at most 1, removing the previous barrier dim_H F > 1 whenever F is regular and the total dimension sum exceeds 2.
  • The new multi-scale estimate with arbitrary small power-loss reproduces the sharp single-scale extension estimate up to R^{Cδ}, so it is consistent with known sharpness while showing a multi-scale gain.
  • The theorem settles the regular case of the distance-set problem in the plane, leaving the non-regular case and the endpoint dim_H E = 1 open.
  • The framework deliberately avoids deep L^p decoupling theory, so the same two-estimate structure may apply to other pinned geometric problems.

Reading between the lines

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

  • If the measure-selection step in Section 5 can be adapted to overlapping E and F—for example by passing to disjoint compact subsets preserving the required dimensions—the same L¹/L² estimate structure would likely prove the full planar distance-set theorem without the regularity assumption on F. This is an editorial extrapolation; the paper does not provide that reduction.
  • The L² ball-inflation method appears transferable to other pinned problems where single-scale refined decoupling was previously used; testing it on the endpoint dim_H E = 1 or in higher-dimensional Euclidean spaces is a natural next step.
  • The multi-scale estimates suggest that even if single-scale Mizohata–Takeuchi-type inequalities must lose a fixed power, multi-scale versions escape that loss; this may inform the local form of the conjecture.
  • A useful diagnostic is to search for overlapping Borel sets E,F satisfying the theorem's dimension hypotheses for which no disjointly supported Frostman measures with the stated energy and Minkowski-dimension bounds can be chosen; this would locate the failure precisely even if the theorem itself remains true.
Share X Bluesky LinkedIn Reddit HN

Signed reviews

No signed human review yet.

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

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

Referee Report

1 major / 4 minor

Summary. The paper claims Theorem 1.1: if E and F are Borel sets in the plane with dim_H E > 1, dim_H E + dim_H F > 2, and F having equal Hausdorff and packing dimension, then there exists y in F such that the pinned distance set Δ_y(E) has positive Lebesgue measure. The proof introduces a multi-scale Good-Bad decomposition (Section 3) and a multi-scale Mizohata-Takeuchi-type L2 estimate (Section 4), then applies them in Section 5. The argument extends the single-scale GIOU decomposition, uses Orponen's radial projection estimates, and develops an L2 ball inflation argument. A baby version of the MT-type estimate is stated as Proposition 1.2. The final step bounds the bad part by <1/100 and the good part by a finite L2 norm, yielding |Δ_y(E)| > 0 for some y.

Significance. If correct, Theorem 1.1 would be a substantial advance: it removes the dim_H F > 1 condition from GIOU and settles the distance set problem for regular pin sets (dim_H F = dim_P F). The multi-scale Good-Bad decomposition and the L2 ball inflation are novel and likely to be influential. The paper is largely self-contained, with clear citations to external results (Orponen, GIOU, the author's earlier L2 identity) and detailed proofs of the new estimates. However, the manuscript as written has a load-bearing gap in the measure reduction at the start of Section 5, so the central claim is not fully established in the present form.

major comments (1)
  1. [Section 5 (Proof of Theorem 1.1)] The proof asserts that the dimension hypotheses yield a probability measure µ on E with finite s-energy for some s>1, and a Frostman measure ν on F of dimension t>2-s with dim_M suppν < t+δ², and then invokes Propositions 3.2 and 4.1. Both propositions explicitly require disjoint supports, and their proofs use dist(y,suppµ)≈1 (e.g., Proposition 3.3, Step 1). The theorem allows E and F to overlap, including E=F. The 'discussion in Section 2' cited here only gives, for a given measure, a subset with smaller upper Minkowski dimension; it does not produce two disjoint compact subsets with the required Hausdorff dimensions and upper Minkowski control. A splitting/reduction argument must be supplied. Without it, the L1 bad-part estimate (3.16) and the L2 good-part estimate (Proposition 4.1) cannot be applied, and the final inequality does not yield |Δ_y(E)|>0. This is a load-bearing gap, thoug
minor comments (4)
  1. [Proposition 3.3, Step 1] The tube in the definition of Bad_{r,r',µ} and in the subsequent containment is written as T_{r/r'×1}(x;y), but should be T_{r'/r×1}(x;y). As written, the dimensions are inverted and inconsistent with the covering by r'/r×1 tubes and with the use in Step 3.
  2. [Section 2, packing dimension definition] In the definition of packing dimension, 'E_i is bounded' should be 'each E_i is bounded' (or 'the E_i are bounded').
  3. [Section 4.2, Lemma 4.4 proof] The sentence 'I hope that the heuristic argument in the previous subsection helps...' is informal and could be moved to a remark or removed.
  4. [Section 3.2, after (3.15)] The statement 'Bad_i is a subset of the construction in Proposition 3.3 below (it seems easier to compare their complement)' is too terse. A short explanation, e.g., covering dilated tubes by un-dilated ones, would improve readability.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 0.0 of 10

