Wednesday, May 20, 2026

The unit distances problem

 OpenAI just announced that ChatGPT has disproved a conjecture about one of Erdos's most famous problems: the unit distance problem.

This problem is personal to me: I spent a good chunk of time during my Ph.D mulling over it, and it's what hooked me into computational geometry. Like most of Erdos's problems, it's really easy to state

Let P be a set of n points in the plane (amen). What is the maximum number of unit distances that can be achieved? 

(the amen is a running joke in my old field of computational geometry) 

Note that this is really about duplicate distances (because if you get a bunch of pairs of points at distance d, you can scale the point set so that d = 1). It's also trivial to see that the maximum is at least n-1 (just put points evenly spaced along the number line), and that the number can't be more than n-choose-2 (because that's the number of pairs). 

So what's the real number? Erdos showed using a fairly complicated construction that you can get a set of points that has $n^{1 + 1/\log\log n}$ unit distances. On the other side of it, a famous result from 1983 by Spencer, Szemederi and Trotter showed that you can't get more than $O(n^{4/3})$ distances. 

Erdos himself used a really elegant but weaker argument to show that you can't get more than $O(n^{3/2})$ distances. And the argument was cool and deceptive (in retrospect). To get a distance pair of 1, a circle of size 1 around a point must touch another point (and vice versa). Draw an edge between those two points when this happens. So here's a fun fact: you can't create a situation where two points are connected by edges to each of three other points. Or to be more formal, you can't create a situation where there's a $K_{2,3}$ bipartite graph hidden inside the set of edges. By a well known result in graph theory this means this graph can't have too many edges in it (because if it did you'd eventually find one of these special graphs): specifically no more than $O(n^{3/2})$ edges. 

So there's a limit. But what's the real limit? A long standing conjecture was that you could NOT get anything nontrivially more than n pairs. Specifically that you couldn't get $\Omega(n^{1 + \epsilon})$ pairs for any $\epsilon$. This is frustrating because the gap between this, and $n^{4/3}$ is huge. 

Turns out this conjecture was wrong. And ChatGPT proved it, by building a complicated generalization of Erdos's construction that is indeed of size $\Omega(n^{1 + \epsilon})$ for some $\epsilon > 0$. 

This was a tantalizing, infuriating, and beautiful problem that has resisted progress for a very long time, and touches on some very deep concepts in mathematics. It's really impressive that an AI system has provided a proof for it. For more on the significance of the result and some interpretation of the proof technique, check out the companion article

No comments:

Post a Comment

Disqus for The Geomblog