Here is an approach which may give some better estimates for particular values of alpha:
sumNi=1i((ialpha))=sumNi=1sumNj=i((jalpha))=sumNi=1sumN−ik=0((Nalpha−kalpha))
So, if you can estimate
supsubstackxin(0,1) MleNbigg|sumMk=0((x−kalpha))bigg|,
then you can crudely multiply by N to get an estimate for |sumi((ialpha))|.
Specifically, my guess is that for quadratic irrationals alpha, there is an upper bound for
bigg|sumMk=0((x−kalpha))bigg|
which is O(logM), which would give you a bound of O(NlogN), and more generally that there is a bound in terms of the coefficients of the simple continued fraction for alpha, so that if those are bounded, then you still get O(NlogN).
For the particular value phi=(sqrt5+1)/2, sumMi=0((iphi)) has logarithmic growth c+(5sqrt5−11)/4logphiM (achieved at indices in the sequences A064831 (+) and A059840 (-)), which suggests that supsumMi=0((x−iphi)) also has logarithmic growth, which would give an NlogN bound for the sum.
In the opposite direction, for all alphanotinfrac12mathbbZ, limsupbigg(logNbigg|sumNi=0i((ialpha))bigg|bigg)ge1
The sum can be greater than N2−epsilon infinitely often by choosing alpha so that it is extremely well approximated by infinitely many rational numbers. When alpha is very closely approximated by p/q, then for N a small multiple of q (where "small" is relative to how well p/q approximates alpha), about 1/q of the terms can be moved past integers with a small perturbation of alpha to alpha′, which causes a jump of about N2/q in the sum. So, either the sum for alpha or alpha′ is large. We can choose a sequence pn/qn which converges to an alpha which produces large sums infinitely often, so that for these alpha,
limsupbigg(logNbigg|sumNi=0i((ialpha))bigg|bigg)=2
No comments:
Post a Comment