No circularity: the main estimates are derived from explicit inequalities and external radial-projection results; the Section 5 measure reduction is a proof gap, not a self-referential step.

full rationale

Walking the derivation chain, Theorem 1.1 is proved by combining the multi-scale good-bad decomposition with an L1 bad-part estimate (Proposition 3.2/3.3) and an L2 good-part estimate (Proposition 4.1), then applying the standard identity 1 = ∫∫ d_y*(µ) dν(y) ≤ bad + |Δ_y(E)|^{1/2}·good. The target conclusion |Δ_y(E)| > 0 is not assumed anywhere. The measure data used by Propositions 3.2 and 4.1—finite s-energy on E and a Frostman measure on F with upper Minkowski control—is asserted in Section 5 via the discussion in Section 2, and if E = F this requires a non-written splitting argument. That is a completeness gap, not circularity: the asserted reduction is not logically equivalent to the conclusion, and no equation in the paper identifies the conclusion with its input. The self-citations [30], [31], [32] are also not circularly load-bearing: [30] supplies an explicit L2 Fourier identity, [32] concerns the range of p in radial projection estimates, and [31] is contextual. These are independent published statements with stated assumptions, not uniqueness theorems or ansätze importing the main claim. There are no fitted constants renamed as predictions. Thus no step reduces to its own inputs, and the paper's central claim has independent mathematical content.

Assumptions & free parameters 0 free parameters · 4 assumptions · 0 invented entities

The proof rests on standard harmonic-analysis tools (localization, local orthogonality, local constancy), Orponen's radial projection theorem, and GIOU's Lemma 3.1. The only delicate assumptions are the regular-pin structure of F and the existence of disjoint-support measures; these are flagged. No invented entities and no data-fitted parameters appear.

assumptions (4)
  • standard math Orponen radial projection estimate: ||pi_x^* nu||_{L^p(S^1 x mu)} bounded for some p > 1 in terms of I_t(nu) and I_{2-t}(mu).
    Used in Step 1 of Proposition 3.3 to bound the mu-heavy tube set; quoted from Orponen [38].
  • standard math Guth-Iosevich-Ou-Wang Lemma 3.1: the L1 difference between distance measures of good and full mu is bounded by sum_i mu(Bad_i(y)) plus negligible terms.
    Reduces the L1 bad-part error to mu(Bad_i(y)) for y in supp nu; quoted from [26].
  • domain assumption Existence of Frostman measures on F with controlled upper Minkowski dimension: from equal Hausdorff and packing dimension, one can choose nu with Frostman dimension t and dim_M supp nu < t + delta^2.
    Relies on the regularity of F; invoked in Sections 2 and 5 to obtain the measure data needed by Propositions 3.2 and 4.1.
  • domain assumption Existence of disjoint-support measures mu on E and nu on F with I_s(mu) < infinity, s > 1, and nu Frostman of dimension t > 2 - s.
    Required by Propositions 3.2 and 4.1, but Section 5 does not explicitly justify the reduction when E and F overlap.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Lebesgue measure of distance sets with regular pins and multi-scale Mizohata-Takeuchi-type estimates." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/QZ4VRXSI

@misc{pith2026260315328,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Lebesgue measure of distance sets with regular pins and multi-scale Mizohata-Takeuchi-type estimates},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/QZ4VRXSI}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2603.15328}
}
abstract

