Symmetric Complete Sum-free Sets in Cyclic Groups
Ishay Haviv∗

Dan Levy†

arXiv:1703.04118v2 [math.CO] 1 May 2017

May 2, 2017

Abstract
We present constructions of symmetric complete sum-free sets in general finite cyclic groups.
It is shown that the relative sizes of the sets are dense in [0, 31 ], answering a question of Cameron,
and that the number of those contained in the cyclic group of order n is exponential in n. For
primes p, we provide a full characterization of the symmetric complete sum-free subsets of Z p
of size at least ( 31 − c) · p, where c > 0 is a universal constant.

1

Introduction

This paper studies symmetric complete sum-free subsets of finite cyclic groups. Let G be an
abelian additive group. A set S ⊆ G is symmetric if x ∈ S implies − x ∈ S. It is complete if for
every z ∈ G \ S there exist x, y ∈ S for which x + y = z, and it is sum-free if there are no x, y, z ∈ S
satisfying x + y = z.
Sum-free sets were first studied by Schur [29], who proved in 1916 that the set of positive
integers cannot be partitioned into a finite number of sum-free sets. This result initiated a fruitful
line of research, which now, over a century later, is central in the area of additive combinatorics,
with applications to several areas of mathematics such as extremal graph theory, Ramsey theory,
projective geometry, and model theory (see, e.g., [7, 9, 26, 6]).
A fundamental question on sum-free sets is how large can a sum-free subset of a group G be.
It is easy to see that the size of a largest sum-free subset of Z contained in [1, n] is dn/2e, attained,
for example, by the set of all odd numbers in this range. For the cyclic group G = Z p where p is a
prime, the well-known Cauchy-Davenport theorem [12, 14] yields that every sum-free set has size
at most b( p + 1)/3c. The sets attaining this bound were explicitly characterized in the late sixties
by Yap [31, 32], Diananda and Yap [17], and Rhemtulla and Street [27].
Theorem 1.1 ([31, 17, 32, 27]). Let p be a prime, and let S ⊆ Z p be a sum-free set of maximum size.
1. If p = 3k + 1 for an integer k then |S| = k and S is equal, up to an automorphism, to one of the
following sets:

[k + 1, 2k],
∗ School
† School

[k, 2k − 1], and for k ≥ 4, {k} ∪ [k + 2, 2k − 1] ∪ {2k + 1}.

of Computer Science, The Academic College of Tel Aviv-Yaffo, Tel Aviv 61083, Israel.
of Computer Science, The Academic College of Tel Aviv-Yaffo, Tel Aviv 61083, Israel.

1

(1)

2. If p = 3k + 2 for an integer k then |S| = k + 1 and S is equal, up to an automorphism, to the set
[k + 1, 2k + 1].
Note that for p = 3k + 2 the sum-free subsets of Z p of maximum size are symmetric and complete,
whereas for p = 3k + 1 only sets of the third type in (1) have these properties. For a general finite
abelian group G, the largest size of a sum-free set was determined in 2005 by Green and Ruzsa [22].
Another question of interest is that of counting sum-free sets. Cameron and Erdős conjectured in [11] that the number of sum-free subsets of the integers [1, n] is O(2n/2 ). This conjecture
was confirmed independently by Green [20] and by Sapozhenko [28] (see also [2]), improving on
Alon [1], Calkin [4], and Erdős and Granville (see [11]). Counting sum-free sets was also considered for finite abelian groups. For the cyclic group Z p with p prime, an essentially tight upper
bound of 2 p(1/3+o(1)) was proved by Green and Ruzsa [21], who later extended their result to general finite abelian groups [22]. The task of counting sum-free sets that are maximal with respect to
inclusion was addressed in [3].

1.1

Our Contribution

In this paper we present families of complete sum-free subsets of various sizes of the cyclic group
Zn of order n. Such sets have found several applications in the literature (see, e.g., [7, 23, 9, 8, 6]
and Section 1.2).
The first family, studied in Section 3, consists of subsets of Zn whose size is linear in n. These
sets include a central symmetric interval and additional elements located symmetrically on its
3 n −1
left and right. Specifically, for s ∈ [ n+
4 , 3 ] and a set of integers T ⊆ [0, 2t − 1], where t is an
appropriately chosen parameter, we consider the set ST ⊆ Zn defined as
ST = [n − 2s + 1, 2s − 1] ∪ ±(s + T )
(see Definition 3.1 and Figure 1). We prove sufficient and necessary conditions on the set T for
which the set ST is sum-free and complete (see Lemmas 3.2 and 3.3) and refer to the sets T of
size t satisfying these conditions as t-special (see Section 3.2). We use the analysis of the sets ST to
establish a variety of results, described below.
Firstly, we provide a full characterization of the ‘large’ symmetric complete sum-free subsets
of Z p for primes p. Namely, we show that for every s ≥ ( 13 − c) · p where c > 0 is a universal
constant and p is a sufficiently large prime, the sets ST ⊆ Z p of size s for t-special sets T are, up
to automorphisms, all the symmetric complete sum-free subsets of Z p of size s (see Theorem 3.8).
This significantly generalizes the characterization of the symmetric complete sum-free sets of maximum size derived from Theorem 1.1. Our proof makes use of a result due to Deshouillers and
Lev [16] on the structure of large sum-free subsets of Z p (see Theorem 2.2; see also [25, 15]).
Secondly, we consider counting aspects of our characterization result. It is shown that counting
the symmetric complete sum-free subsets of Z p of a given size reduces to counting t-special sets
for a certain value of t. In the following theorem, g(t) stands for the number of t-special sets (see
Section 3.4).
Theorem 1.2. There exists a constant c > 0 such that for every sufficiently large prime p and every
1 ≤ r ≤ c · p the following holds.
2

1. If p = 3k + 1 for an integer k then the number of symmetric complete sum-free subsets of Z p of size
p −1
k − 2r is 2 · g(3r + 1).
2. If p = 3k + 2 for an integer k then the number of symmetric complete sum-free subsets of Z p of size
p −1
k − 2r + 1 is 2 · g(3r ).
Lastly, we observe that there is an abundance of t-special sets and derive the following.
Theorem 1.3. There exists a constant c > 0 such that for every sufficiently large n there exist at least 2cn
symmetric complete sum-free subsets of Zn .
In Section 4, we present for a general n a family of symmetric complete sum-free subsets of
Zn of various sizes. The construction combines sets ± A, ± B, C, where A is an interval, B is an
arithmetic progression, and C is a symmetric interval (see Figure 2). A key property of these sets,
used to prove completeness and sum-freeness, is that the sums of the elements from A with the
elements from B precisely fill the gaps between the elements of − B.
We use our construction to prove that the relative sizes of the symmetric complete sum-free
subsets of finite cyclic groups are dense in [0, 13 ]. This answers an open question of Cameron [10]
related to a natural probability measure on sum-free sets of positive integers (see [8, 9, 5, 6] and
Section 1.2).
Theorem 1.4. For every 0 ≤ α ≤ 31 and ε > 0, for every sufficiently large integer n there exists a
symmetric complete sum-free set S ⊆ Zn whose size satisfies
α−ε ≤

|S|
≤ α + ε.
n

We also obtain, for a general n, a symmetric complete sum-free subset of Zn of size propor√
tional to n. This matches, up to a multiplicative constant, the smallest possible size of such
a set, and extends a result of Hanson and Seyffarth [23] that holds for cyclic groups Zn where
n = m2 + 5m + 2 for an integer m.
Theorem 1.5. There exists a constant c > 0 such that for every sufficiently large integer n there exists a
√
symmetric complete sum-free subset of Zn of size at most c · n.

