On several notions of complexity of polynomial progressions

TL;DR

This paper investigates various notions of complexity for polynomial progressions, conjectures their equivalence, proves this for certain algebraic cases, and derives combinatorial and dynamical consequences.

Contribution

It introduces four notions of complexity for polynomial progressions, conjectures their equivalence, and proves this in specific algebraic cases, linking algebraic and analytic perspectives.

Findings

Weyl complexity and algebraic complexity always agree.

Proved the conjecture for progressions with homogeneous algebraic relations.

Derived combinatorial and dynamical corollaries for progressions with linear relations.

Abstract

For a polynomial progression $$(x,\; x+P_1(y),\; \ldots,\; x+P_{t}(y)),$$ we define four notions of complexity: Host-Kra complexity, Weyl complexity, true complexity and algebraic complexity. The first two describe the smallest characteristic factor of the progression, the third one refers to the smallest-degree Gowers norm controlling the progression, and the fourth one concerns algebraic relations between terms of the progressions. We conjecture that these four notions are equivalent, which would give a purely algebraic criterion for determining the smallest Host-Kra factor or the smallest Gowers norm controlling a given progression. We prove this conjecture for all progressions whose terms only satisfy homogeneous algebraic relations and linear combinations thereof. This family of polynomial progressions includes, but is not limited to, arithmetic progressions, progressions with linearly independent polynomials $P_1,\; \ldots,\; P_t$ and progressions whose terms satisfy no quadratic relations. For progressions that satisfy only linear relations, such as $$(x,\; x+y^2,\; x+2y^2,\; x+y^3,\; x+2y^3),$$ we derive several combinatorial and dynamical corollaries: (1) an estimate for the count of such progressions in subsets of cyclic groups or totally ergodic dynamical systems; (2) a lower bound for multiple recurrence; (3) and a popular common difference result in cyclic groups. Lastly, we show that Weyl complexity and algebraic complexity always agree, which gives a straightforward algebraic description of Weyl complexity.