Suppose $E, F$ are Borel sets in the plane, $\dim_{\mathcal{H}} E>1$, $\dim_{\mathcal{H}} E+\dim_{\mathcal{H}} F>2$, and $F$ has equal Hausdorff and packing dimension. We prove that there exists $y\in F$ such that the pinned distance set $$\Delta_y(E):=\{|x-y|:x\in E\}$$ has positive Lebesgue measure. In particular, it settles the regular case of the distance set problem in the plane. The main ingredients of the proof consist of a multi-scale Good-Bad decomposition and a multi-scale Mizohata-Takeuchi-type estimate with arbitrary small power-loss.

Review history (2 revisions) →

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

49 extracted references · 7 linked inside Pith

  1. [1]

    Agmon and L

    S. Agmon and L. H¨ ormander. Asymptotic properties of solutions of differential equations with simple characteristics.J. Analyse Math., 30:1–38, 1976.doi:10.1007/BF02786703

    doi:10.1007/bf02786703 1976

  2. [2]

    On some non-linear projections of self-similar sets inR3.Fund

    Bal´ azs B´ ar´ any. On some non-linear projections of self-similar sets inR3.Fund. Math., 237(1):83– 100, 2017.doi:10.4064/fm90-4-2016

    doi:10.4064/fm90-4-2016 2017

  3. [3]

    Hausdorff dimension and distance sets.Israel J

    Jean Bourgain. Hausdorff dimension and distance sets.Israel J. Math., 87(1-3):193–201, 1994. URL:http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/BF02772994,doi:10.1007/BF02772994

    doi:10.1007/bf02772994 1994

  4. [4]

    On the Erd˝ os-Volkmann and Katz-Tao ring conjectures.Geom

    Jean Bourgain. On the Erd˝ os-Volkmann and Katz-Tao ring conjectures.Geom. Funct. Anal., 13(2):334–365, 2003. URL:http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s000390300008,doi:10.1007/ s000390300008

    doi:10.1007/s000390300008 2003

  5. [5]

    A counterexample to the mizohata-takeuchi conjecture

    Hannah Cairo. A counterexample to the mizohata-takeuchi conjecture. 2025. URL:https:// arxiv.org/abs/2502.06137,arXiv:2502.06137. PINNED DISTANCE SET AND MIZOHATA-TAKEUCHI-TYPE ESTIMATES 21

    arXiv 2025

  6. [6]

    Power loss for the Mizohata-Takeuchi conjecture onC k convex hypersurfaces

    Hannah Cairo and Ruixiang Zhang. Power loss for the Mizohata-Takeuchi conjecture onC k convex hypersurfaces. 2025. URL:https://arxiv.org/abs/2512.08064,arXiv:2512.08064

    arXiv 2025

  7. [7]

    H¨ anninen, and Stef´ an Ingi Valdimarsson

    Anthony Carbery, Timo S. H¨ anninen, and Stef´ an Ingi Valdimarsson. Disentanglement, multilinear duality and factorisation for nonpositive operators.Anal. PDE, 16(2):511–543, 2023.doi:10. 2140/apde.2023.16.511

    2023

  8. [8]

    Some sharp inequalities of Mizohata- Takeuchi-type.Rev

    Anthony Carbery, Marina Iliopoulou, and Hong Wang. Some sharp inequalities of Mizohata- Takeuchi-type.Rev. Mat. Iberoam., 40(4):1387–1418, 2024.doi:10.4171/rmi/1463

    doi:10.4171/rmi/1463 2024

Show all 49 references
  1. [9]

    A weighted formulation of refined decoupling and inequalities of mizohata-takeuchi-type for the moment curve, 2025

    Anthony Carbery, Zane Kun Li, Yixuan Pang, and Po-Lam Yung. A weighted formulation of refined decoupling and inequalities of mizohata-takeuchi-type for the moment curve, 2025. URL: https://arxiv.org/abs/2510.04345,arXiv:2510.04345

    2025

  2. [10]

    Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 2020.doi:10.1017/ 9781108584401