1.2

Applications

We gather here several applications of our results.
Random sum-free sets. Cameron introduced in [8] a probability measure on the sum-free subsets of the positive integers. This measure is defined via a process that constructs a random sumfree set R as follows: Go over the positive integers in turn, and join to R, independently with
probability 1/2, every element that cannot be expressed as a sum of two elements that are already
in R.
The question of identifying sets M for which the probability that M contains a random sumfree set is a constant bounded away from 0 was addressed in [8, 9, 5, 6]. For example, it was
shown in [8] that the probability of a random sum-free set to consist entirely of odd numbers is
3

about 0.218 (the exact constant is unknown). Conditioned on this event, the density1 of a random
sum-free set is almost surely 1/4. The intuitive reason is that if all the elements of the set are odd,
then every odd number is unconstrained in the process and is thus joined to the set independently
with probability 1/2.
For a subset S of Zn , let MS be the set of all positive integers that are equal modulo n to
elements from S. Cameron proved in [8] that for every complete sum-free subset S of Zn the
probability that a random sum-free set is contained in MS is nonzero (see also an extension by
Calkin [5]). Conditioned on this event, it can be seen that the density of a random sum-free set is
almost surely |S|/(2n). Cameron asked in [10] (see also [9]) whether the set
n |S|
2n

S is a complete sum-free subset of Zn , n ≥ 1

o

is dense in the interval [0, 61 ]. Our Theorem 1.4 answers this question in the affirmative.
Regular triangle-free graphs with diameter 2. A nice application of symmetric complete sumfree sets of ‘small’ size comes from the following graph theory question: For an integer n, what is
the smallest d for which there exists an n vertex d-regular triangle-free graph of diameter 2? This
question was studied by Hanson and Seyffarth [23], who were motivated by a problem of Erdős,
Hajnal, and Moon [18] on k-saturated graphs. It was observed in [23] that if S is a symmetric
complete sum-free subset of an abelian group G then the Cayley graph associated with G and S is
an n vertex d-regular triangle-free graph of
pdiameter 2 for n = | G | and d = |S|. The completeness
of S easily yields a lower bound of |S| ≥ 2| G | − O(1). As already mentioned, our Theorem 1.5
extends a result of [23] and shows that this lower bound is attained, up to a multiplicative constant,
for every cyclic group Zn (see [13] for a construction for a non-cyclic group).
Dioid partitions of groups. The motivation for the current work has arrived from the concept
of dioid partitions of groups introduced by the authors in [24]. For a group G, written here in
multiplicative notation, a partition Π of G is a dioid partition if it satisfies the following properties:
1. For every π1 , π2 ∈ Π, π1 π2 is a union of parts of Π, where π1 π2 is a setwise product.
2. There exists e ∈ Π satisfying eπ = πe = π for every π ∈ Π.
3. For every π ∈ Π, π −1 ∈ Π, where π −1 = { g−1 | g ∈ π }.
It is shown in [24] that dioid partitions of a group G naturally define algebraic structures known as
dioids (see, e.g., [19]). Dioid partitions of G are provided, for example, by the set of all conjugacy
classes of G and by the set of all double cosets of any subgroup of G. For a cyclic group of prime
order these examples yield only the two ‘trivial’ partitions { G } and {{ g} | g ∈ G }. However, for
a prime p ≥ 5, every symmetric complete sum-free subset S of Z p yields the non-trivial 3-part
dioid partition {{0}, S, (S + S) \ {0}} (see [24]). Our results in the current paper illuminate some
of the structural and counting aspects of these partitions.
1 The

density of a set of positive integers is the limit of the proportion of the numbers in [1, n] that belong to the set,
as n tends to infinity. We assume in this discussion that the density of a random sum-free set exists almost surely and
refer the interested reader to [10] for more details.

4

2

Preliminaries

Symmetry, completeness, and sum-freeness. For an additive group G and sets A, B ⊆ G we
denote A + B = { x + y | x ∈ A, y ∈ B}, − A = {− x | x ∈ A}, and A − B = A + (− B).
We also denote ± A = A ∪ (− A). The set A is said to be symmetric if A = − A. It is complete if
G ⊆ A ∪ ( A + A), and it is sum-free if A ∩ ( A + A) = ∅. Note that each of these three properties
is preserved by any automorphism of G. Notice that A is complete and sum-free if and only if
A + A = G \ A.
The following claim will be used to prove sum-freeness and completeness of sets.
Claim 2.1. Let G be an additive group, let G1 ⊆ G be a set satisfying G = G1 ∪ (− G1 ), and let S ⊆ G be
a symmetric set. Then,
1. If every x, y ∈ G1 ∩ S satisfy x + y ∈
/ S then S is sum-free.
2. If G1 \ S ⊆ S + S then S is complete.
Proof: For the first item, let x, y ∈ S and denote z = x + y. We prove that z ∈
/ S. If x, y ∈ G1
then by assumption z ∈
/ S. If − x, −y ∈ G1 then by assumption −z ∈
/ S, which by symmetry of S
implies z ∈
/ S. Otherwise, without loss of generality, x, −y ∈ G1 . Assume by contradiction that
z ∈ S. If z ∈ G1 then x, which equals the sum of −y and z is not in S, a contradiction. Otherwise,
−z ∈ G1 and thus −y, which equals the sum of x and −z, is not in S, again a contradiction.
For the second item, let z ∈ G \ S. We prove that z ∈ S + S. If z ∈ G1 then by assumption
z ∈ S + S. Otherwise, z ∈ − G1 , thus (−z) ∈ G1 \ S, implying that −z ∈ S + S, which by symmetry
of S implies that z ∈ S + S as well.
Cyclic groups. For an arbitrary integer n ≥ 1, we consider the cyclic group Zn = {0, 1, . . . , n −
1}, with addition modulo n. Every element a ∈ Zn has infinitely many representatives in Z, those
of the form a + m · n for m ∈ Z. For integers a ≤ b we denote [ a, b] = {z ∈ Z | a ≤ z ≤ b}.
We use the same notation for intervals in Zn , viewing the elements of [ a, b] as representatives of
elements of Zn . Note that we use the same addition symbol for both integer addition and addition
modulo n. In case of possible ambiguity, we will explicitly mention what the notation means. For
a prime p, the group automorphisms of Z p are realized as multiplication modulo p by an element
of Z p \ {0}. For d ∈ Z p \ {0} and A ⊆ Z p the set d · A ⊆ Z p is said to be a dilation of A.
Large sum-free sets of cyclic groups of prime order. We state below a theorem of Deshouillers
and Lev [16] on the structure of large sum-free subsets of Z p for a prime p.
Theorem 2.2 ([16]). For every sufficiently large prime p, every sum-free subset S of Z p of size |S| ≥
0.318p is contained in a dilation of the interval [|S|, p − |S|].
Theorem 2.2 improves previous results of Lev [25] and Deshouillers and Freiman [15]. Dainiak
and Sisask independently proved that the constant 0.318 in the theorem cannot get below 0.25
(see, e.g., [30]). Finding the smallest constant for which the statement holds is an interesting open
question.

