{"id":2962,"date":"2011-10-29T21:17:26","date_gmt":"2011-10-29T19:17:26","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/wpethzprd.ethz.ch\/kowalski\/?p=2962"},"modified":"2024-02-20T13:40:36","modified_gmt":"2024-02-20T11:40:36","slug":"explicit-multiplicative-combinatorics","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/blogs.ethz.ch\/kowalski\/2011\/10\/29\/explicit-multiplicative-combinatorics\/","title":{"rendered":"Explicit multiplicative combinatorics"},"content":{"rendered":"<p>One of the goals of my <a href=\"https:\/\/blogs.ethz.ch\/kowalski\/2011\/09\/22\/expanders-course\/\">course on expanders<\/a> is to (try to) get an explicit spectral gap for the Cayley graphs of $latex \\mathrm{SL}_2(\\mathbf{F}_p)$, for $latex p$ prime, with respect to the generating set<br \/>\n$latex S_p=\\{u,u^{-1}, v,v^{-1}\\}$<br \/>\nwhere<br \/>\n$latex u=\\begin{pmatrix} 1&amp; 3\\\\ 0&amp;1\\end{pmatrix},\\quad\\quad v=\\begin{pmatrix} 1&amp;0\\\\3&amp;1\\end{pmatrix}$<br \/>\n(which corresponds to the reduction modulo $latex p$ of the Cayley graph of the &#8220;Lubotzky group&#8221; $latex L$, generated in $latex \\mathrm{SL}_2(\\mathbf{Z})$ by the &#8220;same&#8221; matrices.)<\/p>\n<p>The first thing to do in order to obtain an explicit estimate is to get an explicit form of the relation between &#8220;pairs of sets with large multiplicative energy&#8221; and &#8220;cosets of a common approximate group&#8221; &#8212; indeed, this is a crucial point in the first step of the argument <a href=\"http:\/\/annals.math.princeton.edu\/2008\/167-2\/p07\">discovered by Bourgain and Gamburd<\/a> to derive expansion for some Cayley graphs from a classification of approximate subgroups (or more directly, of sets with &#8220;small tripling&#8221;, a classification which had been <a href=\"http:\/\/annals.math.princeton.edu\/2008\/167-2\/p06\">produced by Helfgott<\/a> for $latex \\mathrm{SL}_2(\\mathbf{F}_p)$).<\/p>\n<p>To explain this, recall that if $latex A, B\\subset G$ are subsets of a finite group $latex G$, the <i>normalized multiplicative energy<\/i> $latex e(A,B)$ is defined by<br \/>\n$latex e(A,B)=|\\{(x_1,y_1,x_2,y_2)\\in A^2\\times B^2\\,\\mid\\, x_1y_1=x_2y_2\\}|\/(|A||B|)^{3\/2}.$<br \/>\nIt is easy to show that $latex e(A,B)\\leq 1$, and it is a pleasant exercise to prove that the extreme case $latex e(A,B)=1$ occurs if and only if there exists a subgroup $latex H$ of $latex G$ and elements $latex x$, $latex y$ of $latex G$ such that<br \/>\n$latex A=xH,\\quad\\quad B=Hy.$<\/p>\n<p>The Bourgain-Gamburd argument depends on understanding sets $latex A$ and $latex B$ such that<br \/>\n$latex e(A,B)\\geq |G|^{-\\varepsilon}$<br \/>\nfor some (small) $latex \\varepsilon&gt;0$.<br \/>\nThis can now be done, in some cases, by first proving an &#8220;approximate&#8221; version of the characterization of the extreme $latex e(A,B)=1$, and then classifying the resulting &#8220;approximate&#8221; objects. The second step is much more involved, and I won&#8217;t talk about it here, but the first can be done in full generality. The standard texts explaining this are <a href=\"http:\/\/www.cambridge.org\/gb\/knowledge\/isbn\/item1172995\/?site_locale=en_GB\">the book of Tao and Vu<\/a> and <a href=\"http:\/\/front.math.ucdavis.edu\/0601.5431\">a paper of Tao<\/a> (which contains more details than the summary in the book.) <\/p>\n<p>It is clear from reading the proofs that they are &#8220;effective&#8221;, but these sources do not give explicit inequalities. So I did the exercise of going through the arguments to get actual constants, inputing the recent explicit <a href=\"http:\/\/front.math.ucdavis.edu\/1101.3507\">results of Petridis<\/a> to get better control on product