    Ciprian Demeter.Fourier restriction, decoupling, and applications, volume 184 ofCambridge Studies in Advanced Mathematics. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 2020.doi:10.1017/ 9781108584401

    2020

  3. [11]

    Weighted restriction estimates and application to Falconer distance set problem.Amer

    Xiumin Du, Larry Guth, Yumeng Ou, Hong Wang, Bobby Wilson, and Ruixiang Zhang. Weighted restriction estimates and application to Falconer distance set problem.Amer. J. Math., 143(1):175– 211, 2021.doi:10.1353/ajm.2021.0005

    2021

  4. [12]

    An improved result for Falconer’s distance set problem in even dimensions.Math

    Xiumin Du, Alex Iosevich, Yumeng Ou, Hong Wang, and Ruixiang Zhang. An improved result for Falconer’s distance set problem in even dimensions.Math. Ann., 380(3-4):1215–1231, 2021. doi:10.1007/s00208-021-02170-1

    2021 doi

  5. [13]

    New improvement to falconer distance set problem in higher dimensions

    Xiumin Du, Yumeng Ou, Kevin Ren, and Ruixiang Zhang. New improvement to falconer distance set problem in higher dimensions. 2023. URL:https://arxiv.org/abs/2309.04103, arXiv:2309.04103

    2023 arXiv

  6. [14]

    Weighted refined decoupling estimates and application to falconer distance set problem

    Xiumin Du, Yumeng Ou, Kevin Ren, and Ruixiang Zhang. Weighted refined decoupling estimates and application to falconer distance set problem. 2023. URL:https://arxiv.org/abs/2309. 04501,arXiv:2309.04501

    2023 arXiv

  7. [15]

    SharpL 2 estimates of the Schr¨ odinger maximal function in higher dimensions.Ann

    Xiumin Du and Ruixiang Zhang. SharpL 2 estimates of the Schr¨ odinger maximal function in higher dimensions.Ann. of Math. (2), 189(3):837–861, 2019. URL:https://doi-org.easyaccess1.lib. cuhk.edu.hk/10.4007/annals.2019.189.3.4,doi:10.4007/annals.2019.189.3.4

    2019 doi

  8. [16]

    Burak Erdo˘ gan

    M. Burak Erdo˘ gan. A bilinear Fourier extension theorem and applications to the distance set problem.Int. Math. Res. Not., (23):1411–1425, 2005. URL:http://dx.doi.org/10.1155/IMRN. 2005.1411,doi:10.1155/IMRN.2005.1411

    2005

  9. [17]

    K. J. Falconer. On the Hausdorff dimensions of distance sets.Mathematika, 32(2):206–212, 1985. URL:http://dx.doi.org/10.1112/S0025579300010998,doi:10.1112/S0025579300010998

    1985 doi

  10. [18]

    K. J. Falconer.The geometry of fractal sets, volume 85 ofCambridge Tracts in Mathematics. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 1986

    1986

  11. [19]

    Fraser, and Tuomas Sahlsten

    Andrew Ferguson, Jonathan M. Fraser, and Tuomas Sahlsten. Scaling scenery of (×m,×n) invari- ant measures.Adv. Math., 268:564–602, 2015.doi:10.1016/j.aim.2014.09.019

    2015 doi

  12. [20]

    Fiedler and D

    Jacob B. Fiedler and D. M. Stull. Dimension of pinned distance sets for semi-regular sets. 2023. URL:https://arxiv.org/abs/2309.11701,arXiv:2309.11701

    2023 arXiv

  13. [21]

    Fiedler and D

    Jacob B. Fiedler and D. M. Stull. Pinned distances of planar sets with low dimension. 2024. URL: https://arxiv.org/abs/2408.00889,arXiv:2408.00889

    2024 arXiv

  14. [22]

    Jonathan M. Fraser. Distance sets, orthogonal projections and passing to weak tangents.Israel J. Math., 226(2):851–875, 2018.doi:10.1007/s11856-018-1715-z

    2018 doi

  15. [23]

    Jonathan M. Fraser. A nonlinear projection theorem for Assouad dimension and applications.J. Lond. Math. Soc. (2), 107(2):777–797, 2023.doi:10.1112/jlms.12697