5

3

Large Symmetric Complete Sum-free Sets

In this section we present and analyze a construction of ‘large’ symmetric complete sum-free subsets of the cyclic group Zn .

3.1

The Sets ST

Consider the following definition.
Definition 3.1. Let n and s be integers for which t = (n − 3s + 1)/2 is a positive integer and n ≤ 4s − 3.
For a set T ⊆ [0, 2t − 1], let ST ⊆ Zn be the set defined as
ST = [n − 2s + 1, 2s − 1] ∪ ±(s + T ).

1

s

n − 2s + 1

n−s

2s − 1

s+T

n−1

−(s + T )

Figure 1: An illustration of the elements of the set ST .
A few remarks are in order. The set ST ⊆ Zn defined above depends on a parameter s and a
set T. The definition requires the parameters n and s to satisfy
n+3
n−1
≤s≤
,
4
3
where the upper bound on s follows from t ≥ 1. Notice that the interval [n − 2s + 1, 2s − 1]
included in ST is symmetric, thus the set ST is symmetric as well. The set s + T includes | T |
elements, which all belong to the interval [s, s + 2t − 1]. By the definition of t we have s + 2t −
1 = n − 2s, hence the elements of s + T are located on the left of the interval [n − 2s + 1, 2s − 1]
(see Figure 1). By symmetry, the elements of −(s + T ) are located on its right. This implies that
ST ⊆ [s, n − s] and that the size of ST is

|ST | = 4s − n − 1 + 2| T |.
In the case of | T | = t, which will be of particular interest for us, we have |ST | = s.
We consider now the question of what conditions on the set T make the set ST a complete
sum-free subset of Zn . The following lemma gives a sufficient and necessary condition on T for
sum-freeness of ST .
Lemma 3.2 (Sum-freeness of ST ). Let n and s be integers for which t = (n − 3s + 1)/2 is a positive
integer and n ≤ 4s − 3, and let T ⊆ [0, 2t − 1] be a set. Then, the set ST ⊆ Zn is sum-free if and only if
2t − 1 ∈
/ T + T + T,
where the addition in (2) is over the integers.
6

(2)

Proof: Denote A = [n − 2s + 1, 2s − 1], and recall that ST = A ∪ ±(s + T ) ⊆ [s, n − s]. Let us
consider the elements of ST + ST . Observe that
A + A = [2n − 4s + 2, 4s − 2] = [0, 4s − n − 2] ∪ [2n − 4s + 2, n − 1],

(3)

where for the second equality we have used n ≤ 4s − 3. By t ≥ 1 we have
4s − n − 2 = s − (n − 3s + 1) − 1 = s − 2t − 1 < s,
hence, using the symmetry of A and ST , it follows that A + A is disjoint from ST .
Denote B = [s, s + 2t − 1], and notice that s + T ⊆ B. The set
A + B = [n − s + 1, 3s + 2t − 2] = [n − s + 1, n − 1] = −[1, s − 1]
is disjoint from ST , because ST is symmetric and has no intersection with [1, s − 1]. This implies
that the sum of A and s + T is disjoint from ST as well.
It remains to consider the sums of pairs of elements in ±(s + T ). The sum of s + T and −(s + T )
is contained in ±[0, 2t − 1], which is disjoint from ST because
2t − 1 < 2t = n − 3s + 1 < s.
We turn to show that the condition 2t − 1 ∈
/ T + T + T holds if and only if the sum of every
two elements in s + T does not belong to ST . This would imply that this condition is equivalent to
the sum-freeness of ST and thus would complete the proof of the lemma.
First, assume that 2t − 1 ∈
/ T + T + T, and let s + `1 and s + `2 be two elements of s + T where
`1 , `2 ∈ T. Set `3 = 2t − 1 − (`1 + `2 ), and note that the assumption 2t − 1 ∈
/ T + T + T implies
that `3 ∈
/ T. The sum of s + `1 and s + `2 is
2s + `1 + `2 = 2s + (2t − 1 − `3 ) = −(n − 2s − 2t + 1 + `3 ) = −(s + `3 ),

(4)

so by symmetry of ST it suffices to show that s + `3 ∈
/ ST . If `3 ≥ 0 then `3 ∈ [0, 2t − 1], implying
s + `3 ∈ B. However, B ∩ ST = s + T, so by `3 ∈
/ T it follows that s + `3 is not in ST , as required.
Otherwise, `3 < 0, and we claim that in this case s + `3 ∈ [0, s − 1]. Indeed, s + `3 < s, and by
`3 ≥ −(2t − 1) we obtain that
s + `3 ≥ s − (2t − 1) = 4s − n > 0.
Since the interval [0, s − 1] is disjoint from ST , it follows that s + `3 is not in ST , and we are done.
For the other direction, assume that 2t − 1 ∈ T + T + T, that is, there exist `1 , `2 , `3 ∈ T such
that `3 = 2t − 1 − (`1 + `2 ). By the definition of ST , the elements s + `1 , s + `2 and s + `3 are in ST .
As in (4), the sum of the first two is −(s + `3 ), which by symmetry of ST does belong to ST . Hence,
the sum of two elements of s + T belongs to ST , as required.
We now consider the completeness of ST , that is, the property that every element of Zn belongs
to either ST or to ST + ST (or both). The following lemma provides a sufficient and necessary
condition on the set T, assuming that s is sufficiently large compared to n. We use here the notation
min( T ) for the smallest integer in T.
7

Lemma 3.3 (Completeness of ST ). Let n and s be integers for which t = (n − 3s + 1)/2 is a positive
integer and n ≤ 7s/2 − 1, and let T ⊆ [0, 2t − 1] be a nonempty set. Then, the set ST ⊆ Zn is complete if
and only if

[0, 2t − 1 + min( T )] \ (2t − 1 − T ) ⊆ T + T,

(5)

where the addition in (5) is over the integers.
Proof: Denote m = min( T ) and A = [n − 2s + 1, 2s − 1] as before. By (3), we have

[0, 4s − n − 2] ⊆ A + A ⊆ ST + ST .

