2018
DOI: 10.1007/s11856-018-1728-7
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

The Elekes–Szabó Theorem in four dimensions

Abstract: Let F ∈ C[x, y, s, t] be an irreducible constant-degree polynomial, and let A, B, C, D ⊂ C be finite sets of size n. We show that F vanishes on at most O(n 8/3 ) points of the Cartesian product A × B × C × D, unless F has a special group-related form. A similar statement holds for A, B, C, D of unequal sizes, with a suitably modified bound on the number of zeros. This is a fourdimensional extension of our recent improved analysis of the original Elekes-Szabó theorem in three dimensions. We give three applicati… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1
1
1

Citation Types

1
11
0

Year Published

2018
2018
2020
2020

Publication Types

Select...
6
1

Relationship

4
3

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 11 publications
(12 citation statements)
references
References 24 publications
1
11
0
Order By: Relevance
“…With this lemma, we can prove that there are not many points for which C q is not a curve, unless F is Cartesian. A very similar fact is proved in [17].…”
Section: Curves and Dual Curvessupporting
confidence: 78%
“…With this lemma, we can prove that there are not many points for which C q is not a curve, unless F is Cartesian. A very similar fact is proved in [17].…”
Section: Curves and Dual Curvessupporting
confidence: 78%
“…Remark 4. The formulation of Theorem 3 is inspired by the main results and the proofs in [15,18,17]. In these papers one is interested in a bound on the cardinality of a set of the form V ∩ (P × Q), where V ⊂ R 4 is an algebraic variety of fixed degree, and each of P, Q is a finite subset of R 2 (of arbitrarily large cardinality).…”
Section: Main Resultmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Analogously, one would expect that the bound in Theorem 4.1 can be improved on, unless the variety is of some special type. The only other case that has so far been studied is D = 4 and dim(X) = 3, for which Raz, Sharir, and De Zeeuw [42] proved the following. The proof of Theorem 4.2 mostly uses the same techniques as that of Theorem 2.1, and the setup turns out to be simpler.…”
Section: Other Variants 41 Longer One-dimensional Productsmentioning
confidence: 99%