    2023 doi

  16. [24]

    Fraser and Mark Pollicott

    Jonathan M. Fraser and Mark Pollicott. Micromeasure distributions and applications for con- formally generated fractals.Math. Proc. Cambridge Philos. Soc., 159(3):547–566, 2015.doi: 10.1017/S0305004115000523

    2015 doi

  17. [25]

    An enemy scenario in restriction theory

    Larry Guth. An enemy scenario in restriction theory. Joint talk for AIM Research Community ‘Fourier restriction conjecture and related problems’ and HAPPY network., 2022. URL:https: //www.youtube.com/watch?v=x-DET83UjFg

    2022

  18. [26]

    On Falconer’s distance set problem in the plane.Invent

    Larry Guth, Alex Iosevich, Yumeng Ou, and Hong Wang. On Falconer’s distance set problem in the plane.Invent. Math., 219(3):779–830, 2020.doi:10.1007/s00222-019-00917-x

    2020 doi

  19. [27]

    Falconer distance problem, additive energy and cartesian products

    Alex Iosevich and Bochen Liu. Falconer distance problem, additive energy and cartesian products. Ann. Acad. Sci. Fenn. Math., 41(2):579–585, 2016.doi:doi:10.5186/aasfm.2016.4135. 22 BOCHEN LIU

    2016

  20. [28]

    Some connections between Falconer’s distance set conjecture and sets of Furstenburg type.New York J

    Nets Hawk Katz and Terence Tao. Some connections between Falconer’s distance set conjecture and sets of Furstenburg type.New York J. Math., 7:149–187, 2001. URL:http://nyjm.albany. edu:8000/j/2001/7_149.html

    2001

  21. [29]

    New bounds on the dimensions of planar distance sets.Geom

    Tam´ as Keleti and Pablo Shmerkin. New bounds on the dimensions of planar distance sets.Geom. Funct. Anal., 29(6):1886–1948, 2019.doi:10.1007/s00039-019-00500-9

    1948 doi

  22. [30]

    AnL 2-identity and pinned distance problem.Geom

    Bochen Liu. AnL 2-identity and pinned distance problem.Geom. Funct. Anal., 29(1):283–294,

  23. [31]

    Hausdorff dimension of pinned distance sets and theL 2-method.Proc

    Bochen Liu. Hausdorff dimension of pinned distance sets and theL 2-method.Proc. Amer. Math. Soc., 148(1):333–341, 2020.doi:10.1090/proc/14740

    2020 doi

  24. [32]

    Mixed-norm of orthogonal projections and analytic interpolation on dimensions of measures.Rev

    Bochen Liu. Mixed-norm of orthogonal projections and analytic interpolation on dimensions of measures.Rev. Mat. Iberoam., 40(3):827–858, 2024.doi:10.4171/rmi/1472

    2024 doi

  25. [33]

    Spherical averages of Fourier transforms of measures with finite energy; dimension of intersections and distance sets.Mathematika, 34(2):207–228, 1987

    Pertti Mattila. Spherical averages of Fourier transforms of measures with finite energy; dimension of intersections and distance sets.Mathematika, 34(2):207–228, 1987. URL:http://dx.doi.org/ 10.1112/S0025579300013462,doi:10.1112/S0025579300013462

    1987 doi

  26. [34]

    Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 1995

    Pertti Mattila.Geometry of Sets and Measures in Euclidean Spaces: Fractals and Recti- fiability, volume 44 ofCambridge Studies in Advanced Mathematics. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 1995. URL:http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511623813,doi:10.1017/ CBO9780511623813

    1995 doi

  27. [35]

    Random constructions for sharp estimates of mizohata-takeuchi type, 2025

    Siddharth Mulherkar. Random constructions for sharp estimates of mizohata-takeuchi type, 2025. URL:https://arxiv.org/abs/2506.05624,arXiv:2506.05624

    2025 arXiv

  28. [36]

    On the distance sets of self-similar sets.Nonlinearity, 25(6):1919–1929, 2012

    Tuomas Orponen. On the distance sets of self-similar sets.Nonlinearity, 25(6):1919–1929, 2012. doi:10.1088/0951-7715/25/6/1919