(6)

In addition, we have s + m ∈ s + T ⊆ ST and

(s + m) + A = [n − s + m + 1, 3s + m − 1] = −[n − 3s − m + 1, s − m − 1].
By symmetry of ST this implies that

[n − 3s − m + 1, s − m − 1] ⊆ ST + ST .

(7)

n − 3s − m + 1 ≤ n − 3s + 1 ≤ 4s − n − 1,

(8)

Observe that

where the second inequality follows from the assumption n ≤ 7s/2 − 1. Combining (6), (7) and (8),
we obtain that
[0, s − m − 1] ⊆ ST + ST .
Since the interval A starts at n − 2s + 1, using the symmetry of ST , it follows that
Zn ⊆ ST ∪ (ST + ST ) if and only if [s − m, n − 2s] ⊆ ST ∪ (ST + ST ).
The interval [s − m, n − 2s] does not intersect the following sets:
• A, because n − 2s < n − 2s + 1;
• −(s + T ), because −(s + T ) ⊆ [n − s − (2t − 1), n − s] and
n − 2s < 2s = n − s − (2t − 1);
• A + A, by (3) and the fact that 4s − n − 2 = s − 2t − 1 < s − (2t − 1) ≤ s − m;
• (s + T ) + (s + T ), because this set is contained in [2s, 2s + 4t − 2], and n − 2s < 2s;
• (s + T ) − (s + T ), because this set is contained in ±[0, 2t − m − 1], and
2t − m − 1 = n − 3s − m < s − m;
• (s + T ) + A, because this set is contained in
s + [m, 2t − 1] + A = [s + m, s + 2t − 1] + A = [n − s + m + 1, 3s + 2t − 2],
and n − 2s < n − s + m + 1;
8

• −(s + T ) + A, because this set is contained in

−(s + [m, 2t − 1] + A) = [n − 3s − 2t + 2, s − m − 1],
and s − m − 1 < s − m.
Therefore, the only way for the elements of [s − m, n − 2s] to be in ST ∪ (ST + ST ) is to belong
to either s + T or to

−(s + T ) − (s + T ) = −2s − ( T + T ) = n − 2s − ( T + T ).
The condition

[s − m, n − 2s] ⊆ (s + T ) ∪ (n − 2s − ( T + T ))
is equivalent to

[0, n − 3s + m] ⊆ ( T + m) ∪ (n − 3s + m − ( T + T )),
which by the definition of t is equivalent to

[0, 2t − 1 + m] ⊆ ( T + m) ∪ (2t − 1 + m − ( T + T )),
and the latter, using the fact that [0, a] = a − [0, a], is equivalent to the condition in the lemma, so
we are done.

3.2

Special Sets

We now turn to identify the sets T for which ST is a complete sum-free subset of Zn of size s (see
Definition 3.1). Lemmas 3.2 and 3.3 supply the required conditions on T for sum-freeness and
completeness of ST . Recall that the size of ST is s whenever | T | = t. This leads us to the notion of
t-special sets given below.
Definition 3.4. For an integer t ≥ 1 we say that a set T ⊆ [0, 2t − 1] is t-special if it satisfies
1. | T | = t,
2. 2t − 1 ∈
/ T + T + T, and
3. [0, 2t − 1 + min( T )] \ (2t − 1 − T ) ⊆ T + T.
Note that the addition is over the integers.
The following simple claim shows that in case that 0 ∈ T the first and second conditions in
Definition 3.4 imply the third.
Claim 3.5. For every integer t ≥ 1 and a set T ⊆ [0, 2t − 1] satisfying 0 ∈ T, if | T | = t and 2t − 1 ∈
/
T + T + T then T is t-special.
Proof: Assume that 0 ∈ T, | T | = t and 2t − 1 ∈
/ T + T + T. We claim that for every ` ∈ [0, t − 1]
exactly one of the elements ` and 2t − 1 − ` belongs to T. Indeed, the elements ` and 2t − 1 − `
cannot both belong to T as their sum, together with 0 ∈ T, is 2t − 1, which does not belong to
T + T + T. In addition, if T does not contain one of ` and 2t − 1 − ` for some ` ∈ [0, t − 1] then
its size cannot reach t. It follows that every ` ∈ [0, 2t − 1] for which 2t − 1 − ` ∈
/ T satisfies
` = ` + 0 ∈ T + T. This implies that [0, 2t − 1] \ (2t − 1 − T ) ⊆ T + T, hence T is t-special.
9

Remark 3.6. It is easy to notice that for every t ≥ 1 there exist t-special sets. For example, the set
{0} ∪ [t, 2t − 2] and the set of even elements in [0, 2t − 1] are t-special, as is easy to verify using Claim 3.5.
Combining Lemmas 3.2 and 3.3 with the fact that |ST | = s if and only if | T | = t, we obtain the
following result.
Theorem 3.7. Let n and s be integers for which t = (n − 3s + 1)/2 is a positive integer and n ≤ 7s/2 − 1,
and let T ⊆ [0, 2t − 1] be a set. Then, T is t-special if and only if ST is a complete sum-free subset of Zn of
size s.

3.3

Characterizing the Large Symmetric Complete Sum-free Sets in Z p

Consider the cyclic group Z p for a prime p. We provide a characterization, based on Definitions 3.1
and 3.4, of the symmetric complete sum-free subsets of Z p of a given size s for large values of s. By
‘large’ we mean that s ≥ ( 13 − c) · p for a universal constant c > 0 (the proof will give s ≥ 0.318p).
Recall that the maximum possible size of such a set is b( p + 1)/3c, making the restriction on s
quite natural.
Theorem 3.8. There exists a constant c > 0 such that for every sufficiently large prime p and an integer s,
for which t = ( p − 3s + 1)/2 is a positive integer satisfying t ≤ c · p, the following holds. The symmetric
complete sum-free subsets of Z p of size s are precisely all the dilations of the sets ST for t-special sets
T ⊆ [0, 2t − 1].
Note that Theorem 3.8 characterizes the symmetric complete sum-free subsets of Z p of size s
for every possible size s of such a set satisfying
p(1 − 2c) + 1
p−1
≤s≤
,
3
3

(9)

where c > 0 is the constant in Theorem 3.8. Indeed, the size of every symmetric sum-free subset
of Z p , for a prime p > 2, is even. For an even s satisfying (9) the number t = ( p − 3s + 1)/2 is an
integer with 1 ≤ t ≤ c · p.
The fact that the sets ST for t-special sets T ⊆ [0, 2t − 1] are symmetric complete sum-free
subsets of Z p already follows from Theorem 3.7. This immediately implies that their dilations
have these properties as well. Hence, to complete the proof of Theorem 3.8 it suffices to show that
these are the only sets with those properties. This is the goal of the following lemma.
Lemma 3.9. There exists a constant c > 0 such that for every sufficiently large prime p and an integer s,
for which t = ( p − 3s + 1)/2 is a positive integer satisfying t ≤ c · p, the following holds. Every symmetric
complete sum-free subset of Z p of size s is a dilation of a set ST where T ⊆ [0, 2t − 1] is t-special.
Proof: Let S ⊆ Z p be a symmetric complete sum-free set of size |S| = s. Define c = 0.023 (the
constant satisfying 31 · (1 − 2c) = 0.318). By the definition of t, the assumption t ≤ c · p implies
that
p − 2t + 1
p(1 − 2c) + 1
s=
≥
≥ 0.318p.
3
3

