Papers
Topics
Authors
Recent
Gemini 2.5 Flash
Gemini 2.5 Flash
95 tokens/sec
Gemini 2.5 Pro Premium
55 tokens/sec
GPT-5 Medium
20 tokens/sec
GPT-5 High Premium
20 tokens/sec
GPT-4o
98 tokens/sec
DeepSeek R1 via Azure Premium
86 tokens/sec
GPT OSS 120B via Groq Premium
463 tokens/sec
Kimi K2 via Groq Premium
200 tokens/sec
2000 character limit reached

Scalar Integer Partition Problem

Updated 4 August 2025
  • Scalar integer partition problems involve counting nonnegative integer solutions to linear equations with positive coefficients using generating functions.
  • The topic showcases explicit methods like binary expansion for unique representations and leverages sparse sequences to restrict multiplicity.
  • Probabilistic constructions and asymptotic techniques yield polynomial bounds on partition growth, influencing additive combinatorics and complexity.

A scalar integer partition problem asks for the number of nonnegative integer solutions to a linear Diophantine equation with positive integer coefficients, typically expressed as

s=d1x1+d2x2++dmxms = d_1 x_1 + d_2 x_2 + \cdots + d_m x_m

with nonnegative integers xix_i. The enumeration of such solutions, or the analysis of their structure under constraints (e.g., bounds on parts or multiplicities, forbidden patterns, modular conditions), forms a central topic in additive combinatorics, discrete optimization, and analytic number theory. Scalar integer partition theory interacts deeply with asymptotics, probabilistic combinatorics, computational complexity, algorithmic optimization, and the broader paper of generating functions and partition identities.

1. Definitions, Notation, and Fundamental Objects

The principal object is the partition function W(s,d)W(s, d), which counts the number of nonnegative integer vectors x=(x1,,xm)x = (x_1, \dots, x_m) solving s=i=1mdixis = \sum_{i=1}^m d_i x_i. The generating function associated to W(s,d)W(s,d) is given by

G(t;d)=i=1m11tdi=s=0W(s,d)tsG(t; d) = \prod_{i=1}^m \frac{1}{1 - t^{d_i}} = \sum_{s=0}^\infty W(s, d) t^s

where {d1,,dm}\{d_1, \dots, d_m\} are positive integers (the “generators” or “parts”).

A more general formulation incorporates restrictions on parts and multiplicities: Given sets AA (allowable parts) and MM (allowable multiplicities), p(n,A,M)p(n, A, M) denotes the number of representations

n=aAmaa,n = \sum_{a \in A} m_a \, a,

with maM{0}m_a \in M \cup \{0\} for all aAa \in A, and only finitely many mam_a nonzero (Alon, 2012).

When M=NM = \mathbb{N} (no restriction on multiplicity), one recovers the classical partition function. When AA is finite and di=aid_i = a_i, one obtains the classical restricted partition problem.

2. Structural Results: Uniqueness and Growth Rates

Two fundamental results regarding p(n,A,M)p(n, A, M) are established in (Alon, 2012):

Unique Representation: There exist infinite sets AA and MM such that p(n,A,M)=1p(n, A, M) = 1 for all n1n \geq 1. This is constructed via a splitting of the binary exponents in the binary expansion of nn between two disjoint infinite subsets. Formally,

A={2d:dD},M={eE2e:EE}A = \{ 2^{d} : d \in D \}, \quad M = \left\{\sum_{e \in E'} 2^{e} : E' \subset E \right\}

where DD and EE are constructed from disjoint partitions of the nonnegative integers. Every nn thus admits a unique (a,ma)(a, m_a)-representation.

Polynomially Bounded Growth: For certain sparse infinite sequences AA—notably A={k!}k1A = \{ k! \}_{k \geq 1} or A={kk}k1A = \{ k^k \}_{k \geq 1}, or more generally, AA with A[n](1+o(1))lognloglogn|A \cap [n]| \sim (1+o(1)) \frac{\log n}{\log \log n}—there exists a set MM and c>0c > 0 such that for all large nn,

0<p(n,A,M)<nc+o(1).0 < p(n, A, M) < n^{c + o(1)}.

This is achieved via a probabilistic construction involving the union of random subsets of small intervals, with precise control of the number of multiplicity choices per nn using Chernoff–Hoeffding and Janson inequalities. For A={k!}A = \{k!\} or A={kk}A = \{k^k\}, the result answers a question of Ljujić and Nathanson by proving the existence of infinite MM and constants cc, n0n_0 with p(n,A,M)ncp(n, A, M) \leq n^c for n>n0n > n_0.