    1919 doi

  29. [37]

    On the distance sets of Ahlfors-David regular sets.Adv

    Tuomas Orponen. On the distance sets of Ahlfors-David regular sets.Adv. Math., 307:1029–1045,

  30. [38]

    On the dimension and smoothness of radial projections.Anal

    Tuomas Orponen. On the dimension and smoothness of radial projections.Anal. PDE, 12(5):1273– 1294, 2019. URL:https://doi-org.easyaccess2.lib.cuhk.edu.hk/10.2140/apde.2019.12. 1273,doi:10.2140/apde.2019.12.1273

    2019 doi

  31. [39]

    Smoothness of projections, Bernoulli convolutions, and the dimension of exceptions.Duke Math

    Yuval Peres and Wilhelm Schlag. Smoothness of projections, Bernoulli convolutions, and the dimension of exceptions.Duke Math. J., 102(2):193–251, 2000. URL:http://dx.doi.org/10. 1215/S0012-7094-00-10222-0,doi:10.1215/S0012-7094-00-10222-0

    doi

  32. [40]

    A nonlinear version of bourgain’s projection theorem.J

    Pablo Shmerkin. A nonlinear version of bourgain’s projection theorem.J. Eur. Math. Soc. (2022), DOI:10.4171/JEMS/1283

    2022 doi

  33. [41]

    On the Hausdorff dimension of pinned distance sets.Israel J

    Pablo Shmerkin. On the Hausdorff dimension of pinned distance sets.Israel J. Math., 230(2):949–972, 2019. URL:https://doi-org.easyaccess1.lib.cuhk.edu.hk/10.1007/ s11856-019-1847-9,doi:10.1007/s11856-019-1847-9

    2019 doi

  34. [42]

    Improved bounds for the dimensions of planar distance sets.J

    Pablo Shmerkin. Improved bounds for the dimensions of planar distance sets.J. Fractal Geom., 8(1):27–51, 2021.doi:10.4171/jfg/97

    2021 doi

  35. [43]

    On the distance sets spanned by sets of dimensiond/2 inR d

    Pablo Shmerkin and Hong Wang. On the distance sets spanned by sets of dimensiond/2 inR d. Geom. Funct. Anal., 35(1):283–358, 2025.doi:10.1007/s00039-024-00696-5

    2025 doi

  36. [44]

    Stein.Harmonic analysis: real-variable methods, orthogonality, and oscillatory integrals, volume 43 ofPrinceton Mathematical Series

    Elias M. Stein.Harmonic analysis: real-variable methods, orthogonality, and oscillatory integrals, volume 43 ofPrinceton Mathematical Series. Princeton University Press, Princeton, NJ, 1993. With the assistance of Timothy S. Murphy, Monographs in Harmonic Analysis, III

    1993

  37. [45]

    D. M. Stull. Pinned distance sets using effective dimension. 2022. URL:https://arxiv.org/abs/ 2207.12501,arXiv:2207.12501

    2022 arXiv

  38. [46]

    An improvement of the pinned distance set problem in even dimensions.Colloq

    Zijian Wang and Jiqiang Zheng. An improvement of the pinned distance set problem in even dimensions.Colloq. Math., 170(2):171–191, 2022.doi:10.4064/cm8632-10-2021

    2022 doi

  39. [47]

    Decay of circular means of Fourier transforms of measures.Internat

    Thomas Wolff. Decay of circular means of Fourier transforms of measures.Internat. Math. Res. Notices, (10):547–567, 1999. URL:http://dx.doi.org/10.1155/S1073792899000288,doi:10. 1155/S1073792899000288. Email address:Bochen.Liu1989@gmail.com Department of Mathematics & Internat...

    1999 doi

  40. [2017]

    URL:http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.aim.2016.11.035,doi:10.1016/j.aim.2016.11. 035

    2016 doi

  41. [2019]

    URL:https://doi-org.easyaccess1.lib.cuhk.edu.hk/10.1007/s00039-019-00482-8, doi:10.1007/s00039-019-00482-8

    doi

Pith tools

Reviewed August 2, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.