10

Theorem 2.2 implies that the sum-free set S is contained in a dilation of the interval C = [s, p − s].
As the statement of our lemma is invariant under dilations, we can assume that S ⊆ C. Observe
that
C + C = [2s, 2p − 2s] = [0, p − 2s] ∪ [2s, p − 1].
By S ⊆ C we have S + S ⊆ C + C, so the completeness of S implies that Z p \ (C + C ) ⊆ S, that is,

[ p − 2s + 1, 2s − 1] ⊆ S.
Thus we have identified 4s − p − 1 elements of S. The remaining s − (4s − p − 1) = 2t elements
of S belong to
[s, p − 2s] ∪ [2s, p − s],
so by symmetry they are fully defined by the t elements of S in [s, p − 2s]. Denote the elements
of S ∩ [s, p − 2s] by s + T where T ⊆ [0, 2t − 1]. This yields that S is equal to a set ST as given in
Definition 3.1 where | T | = t. Applying Theorem 3.7 we obtain that T is t-special, as desired.
3.3.1

Symmetric Complete Sum-free Sets of Almost Maximum Size

For a prime p, Theorem 3.8 essentially reduces the task of computing the symmetric complete
sum-free subsets of Z p of a given size to that of computing the corresponding t-special sets. We
demonstrate this reduction below and derive an explicit characterization of the symmetric complete sum-free subsets of Z p of ‘almost maximum size’, that is, size smaller by 2 than the maximum
size of such a subset.
For a prime p = 3k + 1 set s = k − 2, and notice that t = ( p − 3s + 1)/2 = 4. It is easy to verify
that the 4-special sets T ⊆ [0, 7] are

{0, 4, 5, 6}, {0, 2, 4, 6}, {0, 3, 5, 6}, {1, 2, 6, 7}.
For every such T this gives us the following symmetric complete sum-free subset of Z p :

((k − 2) + T ) ∪ [k + 6, 2k − 5] ∪ ((2k + 3) − T ).
Assuming that p is sufficiently large, the dilations of these sets are the only symmetric complete
sum-free subsets of Z p of size k − 2.
Similarly, for a prime p = 3k + 2 set s = k − 1, and notice that t = ( p − 3s + 1)/2 = 3. The
3-special sets T ⊆ [0, 5] are
{0, 2, 4}, {0, 3, 4}.
For every such T this gives us the following symmetric complete sum-free subset of Z p :

((k − 1) + T ) ∪ [k + 5, 2k − 3] ∪ ((2k + 3) − T ).
Again, assuming that p is sufficiently large, the dilations of these sets are the only symmetric
complete sum-free subsets of Z p of size k − 1.

11

3.4

Counting the Large Symmetric Complete Sum-free Sets

We now consider the question of estimating the number of symmetric complete sum-free subsets
of Z p of a given size s. For every t ≥ 1 denote the number of t-special sets by g(t). We prove
below Theorem 1.2 that reduces counting the symmetric complete sum-free subsets of Z p of size
s to computing g(t) for an appropriately chosen value of t.
Proof of Theorem 1.2: Let p = 3k + 1 be a sufficiently large prime. For an integer r ≥ 1, denote
s = k − 2r and t = ( p − 3s + 1)/2 = 3r + 1. Assuming that r ≤ c · p for a sufficiently small c,
Theorem 3.8 implies that the symmetric complete sum-free subsets of Z p of size s are the dilations
of the sets ST for the t-special sets T.
We first prove that for every 2 ≤ d ≤ p − 2 and every t-special sets T and T 0 (including the
case T = T 0 ) it holds that ST 6= d · ST 0 . By the symmetry of ST we may assume 2 ≤ d ≤ ( p − 1)/2.
Consider the interval D = [−(s − 1), s − 1], and notice that

| D | = 2s − 1 = 2(k − 2r ) − 1 ≥ 2(k − 2cp) − 1 ≥

2
3


− 5c p ≥ d,

where the last inequality holds for a sufficiently small c. Consider the set
E = d · [ p − 2s + 1, 2s − 1] ⊆ d · ST 0 ,
whose elements form an arithmetic progression of difference d. As D is disjoint from ST , it suffices
to show that D intersects E. Assume by contradiction that D does not include any element of E. By
| D | ≥ d it follows that D does not include any element located between two consecutive elements
of E as well. This implies that [d( p − 2s + 1), d(2s − 1)] is an interval disjoint from D. As its size is
d(4s − p − 2) + 1, it follows that the total number of elements in the group is at least
d(4s − p − 2) + 1 + | D | ≥ 2(4s − p − 2) + 1 + (2s − 1) = 10s − 2p − 4

= 10(k − 2r ) − 2(3k + 1) − 4 = 4k − 20r − 6 ≥

4
3


− 21c p > p,

where for the last two inequalities we again assume that c is sufficiently small. This clearly gives
a contradiction.
Now, for every t-special set T we have to count the ( p − 1)/2 dilations of ST , hence the total
number of symmetric complete sum-free subsets of Z p of size s is ( p − 1)/2 times the number of
(3r + 1)-special sets, as required.
The proof of the second item is essentially identical. Here, for p = 3k + 2 and s = k − 2r + 1
we have t = ( p − 3s + 1)/2 = 3r.

3.4.1

Counting Special Sets

Motivated by Theorem 1.2, we would like to understand the behavior of the number g(t) of tspecial sets as a function of t. While g(t) is trivially bounded from above by (2tt) < 22t , the following claim bounds g(t) from below and shows that it grows exponentially in t.
Claim 3.10. For every integer t ≥ 1, g(t) ≥ 2bt/3c .
12