3. Techniques: Explicit and Probabilistic Constructions

Binary Expansion Construction

The explicit construction for uniqueness is rooted in the binary expansion of nn, partitioning base-2 exponents between BB and CC and creating sets DD and EE accordingly. The sum

n=aAmaan = \sum_{a \in A} m_a a

with AA and MM as above, achieves a bijection between nn and (ma)aA(m_a)_{a \in A}.

Sparse Parts and Probabilistic Multiplicities

For polynomial growth, AA is chosen to be sparse (e.g., A={k!:k1}A = \{k! : k \ge 1\}), and MM is constructed probabilistically. The key ingredient is to select, for each aAa \in A, the set MM so that, for "most" nn, the total number of possible choices for (ma)aA(m_a)_{a \in A} is tightly controlled—at most nc+o(1)n^{c+o(1)}. This fundamentally limits the growth rate of p(n,A,M)p(n, A, M) compared to the usual explosive growth of the classical unrestricted partition function.

In bounding the number of representations, the analysis exploits that for AA very sparse, sums of the form anmaa=n\sum_{a \le n} m_a a = n can be controlled by limiting each mam_a (for each aAa \in A), and that the total number of choices—essentially the product over aa—remains sub-exponential.

4. Formulations and Asymptotic Behavior

The central equation for partitions under part and multiplicity restrictions is

n=aAmaa,maM{0}, finitely many ma0.n = \sum_{a \in A} m_a a, \quad m_a \in M \cup \{0\}, \text{ finitely many } m_a \ne 0.

The main asymptotic result for sparse AA is that

0<p(n,A,M)<nc+o(1),0 < p(n, A, M) < n^{c+o(1)},

for explicit choices of AA and suitably probabilistically-constructed MM (Alon, 2012). The method bounds the number of representations for each nn by estimates such as O(log8n)O(\log^8 n) for the multiplicities and shows that the total is (logn/loglogn)(\log n / \log \log n)-power-like, giving polynomial rather than exponential growth.

For uniqueness, the explicit construction ensures that every n1n \geq 1 admits exactly one partition, leading to p(n,A,M)=1p(n, A, M) = 1.

5. Applications, Implications, and Research Directions

Additive Number Theory

The existence of infinite sets A,MA, M with unique representations connects to longstanding questions about additive bases (Erdős–Turán) and bases with unique representations, but with much sparser sets than previously constructed. The result contrasts classical representations where the number of partitions typically exhibits exponential growth.

Analytic Number Theory and Complexity

Constraining parts and multiplicities yields partition functions with far slower growth, which may inform questions in analytic number theory about the behavior of partition functions under restrictions, as well as complexity-theoretic questions regarding solvability and the enumeration of solutions under combinatorial constraints.

Probabilistic and Combinatorial Constructions

The probabilistic method, especially the use of Janson's inequality to control the growth of partition functions for sparse AA, suggests new paths in constructing partition functions with controlled or prescribed growth. These techniques may be generalized to other combinatorial structures.

Further Research

Potential avenues include:

  • Extending constructions to other A,MA, M families with different growth or density properties.
  • Refining upper bounds for polynomial growth, as the results indicate possible improvements.
  • Generalizing to multi-dimensional or congruence-restricted partitions, introducing new algebraic or combinatorial constraints.
  • Applying these methods to related additive combinatorics problems, especially where randomness is instrumental in balancing representability and sparsity.

6. Summary Table: Key Results and Settings

Construction Sets AA and MM p(n,A,M)p(n, A, M) Method
Uniqueness Infinite AA, MM =1= 1 for all nn Explicit/binary
Polynomial bound (example 1) A={k!}k1A=\{k!\}_{k\ge1} <nc+o(1)< n^{c+o(1)} Probabilistic
Polynomial bound (example 2) A={kk}k1A=\{k^k\}_{k\ge1} <nc+o(1)< n^{c+o(1)} Probabilistic

This demonstrates the dramatic impact that restrictions on parts and multiplicities can have on the behavior of scalar integer partition functions, both in terms of uniqueness and in sharply reducing the number of possible partitions compared to the classical unrestricted case.

7. Implications within the Broader Theory

The constructions in (Alon, 2012) provide explicit examples where, by careful choice of infinite (sparse) sets of parts and adapting multiplicities, the scalar partition function can be forced to exhibit uniquely determined behavior or tightly controlled polynomial growth. This is in stark contrast with traditional results. The methodology bridges explicit combinatorial methods (binary expansions), probabilistic combinatorics (Janson inequalities), and the paper of growth phenomena in partition theory, with implications for further generalizations and applications in number theory, combinatorics, and complexity.

Definition Search Book Streamline Icon: https://streamlinehq.com
References (1)