sets than the corresponding argument in Tao&#8217;s paper. After three or four rounds of checks, I get the following: if<br \/>\n$latex e(A,B)\\geq \\frac{1}{\\alpha},$<br \/>\nthen there exist a $latex \\beta$-approximate subgroup $latex H$ of $latex G$ and elements $latex x$, $latex y\\in G$,<br \/>\nsuch that<br \/>\n$latex |H|\\leq \\beta_2|A|,\\quad\\quad |A\\cap xH|\\geq \\beta_1^{-1}|A|,\\quad\\quad |B\\cap Hy|\\geq \\beta_1^{-1}|B|,$<br \/>\nwhere<br \/>\n$latex \\beta\\leq 2^{14257}\\alpha^{6330},\\quad\\quad \\beta_1\\leq 2^{14667}\\alpha^{6553},\\quad\\quad \\beta_2\\leq 2^{283}\\alpha^{126},$<br \/>\n(and a $latex \\beta$-approximate subgroup is defined to be a symmetric subset, containing the identity, such that $latex H\\cdot H\\subset X\\cdot H$ for some subset of size $latex |X|\\leq \\beta$.)<\/p>\n<p>For the moment, I&#8217;ve only typed a <a href=\"http:\/\/www.math.ethz.ch\/%7Ekowalski\/combinatorics.pdf\">very condensed note<\/a> spelling this out, which is found on my page of unpublished notes; I admit that I had some fun devising an arrow notation to simplify keeping track of the relation and sizes between the sets involved&#8230; <\/p>\n<p>All this will be incorporated in my <a href=\"http:\/\/www.math.ethz.ch\/~kowalski\/expander-graphs.pdf\">lectures notes on expanders<\/a>, and then expanded later to a full proof so that the latter are self-contained.  I will also attempt to improve these constants, which are not very promising when I think of what the spectral gap will become in the end&#8230;<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>One of the goals of my course on expanders is to (try to) get an explicit spectral gap for the Cayley graphs of $latex \\mathrm{SL}_2(\\mathbf{F}_p)$, for $latex p$ prime, with respect to the generating set $latex S_p=\\{u,u^{-1}, v,v^{-1}\\}$ where $latex u=\\begin{pmatrix} 1&amp; 3\\\\ 0&amp;1\\end{pmatrix},\\quad\\quad v=\\begin{pmatrix} 1&amp;0\\\\3&amp;1\\end{pmatrix}$ (which corresponds to the reduction modulo $latex p$ of &hellip; <a href=\"https:\/\/blogs.ethz.ch\/kowalski\/2011\/10\/29\/explicit-multiplicative-combinatorics\/\" class=\"more-link\">Continue reading <span class=\"screen-reader-text\">Explicit multiplicative combinatorics<\/span><\/a><\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":625,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"closed","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[2],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-2962","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-blogroll"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/blogs.ethz.ch\/kowalski\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/2962","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/blogs.ethz.ch\/kowalski\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/blogs.ethz.ch\/kowalski\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/blogs.ethz.ch\/kowalski\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/625"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/blogs.ethz.ch\/kowalski\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=2962"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/blogs.ethz.ch\/kowalski\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/2962\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/blogs.ethz.ch\/kowalski\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=2962"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/blogs.ethz.ch\/kowalski\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=2962"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/blogs.ethz.ch\/kowalski\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=2962"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}