Proof: For every set I ⊆ [d2t/3e, t − 1] consider the set TI defined as
TI = {0} ∪ I ∪ {2t − 1 − i | d2t/3e ≤ i ≤ t − 1, i ∈
/ I } ∪ [2t − d2t/3e, 2t − 2].
Equivalently, the set TI consists of {0} ∪ I and every element 2t − 1 − i for i ∈ [0, t − 1] with
i∈
/ {0} ∪ I.
As there are 2bt/3c possibilities for the set I, each of which gives a different TI , it suffices to
verify that those sets TI are t-special. The set TI includes 0 and has size t. By Claim 3.5, it suffices
to prove that no three elements of TI have sum 2t − 1. If the three elements are nonzero then their
sum is at least 2t. If exactly one of them is zero, then the sum of the other two cannot equal to
2t − 1 because TI includes exactly one of i and 2t − 1 − i for every i ∈ [0, t − 1]. Finally, if at least
two of the elements are zeros then their sum with the third is at most 2t − 2, and we are done.
It is easy to derive now that the number of symmetric complete sum-free subsets of Zn is
exponential in n, confirming Theorem 1.3.
Proof of Theorem 1.3: For a sufficiently large n, let s be the smallest integer for which n ≤ 7s/2 −
1 and t = (n − 3s + 1)/2 is a positive integer. Notice that for this choice we have bt/3c ≥ c · n for
some universal constant c (any c < 1/42 would suffice). By Theorem 3.7, for every t-special set
T ⊆ [0, 2t − 1] the set ST is a symmetric complete sum-free subset of Zn . By Claim 3.10 there are
at least 2bt/3c ≥ 2cn t-special sets T, and since each of them defines a different ST , we are done.

4

Symmetric Complete Sum-free Sets of Various Sizes

In this section we present a construction of symmetric complete sum-free subsets of the cyclic
group Zn that yields such sets with various sizes, confirming Theorems 1.4 and 1.5.
Let t ≥ 1, d ≥ 2 and k ≥ 4 be integers, and let n be one of the following two integers
4dk + 6t − 11, 4dk + 6t − 14.

(10)

Note that every sufficiently large integer n can be expressed as one of these two numbers for
certain choices of the parameters. Consider the following three subsets of Zn :
• A = [ 21 (d n2 e + t + 1), 12 (d n2 e + t + 1) + d − 2],
n
o
• B = 12 (d n2 e + t + 1) + 2d − 2 + i · d 0 ≤ i ≤ k − 4 , and
• C = [b n2 c − t, d n2 e + t].
Define the set
(n)

St,d,k = (± A) ∪ (± B) ∪ C.
Note that A is an interval of length d − 1 and that B is an arithmetic progression of difference d
that includes k − 3 elements, all located on the right of the elements of A (see Figure 2). The set C
is a symmetric interval in Zn , whose size |C | is 2t + 1 if n is even and 2t + 2 if n is odd. It follows
(n)
from the definition that the set St,d,k is also symmetric in Zn .
13

A
1

n
4

+

d

d

d

d

n
2

t
2

C

2d

2d
n
2

−t

d

d

d

d

−A

+t

−B

B

3n
4

−

t
2

n−1

(n)

Figure 2: An illustration of the elements of the set St,d,k . Some additive constants are omitted.
A simple calculation shows, for the two possible values of n given in (10), that the last element
of B, denoted bl , satisfies
jnk
− t − 2d + 2.
(11)
bl =
2
Indeed, for n = 4dk + 6t − 11 we have dn/2e = 2dk + 3t − 5 and bn/2c = 2dk + 3t − 6, hence

1 l n m
bl =
+ t + 1 + 2d − 2 + (k − 4) · d
2 2
1
=
(2dk + 4t − 4) + 2d − 2 + (k − 4) · d
2
jnk
− t − 2d + 2.
= 2dk + 2t − 2d − 4 =
2
For n = 4dk + 6t − 14 the equality is obtained similarly. It follows that bl < bn/2c − t, hence the
elements of B are all located on the left of those of C (see Figure 2). In particular, we obtain that
the sets ± A, ± B, C, considered modulo n, are pairwise disjoint, implying that
(n)

|St,d,k | = 2| A| + 2| B| + |C | = 2(d + k − 4) + |C |.

(12)

Observe that the sets − A and − B can be explicitly written as
1
3n
• − A = [ 21 (b 3n
2 c − t − 1) − d + 2, 2 (b 2 c − t − 1)] and
n
o
• − B = d n2 e + t + 2d − 2 + i · d 0 ≤ i ≤ k − 4 ,

where for − B we have used (11).
The main result of this section is the following.
Theorem 4.1. For all integers t ≥ 1, d ≥ 2, k ≥ 4 and n ∈ {4dk + 6t − 11, 4dk + 6t − 14} such that
(n)
|C | ≥ d (that is, d ≤ 2t + 1 if n is even and d ≤ 2t + 2 if n is odd), the set St,d,k is a symmetric complete
sum-free subset of Zn .
In order to prove the theorem one has to show that every element of Zn belongs to exactly
(n)
(n)
(n)
one of St,d,k and St,d,k + St,d,k . We start with the following claim that shows that the sum A + B
precisely fills the gaps between the elements of the arithmetic progression − B.
Claim 4.2. The sets − B and A + B are disjoint and their union is
hl n m

i
1 j 3n k
+ t + 2d − 2,
−t−1 −d+1 .
2
2
2
14

Proof: The set − B is an arithmetic progression of difference d and length k − 3 starting at d n2 e +
t + 2d − 2. The set A is a d − 1 length interval, so adding it to the arithmetic progression B results
in a pairwise disjoint union of k − 3 shifts of A. The first element of A + B is
  1 l n m

 lnm
1 l n m
+t+1 +
+ t + 1 + 2d − 2 =
+ t + 2d − 1,
2 2
2 2
2
i.e., the consecutive to the first element of − B. Hence, A + B precisely consists of the intervals
of length d − 1 that fill the gaps between the elements of − B and one more interval that follows
the last element of − B. Hence, the sets − B and A + B are disjoint, and their union is an interval
starting at the first element of − B. The last element of this interval is the last element of A + B
which equals
 1 l n m
2


 j n k


1 j 3n k
+t+1 +d−2 +
− t − 2d + 2 =
− t − 1 − d + 1,
2
2
2
2

where we have used (11) and the fact that

1
2

· d n2 e + b n2 c =

1
2

· b 3n
2 c.

In the following claim we consider the set B + C.
Claim 4.3. If |C | ≥ d then the set B + C is
h 1 j 3n k
2


i
− t + 1 + 2d − 2, n − 2d + 2 .

2

Proof: As | B| = k − 3 and C is an interval, B + C is a union of k − 3 intervals, each of which is a
shift of C by an element of B. Since B is an arithmetic progression of difference d, each of these
intervals is a shift by d of the previous interval, and since |C | ≥ d, these shifts overlap, so B + C is
itself an interval. Its first element is
 1 l n m

 j n k


1 j 3n k
+ t + 1 + 2d − 2 +
−t =
− t + 1 + 2d − 2,
2 2
2
2
2
and the last one, using (11), is
j n k

 l n m

− t − 2d + 2 +
+ t = n − 2d + 2,
2
2

so we are done.
We are now ready to prove Theorem 4.1.
(n)

Proof of Theorem 4.1. Denote S = St,d,k = (± A) ∪ (± B) ∪ C. Assume that |C | ≥ d. The proof is
given in the following two lemmas.
Lemma 4.4. The set S ⊆ Zn is complete.
Proof: We shall prove that Zn ⊆ S ∪ (S + S). By Claim 2.1, using the symmetry of S and the fact
that 0 ∈
/ S, it suffices to prove that every element of [b n2 c, n − 1] is in either S or S + S. This is
shown via the following steps:
• [b n2 c, d n2 e + t]: This set is contained in C ⊆ S.
15

• [d n2 e + t + 1, d n2 e + t + 2d − 3]: Observe that this set is equal to A + A ⊆ S + S.
• [d n2 e + t + 2d − 2, 21 (b 3n
2 c − t − 1) − d + 1]: By Claim 4.2, this set is the union of − B and
A + B, and is thus contained in S ∪ (S + S).
1
3n
• [ 12 (b 3n
2 c − t − 1) − d + 2, 2 (b 2 c − t − 1)]: This set is equal to − A ⊆ S.
1
3n
• [ 12 (b 3n
2 c − t + 1), 2 (b 2 c − t + 1) + d + |C | − 3]: Observe that this set is equal to A + C ⊆
S + S.

• [ 12 (b 3n
2 c − t + 1) + d + |C | − 2, n − 2d + 2]: By Claim 4.3, using |C | ≥ d, this interval is
contained in B + C ⊆ S + S.
• [n − 2d + 3, n − d] : For d = 2 this set is empty. For d ≥ 3 it is contained in the interval
[n − 2d + 2, n − d], obtained by adding to A the negative of the first element of B, and is thus
contained in S + S.
• [n − d + 1, n − 1] : Observe that by |C | ≥ d we have
jnk
2
− 2t ≤ n − d + 1,
2
hence this set is contained in [2b n2 c − 2t, n − 1] ⊆ C + C ⊆ S + S.
This completes the proof of the lemma.
Lemma 4.5. The set S ⊆ Zn is sum-free.
Proof: By Claim 2.1, using the symmetry of S and C, it suffices to verify that each of the sets
A + A, A + B, B + B, B + C, A + C, and C + C
has an empty intersection with S. We verify this below:
• The set A + A is equal to [d n2 e + t + 1, d n2 e + t + 2d − 3], hence its elements are located immediately after C and before the first element −bl of − B, so they do not belong to S.
• By Claim 4.2, the set A + B is equal to [d n2 e + t + 2d − 2, 12 (b 3n
2 c − t − 1) − d + 1] \ (− B ),
hence its elements are located after C, before − A, and do not include elements of − B, so
they do not belong to S.
• The set B + B is a sum of an arithmetic progression of difference d and length k − 3 with itself,
hence it forms an arithmetic progression of difference d of length 2k − 7. The first element
of B + B is d n2 e + t + 4d − 3, located on the right of C, and its last element, using (11), is
2b n2 c − 2t − 4d + 4 < n. Hence, it suffices to verify that B + B does not intersect − B and
− A. The first element of − B is d n2 e + t + 2d − 2. Observe that it differs from the first element
of B + B by 2d − 1, which is not divisible by d. Since − B is an arithmetic progression of
difference d, it follows that B + B does not intersect it. Now, let a0 denote the first element of
A. Using (11), the sum of the first and last elements of B is
 1 l n m

 j n k


1 j 3n k
+ t + 1 + 2d − 2 +
− t − 2d + 2 =
− t + 1 = − a0 + 1.
2 2
2
2
2
16

This implies that the element consecutive to the interval − A = [− a0 − d + 2, − a0 ] lies in
B + B. Since the size of − A is d − 1 and the arithmetic progression B + B has difference d,
we get that B + B does not intersect − A.
• By Claim 4.3, the set B + C is equal to [ 12 (b 3n
2 c − t + 1) + 2d − 2, n − 2d + 2], hence its elements
are located on the right of − A and do not belong to S.
1
n
• The set A + C is equal to [ 21 (b 3n
2 c − t + 1), 2 (3d 2 e + 3t + 1) + d − 2]. It can be verified that
the values of n in (10) satisfy that the right edge of the interval is smaller than n. Hence, its
elements are located on the right of − A and do not belong to S.

• The set C + C is equal to [0, |C | − 1] ∪ [n − |C | + 1, n − 1]. By (10), it is clear that n ≥ 6t + 18,
hence the first element of A satisfies

1 l n m
1
a0 =
+ t + 1 ≥ (4t + 10) = 2t + 5 > |C |.
2 2
2
It follows that the elements of C + C are located on the left of A and on the right of − A, so
they do not belong to S.
This completes the proof of the lemma.
We can now show that for every sufficiently large integer n there exist symmetric complete
sum-free subsets of Zn of various sizes.
Theorem 4.6. There exist constants c1 , c2 , c3 > 0 such that for every sufficiently large integer n there
exists a collection of symmetric complete sum-free subsets of Zn whose sizes form an arithmetic progression
√
√
√
with first element at most c1 · n, difference at most c2 · n, and last element at least n3 − c3 · n.
√
Proof: Let n be a sufficiently large integer. Define d0 to be the unique integer in b nc − {0, 1, 2}
√
√
that satisfies d0 = 1 (mod 3), and notice that n − 3 ≤ d0 ≤ n. Define a = 11 if n is odd and
a = 14 if n is even. As n is sufficiently large, one can write n = 2m − a for a positive integer m. Let
m0 be the integer satisfying m0 = m (mod 2d0 ) and 0 ≤ m0 < 2d0 . The choice of d0 guarantees that
3 divides one of m0 + 2d0 , m0 + 4d0 , m0 + 6d0 . Denote by 3t0 the one divided by 3, and notice that
√
√
2d0 ≤ 3t0 ≤ 8d0 , implying 2 n/3 − 2 ≤ t0 ≤ 8 n/3 and d0 ≤ 2t0 + 1. As m = 3t0 (mod 2d0 ), it
follows that there exists an integer k0 for which m = 2d0 k0 + 3t0 , thus
n = 4d0 k0 + 6t0 − a.

(13)

Using again the assumption that n is sufficiently large, we have t0 ≥ 1, d0 ≥ 2, k0 ≥ 4 and
√
k0 ≤ n/(4d0 ) ≤ n/3. Applying Theorem 4.1 to the integers t0 , d0 , k0 , we get that there exists a
symmetric complete sum-free subset of Zn , whose size s, using (12), satisfies s = 2(d0 + k0 + t0 ) − 7
√
if n is even and s = 2(d0 + k0 + t0 ) − 6 if n is odd. In both cases we have s ≤ c1 · n for a universal
constant c1 > 0.
j
k
Now, define b = k03−4 . For every integer 0 ≤ i ≤ b denote
k i = k0 − 3 · i and ti = t0 + 2d0 · i.
Observe, using (13), that for every such i we have n = 4d0 k i + 6ti − a, k i ≥ k0 − 3b ≥ 4, and
d0 ≤ 2ti + 1. Applying Theorem 4.1 to the integers ti , d0 , k i , we get that there exists a symmetric
17

complete sum-free subset of Zn , whose size, as follows from (12), is s + i · 2(2d0 − 3). Denote
√
r = 2(2d0 − 3), and notice that r ≤ c2 · n for a universal constant c2 > 0. The integers s + i · r, for
0 ≤ i ≤ b, form an arithmetic progression, each of its elements is a size of a symmetric complete
sum-free subset of Zn . To complete the proof, observe that its last element satisfies
s+b·r ≥

√
k0 − 6
1
n
· 2(2d0 − 3) = (4d0 k0 − 24d0 − 6k0 + 36) ≥ − c3 · n
3
3
3

for a universal constant c3 > 0, and we are done.
Theorem 1.5 is an immediate consequence of Theorem 4.6. We turn to derive Theorem 1.4.
Proof of Theorem 1.4: Let 0 ≤ α ≤ 31 and ε > 0 be fixed constants. Let n be a sufficiently large
integer. By Theorem 4.6, for universal constants c1 , c2 , c3 > 0, there exists a collection of symmetric
complete sum-free subsets of Zn whose sizes form an arithmetic progression with first element at
√
√
√
most c1 · n, difference at most c2 · n, and last element at least n3 − c3 · n. Let S be a set in this
collection whose size is closest to α · n. Then, for c = max(c1 , c2 /2, c3 ), we have
α·n−c·

√

n ≤ |S| ≤ α · n + c ·

√

n.

√
Assuming that n is sufficiently large, so that ε ≥ c/ n, it follows that
α−ε ≤

|S|
≤ α + ε,
n

as required.

Acknowledgements
We thank Peter Cameron, Grahame Erskine, David Grynkiewicz, Sarah Hart, Karen Seyffarth and
Olof Sisask for their kind help with the literature and for useful discussions.

References
[1] N. Alon. Independent sets in regular graphs and sum-free subsets of abelian groups. Israel
Journal of Mathematics, 73(2):247–256, 1991.
[2] N. Alon, J. Balogh, R. Morris, and W. Samotij. A refinement of the Cameron-Erdős conjecture.
Proc. London Math. Soc., 108(1):44–72, 2014.
[3] J. Balogh, H. Liu, M. Sharifzadeh, and A. Treglown. A sharp bound on the number of maximal
sum-free sets. Electronic Notes in Discrete Mathematics, 49:57–64, 2015. Preliminary version in
EuroComb 2015.
[4] N. J. Calkin. On the number of sum-free sets. Bull. London Math. Soc., 22(2):141–144, 1990.
[5] N. J. Calkin. On the structure of a random sum-free set of positive integers. Discrete Mathematics, 190(1-3):247–257, 1998.
18

[6] N. J. Calkin and P. J. Cameron. Almost odd random sum-free sets. Combinatorics, Probability
and Computing, 7(1):27–32, 1998.
[7] P. J. Cameron. Four lectures on projective geometry. In C. Baker and L. Batten, editors, Finite
Geometries, volume 103, pages 27–63. New York: Marcel Dekker, 1984.
[8] P. J. Cameron. On the structure of a random sum-free set. Probability Theory and Related Fields,
76(4):523–531, 1987.
[9] P. J. Cameron. Portrait of a typical sum-free set. In C. Whitehead, editor, Surveys in Combinatorics 1987, volume 123, pages 13–42. Cambridge Univ. Press, 1987.
[10] P. J. Cameron. Another sum-free set problem (Peter Cameron’s Blog), 2010. Available at
https://cameroncounts.wordpress.com/2010/03/07/another-sum-free-set-problem/.
[11] P. J. Cameron and P. Erdős. On the number of sets of integers with various properties. In
R. A. Mollin, editor, Number Theory: Proceedings of the First Conference of the Canadian Number
Theory Association, pages 61–79. 1990.
[12] A. Cauchy. Recherches sur les nombres. J. École Polytech, 40:99–116, 1813.
[13] W. E. Clark and J. Pedersen. Sum-free sets in vector spaces over GF (2). Journal of Combinatorial
Theory, Series A, 61(2):222 – 229, 1992.
[14] H. Davenport. On the addition of residue classes. J. London Math. Soc., 10:30–32, 1935.
[15] J.-M. Deshouillers and G. A. Freiman. On sum-free sets modulo p. Funct. Approx. Comment.
Math., 35(1):51–59, 2006.
[16] J.-M. Deshouillers and V. F. Lev. A refined bound for sum-free sets in groups of prime order.
Bull. Lond. Math. Soc., 40(5):863–875, 2008.
[17] P. Diananda and H. Yap. Maximal sum-free sets of elements of finite groups. Proc. Japan Acad.,
45:1–5, 1969.
[18] P. Erdős, A. Hajnal, and J. W. Moon. A problem in graph theory. The American Mathematical
Monthly, 71(10):1107–1110, 1964.
[19] M. Gondran and M. Minoux. Graphs, Dioids and Semirings: New Models and Algorithms. Operations Research/Computer Science Interfaces Series, Springer, 2010.
[20] B. Green. The Cameron-Erdős conjecture. Bull. London Math. Soc., 36(6):769–778, 2004.
[21] B. Green and I. Z. Ruzsa. Counting sumsets and sum-free sets modulo a prime. Studia Scientiarum Mathematicarum Hungarica, 41(3):285–293, 2004.
[22] B. Green and I. Z. Ruzsa. Sum-free sets in abelian groups. Israel Journal of Mathematics,
147(1):157–188, 2005.
[23] D. Hanson and K. Seyffarth. k-saturated graphs of prescribed maximum degree. Congressus
Numerantium, 44:127–138, 1984.
19

[24] I. Haviv and D. Levy. Dioid partitions of groups. 2017. In preparation.
[25] V. F. Lev. Large sum-free sets in Z/pZ. Israel Journal of Mathematics, 154(1):221–233, 2006.
[26] G. Payne. A solution to a problem of Cameron on sum-free complete sets. Journal of Combinatorial Theory, Series A, 70(2):305 – 312, 1995.
[27] A. H. Rhemtulla and A. P. Street. Maximal sum-free sets in finite abelian groups. Bull. Austral.
Math. Soc., 2:289–297, 1970.
[28] A. Sapozhenko. The Cameron-Erdős conjecture. Dokl. Akad. Nauk, 393(6):749–752, 2003.
[29] I. Schur. Über die kongruenz x m + ym ≡ zm (mod p). Jahresbericht der Deutschen MathematikerVereinigung, 25:114–117, 1916.
[30] O. Sisask. Combinatorial properties of large subsets of abelian groups. PhD thesis, University
of Bristol, 2009.
[31] H. P. Yap. The number of maximal sum-free sets in C p . Nanta Math., 2(1):68–71, 1968.
[32] H. P. Yap. Structure of maximal sum-free sets in C p . Acta Arithmetica, 17(1):29–35, 1970.

20

